Implement running to any town

Takuna
Your "blasted post" was four sentences long. That's not hardly enough to flesh out anything. I apologize for any rudeness in my reply to you; but please understand, if you don't spend more time making a reasoned argument than that, you come across as uninformed.

Making people play for longer works... if they are actually playing. As I had stated, a fair number of people are just quitting Guild Wars (PvE) altogether because they are tired of playing the same old character professions, but don't have the will to grind another profession through the campaigns.

Furthermore, you are right that if people's only goal is to complete the game, then shortening the process will make them leave faster. However, I contend that encouraging new PvE character creation would be an encouragement to stay. And also, I do not believe that people just finish the game and quit. Most of the people I know have already finished the campaigns on their favourite characters, but continue to play by grinding gold, repeating high-end missions with friends, and so forth.

Then again, if people are going to just finish the game and leave, don't you think they've had enough time to do so? My suggestion is aimed at retaining the people who are still on Guild Wars, who still want to play some aspects of the game, but do not wish to complete the required Grind to get to those areas.

Lyra
Oh, burnout will still happen. But, so sorry, we have a fundamental disagreement. I think that, for some/many people, giving someone the option to skip the continental grind will in fact encourage them to continue playing the areas they find fun, without requiring they go through the areas they don't. Again, do not force your customers to have meatloaf if they want cherry pie.

By the way, doesn't referring to how many people want to skip the cinema, only prove that there are people who appreciate the option? Your argument says that we can't give people the option to skip zones, or else they'll skip them.

?

You're right... burnout will happen overall. But, my suggestion is aimed at (what I perceive as) a specific, sizable cause of burnout--namely, the grind so many of us PvEers despise. Remember, Guild Wars is the game where Skill outplays Grind.

So let me avoid the Grind, and use my Skill in the high-end areas please.

Magma
Um.... a little short-sighted? You keep repeating yourself, how much you enjoyed those areas of the game. Great! However, not all of us enjoy the same aspects you do. To a degree you have a point--if this is the way the game would always be, then yes, it would make sense to find a different game. And, in fact, this is what many people have already done...

... which is my point! ANet could retain some of its player (and thus, customer) base by adding in a modification to the current game. You can tell me to find a different game over and over--and in the end, that might be what happens. And yet, if this game can be improved to avoid that need, why should we not talk about it?

Please stop telling me to deal with the game as it is--to take it or leave it--and instead focus on the merits and flaws in my argument.

I didn't think I needed to say much more in my first post. I don't like to say more than need be. And yes, I had forgotten about people that were willing to grind gold and such, as I'm pretty sick of grinding anything. All I enjoy about the game is training up new professions and exploring new areas; trying new aspects of the game. I'm not one for 'getting that monk as fast as possible so I can do UW all month'.

One thing I do like, though, is knowing that most (debatable but... whatever...) of the people in high level areas know how to play. Letting newbies into higher areas faster will just make it annoying. I think we've heard all of this before from the whole Factions speed characters debates.

I just skimmed this and if it means unlocking all towns and outposts if 1 of your char.s has beaten the game I support it.I know a lot of ppl like and say just play the game but it is getting old and who wants to reroll a char.This may help those get survivor as well and if it mean getting ascended early then so be it.I have said it in a few threads that it would be great to be ascended before you get to ToA.

I would agree with this provisionally. Ferries to outposts you've unlocked only after you've beaten the campaign in question.

I would also add the idea that it should only be for chars after level 20. Don't wanna beat NF again just to get your 5th char to DoA? Cool. But imo ONLY 20's should have this. Otherwise you end up with chars that are way outleveled by the area LFG and you have lots of what we had in the recent past...ppl rolling chars, ferry to end, get end game loot, scrap, reroll. That is not enjoyment of the game in a new way.

/signed for a ferry for a price NPC if one of your characters has been there already, and if you've beaten that campaign.

Takuna
Your first paragraph states what you enjoy. Great! My suggestion would not keep you from exploring new areas and raising your new professions at all. You may not be keen on rushing professions to high end areas. ^_^ My suggestion does nothing to rush you.

Your second paragraph, though, raises a good point. This would indeed allow people to high-end areas before they might have the necessary experience. For myself, I consider this an acceptable trade off. I'd rather allow myself and my friends and guildmates to rush monks and paragons to the end areas... than be forced to grind through the campaigns, simply to make sure the nooblets get weeded out.

And, indeed, the nooblets are not reliably weeded out as it is. There have been many times in high-end areas... FoW, UW, Deep, Urgoz, and so forth... where I have been in party with "experienced" players who were obviously very, very baed at teh gamez.

