Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
LastLast
  1. #61
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    Grats you can't even read the shit you quote. Specifically where it says, optional....where people who want to chase prestigious gear can do so, but are under no obligation to.

    Whatever, running explorables right now so I don't have time to argue with people who quit the game but still whine about it.
    Oh my word, try learning to read, the bit in bold is a clue.

    P.S - Also on a more PvE note, you might want to read up on what a gating mechanism is, because 'agony' is one and then see if you can work out why a gear dependent gating mechnism is directly opposed to what I quoted from Mr Johanson.
    Last edited by mmoc1f2ad58cb4; 2012-11-20 at 03:52 AM.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Wow, so now it's come to this...you have quotes copy pasted to you and still deny that the quotes even say what they say.
    No but when you bold only one part of it and ignore the rest of it, kind of makes you look like a tool.

  3. #63
    No, I just don't think it's as big of a deal as you people are making it out to be...

  4. #64
    Don't think it's a big deal even though a lead developer is stating exactly the opposite of the current situation?

    Doesn't seem to be a case of player making this gating mechanic out to be anything-- the developers themselves are stating it for us.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 12:43 AM ----------

    Side note: Why do people dislike resistance mechanics in stat driven games? It makes no sense as depth of play in such games is based on manipulation of those stats.

    If I have 10 factors to contend with and balance that is deeper gameplay/consideration than if I had 5 or 2. In stat driven games, of course.

    I actually greatly dislike the lessening of these stats in modern games. Thus why I enjoy Path of Exile, Rift, Everquest or Radiant Arcana. I love having to consider these variables carefully. Wouldn't be playing such games if I didn't-- I'd b playing Diablo 3 or World of Warcraft for streamlined simplicity.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2012-11-20 at 06:32 AM.

  5. #65
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    Side note: Why do people dislike resistance mechanics in stat driven games? It makes no sense as depth of play in such games is based on manipulation of those stats.
    I personally don't have an issue with them, but I believe that any form of "resistance" that is, something that reduces the total damage done by a given value or percentage should have a converse "penetration" stat. It's no fun if it's simply a way to reduce player damage. If player damage levels are a problem relative to the health or defenses of an enemy, then that's what needs to be looked at. Adding a "spell resistance" or "damage reduction" value without giving the players ways to get around it just annoying.


    If I have 10 factors to content with and balance that is deeper gameplay/consideration than if I had 5 or 2. In stat driven games, of course.
    Not necessarily no. "Deep" gameplay means a lot of things to a lot of people. It doesn't just mean more stats to contend with(though it does to some). It could come in the form of more mechanics, more complicated mechanics, adds, and so on. 10 factors as opposed to one or two also makes balanced gameplay more difficult to achieve, and severely unbalanced gameplay because certain stats hold a more significant role for one class or against another does not create "deeper" gameplay. In such a case "deeper" gameplay would likely be created based on fewer stats and more interesting mechanics based on them.

    Compared to some other games, I feel that GW2 actually uses fewer stats, even fewer than WoW currently does. While some people find number-crunching in games to be a lot of fun, I don't think that number-crunching is a good basis for deeper gameplay.

    I actually greatly dislike the lessening of these stats in modern games. Thus why I enjoy Path of Exile, Rift, Everquest or Radiant Arcana. I love having to consider these variables carefully. Wouldn't be playing such games if I didn't-- I'd b playing Diablo 3 or World of Warcraft for streamlined simplicity.
    I think it's a given that different people like different things. Games should always seek to find ways to balance out people's likes.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    Adding a "spell resistance" or "damage reduction" value without giving the players ways to get around it just annoying.
    Why?

    What makes the function of mitigation more annoying the function of a DPS stat. That are essentially the same thing. It just a change in the direction of the boss/enemy health bar.

    Is it a purely psychological thing such as in Asura's Wrath?

    Elaborate.

    Not necessarily no.
    It can only be "no" if the gameplay is not based on stat gain/loss.

    While I agree that GW2 is far less dependent on opposing stat outcomes than say, Path of Exile or League of Legends. Damage in/out is a factor partly determined by stats all the same.

    And in games where stats manipulation is the principle gameplay and drive than it makes no sense to be opposed to the inclusion of more stats.

