EoD expansion should have new RAID

[Obtena.7952]

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

you literally said there was no motivation for raids

No, I didn't say that

and that they failed yet they are literally the only way to get legendary armor in the game,

This is true ... and I never disagreed with this fact.

yet you said legendaries are a way to keep players in but not if its from raids

No I didn't say that.

You better up your game a little if you want to try to tell me things I never said.

I said that we don't need NEW raids for people to get legendary armor. Therefore, legendary armor isn't a reason for Anet to add new raids in EoD.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don't know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

You just like taking this rabbit out of the hat because it suits your limited perspective. That's not even accounting for bad business decisions or design decisions which needed correcting made over the years. Let's name a few shall we?

• having to rework HoT open world maps and metas
• having to rework PoF open world metas
• 3 redesigns of fractals
• releasing HoT without any consideration for veteran players
• reworking LI and LD with PoF, only to drop this new system (leaving LD pretty much useless right now)
• adding a public strike mode, against the direct recommendations of dedicated players
• pulling developers from GW2 for other projects

I could go on, but I think this will suffice. We don't know what drive were behind those decisions. It certainly was not revenue. Why? Because not every decision is purely revenue driven but subject to a ton of other factors and inner workings in a company. I hope you at least have that much basic understanding of business.

[Vilin.8056]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Vilin.8056 said:Therefore you do even know this game in its early years or any MMO structures in general. Exotic gears in ideal stats were costly to afford for the average players, and dungeons were not regularly being successful done by casual players, outside of story mode.Exotic gear was not costly at all - remember, there were karma temple sets. It just took a while to get. And was pointless to get until you were level 80. The initial problems you speak of were happening at the very beginning of the game (initial few months), and were a result of casuals attempting those dungeons at sub-80, with mismatched blue and green gear. As soon as those players caught up and managed to get to level 80 and at least rare gear (remember,

rare

, not exotic was the gear tier dungeons were balanced for), situation got way better. Within a year from launch, you could safely get a random group of people waiting before dungeon entrance (because no LFG yet :P) and reasonably expect to finish the dungeon even if you ended up with 4 more casuals with barely any experience. It just took longer. Well, unless it was Arah, in which case it could take

way

longer (but still could be done).

Yes, and lv 80 only requirement for low level dungeons was also considered elitism back then, especially when everybody levels the slow way.

Also, what you said may be possible for a few exploitable paths such as AC P1 P3 with the the help things like the the popular FGS bug. Not quite with the rest of the dungeons as my early days of getting the Dungeoneer title with pugs consists frequent 2 hour+ struggles on a single boss and a few hundred of kicked players simply we simply cannot get through with them in the party.

Karma Temple sets were not sufficient for dungeon at that time, due to high failure rate among temple meta and sustain stats weren't as effective with old patches, they were opted out for dungeons in compare to lv 78 exotics berserkers.

Simply put, constructing a party with high offensive power was still the key of passing the level at that time, which still hold true to HC contents to this day.

[yukarishura.4790]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

you literally said there was no motivation for raids

No, I didn't say that

and that they failed yet they are literally the only way to get legendary armor in the game,

This is true ... and I never disagreed with this fact.

yet you said legendaries are a way to keep players in but not if its from raids

No I didn't say that.

You better up your game a little if you want to try to tell me things I never said.

I said that we don't need NEW raids for people to get legendary armor. Therefore, legendary armor isn't a reason for Anet to add new raids in EoD.

DUDE you claimed raids FAILED, which they DIDNT, we just need new ones

[Obtena.7952]

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

[Obtena.7952]

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

you literally said there was no motivation for raids

No, I didn't say that

and that they failed yet they are literally the only way to get legendary armor in the game,

This is true ... and I never disagreed with this fact.

yet you said legendaries are a way to keep players in but not if its from raids

No I didn't say that.

You better up your game a little if you want to try to tell me things I never said.

I said that we don't need NEW raids for people to get legendary armor. Therefore, legendary armor isn't a reason for Anet to add new raids in EoD.

DUDE you claimed raids FAILED, which they DIDNT, we just need new ones

No, they defintely failed ... That's why we don't have them anymore.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

The same as all the other reasons I named which you again conveniently decided to ignore:inner workings of a company which are revenue unrelated.