So, while we may be allowing more nooblets in than we would otherwise like, we gain the benefit increasing accessiblity in the game to experienced players who are getting burned out on grinding new professions through an uninteresting (to them!) campaign. And besides, there are several counters to the nooblet worry. You can demand skill bar checks as you form a party; you can demand Ventrilo or TeamSpeak Attendance; you can go with mostly/total guild and alliance groups, whom you trust to run even new professions.

Shakti
Level 20, eh? There's an idea... same as the EotN ferry.
Then again, what did ANet do when they wanted to encourage EotN exploration?
THEY LOWERED THE LEVEL REQUIREMENT FOR CHARACTERS TO 10.

Now, I think you have a good idea. The level 20 requirement might be necessary.
My point, though, is that when ANet wanted more players, they increased accessibility by allowing players to reach areas sooner than they previous could.

Hmmm.

You don't want to play a section of the game because you dont find it fun. Ok, this I understand.

But the places you do want to play were designed to be the reward for playing the parts you might not find fun. This I understand also, but I do not agree with.

I choose A, and get a rewad.
You choose B and for less effort and get the same reward as me.

This is inherently unfair. IF you want the option to skip parts of the game, people who don't skip parts of the game should be given something as a compensation for their effort to offset not skipping it.

Adding such an option is not optional, but rather a mandatory thing.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Grind is completely SUBJECTIVE. There was a thread in riverside as to what was people's definition of grind. Go look it up and see if anyone agrees.

Playing through the storyline, for me, isn't a grind.
Playing the Deep OVER and OVER just to get crappy Zodiacs is a grind to me.

Again.
Some people will enjoy the cherry pie so much that they are willing to endure the hated meatloaf in order to get to the dessert at the end. Meanwhile, other customers will just say "screw it" and get their cherry pie elsewhere.

As a business, ANet does not want their customers to go elsewhere (RIGHT?!)*. Thus, my suggestion is an attempt to keep the customers coming here. Yes, people have always in the past gotten to the cherry pie as a reward for finishing the meatloaf.... but hey, if your customers want cherry pie, then by all means give them cherry pie!

By the way, you do get compensation for finishing the whole game. Gold, experience, faction, titles, drops, and so forth.

Finally, yes. Grind IS completely subjective--which is my entire point. You're not forced to grind zodiacs, and I ask we not be forced to grind campaigns.




* footnote: I do not personally believe the conspiracy theory that ANet has made their revenue off us, and now wishes we would all just stop playing in order to save bandwidth costs while also convincing us to buy GW2 a year or two from now. Of course, if you believe that ANet is trying to chase us all away from GW1 but not GW2, then my arguments lose much of their support.

1) This allows people to skip the game. This means people who WANT to play something like Bloodstone Fen, may not find a PUG, as the many who hate it will be skipping it entirely.

2) The economy is already bad. This allows people to equip themselves and their heroes with green end game weapons fast and easy. Someone with a Warrior, and all 4 games can easily outfit his 4 Warriors (player +3 heroes) with Exalted Aegis' and Sword/Axe of the Forgottens. They can do this now, but it would mean they buy the items, not 'earn' them.

3) If you want a skill or elite found in late game areas (Mind Blast, for example) you already have a way to get that. A level 1 Ele can have Mind Blast as soon as they get to a city and buy an Elite Tome.

4) I don't see how this will bring NEW sales in. Even if you are right, and people stop leaving the game because they don't have to 'grind' to the part they like, why are new people going to buy it? There are 10 classes, and if you own all 3 games to allow for those 10 classes, you get 8 character slots. At most, this means people will buy 2-3 extra character slots if they want to have 1 of each class. Many people, however, play 1-2 characters max, and have PvP slots or storage mules for the rest. There are also many people like myself, who have multiple accounts. I see little to no income being generated by this feature.

5) People stop playing when they get bored. Getting to the end game areas fast, having 1337 armor and weapons fast, and having nothing to work towards gets boring for most people. I see people no longer farming UW/FoW to get Obsidian armor, because they get bored playing the game, and no longer want to play. Most of the groups that do UW/FoW aer farming groups, or CLEAR groups for a monument. I see your idea causing more people to leave, not more to stay.

6) You can already get runs past large sections of the game, especially in Tyria. Although more limited, Cantha and Elona will allow you to skip sections, or not participate and get through. This has become part of the games economy, as many people make money by providing runs to places or through missions/quests. Your idea takes away part of the economy (which is not an inherently bad thing).

All I see you saying is:

"I don't like parts of the game, and would like Anet to make it so I can skip it after my first character has done it."

They lowered the req to 10 to get players in that campaign. They wanted sales, end of story. Allowing lvl 10's access to the beginning (with a huge buff) is a far cry from giving anyone at all access to all end game areas.