    Where to use Path of Exile as an example again, more stats can only deepen the gameplay presented to the player. Because the only method of expressing gameplay is via stats.

    "Deep" gameplay means a lot of things to a lot of people.
    It can't. Depth of play can only come for the systems and rules of the game.

    I don't think that number-crunching is a good basis for deeper gameplay.
    This could not be objectively true. Entire genres are built around "number crunch", so to speak. Or manipulating the outcome of numerical values in your favor within a system expressly designed to cheat you.

    From pen & paper's THAC0 to modern day X-com.

    I think it's a given that different people like different things. Games should always seek to find ways to balance out people's likes.
    Noted. But I am trying to understand what would make someone interested in game where ALL the gameplay is based on numerical outcomes +/- to be against more variables in the dice roll.

    It makes no sense.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 02:55 AM ----------

    The problem that people (generally) have with resist stats is that they're outside the normal stat interactions in most cases. Sure, as a Healer in WoW I might have Intellect, Haste, Mastery, Spirit and Crit to work with and balance to my taste and optimize...and then I have Shadow Resist.

    All it does is subtract from my role and force me to farm a particular set of gear, and only for this one fight.
    These are the interesting parts.

    Why?

    I understand that the value of say haste might be more commonplace than Shadow Resistance. However the gameplay is based on meeting X criteria Y situation(s).

    What X is should be irrelevant to you. As the value of X is required as minimum goal in situation Y.

    It seems more a personal feeling that Haste [or whatever] should be "your stat". But in gameplay terms your stat should be whatever is required for Y.

  7. #67
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,074
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    Why?

    What makes the function of mitigation more annoying the function of a DPS stat. That are essentially the same thing. It just a change in the direction of the boss/enemy health bar.

    Is it a purely psychological thing such as in Asura's Wrath?

    Elaborate.
    I wasn't comparing it to a DPS stat. Damage reduction stats such as armor and resistance make players feel lame, especially if they have no way to counter it and it's randomly generated. Predictability is as important as randomization, this is classic TTRPG logic. Take for example, the d20 roll. It is random...but within a constrained range(1-20) and can be augmented by +/- alterations by the players.

    It can only be "no" if the gameplay is not based on stat gain/loss.

    While I agree that GW2 is far less dependent on opposing stat outcomes than say, Path of Exile or League of Legends. Damage in/out is a factor partly determined by stats all the same.

    And in games where stats manipulation is the principle gameplay and drive than it makes no sense to be opposed to the inclusion of more stats.
    Yes, it does. Because an increase in the number of stats does not directly correlate to an increase in gameplay quality or game enjoyment. I play D&D on a regular basis, among other TTRPGs. Lots, or few numbers have almost no bearing on the quality of play.

    Where to use Path of Exile as an example again, more stats can only deepen the gameplay presented to the player. Because the only method of expressing gameplay is via stats.
    This is one of those bell curve things. It is a not a perfect linear relation.

    It can't. Depth of play can only come for the systems and rules of the game.
    I'm sorry, but unless you have some sort of statistical backup to this, what you are saying here is your opinion.

    This could not be objectively true. Entire genres are built around "number crunch", so to speak. Or manipulating the outcome of numerical values in your favor within a system expressly designed to cheat you.

    From pen & paper's THAC0 to modern day X-com.
    Perhaps I should have clarified. I do not think that number manipulation alone is grounds for better gameplay. There is a happy medium where there are enough stats to effectively represent in-game variables, but not so many as to overwhelm players, or too few to lose detail and some level of depth. A lot of people don't like THAC0 at all.


    Noted. But I am trying to understand what would make someone interested in game where ALL the gameplay is based on numerical outcomes +/- to be against more variables in the dice roll.

    It makes no sense.
    Pure RNG is not fun, it's boring. There's essentially no input from the players in pure dice rolls, and when the entirety of the game is decided by something outside the player's control, then that's boring. It's like if someone said you were playing football by watching someone else run down the field.
    Last edited by Sunseeker; 2012-11-20 at 08:08 AM.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    The problem that people (generally) have with resist stats is that they're outside the normal stat interactions in most cases. Sure, as a Healer in WoW I might have Intellect, Haste, Mastery, Spirit and Crit to work with and balance to my taste and optimize...and then I have Shadow Resist.