[yukarishura.4790]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

you literally said there was no motivation for raids

No, I didn't say that

and that they failed yet they are literally the only way to get legendary armor in the game,

This is true ... and I never disagreed with this fact.

yet you said legendaries are a way to keep players in but not if its from raids

No I didn't say that.

You better up your game a little if you want to try to tell me things I never said.

I said that we don't need NEW raids for people to get legendary armor. Therefore, legendary armor isn't a reason for Anet to add new raids in EoD.

DUDE you claimed raids FAILED, which they DIDNT, we just need new ones

No, they defintely failed ... That's why we don't have them anymore.

they are still in the game, they are still played, ppl are still getting their legendary armors there lol

[Obtena.7952]

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

The same as all the other reasons I named which you again conveniently decided to ignore:inner workings of a company which are revenue unrelated.

... and whatever those are ... what makes you think those are still not going to prevent new raids from being successful in EoD? I mean, that's what we are talking here. As I said ... WHATEVER the reason we don't have raids now, why does anyone think that reason is gone in EoD?

[Obtena.7952]

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@yukarishura.4790 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

you literally said there was no motivation for raids

No, I didn't say that

and that they failed yet they are literally the only way to get legendary armor in the game,

This is true ... and I never disagreed with this fact.

yet you said legendaries are a way to keep players in but not if its from raids

No I didn't say that.

You better up your game a little if you want to try to tell me things I never said.

I said that we don't need NEW raids for people to get legendary armor. Therefore, legendary armor isn't a reason for Anet to add new raids in EoD.

DUDE you claimed raids FAILED, which they DIDNT, we just need new ones

No, they defintely failed ... That's why we don't have them anymore.

they are still in the game, they are still played, ppl are still getting their legendary armors there lol

All those things do NOT indicate a lack of failure. Let's be clear ... Anet has STOPPED developing raids ... and it's not because they are massively successful content.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

The same as all the other reasons I named which you again conveniently decided to ignore:inner workings of a company which are revenue unrelated.

... and whatever those are ... what makes you think those are still not going to prevent new raids from being successful in EoD?

I didn't claim this would make raids successful. That was not my goal. All I had to show was your argument to be nonsense. Which it is.

Revenue is a huge factor in orientation of a company, but it does not affect each and every decision. In fact one of the biggest ones of the last few years, pulling developers from GW2 for other projects, might very well have been revenue driven AT THE COST of this game. It would have made sense from a company business perspective, and would still have been a bad decision for this game.

So even from a revenue perspective, there might have been very unhealthy decisions made affecting this game.

In short: your claim that revenue decisions would benefit this game ALWAYS is strait up incorrect. We have the last few years as direct proof.

[Obtena.7952]

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

The same as all the other reasons I named which you again conveniently decided to ignore:inner workings of a company which are revenue unrelated.

... and whatever those are ... what makes you think those are still not going to prevent new raids from being successful in EoD?

I didn't claim this would make raids successful.

I get you don't like that I've hung my hat on the obvious, reasonable and sensible 'revenue' reason for why raids are no longer being developed ... so your goal is just to argue. Fair enough. So my point still stands ... whatever reason they had to stop raids ... probably still an impediment for bringing them back.

[Cyninja.2954]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Revenue numbers back up that perception.

Then maybe it's not a perception ... it's real?

What, that the game is doing poorly and is in decline? Sure, so we agree that this will eventually end in shut down.

No debate there ... What IS debatable is that this poor performance and decline is because 'no raids'. It's even possible that stopping development of raids slowed down the decline of the game ... content that takes dev time to create that doesn't generate the necessary ROI tends to make game studios bleed out faster.

No, the debate here actually started with dedicated players and you claiming that this has no bearing on revenue.

Of course Anet wasting resources on content that doesn't generate revenue has bearing on revenue. That's my whole point as to why they shouldn't add more raids in EoD.

You have not yet shown this to have been the case.

So the fact that Anet stopped developing raids isn't evident enough to you that they didn't make the desired revenues with them? OK. I think it's pretty obvious given there is almost no reason for them to stop doing so, ESPECIALLY if they WERE generating the desired revenues.

This was covered in this thread. In fact you yourself said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Honestly, I don't know the details of that business case.

You don't know the business decision behind this case. You don;t know the inner workings or why certain decisions were made 4 years in, or at any time. You don't know because none of us know.

I don't need to know the business case to know that if raids made Anet piles of cash, they would still be making raids, probably as fast as they can pump them out ... you know, revenue generation ... because it's about businesses try to do.

Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

The same as all the other reasons I named which you again conveniently decided to ignore:inner workings of a company which are revenue unrelated.

... and whatever those are ... what makes you think those are still not going to prevent new raids from being successful in EoD?

I didn't claim this would make raids successful.

I get you don't like that I've hung my hat on the obvious, reasonable and sensible 'revenue' reason for why raids are no longer being developed ... so your goal is just to argue. Fair enough.

Yeah, sorry I made sense with my 101 of basic decision making in business which might not be purely revenue related.

[Astralporing.1957]

@"Vilin.8056" said:Yes, and lv 80 only requirement for low level dungeons was also considered elitism back then, especially when everybody levels the slow way.

Also, what you said may be possible for a few exploitable paths such as AC P1 P3 with the the help things like the the popular FGS bug. Not quite with the rest of the dungeons as my early days of getting the Dungeoneer title consists frequent 2 hour+ struggles on a single boss and a few hundred of kicked players simply we simply cannot get through with them in the party.Must have been the really early days. For me 2 hours was generally enough for almost all dungeon paths (except Arah, where some paths could take longer than 2 hours) -and with a ton of time to spare (while 1 hour runs were pretty common, longer ones were actually rare - again, except for Arah, where the easiest path always took at least an hour).Perhaps that was because i was not so eager to kick players after few wipes, when they might have already started learning the fight. Or perhaps you were trying to force the HC strats in groups that were not ready for them (see my comment about Lupi at the end).

Karma Temple sets were not sufficient for dungeon at that time, due to high failure rate among temple meta and sustain stats weren't as effective with old patches, they were opted out for dungeons in compare to lv 78 exotics berserkers.For minmaxers, sure. I'm also quite sure you'd be horrified by the stat selections i (and lot of players i associated with then) was running at that time. Surprisingly enough, those "not sufficient" sets were actually completely fine.My first runs of AC, CM, CoE and CoF was actually in a group that (while level 80) was running a completely mismatched setup of level 80 and 7x gear of mixed quality, from green to exotic - with no thought at all put into runesets and sigils (and with builds that would probably be considered a "bad casual" meme now). And while there were hard parts, i admit, that was still completely doable.(and before you'll say "static" - i was also pugging those dungeons heavily then, and always was picking the casual runs over speedrunner ones, with predictable consequences for the team quality - and the results were quite similar)

Simply put, constructing a party with high offensive power was still the key of passing the level at that time, which still hold true to HC contents to this day.Nah. That was simply the optimal solution, but by no means the only one. It wasn't the key to finishing the content. It was the key to finishing the content in the fastest time possible. And there has been a massive gap between those two, allowing for multitude of different approaches.Hint: do you know how much easier were casual runs if someone was running a bunker guardian that tended to attract a large part of aggro (and was actually able to survive that)? You can;t even imagine how easy Lupi, for example, turned out to be if you just managed to keep it on you while running in circles around the room, allowing others to safely range/revive themselves (even if attempting to melee him, as most HC groups did, was generally a suicide in a casual group. Would not recommend).

[Obtena.7952]

@Vilin.8056 said:Simply put, constructing a party with high offensive power was still the key of passing the level at that time, which still hold true to HC contents to this day.

That's true ... but does that change that the game is targeting casual players? I mean, ANY game is going to have an optimal solution to content in it ... otherwise you couldn't solve it ... unless it's so trivial to play that EVERY solution is optimal. Having optimal solutions doesn't impact who the game targets with it's design. On the other hand, the NUMBER of solutions is a good indicator of who the game targets, especially if those solutions contain NON-OPTIMAL builds.

[Vilin.8056]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Vilin.8056" said:Yes, and lv 80 only requirement for low level dungeons was also considered elitism back then, especially when everybody levels the slow way.

Also, what you said may be possible for a few exploitable paths such as AC P1 P3 with the the help things like the the popular FGS bug. Not quite with the rest of the dungeons as my early days of getting the Dungeoneer title consists frequent 2 hour+ struggles on a single boss and a few hundred of kicked players simply we simply cannot get through with them in the party.Must have been the

really

early days. For me 2 hours was generally enough for almost all dungeon paths (except Arah, where some paths could take longer than 2 hours) -and with a ton of time to spare (while 1 hour runs were pretty common, longer ones were actually rare - again, except for Arah, where the easiest path always took at

least

an hour).Perhaps that was because i was not so eager to kick players after few wipes, when they might have already started learning the fight.