The entire EotN was closed to all below 20, not so in the other 3. Map travel is rather different. What I'm proposing is that the map travel npc ONLY works after lvl 20. This will stop the farm I mentioned previously, the low lvls looking for free rides through end game missions to get greens etc etc. Most (not all) of the complaints I see regarding this would be solved by the limit on lvl.

Some customers leave not because they want the cherry pie elsewhere but because the whole meal has gotten boring in general.

If they get sick of the pie, then they will lose the customer anyway.


No, these things are irrelevant, since XP/Gold/Good items are better in the higher end areas.

No. You are not forced to grind the campaign. You can choose to not play it. Thats an option too.

As long as primary quests and missions are required to be made IN ORDER, that, is you can go to Abaddon mouth with any character if any character has been there before, BUT, you WON'T be able to make Abaddon's mouth unless you make ALL the previous quests and missions.

Of course, that would include Prophecies quests. Travel by boat to Ember camp if you want, but will not be able to make the missions there unless making the previous ones.

Otherwise, NOT.

Have you ever though of the fact you would be burden to your guildies/friends? Playing class you have no experience, fighting mobs you never fought with that class before. Not only would you be buirden to oyur friends, you would allow thousands of other players to do same to their groups. All for what? together time which you could have easily somehwere else.

How selfish of you.

It would be reinisance of "bane signet-healbreeze-powershot-readthewind" monks we all knew and loved in THK, all this running would generate is lots of people missing experience playing their class in highend areas. And no, playing other characters trought does not count, because unless you are very smart, you need couple of roadblocks that teach you how to play better.

It would push people even harder to limiting their pug experience to people who are worth it: who grinded pve titles apropriate to that mission. And it would be necesity, simply because noone likes to fail.

Magma
In effect, you are correct in your statements. Your final summation of my posts is actually quite accurate. I don't see why that summation is a bad thing.

(1)
It's already bloody difficult to get a PUG at obscure locations. Your arguments rests on two ideas. First, that we should force people who hate playing that mission to play it. How... interesting. Second, you assume that there will be less people in that zone. While that is a concern, part of my argument is that there will be MORE people, as players create new characters and are able to try for Protector and Guardian titles, without having to actually run through all the primary quests between each mission.

Think of it! We could post a thread on Guild Wars Guru "Bloodstone Fen mission, Saturday at 19:00 GMT. Please sign up with character and profession you will be bringing." Now, I could only take my monk and warrior there currently--but if this were implemented, I could roll a ranger and have it ready by then with so much less effort than I'd need currently!

(2)
Yes, the economy is already bad. What are you trying to save? In my original post, I explained and discounted the worth of the end-game items you're referring to--did you see that part? More importantly, you can already get your heroes statistically superior weaponry with /bonus items. Hourglass Staff, anyone? I know all my casters use them.

(3)
Yes, and I already admitted that the PvE Unlock Packs were a secondary consideration. My point is not to get your characters skills faster; rather, it's to get your characters faster to the areas you actually want to play.

(4)
Even a little increased income generated through increased character slots and purchased campaigns would still be an income increase, and thus a larger bottom line, right? Even if it's minimal, as someone else in this thread has stated... most people have already bought their campaigns and aren't shelling out more cash. Thus, ANet needs to find ways to convince people to spend more money that they otherwise wouldn't. Here is my suggestions. ^_~

(5)
As I said to Lyra, people are going to continue to leave for various reasons. My suggestion targets one specific reasons; that some people would like to play other parts of the game (i.e. try Domian of Anguish on a Paragon), but don't find the idea of raising a new paragon all the way to DoA appealing. Do you think that offering people the chance to UW/FoW faster is going to chase them away? On the contrary, I would think that with the increased accessibility because of how easy it is to get new characters to UW and FoW, wouldn't they want to go to those areas more to get a monument for each character?

(6)
If it's not necessarily a bad thing, it's not a real objection. Of course, this is something to consider.

Well, if you've beaten that campaign and have unlocked the outposts, why not? People are getting runs through areas and missions already; if they don't want to play that area, they'll find ways around it.

The exploit was a little TOO free IMO, but with a bit of reasonable limitation I'd like the option of unlocking the maps. This would be especially nice in Factions where you need to earn 10k just to continue. I've done it three times already, and now I'm leery about spending any faction on things I'd like to have just so I don't have to stop and farm it.

I think if I was Anet, i would focus on making those boring areas of the game more fun instead of letting people just skip it.

That would be more productive.

Shakti
Ah, so sorry, I wasn't disagreeing with you at all! It's simply that your suggestion made me think of that point.