    Why do I have Shadow Resist? Presumably there's a fight that says, "Have this much Shadow Resist, or screw you." So...I have that much. It doesn't interact with any of my other stats, it doesn't even impact my role. There's really no interaction at all from me as the player.

    All it does is subtract from my role and force me to farm a particular set of gear, and only for this one fight.

    Now, if the usefulness of resistances were more widespread, and there wasn't such a hard requirement on when you had to use it and games were more oriented toward personal survival being more important than role performance and it didn't take away so much from the item budget and....you get the idea. There's a lot that would have to change just to properly accommodate resistances and make them...well, not suck.
    Why even the need for resistances in the first place in FOTM? Is Anet telling us they can't make a progressively harder dungeon with progressively better rewards without resistance?

    Resistance = bad idea, pure and simple.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I wasn't comparing it to a DPS stat.
    It doesn't matter what kind of stat it is. It's a stat.

    A stat needed for a certain event or threshold. That's all that matters in gameplay terms.

    Take for example, the d20 roll. It is random...but within a constrained range(1-20) and can be augmented by +/- alterations by the players.
    Isn't this essentially at work under the hood of many CRPGs?

    That +10 to armor is just as well -10AC.

    Yes, it does. Because an increase in the number of stats does not directly correlate to an increase in gameplay quality or game enjoyment.
    Not quality- too subjective. Depth of play is not. Depth of play can not logically go down by adding more stats to a stat driven rule system.

    Unless for example a single or set of stats [attributes] undermine or contradict another. Though that would simply be an issue of poor design. Not a particular stat, resistance in this case, being "bad" in of itself.

    What I am driving at here is implementation. I don't see any reason for players to balk at the concept as a matter of course.

    This is one of those bell curve things. It is a not a perfect linear relation.
    Perhaps not. I don't want to bring in specific MMOs into the discussion because things go off track easily.

    Though it should be consistent in any rules system based on stat +/-. Because the only way one can defeat the fire elemental with no legs is to meet X fire resistance, Y damage output, K blahblah, etc.

    The gameplay isn't based, and doesn't even allow option, having a conversation or trapping the fire elemental dude in a bag of holding via ingenuity.

    I'm sorry, but unless you have some sort of statistical backup to this, what you are saying here is your opinion.
    It's not. Gameplay is objective. I don't care about enjoyment at all.

    The game presents a set of rules. Players work within those rules to accomplish a goal. The more variables those rules allow the greater the degree of options a player has to accomplish those goals.

    In the case of EQ and the like those rules are completely numbers driven. One can not even interact with the game in a way that is not driven by stats in many cases.

    Perhaps I should have clarified. I do not think that number manipulation alone is grounds for better gameplay. There is a happy medium where there are enough stats to effectively represent in-game variables, but not so many as to overwhelm players, or too few to lose detail and some level of depth.
    I don't have too much argument with that honestly. And would tend to agree for the most part. Noting that some games or rules systems are driven by different factors.

    Many of the MMOs of modern era are drive by the factor of stats/gear.

    There's essentially no input from the players in pure dice rolls, and when the entirety of the game is decided by something outside the player's control, then that's boring.
    But one is influencing the outcome of the dice. That is the entire point of these stats in many cases. +5 to your roll one way or the other. It doesn't matter if players find it fun or boring. In gameplay terms that is how you are expressing a sword swing, parry or constitution for a certain condition.

    It's like if someone said you were playing football by watching someone else run down the field.
    What if the game one was playing was not predicated on running down the field but on creating the variables that make running down the field a success.

    That is a valid gameplay model.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2012-11-20 at 09:12 AM.

  10. #70
    I think the problem is that there are two different aspects:

    1) The gear is better. That has an aspect of the "gear treadmill" in it. No one can dispute that.

    2) Is the gear required to play all of the content. No, I don't think any can dispute this either. There is an exception here, and that's the agony mechanic. The exception is that people won't be able to do the same content on a higher level until they have completed the easier levels first. That will be a natural progression. I can't log off today and come back on in 6 months and try and do level 40 of fractals. But that's level 40 of the same dungeons. I can still experience the content, just not at the high levels.

