Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Leo G.4501

Members
  • Posts

    1,589
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Leo G.4501's Achievements

  1. Wouldn't this be better as some sort of achievement? Why would you have to buy this? Maybe with gold, but why gems? Coming from another game with multiple player titles, I don't see it as a big issue.
  2. I get you. I suppose a short video wouldn't be detrimental, but likely still confusing (from a newb perspective, seeing the spec use different weapons doesn't have the same meaning to them as it does to us vets). Usually the main thing on display for these videos are the flashy graphics rather than an explanatory tutorial. Like I said before, you're trying to excite them not bore them and there really is no drawback to testing something before settling on a specific profession. Only other issue I could see with the demo videos is them dating themselves like that core video. Considering how trigger happy they get altering specs, it only takes a few before the video starts to present a distorted view of what the spec actually does. This isn't me shooting down the idea tho, just presenting issues and concerns. I just think a flavorful description can be enough to capture a new player's imagination and excitement. And most of those things are kind of boring to need to tutorialize (yeah, let me tell you about points of interests or POIs...). While I get where you're going, I think you undercut just how diegetic some of the tutorials in the game are. I've seen players walk right NPCs that are talking to them and only after the streamer stops and listens did they notice it and then interact and then BOOM, it's a scout or an event. They then learn that, sometimes NPCs aren't just static but also tell you information (something a lot of players aren't used to, or even how a lot of dialog is voiced). Having a codex for specific stuff like certain combat stuff (combo fields, stunbreaks, etc) right in the game to reference wouldn't be a bad thing tho. In that regard, a lot of vets go a good portion of their early game not even knowing what or how combos work. Putting some reference in the game to point to their existence would help there.
  3. I think we all already calculate Mesmer's contrary nature when theming weapons for them.
  4. Crazy weather out there, eh? It's been real Willbendery this season.
  5. I kind of like your #1 there. Although it's a bit overcomplicated. Telling the player the names and short description of the profession's elite specs is great, with maybe a wiki link that, when clicked, opens a window to the e-spec's page. A video, for the most part, is going to go over the new players' heads. It's pointless. Like, let me pull up a video of a raid on a profession you haven't played and you tell me what's going on in the video...it'll be tough to do. #2 I just flat out disagree. The tutorial you outline sounds boring. You don't want to bore a new player in the first 10 min, you want to WOW them. Put them in a grandiose battle that they get to participate in, drip feed them info and then when the time comes, let the loose to explore and figure stuff out on their own. The player doesn't need to know everything at once or even a lot at once, just the basics (using their skills, how to dodge and how equipment works). That's why the early areas are easy. If players are complaining about being overwhelmed, putting them in a 10min intro tutorial isn't going to suddenly whelm them. They'd have to actually make it through said tutorial first and then retain that info after. An optional tutorial for stuff like boons, conditions, combos, profession mechanics, etc should be optional if it exists. That and it saps the fun out of actually learning things yourself. There is a sense of excitement when you discover "Oh, this weapon has completely different skills?" or "Oh, that mob died because I put conditions on it?" feels better than just sitting through a tutorial telling you about it. And learning through trial and error ("so that's what that downed skill does") is more effective than a pop up to tell you to do something in a specific rotation or order. I dunno, maybe I'm bias. I sometimes watch streamers who are trying out the game for the first time, in awe at how fluid the movement is and how novel the questing is. The worst thing that happens is when a stan watching the stream comes in (in game) telling them how everything works, where to go, what to equip, etc saps the enjoyment of watching them learn but also robs the player from discovering the game at their own pace.
  6. People besides me use Rifle? It's my go-to build while I play Bladesworn. I lose out on the F1 Killshot but is that really a loss? I don't think anyone even mentioned the burst lol Or maybe Killshot is good now. I dunno...it's either reg rifle on BS or Gunflame on Berserker.
  7. Would that not extend to engineer too (to a lesser degree than elementalist tho)?
  8. Could be a fun idea. Maybe test it out by limiting it to a specific trinket first or chest piece only. Then expand the slots over time until that breaking limit.
  9. Agreed. That's why I think focusing more on theme/concept and mechanics is the likelier thing. And from how some of the weapons turned out, they are already going that route.
  10. Is redundancy a bad thing? If it is, can we start clipping some of these gear spreads? Or just get rid of minor/major runes and sigils? I mean, I don't want to get rid of stuff just because I personally don't use them, but at the same time, redundant alternatives with the new relic slot seems in line with the other stuff.
  11. Personally think the weapon itself isn't as important as the mechanics/theme. You can do crazy things with weapons that like ranged Greatswords/Axes or melee pistols. As we get higher and higher saturation of skills, these mechanics and themes become more and more important. So I'd ask what players actually want/need for different professions. For example: I see Necromancer staff as quite unique in it's ability to set marks. Wouldn't it be cool if Elementalist had a similar ability to set such traps? They could be similar mechanically (set ground thing, enemy walks onto it and triggers it, profit) but with a different category like conjure or glyph. One might ask "but conjures and glyphs do such and such and that doesn't work like Marks" and you can either *add* that type of functionality to that skill type OR make the triggered effect similar...like triggering an elementalist's "conjure" summons a weapon near the target that will follow the target until you cause it to attack by swapping attunements or something. Similarly, if you wanted to make a, I dunno, Warrior "mark" weapon, maybe theme it around something non-magic like bohemian/tribal trail markings with the additional ability to mark directions when placed and if someone triggers them, they have to follow the direction you placed or suffer some ill fate. I focused on marks a lot but you could play around with different mechanics that aren't shared like Ranger's Nature's Strength but like themed for the profession you're adapting it to like "Executioner's Hood" for Necro and it does something unique like causes a shadow well when you go into shroud or augments one of your shroud skills, etc.
  12. When presenting arguing points, it's better to steelman them than strawman them, which is really the only argument I had here. Threats and attacks on character can be ignored. Like I said before, I took the latter of protesting with the wallet as I haven't bought anything from the gem store in quite some time and didn't purchase the last expansion. And yeah, you still want to keep tabs and log in every now an then to burn a little server power.
  13. lol apparently we can share the same outlook on the game but if you're not picking up a torch and pitchfork, you're doing mental gymnastics. So, what have you done to actually protest Anet's questionable design choices?
  14. Would have sworn he released a video about this before but this one is newer (today, in fact).
×
×
  • Create New...