Lyra
Yes. If they get sick of the whole meal, they'll stop coming. I am not suggesting a thing to retain thsoe people. I am only making a suggestion that will help keep the customers around who like the pie but not the meatloaf.

"You are not forced to grind... you can choose not to play." Excuse me. Again, it's an example of "take it or leave it", is if the very act of suggsesting a modification is wrong. As I have said repeatedly, what you advise is exactly what many people are doing--they don't want the meatloaf, so they choose not to play at all! Wouldn't you rather serve more customers--some the whole meal, and some just parts of it--rather than lose customers because you insist on serving the meal in only one fashion?

zwei
An excellent attempt at the style of writing, but the flaw in the argument is a bit too obvious. I suggest giving people more freedom, which is hardly selfish. At least, it seems absurd to imply that giving people more options is tantramount to greed.

And, your argument would have more poignancy if PUGs were currently a healthy and large part of this game. Finding good PUGs is already an option; and as I have said previously, there are counters. You can form a party, for example, and demand to see skill templates. If you see a "RtW/Power Shot/Bane Signet Monk", you don't continue with him or her. XD

This quote demanded a separate post.
QFT

Of course, I have no idea how to do this. Do you?
If you do, please start another thread.
<3 And I will /sign it for you.

Shakti I agree with you on that to some degree - we all agree that do agree - that the whole mechanics would have to be worked out.


MagmaRed... As far as farming the end greens for their heros and such... Well it's just not all that anyways! I mean /bonus gives me about all I need for my heros. I doubt it will make that big of a difference. I continue to play this game because of the friends I have made and not my pixels and I can't play with those friends because they are either leaving the game because they don't feel like playing through the game for the millionth time or I don't feel like doing so with mine to get to that area to play with them.

As for DoA rewards - in case you haven't noticed at all, its not a cake walk in and of itself. There is a grind in that to get the "rewards" and you have to have completed the game anyways which anyone can get guildies to afk you through everything but I highly doubt that is any fun for them. I "forced" a character with some guildies to a high end area so that we could play and guess what? We were all too burned out to bother by then.

I don't want that.

As for the whole noob thing - you cannot fix stupidity. The bar has 8 slots and if they cannot figure out how to use 8 skills properly then they need to go back to playing hello kitty. I can understand it for pvp, but pve changes little - you get agro, you kill. I've known people to go all the way through the game and THEY ARE STILL NUBS! Ya can't fix stupid.

I advocate gameplay. I do not advocate catering to lazy players.

If you want something, you pay the cost. If you want this option, whats the cost?

Currently, the cost is eating the meatloaf. Either I finish the meatloaf, or I can't have any pie.

This thread is essentially my asking to skip the meatloaf and be allowed to eat the pie. And you repeatedly telling me why I shouldn't even ask to skip the meatloaf.

You are right, there is a cost. I am suggesting the cost is driving some customers away, and ANet should thus make a change.

The current cost is playing the game.
To get to the endgame areas.

Driving away people who DONT WANT TO PLAY THE GAME is not the same as driving away CUSTOMERS.

What will be the cost of getting to the end without playing?

Find me a reasonable and balanced cost.

basically, i have started 3 new pve characters in NF trying to get them to DoA and gotten horribly bored because i have already taken 3 through. This idea is epic and needs to be done.

/signed.

I think she has pricey pie there Red. >_>

Someone suggested making an actual NPC with prices - prices that go up per area along the line. Also the NPC would only be able to take that one character. This would prevent paid ferries of large groups as well or people being shuttled to parts of the game that they haven't touched. I think that would be obvious.

Heck I would pay 20k per character for all my level 20s to have the map unlocked for them. Kinda like skill points, it starts out low and progresses with the map progression. Heck I would be happy for this for just lvl 20 characters! I got about 10 level 20s just sitting at various boating towns. My ranger is the only character who has fully and completely beaten all 3 campaigns and the expansion. I love playing my other characters, I just get bored with the excess of each quest and mission over and over.

Gotta say, when this whole glitch thing began I actually agreed with ya Lyra. As time's gone on though, I really read both sides of the argument...and now I feel why not? If we limit the lvl to 20 and enable it only after you've beaten the campaign at least once, why not? Doesn't hurt me, doesn't hurt you.

Don't think I'd choose to do it, if I'm gonna play I wanna play lol....but I don't have the right to tell anyone else how to enjoy their game if what they're doing isn't affecting others...and with those limits, I don't see that it would .

You just repeated me.
The current cost to get the pie is eating the meatloaf.
The current cost to get high-end areas is playing through the campaign.

Driving away people who DON'T WANT TO PLAY THE ENTIRE GAME is precisely the same as driving away CUSTOMERS who don't want your meatloaf, only your pie.

Does everyone remember the PvE character vs PvP character issues? Players who PvE'd were able to gain a substantial advantage over PvP characters, as the PvEs could take in multiple armor and weapon sets, and so forth. The cost of playing PvP at its best was grinding through the PvE campaigns.

AND THEN THEY CHANGED IT

What is the cost now of enjoying PvP without ever rolling a PvE character? Not really anything at all; and why should there be? Let people enjoy the PvP areas without making them pay a cost at all. Indeed, this is part of what makes Guild Wars appealing!

Now then. You keep talking as if there HAS to be a cost for getting the pie, as if you HAVE to sacrifice something to get there.

Why?

Hmm, interesting write up, but I think there are a LOT of exploits that could surface due to something like this. While on a whole I think I /sign this idea, especially as GW1 comes to its end-of-life.

A few things:

1) If you want anet to truly listen to the idea, I think you should constantly update your original post (at the bottom) with the more intelligent pros/cons that have been raised in the thread. Do the leg work (tally up the yay's and nay's )

2) When the "gates" on factions were implemented to deter running, why do you think this was done? Out of the design meetings the ANET staff may have had discussing the running/gates issue, why would they change their mind now - there must have been strong opinions against it to add that in the game right?

All in all, its a good discussion. I lean toward implementing something like this, but being very careful about its limitations and unforeseen consequences.

Yes. I know. And I want to know what replacement cost you will use since you dont want to pay the current cost.

If you want only pie, then go to a place that sells pies.

Guild Wars sells the complete meal. I don't see the point in trying to keep people who don't find the whole thing appealing, since in the end of the day, they aren't enjoying their stay. They would be happier elsewhere.

LOL. Are you actually comparing a change that was made for BALANCE reasons to your idea?

Because it is the END GAME PvE content.

***Warning: This is Lengthy. Not intended for skimmers!****

I will play the devils advocate on a few things and give some counters.

True. People do want to play high end areas together. It's a lot of fun. My guild and alliance play UW/FOW, DoA, etc. But here's where I have an issue with the instant ferrying; Class Experience.

This isn't meant to sound "leet", but my main is a Mesmer (obviously) and I'm a great Mesmer. I pride myself on working to be an effective player with my groups so we can accomplish our goals. The only reason I'm good at my class is because of playing experience. That's something a wiki can't give me. A wiki can't teach me timing, positioning, and skill combinations that can compliment each other when used properly.

I've never, ever, played a Paragon, but someday I will and I would certainly love to bring her to DoA. If I'm able to create, ferry to the final mission, get a run, and get into DoA, that doesn't present any further opportunities to anyone. Well, anyone except 'me' because afterall, I'm there and that's all that matters. However, I'm still a Paragon without any class playing experience. It matters not that I'm a great Mesmer, would you want me playing my Paragon in DoA with you? If you say no, I wouldn't blame you. Even if I had the best, uber, most effective build a Paragon can run in DoA, I'm still not effective in timing, positioning, knowing "when to", knowing "not when to", the class energy management if required, etc. All things a wiki can't teach; only actual playing experience.

I've been playing Guild Wars for over 1 year now. I encourage players to play as many different classes as they can and I encourage myself to do the same. I hold 8 character slots. 2 are Mesmers. The rest are Dervish, Assassin, Necromancer, Ritualist, Ranger, and Monk. I have plans of buying slots to create an Ele and a Paragon.

The point is there is a trade-off to insta-warping. The trade off is this. Yes, you'll have more people and more variations of classes in elite areas. The flipside to that is you now raise the percentage of players who have little class playing experience. Again, see my hypothetical Paragon. For some this might not be an issue. However, keep in mind we have a community that is extremely picky in regards to ability, especially in elite areas and one that, in which the majority, doesn't like to teach, instead reply with "Read the wiki". Full circle.

I completely understand the pain of redundant gameplay and some people just want to play a certain class in a certain area. But I just don't see the point of the instant ferry to do so. If it holds true that your guild/alliance loves to do things together, take the few hours to have your guild/alliance aid in getting you to HzH for Urgoz, or the key missions to finish Nightfall. That alone is something everyone can do together instead of leaving it up to Anet to do it for you.


I disagree and here's why. If you provide the ability to skip content, what content are you drawing interest too? Barely a handful of single areas in 3 massive chapters? That hardly seems like a balance of interest. To overhaul mechanics of an entire sector (PvE) for a few areas.

To that though I do offer a suggestion and that is in relation to a Guilds/Alliance, alliance. That's to offer that when you're part of a Kurzick Guild, or Luxon, your characters, account wide, can have instant access to that sides specific Elite Mission through your Guild Hall, much like having an AB NPC available. Those Elite Missions are about the only area in which I do believe Anet SHOULD open up to everyone because those two can encourage more co-op guild play in the manner the AB does.