    Yes, it's a change in the A/Net mantra but I still don't believe it impacts players to the extent that some are complaining about, if at all.

    The problem is this. There is a large variety of people playing the game. Some people are complaining that the content is too easy, others that it's too difficult. Some are saying that there is plenty to do, others say that there is nothing to do. A/Net are trying to balance the game to applease everyone and it's not easy.

    To all of those complaining about the Ascended gear. How would you propose that A/Net add longevity to the game? How can they, with limited resources because all companies have that restriction, create a system where players can repeat the same content and still feel some kind of accomplishment without adding something like agony? As I said in another post, there are only so many boss skills that you can add to a fight before it becomes too complex.

    People are more organised then they ever were when it comes to MMO games. Teamspeak, Mumble, etc are now standard practice, even for dungeons. This organisation cost WOW a large number of subscribers with Firelands (I know because I saw all of my friends quit). The balanced the fights around the highly organised guilds to the extent that a lot of casual raiders couldn't handle it. A/Net are in a difficult position. How do they answer the calls for tougher fights without having the same problem?

  11. #71
    I'm on Tarnished Coast. I haven't seen anyone in the game complaining about the new Ascended armor or fractals dungeon. It seems the only people complaining are the ones on the forums. To be honest, they haven't made an impact on how full our server is. If I hadn't read the forums, I wouldn't have known they left.

  12. #72
    They added a new tier of gear and scaling difficulty so that there would be at least some form of end game. As it stands, you can get full exotic gear in a week after hitting 80 by running dungeons. Hell, that's what I did. I don't do fractals for the gear anyways, I find the dungeons themselves fun as hell.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I still think it had more to do with Firelands being a tad boring than being too hard....Firelands was one of the easier raid tiers (aside from H-Ragnaros) and even my friends in casual guilds got to 6/7H.
    You may want to look at numbers for the entry level bosses from wowprogress.com: 84k guilds killed Marrowgar, 71k guilds killed Magmaw, 65k guilds killed Shannox, 63k guilds killed Morchok. The big loss, of course, occurred between T10 and T11, but overall WoW seems to have lost about a quarter of its raiding population over the course of Cataclysm. It is relatively irrelevant what you and your friends (or I and mine) think about the difficulty of the content: When Blizzard bumped the difficulty level for 10-player raids from being below that of 25-player raid levels to be on par, they did exclude a large number of players who just couldn't handle that.

    And, mind you, these are numbers after nerfs. Right now, we have less than 30k guilds who actually have a normal mode Stone Guards kill. We'll likely see more once the nerfs are being phased in, but at the moment, we're probably having less than half a million people outside China who are raiding actively. Organized progression PvE is simply not an activity with a lot of mass appeal.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I really wish I didn't have to explain why using wowprogress as a census tool is flawed every single time the topic of raiding comes up around here. =(
    Which is why I was comparing relative numbers (which should not be affected much by selection bias) and made generous assumptions for it undercounting.

    In any event, it's certainly better than any anecdotal data you may have.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I still think it had more to do with Firelands being a tad boring than being too hard....Firelands was one of the easier raid tiers (aside from H-Ragnaros) and even my friends in casual guilds got to 6/7H.
    Was that before or after the nerfs? My whole guild literally dissipated. We had a lot of fun during ICC. It would take us a couple of weeks but we would progress past a boss, etc. Cata changed a lot of that. The problems started with Magmaw. It's exactly what people were complaining about with GW2 bosses one shotting people. The fights started to have too many points of failure. One person makes a mistake and it's a wipe. We often ended Lady DW with a couple of players standing in the beginning. About 8 weeks on Shannox and a few on Beth and it was over. I played through DS but I was 1 of 3/4 left. The rest of the people all quit.

    Boss fights must be interesting, but they should also be a bit forgiving. Losing a player should not spell the end of the fight. That's why I like the situation in GW2 where there are no enrages. It's still possible to finish with 4 (or even 1 if it's for a short time). You should be able to make a call. "We have 3 people left, lets ignore the adds and try and kill the boss." or "Maybe we can get one to kite the adds around and the other two focus on the boss." or even "We can still fight normally it will just take a bit longer.".