Karma Temple sets were not sufficient for dungeon at that time, due to high failure rate among temple meta and sustain stats weren't as effective with old patches, they were opted out for dungeons in compare to lv 78 exotics berserkers.For minmaxers, sure. I'm also quite sure you'd be horrified by the stat selections i (and lot of players i associated with then) was running at that time. Surprisingly enough, those "not sufficient" sets were actually completely fine.My first runs of AC, CM, CoE and CoF was actually in a group that (while level 80) was running a completely mismatched setup of level 80 and 7x gear of mixed quality, from green to exotic - with no thought at all put into runesets and sigils (and with builds that would probably be considered a "bad casual" meme now). And while there were hard parts, i admit, that was still completely doable.(and before you'll say "static" - i was also pugging those dungeons heavily then, and

always

was picking the casual runs over speedrunner ones, with predictable consequences for the team quality - and the results were quite similar)Doable maybe if you are willing to spend the extra hour(s) on the configuration you claimed, but unlikely maintainable if you claim to clear all paths in most dungeons in under 2 hours. Unless I'm extremely unlucky or some players in your pugs were the minmaxer pulling the heavy lifting, especially in CoE.Given that casual players in pugs usually leave party after 2 wipes, it's uncommon that they would stick to the end to reach a successful outcome.

I believe we pugged dungeons with different intensity.

[Linken.6345]

Maybe its time to take away the weekly lockout on raid to see if they are profitable or not to develop further.If they are played more then living world maps they would be right @Obtena.7952?I mean people spending most time in something make it the best roi right?

[Asum.4960]

Nobody is saying that Raids are a single "massive" cash cow.People are arguing that community oriented and hardcore/longterm repeatable content are a vital contribution for the long term health of an MMORPG, just as much as the casual experience is.

But why make such a long term investment when they are planning to move on from the product?Except then those other products fail, and now they have to go back and come up with EoD as a backup plan.

The only question is, are they just trying to buy a little more time with EoD before moving on from GW2, in which case it likely won't include long term community oriented content, or do they actually want to revitalize, grow and stick with GW2 for years to come, in which case it needs to come with that type of content.

Something that is conclusive with revenue and content trends over the course of years and fairly common business and game design sense.

Your whole going in circles about what has short term and direct return of investment is irrelevant to this discussion, and suggesting that data isn't easily and even commonly misinterpreted/flawed ridiculous.You can't make every game, single or what have a hit or have every video go viral, because data is flawed and incomplete.Businesses take gambles all the time, have to cut corners and content for non-immediate ROI reasons and circumstances all the time.Have to interpret consumer wishes and trends all the time.

Your conviction about the absolute knowledge and wisdom of corporations is staggering (when it supports your PoV at least), thankfully they can't read consumer minds yet - but that also means making mistakes.

It's not that I don't understand analytics and therefor it is "voodoo magic" to me as you put it. It's that I do understand it somewhat and therefor I know that it can't do voodoo magic.It's incredibly useful in a broad sense and trends. It's far from perfect in detail, and even more so when concerning creative endeavours like video games with extremely hard to impossible to quantify aspects.

If revenue had soared with the abandonment of all this "horribly failed content that drained their resources while not generating enough revenue to justify their development", as one would therefor naturally expect, you might have had a point, but it didn't. The opposite is the case.

@Obtena.7952 said:Again, if you don't think this was a revenue driven decision, then what else do you think it could have been? Why would a company who is running a business NOT want to continue developing content that is meeting their revenue targets that they have the motivation, resources and consumer demand to provide it?

I have literally addressed that three times now to be ignored. Long term health of the product was, at that time, not the priority.Keeping a moderate revenue stream while transitioning to other properties was.

They were still investing in long term success, just not in GW2.

Content like LW provides good short term ROI by spiking a large amount of casual player engagement, before quickly falling off again.Content like Raids, WvW, Guild Activities and such each provide good long term ROI by keeping the engagement of smaller but more dedicated communities consistently.

If you plan to move on from a game, as we know they did, which would you cancel?

@Obtena.7952 said:WHATEVER the reason we don't have raids now, why does anyone think that reason is gone in EoD?

Because most of Anet's other projects got cancelled and licenses distributed to other companies, coming with massive layoffs to the company - which may have refocused them on caring about the long-term health of their remaining product again.

@Obtena.7952 said:if revenues are backing up my perception

They are not though, reality is in direct contradiction to your argument/pov.Cancelling horribly failed content that wasn't bringing a ROI, as you insist, should have increased revenue, not led to record drops in revenue.

[Obtena.7952]

@"Asum.4960" said:Nobody is saying that Raids are a single "massive" cash cow.People are arguing that community oriented and hardcore/longterm repeatable content are a vital contribution for the long term health of an MMORPG, just as much as the casual experience is.

OK ... but that doesn't necessarily mean raids is the best solution for that. I think if you look at the direction the game has taken, raids is actually the opposite approach to how instanced group content figures into the long term health of the game. I know you guys like to chalk that up as 'mistakes' because 'incompetent' ... but if you believe that, then that same 'incompetent' trait is just as reasonable to speak against using raids as that vehicle for long term health.

@Obtena.7952 said:WHATEVER the reason we don't have raids now, why does anyone think that reason is gone in EoD?

Because most of Anet's other projects got cancelled and licenses distributed to other companies, coming with massive layoffs to the company - which may have refocused them on caring about the long-term health of their remaining product again.

There is no evidence that raids are necessary for the long term health of the game. That's purely speculation.

@Obtena.7952 said:if revenues are backing up my perception

They are not though, reality is in direct contradiction to your argument/pov.Cancelling horribly failed content that wasn't bringing a ROI, as you insist, should have increased revenue, not led to record drops in revenue.

That's not necessarily true because there are LOTS of other things that contribute to revenue.

[Obtena.7952]

@Linken.6345 said:Maybe its time to take away the weekly lockout on raid to see if they are profitable or not to develop further.maybe ... I'm in no way against improving existing raid content for people that play it.

If they are played more then living world maps they would be right @Obtena.7952?I mean people spending most time in something make it the best roi right?

Not really ... the relevant measure here is the revenue to played time ratio. It's not enough if players spend most their time in content if those players aren't spending on gems.

Just for an example ... if 100% of the revenue comes from some small amount of total time played in game mode 'X', lower than other modes, then clearly it would be absurd for a company to not allocate a significant number of resource to 'X' even if it's not the highest amount of time played. In otherwords, where players spend time isn't enough of an indicator to justify resource allocation.

[Asum.4960]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@"Asum.4960" said:Nobody is saying that Raids are a single "massive" cash cow.People are arguing that community oriented and hardcore/longterm repeatable content are a vital contribution for the long term health of an MMORPG, just as much as the casual experience is.

OK ... but that doesn't necessarily mean raids is the best solution for that. I think if you look at the direction the game has taken, raids is actually the opposite approach to how instanced group content figures into the long term health of the game.

I didn't say it was. I personally think Raids would be a very good part of the solution, but what form that longterm content should take is easily up for debate.Just for me personally, I had the best time in this game playing content like Raids and Fractal CM's, where all of the game's mechanics really come together and shine for PvE, along with meeting the friendliest people and best communities there, even following on to other things since. I would love to recapture that with new Raids, but that's obviously entirely personal bias.

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:WHATEVER the reason we don't have raids now, why does anyone think that reason is gone in EoD?

Because most of Anet's other projects got cancelled and licenses distributed to other companies, coming with massive layoffs to the company - which may have refocused them on caring about the long-term health of their remaining product again.

There is no evidence that raids are necessary for the long term health of the game. That's purely speculation.

Looking at popular MMO's past and present, it is a pretty well funded one though.Plus I, again, didn't say Raids were necessary. I said long term, community building and hardcore content was part of what keeps that kind of game healthy longterm, in conjunction with broadly appealing casual and short term dip in and out content, and that Raids simply check all of those boxes of what is missing really well.It's neither the only, nor entire solution.

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:if revenues are backing up my perception

They are not though, reality is in direct contradiction to your argument/pov.Cancelling horribly failed content that wasn't bringing a ROI, as you insist, should have increased revenue, not led to record drops in revenue.

That's not necessarily true because there are LOTS of other things that contribute to revenue.

Absolutely. I don't claim absolute certainty there, it's just a sensible conclusion. What isn't though is that it supports the claims you made.

[Obtena.7952]

@Asum.4960 said:Looking at popular MMO's past and present, it is a pretty well funded one though.

yeah sure ... in games designed around gear treadmills through raids, that MUST be the way it works if you want to progress. That's not the case in GW2 because I can run around in Exotic gear and be killing all day doing endgame content. The notion that we NEED raids because 'longterm health' IF it applies in GW2 most definitely doesn't apply for the same reasons as other popular MMO's. That's why it begs further explanation.

@Asum.4960 said:I said long term, community building and hardcore content was part of that, and that Raids simply check all of those boxes really well.

Let's focus on the topic here ... because we ARE in a thread about why Anet should add more raids for EoD. It begs the question how you conclude "hardcore content" is part of the long term health of the game, ESPECIALLY if a player can be successful and NEVER step foot in a raid EVEN if you are hardcore. I don't see why that's such a critical part of game health ... like somehow if we didn't have this niche of hardcore players cranking out playing raids ... the game would be unhealthy? Howso? I mean, we didn't even HAVE raids for the first three years and that is arguably some of the the most successful era of the game! We haven't seen a new raid for 2 years ... game hasn't collapsed into chaos either. So this 'need' for raids hasn't really manifested itself as like this thread would like us all to think.

Such a belief doesn't make sense if you understand the opportunity cost of Anet focusing content that not ONLY appropriate for hardcore players but ALSO casual ones. If some content is some benefit to the long term health of the game if it targets a niche community ... it can only be MORE benefit if some content benefits that niche community AND a wider range of players as well.

The bottomline here is that there is no argument for spending resources on things specific to a small community in the game over using those SAME resources on things appealing to a much wider range of the community. No matter how you want to cut it, there is no debate that the size of raiding community in this game is just not big enough to make continued raid development a sustainable proposal.

[Asum.4960]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Asum.4960 said:I said long term, community building and hardcore content was part of that, and that Raids simply check all of those boxes really well.

Let's focus on the topic here ... because we ARE in a thread about why Anet should add more raids for EoD. It begs the question how you conclude "hardcore content" is part of the long term health of the game. I don't see why that's such a critical part of game health ... like somehow if we didn't have this niche of hardcore players cranking out playing raids ... the game would be unhealthy? howso? I mean, we didn't even HAVE raids for the first three years and that is arguably some of the the most successful era of the game!

Such a belief doesn't make sense if you understand the opportunity cost of Anet focusing content that not ONLY appropriate for hardcore players but ALSO casual ones. If some content is some benefit to the long term health of the game if it targets a niche community ... it can only be MORE benefit if some content benefits that niche community AND a wider range of players as well.

The bottomline here is that there is no argument for spending resources on things specific to a small community in the game over using those SAME resources on things appealing to a much wider range of the community.

-

@Asum.4960 said:Content like LW provides good short term ROI by spiking a large amount of casual player engagement, before quickly falling off again.Content like Raids, WvW, Guild Activities and such each provide good long term ROI by keeping the engagement of smaller but more dedicated communities consistently.

Things like LW/Story expansions take a tremendous amount of resources to produce, with large content teams, massive efforts in world building, voice acting costs, marketing etc.Yes they generate a lot of short term revenue by appealing to a massive audience, but it appears to not be sustainable on it's own. They also come with more risk.Equally unsustainable on it's own is the comparatively small effort hardcore content, generating low but constant, consistent and fairly safe revenue.

Put both together, and you have a chance for a healthy MMO.Launch always looks good due to hype and the massive amount of content already done that's initially available, with it's primary cost being upfronted. But you can't ride that wave forever. Neither with just short term spikes nor just a long term trickle.

[Obtena.7952]

@Asum.4960 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Asum.4960 said:I said long term, community building and hardcore content was part of that, and that Raids simply check all of those boxes really well.

Let's focus on the topic here ... because we ARE in a thread about why Anet should add more raids for EoD. It begs the question how you conclude "hardcore content" is part of the long term health of the game. I don't see why that's such a critical part of game health ... like somehow if we didn't have this niche of hardcore players cranking out playing raids ... the game would be unhealthy? howso? I mean, we didn't even HAVE raids for the first three years and that is arguably some of the the most successful era of the game!

Such a belief doesn't make sense if you understand the opportunity cost of Anet focusing content that not ONLY appropriate for hardcore players but ALSO casual ones. If some content is some benefit to the long term health of the game if it targets a niche community ... it can only be MORE benefit if some content benefits that niche community AND a wider range of players as well.