You mentioned hard mode and normal mode, but this account wide feature doesn't grant anything to a player other than increased difficulty, better exp, and some special drops (Tomes, Lockpicks, etc). HArd Mode doesn't grant me specifically designed Rewards for completion of a special area.

To unlock all areas via a ferry is, however, a different story. It removes the "Elite" area function that it's supposed to serve for the indivdual "character" and "character" is the keyword for that. Just because I've completed Nightfall on this Character doesn't mean I should have the right to access DoA on a brand new Paragon just because I said so, or that I've proved my worth on Sonata, so my ParagonX should be worthy too.

I will agree, I am impatient and have desires to get to placeX right away on another character, but, I don't think that entitles me to just have it handed to me because I succeeded on another character.

Finally, in regards to armor. This was a big discussion point in many towns. If one of the keys to the insta-ferry is too allow easy access (lets say to Kodash for Vabbian, or Cava for Luxon) for armor, why not just place the crafters in the beginning capitals? Ascalon, Shing Jea, Kamadan. It would serve the same purpose, but even so, it looks even more like just giving players what they want without actually working for it.

This is true, in some aspects. It would allow easier access to more advanced skills, specific armor, and key areas for second profession changes. It could very well draw in people to purchase more slots. However, is it really running the character and why does it all have to be easy? One of the biggest complaints I always hear is that PvE is too easy. If it's so easy to begin with, why is it so difficult for people to make it to AreaX?

Again, if I can make a Paragon, skip an entire campaign, only aquiring the skills needed for a high end area, that doesn't make me a great Paragon, nor does it mean I'm going to play a Paragon a lot if it's just there to do DoA. To use another example; I don't play my monk much at all. Barely would be best for a description. I could run the most elite Monk build given to me, but that doesn't mean at all I'm going to perform great if I don't have the playing experience that is gained from playing through the games. What good is the build if I don't know how to play it? I could just pound at numbers blindly and hope for the best.


From my vantage point, and only for me, it becomes a wasted character slot. No time put into it, no skill, no class experience. That's the downfall that can't be seen on the surface, but would show itself quickly and worries me in a community that has lately been obsessed with Skill>time and the raging of PUG's. In a time in which many players are convinced Skill>Time is going out the window, now you're asking Anet to make a feature that truly goes against that mantra.


But here's the kicker. Compound that 15K (using the avg of 10+20) by the now easily obtainable quantity. Assuming the insta-ferry allows me to create a character, skip to the final mission, run it, and grab an end game; we're looking at what, 10 minutes tops for each run? So we'll say, max, 6 end games per hour. Play 8 hours a day, that's 48 end games for one day. Sell all 48 the next day at the cheapest possible avg of 10K is 480K. Take those numbers and multiply it by the number of players who would do this method and you drive any value of these items right into the ground even more and overflood the game with them even more.

I'm not against farming and I'm not against making money. I am, however, against giving opportunity to easily obtain "End game" items without actually playing to end the game. Again, it's saying "You don't need to work for anything, just have it now". No, it doesn't affect me directly, but it makes me ask the question, why even have any game content at all if all the rewards for playing are given to you the moment you walk through the front door?

It is a ripple effect and end game items are only one aspect.

Just because the prices are lower now than they used to be doesn't mean it's a great reason to drive them into the ground more.


Also, keep in mind, a persons value of their gold is different from anothers. One person might not consider 100K to be much at all. Many in this game feel 100K is pocket change. However, to others, 100K is more than enough and rely on specific items of 10-20K, which sell rather easily, to maintain profit.

There are somple players who make in game financial livings off of Dock ferry runs for 500g. Certainly cheap, but who are we to say if it's worthless, or not? Something doesn't have to be 100K+20e to, over time, obtain wealth from the item, or service.

I don't have much of a reply to this part other than it shouldn't be on Anets shoulders to cater to your Guild/Alliance players abilities. There's nothing stopping Guilds and Alliances from working on MissionX other than some players unwillingness to work. While it might not have been intended, this comes across to me as almost "It's Anets fault playerX can't do Grand Court because PlayerX can't just get there right away".

On another note, I do feel it will pull people away from already rather empty areas. You mentioned the jungle and again I agree. But seeing as how people can skip places like the Wilds, Bloodstone, and a few others and move right to Sanctum, the reasons these places are so empty is because we already see the effects of being able to skip large portions of gameplay just to get to the end. Note the populations of Sanctum vs Riverside, Wilds, and the previous. This is already a direct result of the ability to skip and the reason why some players LOVED the locked gates in Factions.


This is at the heart of it all and is why your post is no more right, or wrong, than mine. You make a very fair arguement that limitations to you shouldn't happen. I agree just as I'm sure you wouldn't want to limit my gameplay either. However, there has to be realization that the downfalls and negatives are felt by everyone in the game no matter if you're new, old, those who would use it, and those who don't. This is the fine line that has to be walked, not by us, but by Anet. Guild Wars hasn't been a success because it got lucky. It's been a success, with such a loyal player base, because of the play mechanics it uses. To suddenly change a significant portion of that is one that shouldn't be taken lightly and certainly a reason I'd suggest and hope Anet never, ever, makes it a feature.

There will always be players who will see Anet as never doing anything right no matter what. So be it. But keep in mind that making a feature this big, insta-ferry, has a huge impact. While it can be positive and you outlined some great positives, it's not all positive, and has serious drawbacks on the entire community. These are things we need to be very careful with. Many online games have destroyed themselves because of significant game mechanic changes.


Again, I have to say, should this fall onto Anets shoulders for blame? I don't see how, or why, it should. It's asking Anet to change a significant portion of the game setup just to cater to a group who needs one specific class for one specific area. This isn't agruing about what's fair, or what isn't fair, it's just saying why is this problem up to Anet to solve for you with immediate gratification?

Sure, it sucks that one would have to decline, but that shouldn't fall on Anets shoulders to fix.


There are more problems than meets the eye and some I listed and explained. Given time if ever put in place I'm sure more would arise. There are consequences to adding such a feature. Some seen now and certainly some that are unseen.



I won't sit here and lie that if such a feature was put in place, I would not be without temptation to use it. I would. That, though, doesn't mean it should be.

It should never be Anets responsibility to make everything available right away, no matter how long we've played, or how many characters we have. If you have 10 characters, but can't be bothered to work all 10, then perhaps that's a sign you shouldn't have 10.

Having the ability get anywhere at anytime, or to get any armor, or special weapon at anytime, is essentially the same as placing every high end crafter right in the starter Captial and in turn makes Guild Wars nothing more than a Kaneva, or Second Life. Just buy what you need to make you look good and become a social status.


I really wish I could /sign Red. To be honest, at first read I was thinking it would be a great feature. But after thinking it through, I just can't find enough reason to back it. In the end it just feels like another "Too lazy to earn it, I just want it all now". I don't mean that to be disrespectful, but there's just no other phrase that can describe it.



It was a great read though. Happy new year!

/signed
grind is fail

/not signed

Thanks but no thanks you know that gold spammers would utilize this or find a bug in it and then we will have gold spammers in every town. This would kill the game not make it better.

/signed

too many people can't see outside the box..

ANet could easily figure out a way to implement a GW version of Tabula Rasa's (Richard Garriot/NCSoft America) Character Cloning. They are smart enough to figure out how to make it into a Character Morph (seeing as how the class system works differently and you'd be creating a char of a different class) which would have the same stuff unlocked as the original. Then you proceed to unlock the stuff specific to that class and have the previous characters skills already unlocked (for use as primary or secondary skills depending upon the class).

I prefer to be in a group of people that are having fun even if we're laughing our asses off at stupid wipes in Abaddon's Gate than elite 'good' players that are trying to plan and execute a perfect (read: not very fun) mission most of the time. If they suck, so be it. If I really really want to get something done then I'll just H/H it anyways.

EDIT: If a player is smart enough to play through a class (play through it fully once and not be run/escorted) then they're smart enough and probably adaptable enough to figure out another class, even one very different from their previous ones. In PvP people switch between classes all the time. In fact, learning a class in PvP is done by playing a new class at level 20 with all its gear (and now with the unlocks) all their skills. If PvP is harder than PvE (which people constantly say on these forums), then there's absolutely no reason people can't do the same with different characters in PvE.

I think completing a campaign should give you a certain number of "passes" - those passes can be used to get to the next major point in the campaign instantly, and thus allow players to skip certain missions or quests that they detest. Further, I would also include an "easy" option for missions that someone is finding particularly difficulty. Perhaps it would lower the enemies' level a little, or reduce their numbers, but the end reward would also be reduced. Another option would be to have GW2 base mission rewards upon how many people/henchmen/heroes you bring - so the "standard" amount gives normal rewards, but you can bring more allies along to ease things a little.

Overall, though, I am against complete and unlimited skipping of content because it would cause people to jump to the end as soon as possible, become bored or under-skilled w/ their character, and either whine that there's nothing else to do or make those higher areas less fun for those who did the content to get there.

/notsigned
The traveling system in GW is already incredably easy (map travel is an amazing pro for casual gamers, but also a big con as it breaks emersion).
I'd prefer if GW2 had some sort of happy medium. ie... allowing map travel but requiring you to use some sort of magic amulet or something to do it.

I actually think this is a very interesting argument. I'm actually torn between whether it's a good idea or not. I must confess that I've used my fair share of runs and taxis in my time.

I have never used a taxi service or somthing similar, to skip elements of the game I have not previously completed. I think this is probably true for a very large percentage of people who use such services. The whole concept of "running" in guild wars is quite unique amongst MMOs, it's an accepted practice specifically designed at skipping large chunks of the game.

I really see the suggestion as the logical extension of running. Personally, I would love to see it in the game, having unlocked every town and outpost on at least 3 PvE characters already, it would be nice if some of my other characters could inherit some of their hard work.

Lyra has made some very good points about the possible cons of this system. I agree that it could possibly shorten the lifespan for some players, rather than extend it. I know that I have spent a respectable amount of hours "grinding" my 4th, 5th, 6th... all the way up to 10th characters through PvE. If I had a "Skip to the towns with the cool armour" button, I'd have clicked it.

I can just foresee this kind of option, as causing burn-out for players MUCH faster in PvE. Sure I don't particuarly enjoy grinding my characters through Bland Area 53, but having put in the work, there is at least some small sense of satisfaction when you get to the needed town (even if it is for the 300th time).

However, when you consider the amount of hours the more hardcore players put in on their characters, the few days it takes to fully unlock a continent, are almost insignificant, compared to the hours they spend farming, vanquishing, questing, earning titles (the list could go on...)

At this point I'm still not sure it would be the right thing for ANet to do, they are effectively giving people less reasons to play very large chunks of their game. I can't help but feel it would decrease the general population somewhat. As Inde said near the start of the thread, maybe when GW2 comes out, this could be a nice feature.

Final thought: why did they make Hard Mode account wide? Having it character based would have been more inline the current model of the campaigns, yet I have never seen anyone complain that HM should have been limited to only characters who had cleared a game.

/bonus means nothing. Why? Not everyone has the option. End Game Greens are an option for everyone who owns the game. The bonus items are only available to the people who own the correct version of the game. Out of the 80 some people in my guild, I know of only 6 people who can use /bonus items.

End game greens are not 'GODLY'. But they are very nice. Currently, people who do not need/want the end game greens make some money by selling the greens or the amulet/book/key. Your idea makes it so their customer base is gone. Why buy one from someone when I can get infinite amounts of those greens for little time/effort?

And as I stated, and have yet to see anyone disagree with, the economy is bad. You don't disagree with that, but you want to make it worse. Your idea eliminates 2 ways people make money. Selling end game greens and selling runs. Although I can't say either of those are my favorite part of the game, I don't see selling the end game greens or runs to be a problem.

And since you asked, yes, I did see your mention of the end game greens and value. But what you seem to forget, is that there is some value to those greens. It may be small, but people are making money with it. You offer people a way to get those items for free, meaning the people making chump change on end game greens will be making nothing.

I rarely PUG. I find hero + hench to be faster for me. If I need more help or want some interaction, I use my friends list and guild roster. But I do PUG, and I always see people in cities PUGing. When you no longer have to do certain areas of the game, there will be a HUGE decrease in the population there. This is a comment on the game, but is not needed. Having people in places they don't want to be is a part of life. You can already skip 90% of Tyrian missions. But allowing this to happen freely means new players will have a VERY hard time finding teams for those unfavored places.

Although I have no problems with the way the game is, I'd MUCH prefer a way to make those areas more enjoyable for people than to give them a way to skip it.

This bit changed my mind...
/unsigned

/signed

NO one should say /notsigned. You don't have to use this feature if it's implemented into Guild Wars, which it hopefully is.

If no one should say /notsigned, it defeats the purpose of making a thread if there is only one answer.

There are "meta-level" implications that a feature like this would cause. It would affect *everyone* who plays the game, and as such, even though that wouldn't use it would be affected.

Let's say that once you beat the campaign, you can bring any future character to any outpost in that campaign. Now, you choose to use that feature but I don't. Unfortunately, I now have a smaller pool of other players to meet in the mid-level outposts to help me or maybe I just prefer to play w/ human players. I get frustrated that I can't find a player, and because I don't want to or can't bypass this particular mission, I quit playing and GW loses a customer for future products - I've been turned off to the entire series.

That example is an extreme one, but it's not unreasonable. I think what is needed is a happy medium; a way to speed through content a bit more quickly your second or later time around. I think the idea of a limited number of skips for subsequent characters would work, or perhaps branching paths to the end game (some having less missions) would also work.

Overall, though, a wholesale free pass straight to the end would damage the game...