  16. #76
    Deleted
    I like the fact that there are new dungeons; as in new maps, new bosses, new encounters.

    I couldn't care less to do the same instance over and over to beat an artificial / gimmick mechanic called Agony.
    That in my mind is as pointless as it gets... is there other mechanics coming at play at "higher difficulties"?
    From my understanding "no".

    You need infusions just to survive an ever present AoE (for lack of a better term).
    Can I react to it / nullify it / mitigate it in some other way? through "skill"? No, I can only outgear it, the rest of the encounter remains the same.

    Bottom-line (and this is entirely my personal take on it although that shouldn't need saying):
    As long as they feed me content and I have something to do I'm going to ignore gimmick mechanics like Agony and all it entails.
    If said gimmick becomes their way of "cheap" updates... I already got my money's worth, they lose any potential cash purchases as I'm just dropping the game.

    Simple as that

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray_Matter View Post
    Boss fights must be interesting, but they should also be a bit forgiving. Losing a player should not spell the end of the fight.
    The problem is more that there is a really wide spectrum of proficiency among players and most MMOs only account for a fairly narrow part of that spectrum. So, the above is not really a universal solution, either: It makes the fight more interesting if you're struggling, but more boring if you aren't. And the at most 2-3 difficulty levels that you find in MMOs these days don't really do a good job of accounting for a sufficiently broad part of the overall spectrum.

  18. #78
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I never know what to think...one thread people will say that if you're bored you "went too fast" and the game doesn't have enough content to support you. In another thread people will rave about how much content there is.

    Me? I wish I knew where all this "content" is that I hear people like you raving about. I mean, there's "stuff" around, but unless I turn into a compulsory completionist, very little of it is actual content that I want to sit down and do. Now, I'm not going to say that no one likes it, because that's obviously untrue. But I just don't see where all this content is.

    I'm sure this is where someone will chime in with a list of such things as "map completion" and "grinding for legendary"...which are about as good excuses for "content" as entering your password at the login screen.
    Yes because you've made up your mind that "there is no content" and now have determined yourself to endlessly drive your anti GW2 campaign ahead, for christs sake find another hobby dude this is worrying.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-21 at 01:11 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Yeah, see...things like "map completion" being passed off as content just annoys the hell out of me. It makes me wonder how long people will accept, "Hey, we threw some darts at the map, go to the places where the darts landed." as actual content. =(
    This is nothing but trolling...
    Last edited by Kelesti; 2012-11-21 at 07:41 PM.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Manekk View Post
    Yes because you've made up your mind that "there is no content" and now have determined yourself to endlessly drive your anti GW2 campaign ahead, for christs sake find another hobby dude this is worrying.
    He's actually made valid points throughout every discussion he's been part of, whether you (or I) agree with them or not. That you consider it a "campaign" or what others would call a "crusade" or anythign else, and rather than dispute his points fall to this? This itself is more worrying that people can't accept criticism of their favored activity.

    This is nothing but trolling...
    No, it's really not. Giving up on the point and directing frustrations at the person making them is a lot closer to trolling than that post is.
    ~Former Priest/Guild Wars 2 Moderator~
    Now TESTING: ArcheAge (Alpha)
    Now PLAYING: MonoRed Burn (MtG Standard)
    Twitter: @KelestiMMO come say hi!
    ~When you speak, I hear silence. Every word a defiance~

  20. #80
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelesti View Post
    He's actually made valid points throughout every discussion he's been part of, whether you (or I) agree with them or not. That you consider it a "campaign" or what others would call a "crusade" or anythign else, and rather than dispute his points fall to this? This itself is more worrying that people can't accept criticism of their favored activity.
    It's not that I can't accept criticism, he really does have an abnormal amount of it, apperantly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelesti View Post
    No, it's really not. Giving up on the point and directing frustrations at the person making them is a lot closer to trolling than that post is.
    I disagree with you at best you can call it a straw man argument, I already pointed that out to him that it's obviously the hearts, vistas etc that's the content, but having a tally run for the entire world makes it something to aim for if you like exploration and rather than say I aim to do all of it you can sum it with I want "map completion"

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-22 at 12:25 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Relax, sir. No one is kicking your dog or anything.
    I am relaxed, it's just a comment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •