Note: I tried posting this earlier, and a major power failure cut me off mid-post. By the time the power came back on, I tried posting again only to find the thread had been closed. I felt strongly enough about my opinions that I'm posting it now. Although it may seem slightly out of place at this point in the conversation, I still believe it is pertinent. Also, it is difficult to properly convey emotion in simple text, so just to set things straight, please don't read any anger into my post. There is a degree of indignance, and even frustration, but it is not intended to be directed at any individual. Thanks
Many posters have mentioned inflation and the effect of these changes on the economy within Guild Wars. The problem with trying to gauge the impact of any single event on an economy is that any two economists will give you opposite opinions on what will ultimately occur. The fact is that unless what is being tried has been done before in the exact same circumstances(and even then sometimes), there are too many variables to be absolutely certain what impact the change will have until it has been implemented and tested in reality. With that caveat in mind, I have my own analysis on how these changes will affect the GW economy. I've posted my position already, and I'm not going to type it again. If interested, you can read it
here, and to sum it up, I believe that this will effectively raise the value of the gold which players have already in storage prior to the update, effectively keeping prices near their current level, while reducing the availability of new gold within the game and making it harder for players to obtain such gold, raising relative prices for everyone.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
Kaleban, I don't use "belief doublespeak," and I'd prefer to keep this discussion away from the personal. Disagree with my position all you wish, but there is no need to be truly disagreeable, is there? 
|
I can't speak for Kaleban, but many of us are tired of having the game changed with no explanation other than PR spin with no real logical argument or factual evidence. Personally, I do my best to remain civil, but I don't like being patronized and I'm frustrated with the poor responses we have so far received, so please understand if we seem a bit upset.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
I will explain the reasoning for the change:[*]It could be said that in the past, when certain players were receiving 800% the rewards of other players, there was an inequity.
|
It is important to keep in mind that these players were also doing 800% of the work as other players. The game has always had a choice with a tradeoff, work together with other players and get through the enemies faster but with less loot, or work alone (or in a smaller group) and work harder and longer, but have more to show for it in the end. Unless I greatly misunderstand, a choice of how to play with accompanying consequences and rewards is a major part of the Guild Wars experience. What else would you call the option to use the new "Hard Mode?" Until now, there has always been an equality of opportunity, as all players could choose their method of play. There was equity in the system, any inequity between players was a result of player choice (or skill, which I thought was also a major part of the game).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
[*]All players were seeing high prices for the most desirable items; they noted a push to unattainable of items they wanted to get.
|
I think that the best(but certainly not the only) example that debunks this argument is the Obsidian armor. This armor has two major components, the first being a large amount of gold (60k-75k depending on if the armor includes a headpiece). This gold is a fixed price, it does not nor has it ever fluxuated with the in-game market economy. The other major component is a large quantity of rare crafting materials, Globs of Ectoplasm and Obsidian Shards, 105-120 of each. In a typical trip to the Underworld or Fissure of Woe, there are usually one or two drops of these items. So, in an eight player group, and assuming a high average of two drops per run, each player would get 1/4 of an ecto or shard in a single run to the UW or FoW. Therefore, it would take a player between 840 and 960 runs to obtain enough materials to craft this armor. While the prices of these materials have fluctuated over time, their rarity has ensured that they have been and always will be relatively expensive. By design, the armor and its components are high priced to the point that the only feasible way to obtain it is by farming, either for the components themselves or the gold to buy them. If farming the components directly, the only truly viable method is to do it solo or in small groups so as to lessen the number of runs needed. I understand that the drops of these items have been restored in the recent update, but the point is that these armors are intentionally costly and near "unattainable" by the design of the developers, not because of any influence in the in-game economy, the actions of farmers, or the amount of gold in circulation. If prices in game are high, bear in mind that a great deal of that is because high end items were given those fixed prices by the game's designers, not the players. In fact, any inflation in the game would have made these fixed-price high end items
more attainable by players by lowering their relative cost.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
[*]The only players able to attain the coolest items fell into a certain player type, the farmer.
|
As pointed out before, if this is true, then it has been by the design of the developers. If rewards available in-game from completing quests and missions is not enough to purchase the high-end items in game, then of course players must turn to alternate methods of obtaining gold if they want to buy the high end items. In short, if you have to farm to get the "coolest" items, it is because Anet set it up that way, not because people farm. Many players consider the "coolest" items in game to be the "designer" armors (15k, Vabbian, Obsidian, etc.), they are certainly among the more expensive items, and claiming that they can only be attained by farmers because there are farmers is a blatant falllacy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
[*]This reduced the fun factor of the game, in that the game seemed to require that players play in a certain way if they wanted to get those items.
|
I'll agree that farming is less fun for many players, myself included. I hate farming, but I have resorted to it to obtain the items in game that I want. But I don't place the blame for the need to resort to farming on other farmers.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
[*]Farming is ok with us, no problem at all, but we did not intend that farming would be "required," or that only farmers would be able to obtain the coolest items.
|
If farming is truly "ok" with you, stop making it more difficult or less profitable to do. If you don't intend for it to be "required," then either improve the rewards in other parts of the game or lower the fixed prices so that we can accomplish the goals you have made available in game without resorting to farming.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gaile Gray
[*]Loot scaling was implemented, in part, to adjust for the changes to the game that affected normal mode with the addition of Hard Mode. If you're able to enter a map more often without a reduction in loot, and if you can complete a map or kill X number of mobs faster, then loot scaling makes the rewards more fair and more appropriate. See the original post in this thread for more information.[/LIST]Here's one way of looking at it, perhaps this will make sense to some: The intention of loot scaling is not to "punish" the expert farmer. The intention is remove the numeric punishment that was previously inflicted upon those who play casually and/or who play in a party.
|
So instead of experiencing a decrease in loot after a few trips through an area (which is about all a "casual" player would be doing in one sitting), players experience a constant and permanent decrease in loot any time they try to farm with less than a full group. How is this more "fair" or "appropriate?" You're probably right, this most likely will not "punish" the "expert farmer," but rather it punishes the casual farmer. My understanding from the first day I picked up the GW box was that the game was designed to cater to the casual gamer, but more and more I see changes that provide content only attainable by players who devote massive amounts of time to the game, and this change to the loot system only serves to underscore this trend.
I am a casual player. I enjoy games for their plots and stories, as well as the development of my character. I don't have a lot of time in my life to devote to gaming, and I'd prefer to get the most out of the time I do have. This means that I'd rather spend as little of it farming and as much of it playing missions and quests as possible. These new changes do not remove the need to farm, but rather increase the farming time required to achieve the same goals. Rather than farm even more to reach these goals, casual players like myself are more likely to become frustrated and give up on such goals altogether. This change does not raise the fun value of the game for anyone, it just makes it more of a pain and more likely to receive less attention and playtime from players like me.
This loot change, the change to soul reaping, and many others in recent months have made it appear that Anet has been coming up with "fixes" without considering their full impact on the game. Half-formed explanations that can't stand up to a cursory examination have done nothing to improve their case. Truly casual players who don't spend a great deal of time in a game tend to rely on using the same tactics over a long period of time because they don't want to constantly have to spend their time rethinking
how they play, they just want
to play. Constant changes to skills, abilities, and game mechanics that require frequent changes to play styles only serve to alienate the casual gamer. Anet had better do some research on the history of MMORPGs such as SWG if they want to keep their playerbase, especially if they plan on the bulk of current players buying GW2.