Group content required for story completion

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

[Zin Dau.1749]

A group of 5, 10 people isn't Massively Multiplayer by any stretch of the imagination. If you think group content must be compelleed, then all group content should be designed for huge squads of 50, 100, 1000 people.

I (and probably many other players) do enjoy group content in the open world, but not instanced tiny group content. Many reasons these instanced unmassive group content in MMO are avoided. Repetitive, claustrophobic, linear, instanced, and (perhaps most importantly) not massive. In fact quite opposite of what MMOs should strive for; arguably holding back the genre.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Zin Dau.1749 said:A group of 5, 10 people isn't Massively Multiplayer by any stretch of the imagination. If you think group content must be compelleed, then all group content should be designed for huge squads of 50, 100, 1000 people.

I (and probably many other players) do enjoy group content in the open world, but not instanced tiny group content. Many reasons these instanced unmassive group content in MMO are avoided. Repetitive, claustrophobic, linear, instanced, and (perhaps most importantly) not massive. In fact quite opposite of what MMOs should strive for; arguably holding back the genre.

Then don't do the instanced group content.

I'm sure all those that have been wanting more dungeons, many of them casual players like yourself, would not agree with the last part of your post.

Also, if you're so against those instances that require like 5-10 players because it's not massive enough, then all story content should require a massive number of players to complete whether it be in an instance or all in the open world. You say that small group instanced content doesn't belong in an MMO then why should solo instanced content? Otherwise, you're just cherry picking what is acceptable and what isn't.

[coso.9173]

This is a dungeon. A dungeon that gives some backstory.same as other dungeons provide some more backstory. In both cases it's done in groups. I don't see why the complaints.

[ArchonWing.9480]

You mean the part with the tank?

i didn't realize it was 10 person content myself; thought it was open world lol.

[Dante.1763]

@"coso.9173" said:This is a dungeon. A dungeon that gives some backstory.same as other dungeons provide some more backstory. In both cases it's done in groups. I don't see why the complaints.

Difference being for most im guessing is:

Dungeons arent found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, in fact, i played through almost the entire story of GW2 without ever setting foot in dungeons and i understood the entire story.

This is found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, and not only that its far more than just backstory. its Aurene giving you a view of your enemies and information you can use should you fight them, thats huge IMO, and i wouldnt be surprised if this was heavily tied into to the next step of the story.

[Thornwolf.9721]

@kharmin.7683 said:So what happens a year from now when most players aren't playing on this map any longer and new players are struggling to find a group for this content in order to progress their story? Will we have the same complaints as Deadhouse, Skyscale or other things like these?

I don't believe that will happen as both strikes and visions are centralized here, and that is the content that will more than likely replace raids. As they have both parts of raids which would be escort event style stuff, and the Bosses themselves. So with this being the new hub for both of those forms of content and it being accessible to everyone regardless of expansion it seems like? I don't know.

I feel it will still have people doing it as the rewards aren't that bad either, so there is that.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Dante.1763 said:

@"coso.9173" said:This is a dungeon. A dungeon that gives some backstory.same as other dungeons provide some more backstory. In both cases it's done in groups. I don't see why the complaints.

Difference being for most im guessing is:

Dungeons arent found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, in fact, i played through almost the entire story of GW2 without ever setting foot in dungeons and i understood the entire story.

This is found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, and not only that its far more than just backstory. its Aurene giving you a view of your enemies and information you can use should you fight them, thats huge IMO, and i wouldnt be surprised if this was heavily tied into to the next step of the story.

The dungeons players had to do during LS1 were in the story section which before went as the Living World section. Never mind that the tank escort strike an be done solo.

You understand the entire story from doing just the personal story? What about the the side stories from the dungeon story modes?

[Adul.1520]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former can be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

[Burnfall.9573]

@Mea.5491 said:

@Dante.1763 said:

@Mea.5491 said:

"Making group content required for the story is a step backwards."

Then you would cry in FFXIV, story is locked behind DOZENS of non-soloable dungeons and trials, lol. GW2 has a ridiculously LOW amount of FORCED group content for a massively

multiplayer

game. :tongue:

Maybe thats why we are playing this game and not that one.

Maybe that's why FFXIV is successful and GW2 is having issues. I love GW2 but too often it feels like a single-player game for an MMO. Solo players always cry when we get multiplayer content in a multiplayer game. It's sad.

+10

i completely agree with you including the Op. The Truth to the matter is, Guild Wars 2 is having serious identity crisis, it just really doesn't know what it want to be and that is where the root cause problems lies especially when it comes to this.

Wasn't this the whole reason behind it abandoning the Holy Trinity System to begin with?

Wasn't this the whole idea behind the removal of the Holy Trinity to not rely on group content and solo play instead?

'Guild Wars 2 is the sequel to ArenaNet’s flagship title, Guild Wars. GW2 aims to fix a lot of what’s “wrong” in the MMO world. With reworked combat mechanics, a focus on Dynamic Events, voiced quest dialog, several new professions, fan-favorite races, and the massive open world of Tyria, Guild Wars 2 is far more epic in scope than the original… while still retaining the F2P business model. The reliance on a holy trinity of class-roles is gone too, with every profession in GW2 being able to take on several roles, including that of a healer. '

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

This isn’t shifting the goalpost.

Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

[Adul.1520]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

This isn’t shifting the goalpost.

Yes, it is.

– They shouldn't put instanced group content in story achievement categories.– Instanced group content and open world group content are essentially the same, so your criticism is invalid.– No, instanced group content and open world group content are clearly not essentially the same for these reasons: A, B and C.– Then don't play it.

That's shifting the goalposts.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

I’m sure many players would not want this as they want the game to be more solo. Putting more of the story in the open world would likely lead to less of that.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

Instanced content is a part of MMOs. The “console” part was probably incorrect as that would exclude the other part of MMOs: open world. You may not like instanced content but other do and it is very much a part of MMOs. It’s something you’ll have to learn to deal with while playing this genre.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

This isn’t shifting the goalpost.

Yes, it is.

– They shouldn't put instanced group content in story achievement categories.– Instanced group content and open world group content are essentially the same, so your criticism is invalid.– No, instanced group content and open world group content are clearly not essentially the same for these reasons: A, B and C.– Then don't play it.

That's shifting the goalposts.

No, that’s not. Shifting the goalpost would be me adding another criterion. Telling you to either accept it or don’t play is not the same thing.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

Yes, playing the game is optional but that fact still doesn’t change that many aspects of the game are still optional. Getting legendary weapons is optional too. What would you say to someone that said otherwise? Would you tell them that they were optional? What if they repeated the same thing you stated and that the “game was optional”?

Anet isn’t mixing content categories. Group content has been a part of the LW achievements (and story) since LS1. Instanced content, even instanced group content, was present in LS1. You’re also still failing to acknowledge that the current strike mission is completely soloable rendering your entire argument moot.

[Adul.1520]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

I’m sure many players would not want this as they want the game to be more solo. Putting more of the story in the open world would likely lead to less of that.

Not necessarily. Open world content is often soloable, it's up to the content designers to decide whether it is or isn't.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

Instanced content is a part of MMOs. The “console” part was probably incorrect as that would exclude the other part of MMOs: open world. You may not like instanced content but other do and it is very much a part of MMOs. It’s something you’ll have to learn to deal with while playing this genre.

GW2 has revolutionized many aspects of the MMO genre. This is one aspect they failed to revolutionize on release, but have been making some headway into since. And I'm glad they have, because instanced content actually does go against the concept of being part of an online persistent multiplayer world where you can meet other players while exploring, which is the most essential feature of MMOs. It feels jarring every time the game requires me to exit the open world and enter an instance, because as far as I'm concerned the open world is the crux of the game.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

This isn’t shifting the goalpost.

Yes, it is.

– They shouldn't put instanced group content in story achievement categories.– Instanced group content and open world group content are essentially the same, so your criticism is invalid.– No, instanced group content and open world group content are clearly not essentially the same for these reasons: A, B and C.– Then don't play it.

That's shifting the goalposts.

No, that’s not. Shifting the goalpost would be me adding another criterion. Telling you to either accept it or don’t play is not the same thing.

It actually is. You abandoned one line of argument (open world group content and instanced group content are essentially the same) and went for another (you don't need to play it because it's optional).

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

Yes, playing the game is optional but that fact still doesn’t change that many aspects of the game are still optional. Getting legendary weapons is optional too. What would you say to someone that said otherwise? Would you tell them that they were optional? What if they repeated the same thing you stated and that the “game was optional”?

I wouldn't make that argument in the first place. It's not a valid or useful rebuke of game design criticism to say "don't play it if you don't like it."

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Anet isn’t mixing content categories. Group content has been a part of the LW achievements (and story) since LS1. Instanced content, even instanced group content, was present in LS1.

As far as I remember, LW1 achievements were released well before the restructuring of achievement categories and they've never been part of the Story achievement category. They're certainly not there now, and haven't been there for the majority of the game's lifetime.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:You’re also still failing to acknowledge that the current strike mission is completely soloable rendering your entire argument moot.

This is the first sentence of the first post of mine you've decided to respond to:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented).

And I'm not sure why you think missing this detail would render my entire argument moot when there are other non-solo-oriented instanced strike mission achievements in the story achievement category, which is what my argument is about.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

I’m sure many players would not want this as they want the game to be more solo. Putting more of the story in the open world would likely lead to less of that.

Not necessarily. Open world content is often soloable, it's up to the content designers to decide whether it is or isn't.

How would they add meaningful boss encounters that wouldn’t be zerged down within seconds? How about when we get to Jormag? Having the story be completely in open world doesn’t work in this game.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

Instanced content is a part of MMOs. The “console” part was probably incorrect as that would exclude the other part of MMOs: open world. You may not like instanced content but other do and it is very much a part of MMOs. It’s something you’ll have to learn to deal with while playing this genre.

GW2 has revolutionized many aspects of the MMO genre. This is one aspect they failed to revolutionize on release, but have been making some headway into since. And I'm glad they have, because instanced content actually does go against the concept of being part of an online persistent multiplayer world where you can meet other players while exploring, which is the most essential feature of MMOs.

They really haven’t revolutionized anything. Instanced content has existed in MMOs from like 30 years now. It’s a part of MMOs whether you choose to accept it or not. You not likely it doesn’t make it any less so.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Then don't do the instanced group content.

See, this is the part where my original criticism of Anet dumping instanced group content into achievement categories that have, up to that point, been almost completely dedicated to solo and open world content comes in. Your shifting of the goal posts has actually reinforced my point.

This isn’t shifting the goalpost.

Yes, it is.

– They shouldn't put instanced group content in story achievement categories.– Instanced group content and open world group content are essentially the same, so your criticism is invalid.– No, instanced group content and open world group content are clearly not essentially the same for these reasons: A, B and C.– Then don't play it.

That's shifting the goalposts.

No, that’s not. Shifting the goalpost would be me adding another criterion. Telling you to either accept it or don’t play is not the same thing.

It actually is. You abandoned one line of argument (open world group content and instanced group content are essentially the same) and went for another (you don't need to play it because it's optional).

That’s still not shifting the goalpost. I suggest reading up on what it actually is.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

Yes, playing the game is optional but that fact still doesn’t change that many aspects of the game are still optional. Getting legendary weapons is optional too. What would you say to someone that said otherwise? Would you tell them that they were optional? What if they repeated the same thing you stated and that the “game was optional”?

I wouldn't make that argument in the first place. It's not a valid rebuke of game design criticism to say "don't play it if you don't like it."

It’s a valid response as not everything in a game will appeal to all players. What percentage of players dislike WvW and sPvP? They simply choose to not play that content and focus on what they enjoy. What I said is no different.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Anet isn’t mixing content categories. Group content has been a part of the LW achievements (and story) since LS1. Instanced content, even instanced group content, was present in LS1.

As far as I remember, LW1 achievements were released well before the restructuring of achievement categories and they've never been part of the Story achievement category. They're certainly not there now, and haven't been there for the majority of the game's lifetime.

The Story achievement section replaced the Living World section. The only difference being that the LS1 releases would go to historical rather than be permanently available.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:You’re also still failing to acknowledge that the current strike mission is completely soloable rendering your entire argument moot.

This is the first sentence of the first post of mine you've decided to respond to:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented).

And I'm not sure why you think missing this detail would render my entire argument moot when there are other non-solo-oriented instanced strike mission achievements in the story achievement category, which is what my argument is about.

Oh so this is now more about the achievements rather than the actual story instances? You keep going back and forth between the two.

There’s absolutely no reason that a release’s achievement cannot be in instanced content. Anet has done this in the past and continues to do so now. They don’t share the same viewpoint on this issue as you. I don’t get where you came up with the rationalization that all achievements for a release must be able to be done solo.

[dodgerrule.8739]

Actually group content was forced in guild wars 2 main campaign as the final story mission. So saying that it was never forced before is false.

[coso.9173]

Why is it even important which part of the achievements it is in? If it was below story would it even matter?And this is an instance but still don't need to use lfg and can just join in and do it with other randoms, just like open world.

[Moonyeti.3296]

This is really no different than Zhaitan. You can go in alone even though it recommends 5. You can do the same here, the chain scales if you go in a solo squad. The tank never dies, you just have to repair it before you can get back in when it gets critical.

[Adul.1520]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

I’m sure many players would not want this as they want the game to be more solo. Putting more of the story in the open world would likely lead to less of that.

Not necessarily. Open world content is often soloable, it's up to the content designers to decide whether it is or isn't.

How would they add meaningful boss encounters that wouldn’t be zerged down within seconds? How about when we get to Jormag? Having the story be completely in open world doesn’t work in this game.

Phased content.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

Instanced content is a part of MMOs. The “console” part was probably incorrect as that would exclude the other part of MMOs: open world. You may not like instanced content but other do and it is very much a part of MMOs. It’s something you’ll have to learn to deal with while playing this genre.

GW2 has revolutionized many aspects of the MMO genre. This is one aspect they failed to revolutionize on release, but have been making some headway into since. And I'm glad they have, because instanced content actually does go against the concept of being part of an online persistent multiplayer world where you can meet other players while exploring, which is the most essential feature of MMOs.

They really haven’t revolutionized anything. Instanced content has existed in MMOs from like 30 years now. It’s a part of MMOs whether you choose to accept it or not. You not likely it doesn’t make it any less so.

It's disingenuous to say they haven't revolutionized anything. If you saw the original marketing of GW2 you'll know that this was marketed as the MMO that doesn't do things like other MMOs do. Sure, they've walked back on some of those promises (no holy trinity), but have also delivered and still continue to stand by many others (no fetch quests, no killstealing/griefing, no gear grind). And since Heart of Thorns they have been introducing a lot more story content in the open world, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

This entire argument is beside the point, anyway. Whether they have or haven't been introducing open world story content has no bearing on the argument that they should stop mixing in instanced group content into an achievement category that has always been almost entirely separate from it.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

Yes, playing the game is optional but that fact still doesn’t change that many aspects of the game are still optional. Getting legendary weapons is optional too. What would you say to someone that said otherwise? Would you tell them that they were optional? What if they repeated the same thing you stated and that the “game was optional”?

I wouldn't make that argument in the first place. It's not a valid rebuke of game design criticism to say "don't play it if you don't like it."

It’s a valid response as not everything in a game will appeal to all players. What percentage of players dislike WvW and sPvP? They simply choose to not play that content and focus on what they enjoy. What I said is no different.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Anet isn’t mixing content categories. Group content has been a part of the LW achievements (and story) since LS1. Instanced content, even instanced group content, was present in LS1.

As far as I remember, LW1 achievements were released well before the restructuring of achievement categories and they've never been part of the Story achievement category. They're certainly not there now, and haven't been there for the majority of the game's lifetime.

The Story achievement section replaced the Living World section. The only difference being that the LS1 releases would go to historical rather than be permanently available.

I don't care. They're not in the story section now, and they haven't been for the vast majority of the game's lifetime. Them being in the historical section doesn't bother me and has no precedence over what's in the story section.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:You’re also still failing to acknowledge that the current strike mission is completely soloable rendering your entire argument moot.

This is the first sentence of the first post of mine you've decided to respond to:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented).

And I'm not sure why you think missing this detail would render my entire argument moot when there are other non-solo-oriented instanced strike mission achievements in the story achievement category, which is what my argument is about.

Oh so this is now more about the achievements rather than the actual story instances? You keep going back and forth between the two.

There’s absolutely no reason that a release’s achievement cannot be in instanced content. Anet has done this in the past and continues to do so now. They don’t share the same viewpoint on this issue as you. I don’t get where you came up with the rationalization that all achievements for a release must be able to be done solo.

You've responded to me like five times and you still don't understand the criticism that you've been trying to refute this entire time. But maybe that's my fault.

Here it is, once again, in the simplest terms I can put it:

Before the Icebrood Saga achievement categories had been separated largely by content type. The story category used to include mostly solo-oriented content, some open world group content, and with one exception (Migraine) no instanced group content. Anet used to separate instanced group content into separate categories. Therefore, many players who like solo and open world content and don't like instanced group content—typically referred to as the explorer type, which is overrepresented in GW2 because it's a game that facilitates a lot of explorer content—have come to enjoy a sense of completion by completing all achievements in the story category. By starting to mix in instanced group content into the story category, the Icebrood Saga content designers are not only breaking previous precedence, but also cause many players who previously completed the story achievement category and its metas to no longer want to do so, effectively decreasing their enjoyment of and involvement in the game, for no reason whatsoever. It wouldn't be difficult to create a separate achievement category for strike missions, just how there are separate categories for dungeons, fractals and raids. That's obviously the correct thing to do, and it's also supported by precedent.

It's useless for you to say that the current content designers don't see it the same way I do (or maybe they just haven't thought it through to the same extent, I will add), otherwise they would have already implemented it the way that I want them to and I would have no reason to criticize their work. But here I am, criticizing. And here you are, protecting Anet from constructive criticism.

Here we are.

[Ayrilana.1396]

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented). But the fact remains that lately they have been dumping strike mission achievements into the story achievement categories and even requiring those achievements for the story metas, so I still stand behind my complaint/whine.

How many of these story achievements are able to be done on the map without other players? I seem to recall that every LS episode’s achievements always have some that cannot be done solo. Whether or not you need to be in an actual party/squad is just semantics.

It's not just semantics. Instanced group content requires use of the LFG tool and is generally a social experience where players are often expected to interact, bring certain builds, etc. Comparably, joining a zerg in the open world requires no LFG, can be done seamlessly by moving around in the in-game world without opening any menus or scrolling through lists, and is a much less social experience. Of course, those differences may not be meaningful to you, but they're meaningful to many other players.

Again, it's semantics. Whether you're in or out of a group doesn't matter. How many people use the LFG to join an active meta map to do LW achievements? How many joined one of those squads with markers to various items (i.e. grothmar whispers hideout, interact-able items in Bjora, etc). You can't pick and choose when the LFG is okay or not.

I don't like to use the LFG for open world content either, but an important difference between open world and instanced group content is that the former

can

be encountered and completed seamlessly as part of the exploration experience, while the latter can only be played through navigating menus and by isolating yourself from the rest of the game.

Instanced content is as much a part of this game as it is in other games. If you’re so against isolating oneself from the rest of the game then perhaps you’d prefer that Anet remove story instances entirely and move them to the open world?

I wouldn't want them to go back and dedicate resources to doing that, but if they can integrate new story more seamlessly and with less instances, which is what they've been doing for the last few seasons, then yes, I'm for it.

I’m sure many players would not want this as they want the game to be more solo. Putting more of the story in the open world would likely lead to less of that.

Not necessarily. Open world content is often soloable, it's up to the content designers to decide whether it is or isn't.

How would they add meaningful boss encounters that wouldn’t be zerged down within seconds? How about when we get to Jormag? Having the story be completely in open world doesn’t work in this game.

Phased content.

Elaborate more as I don’t see this in GW2. When you stated “phased content” I thought of ESO.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

Some of that criticism applies to solo instances too, by the way—I'm not necessarily a big fan of those either. But at least I can complete those whenever I want, at my own pace, without using LFG, so it's relatively painless. Meanwhile, instanced group content is the worst of both worlds.

You’re playing the wrong genre then. Perhaps a console RPG would be more suited for you?

Not sure what you think your rationale is behind this smear, but I don't even own a console.

Instanced content is a part of MMOs. The “console” part was probably incorrect as that would exclude the other part of MMOs: open world. You may not like instanced content but other do and it is very much a part of MMOs. It’s something you’ll have to learn to deal with while playing this genre.

GW2 has revolutionized many aspects of the MMO genre. This is one aspect they failed to revolutionize on release, but have been making some headway into since. And I'm glad they have, because instanced content actually does go against the concept of being part of an online persistent multiplayer world where you can meet other players while exploring, which is the most essential feature of MMOs.

They really haven’t revolutionized anything. Instanced content has existed in MMOs from like 30 years now. It’s a part of MMOs whether you choose to accept it or not. You not likely it doesn’t make it any less so.

It's disingenuous to say they haven't revolutionized anything. If you saw the original marketing of GW2 you'll know that this was marketed as the MMO that doesn't do things like other MMOs do. Sure, they've walked back on some of those promises (no holy trinity), but have also delivered and still continue to stand by many others (no fetch quests, no killstealing/griefing, no gear grind). And since Heart of Thorns they have been introducing a lot more story content in the open world, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

This entire argument is beside the point, anyway. Whether they have or haven't been introducing open world story content has no bearing on the argument that they should stop mixing in instanced group content into an achievement category that has always been almost entirely separate from it.

Collection events are essentially fetch quests. There is griefing in the game through portals, interactable objects, etc. It’s debatable as to whether ascended counts as a grind. Kill stealing happens often during the beginner map dailies or when players are competing over mobs which die quickly.

Yes, they have been introducing more filler story content into the open world. I never once denied that. This has nothing to do with your argument that instanced group content is wrong.

If instanced group content is released as a part of the content then it belongs with said content. Strikes are a part of the Saga and are stemmed from its story content. You may still continue to argue that instanced group content is different from map group content but it’s really not.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Not all content will appeal to all players. Fortunately players are not required to do all content. The “story” in this release can be done solo just like a regular story instance. It’s also a side story and not directly a part of the main story as the stories of episodes one and two are. Achievements tied to a release are completely optional.

So is playing the game. No reason for Anet to start mixing together content categories that different groups of players have been enjoying completing separately.

Yes, playing the game is optional but that fact still doesn’t change that many aspects of the game are still optional. Getting legendary weapons is optional too. What would you say to someone that said otherwise? Would you tell them that they were optional? What if they repeated the same thing you stated and that the “game was optional”?

I wouldn't make that argument in the first place. It's not a valid rebuke of game design criticism to say "don't play it if you don't like it."

It’s a valid response as not everything in a game will appeal to all players. What percentage of players dislike WvW and sPvP? They simply choose to not play that content and focus on what they enjoy. What I said is no different.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Anet isn’t mixing content categories. Group content has been a part of the LW achievements (and story) since LS1. Instanced content, even instanced group content, was present in LS1.

As far as I remember, LW1 achievements were released well before the restructuring of achievement categories and they've never been part of the Story achievement category. They're certainly not there now, and haven't been there for the majority of the game's lifetime.

The Story achievement section replaced the Living World section. The only difference being that the LS1 releases would go to historical rather than be permanently available.

I don't care. They're not in the story section now, and they haven't been for the vast majority of the game's lifetime. Them being in the historical section doesn't bother me and has no precedence over what's in the story section.

It doesn’t matter that you don’t care. It’s more or less the same thing. It’d be no different than if Anet only kept the current episode in the Story section and moved everything else to the historical section.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:You’re also still failing to acknowledge that the current strike mission is completely soloable rendering your entire argument moot.

This is the first sentence of the first post of mine you've decided to respond to:

@Adul.1520 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Adul.1520 said:It's always been established precedent that story missions and achievements were solo-play-oriented with a couple of notable exceptions (original Zhaitan, Migraine). I find it very unfortunate that in this season Anet just decided to start dumping instanced group content into these categories instead of giving it its own separate categories like they had always done previously. It feels like I'm being coerced into playing content that I don't want to play and don't enjoy playing, and it also feels like that content is overtaking the spaces where I previously always used to find content that I did want to play.

I think the people who designed and classified this content failed to properly take into account the preferences of much of their playerbase—the huge explorer player population that GW2 has because of what kind of game it is.

Read the thread.

The opening instanced escort mission can easily be soloed. It's designed to scale to as low as 1 player.

That's good to know, and I fully appreciate it as far as this mission goes (though Anet certainly should have made it clearer that it's also solo-soriented).

And I'm not sure why you think missing this detail would render my entire argument moot when there are other non-solo-oriented instanced strike mission achievements in the story achievement category, which is what my argument is about.

Oh so this is now more about the achievements rather than the actual story instances? You keep going back and forth between the two.

There’s absolutely no reason that a release’s achievement cannot be in instanced content. Anet has done this in the past and continues to do so now. They don’t share the same viewpoint on this issue as you. I don’t get where you came up with the rationalization that all achievements for a release must be able to be done solo.

You've responded to me like five times and you still don't understand the criticism that you've been trying to refute this entire time. But maybe that's my fault.

Here it is, once again, in the simplest terms I can put it:

Before the Icebrood Saga achievement categories have been separated largely by content type. The story category used to include mostly solo-oriented content, some open world group content, and with one exception (Migraine) no instanced group content. Anet used to separate instanced group content into separate categories. Therefore, many players who like solo and open world content and don't like instanced group content—typically referred to as the explorer type, which is overrepresented in GW2 because it's a game that facilitates a lot of explorer content—have come to enjoy a sense of completion by completing all achievements in the story category. By starting to mix in instanced group content into the story category, the Icebrood Saga content designers are not only breaking previous precedence, but also cause many players who previously completed the story achievement category and its metas to no longer want to do so, effectively decreasing their enjoyment of and involvement in the game, for no reason whatsoever. It wouldn't be difficult to create a separate achievement category for strike missions, just how there are separate categories for dungeons, fractals and raids. That's obviously the correct thing to do, and it's also supported by precedent.

It's useless for you to say that the current content designers don't see it the same way I do (or maybe they just haven't thought it through to the same extent, I will add), otherwise they would have already implemented it the way that I want them to and I would have no reason to criticize their work. But here I am, criticizing. And here you are, protecting Anet from constructive criticism.

Here we are.

Instanced group content existed in LS1 so them not including it in later seasons broke precedent.

[kharmin.7683]

@dodgerrule.8739 said:Actually group content was forced in guild wars 2 main campaign as the final story mission. So saying that it was never forced before is false.

Which was then changed to make it solo-able.

[Etria.3642]

I guess it all depends on your definition of "group content" and for who. I, for example, can't solo all the prior story stuff. So I ALWAYS take folks with me. Once I get past the Claw Island stuff, I start dying/going down, and it is just so much EASIER and more fun, for me, to have someone else there. Lord knows the npc's they provide are....not adequate.

I also consider events I cannot solo to be group content. For instance, I can solo almost all of leveling one of the outposts in Verdant Brink but toward the end, no can do. At least not without more effort than I am willing to put in.

In that respect, the new map is much more solo friendly. I can solo all the do it 20 times events. They are easier/faster with other folks but are rather appropriately scaled down for just one.

[robertthebard.8150]

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Dante.1763 said:

@"coso.9173" said:This is a dungeon. A dungeon that gives some backstory.same as other dungeons provide some more backstory. In both cases it's done in groups. I don't see why the complaints.

Difference being for most im guessing is:

Dungeons arent found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, in fact, i played through almost the entire story of GW2 without ever setting foot in dungeons and i understood the entire story.

This is found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, and not only that its far more than just backstory. its Aurene giving you a view of your enemies and information you can use should you fight them, thats huge IMO, and i wouldnt be surprised if this was heavily tied into to the next step of the story.

The dungeons players had to do during LS1 were in the story section which before went as the Living World section. Never mind that the tank escort strike an be done solo.

You understand the entire story from doing just the personal story? What about the the side stories from the dungeon story modes?

What about them? I didn't run any of the dungeons either. In fact, all I knew about them was that my Herald was sending me letters telling me that Destiny's Edge was taking care of business. What else is it that you think I should know? It wouldn't be the first time that someone's tried to tell me that despite saying I had enough information, I really didn't. I don't care how they resolved their issues, and I can't say that they really did. I can say that for what I had to do, it was enough if they showed up when the chips were down. They're called "side stories" for a reason. I didn't clear every heart on every map before I finished the vanilla story either, did I miss something there that should have prevented me from completing, or was it, also, just side content?

[coso.9173]

@robertthebard.8150 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Dante.1763 said:

@"coso.9173" said:This is a dungeon. A dungeon that gives some backstory.same as other dungeons provide some more backstory. In both cases it's done in groups. I don't see why the complaints.

Difference being for most im guessing is:

Dungeons arent found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, in fact, i played through almost the entire story of GW2 without ever setting foot in dungeons and i understood the entire story.

This is found in the "Story" portion of the hero panel, and not only that its far more than just backstory. its Aurene giving you a view of your enemies and information you can use should you fight them, thats huge IMO, and i wouldnt be surprised if this was heavily tied into to the next step of the story.

The dungeons players had to do during LS1 were in the story section which before went as the Living World section. Never mind that the tank escort strike an be done solo.

You understand the entire story from doing just the personal story? What about the the side stories from the dungeon story modes?

What about them? I didn't run any of the dungeons either. In fact, all I knew about them was that my Herald was sending me letters telling me that Destiny's Edge was taking care of business. What else is it that

you

think

I

should know? It wouldn't be the first time that someone's tried to tell me that despite saying I had enough information, I really didn't. I don't care how they resolved their issues, and I can't say that they really did. I can say that for what I had to do, it was enough if they showed up when the chips were down. They're called "side stories" for a reason. I didn't clear every heart on every map before I finished the vanilla story either, did I miss something there that should have prevented me from completing, or was it, also, just side content?

the same way, the information we got now about Ryland, Almorra and the emperator is part of their backstory, and might not be needed for what is coming next.

[Mewcifer.5198]

@dodgerrule.8739 said:Actually group content was forced in guild wars 2 main campaign as the final story mission. So saying that it was never forced before is false.

If you are saying this as a reply to my original post that started this thread then you very clearly did not read what I said. If you are replying to someone else, you should probably use the quote feature.