The bottomline here is that there is no argument for spending resources on things specific to a small community in the game over using those SAME resources on things appealing to a much wider range of the community.

-

@Asum.4960 said:Content like LW provides good short term ROI by spiking a large amount of casual player engagement, before quickly falling off again.Content like Raids, WvW, Guild Activities and such each provide good long term ROI by keeping the engagement of smaller but more dedicated communities consistently.

Things like LW/Story expansions take a tremendous amount of resources to produce, with large content teams, massive efforts in world building, voice acting costs, marketing etc.Yes they generate a lot of short term revenue by appealing to a massive audience, but it appears to not be sustainable on it's own. They also come with more risk.

I can't complete agree with that ... I already gave the example of Anet making a World Boss Teleporter for sale in the GS ... and that revenue stream is related to about as old and as OW content as you can get. If anything, I think scripted, repeatable content that is difficult for the average player is most likely to generate the shortest term and/or smallest revenues. I mean, if we want to talk about the content that generates the most revenue, that's likely going to be content where the revenue streams are most relevant ... and even though the storyline/LS content itself is short lived, their maps are not. Therefore, I would bet that content related to OW maps are where the money is.

For me, the difference between long and short term health isn't related to the activities you can do ... because again, the game is targetted at people that don't have hours to play. The health is related to the items you can get from them. hence, we get legendary weapons and other 'long to get' things even though getting the mats for them are not linked to the activities that one normally attributes to end game or long term 'farming' kinds of group raids.

Equally unsustainable on it's own is the comparatively small effort hardcore content, generating low but constant, consistent and fairly safe revenue.

Put both together, and you have a chance for a healthy MMO.Launch always looks good due to hype and the massive amount of content already done that's initially available, with it's primary cost being upfronted. But you can't ride that wave forever. Neither with just short term spikes nor just a long term trickle.

I'm going to put forth the idea that if that proposed comparatively small effort hardcore content was made into comparatively small effort hardcore+casual content, that's even BETTER way for Anet to use those resources. Unfortunately, that was NEVER what raids were implemented as.

That's where I believe Anet made their biggest mis step with raids. It's simply not appropriately implemented for most of the people that play this game. That's why I'm so opposed to the idea they bring them back. Any notion of new raids being developed, assuming they follow the established raid formula already in this game, should die in a horrible fire.

Listen, I'm not against content for people, but I am against the idea we just throw SH*T at the wall and see if it sticks to get things that don't make sense for the game. Content aimed at a specific and small group of players defined by their love of a game element that is no longer being developed is NOT what I would expect to find in a game that cares about it's longterm health or a game that can't afford the luxury of serving these niche groups.

You know, it's funny because I never see proponents of raiding talking about ideas that would make raiding relevant again. I know you guys got hang ups about associating raid content development with revenue but you know what I think ... if raids had revenue streams specifically beneficial to them for raiders to spend gems on, it would be WAY easier to push for new raid content. You don't need new raids ... you need GS content that you can buy to support their development.

[Asum.4960]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Asum.4960 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Asum.4960 said:I said long term, community building and hardcore content was part of that, and that Raids simply check all of those boxes really well.

Let's focus on the topic here ... because we ARE in a thread about why Anet should add more raids for EoD. It begs the question how you conclude "hardcore content" is part of the long term health of the game. I don't see why that's such a critical part of game health ... like somehow if we didn't have this niche of hardcore players cranking out playing raids ... the game would be unhealthy? howso? I mean, we didn't even HAVE raids for the first three years and that is arguably some of the the most successful era of the game!

Such a belief doesn't make sense if you understand the opportunity cost of Anet focusing content that not ONLY appropriate for hardcore players but ALSO casual ones. If some content is some benefit to the long term health of the game if it targets a niche community ... it can only be MORE benefit if some content benefits that niche community AND a wider range of players as well.

The bottomline here is that there is no argument for spending resources on things specific to a small community in the game over using those SAME resources on things appealing to a much wider range of the community.

-

@Asum.4960 said:Content like LW provides good short term ROI by spiking a large amount of casual player engagement, before quickly falling off again.Content like Raids, WvW, Guild Activities and such each provide good long term ROI by keeping the engagement of smaller but more dedicated communities consistently.

Things like LW/Story expansions take a tremendous amount of resources to produce, with large content teams, massive efforts in world building, voice acting costs, marketing etc.Yes they generate a lot of short term revenue by appealing to a massive audience, but it appears to not be sustainable on it's own. They also come with more risk.

I can't complete agree with that ... I already gave the example of Anet making a World Boss Teleporter for sale in the GS ... and that revenue stream is related to about as old and as OW content as you can get. If anything, I think scripted, repeatable content that is difficult for the average player is most likely to generate the shortest term and/or smallest revenues. I mean, if we want to talk about the content that generates the most revenue, that's likely going to be content where the revenue streams are most relevant ... and even though the storyline/LS content itself is short lived, their maps are not. Therefore, I would bet that content related to OW maps are where the money is.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, I don't think the World Boss Teleporter was a flagship revenue generator. And yes, there are rare and limited opportunities to monetize old casual content, but they are just that.

I don't know why you perceive difficult hardcore content as short term.If you have a bunch of bad story/casual releases, or no releases at all for months, you will lose a significant amount of those players, many forever.Hardcore crowds are by definition a lot more resilient to that, and will play and therefor engage with the gemstore for much, much longer through bad releases and content draughts.As for Open World maps not being short lived, that really only goes for the hardcore farm maps.

I very highly doubt that the average years old, much bigger, much costlier to develop OW map generates more weekly engagement than the average Raid Wing - but I'm willing to hear anything that would suggest otherwise.

@Obtena.7952 said:For me, the difference between long and short term health isn't related to the activities you can do ... because again, the game is targetted at people that don't have hours to play. The health is related to the items you can get from them. hence, we get legendary weapons and other 'long to get' things even though getting the mats for them are not linked to the activities that one normally attributes to end game or long term 'farming' kinds of group raids.

Imo the key is to target as many audiences as you can. That's really what MMO's are all about.While they can't compete with dedicated single player story experiences, or focused PvP games, the magic of them is that they provide all of that in a shared world.To then just target very casual, largely single player, story players to me, and according to what we can likely conclude from financial trends, does not seem to be a good idea.

@Obtena.7952 said:

Equally unsustainable on it's own is the comparatively small effort hardcore content, generating low but constant, consistent and fairly safe revenue.

Put both together, and you have a chance for a healthy MMO.Launch always looks good due to hype and the massive amount of content already done that's initially available, with it's primary cost being upfronted. But you can't ride that wave forever. Neither with just short term spikes nor just a long term trickle.

I'm going to put forth the idea that if that proposed

comparatively small effort hardcore content

was made into

comparatively small effort hardcore+casual content

, that's even BETTER way for Anet to use those resources. Unfortunately, that was NEVER what raids were implemented as.

I'd argue the same for casual content. I've been saying for years to reuse some of those set pieces and story instances as repeatable hardmode and group content.Why they haven't turned things like Fahranur, the First City or the assault on Balthazar, Kormir's Library and many many others into 5-man hardmode dungeon/fractal/raid like experiences with it's own currency system is completely beyond me.

That's actually what I at first thought Strikes where going to be. Finally reusing all those existing assets and frameworks for people to go in as "Strike Teams" to relive and reuse in a way catering to a different part of the audience.

That's really my main gripe with the Story content in this game. It takes such massive amounts of resources to produce just to largely go to waste for the vast majority of players after the initial hype/engagement.

@Obtena.7952 said:if raids had revenue streams specifically beneficial to them for raiders to spend gems on, it would be WAY easier to push for new raid content. You don't need new raids ... you need GS content that you can buy to support their development.

Everything that contributes to player retention contributes, at large, to gemstore engagement.Raiders want to look cool too. Fractal players love the convenience of the Mistlock Sanctuary. Everybody likes endless salvaging tools, etc.In fact, the more hardcore you play, the more need you have for bank expansions, bank tabs, inventory expansions, shared inventory slots, build slots etc.If you log in frequently for weekly hour long Raid clears, daily Fractals runs and so on, you are much more readily exposed to new cash shop items, new sales., if you are part of a dedicated community much more invested into showing off, etc., than a largely solo LW tourist.Yes, they are fewer players, but beyond making the game seem alive, interesting, providing content, guides, goals and so on, they are also a very safe and valuable demographic, and they don't take nearly the same amount of resources to cater to than major once and done Story set pieces and experiences.