Totally agree with this. My exact thought when I read Kafka say about needing a work/life balance was that the devs don’t expect their players to have such a balance and it would be great if the game was designed around encouraging such balance better.
Well said.
9 Likes
I think there’s a point to be made that it is not the devs’ job to design a game around a healthy work-life balance. For one, the game is owned by a business whose purpose is to make money. Second, a healthy balance may look different for different players. Third, it should be each player’s responsibility to maintain a work-life balance, not a company’s.
That being said, I do think there are some aspects of the game, especially PvP, which require huge time sinks to meet basic goals (such as having enough season VP to unlock the Mythic/Legendary troop purchase in the PvP shop). I do think there’s a way to make the “base game goals” achievable in a more reasonable timeframe while giving players plenty of carrots to chase after with their spare time.
A good example of a carrot to chase are the PvP Season goals. Casual players will likely not achieve most of those. I play just about daily (granted, not for super long each day) and will not achieve most of those goals. Yet I’m fine with this, because those feel like bonus rewards for those willing to sink more time/effort into PvP.
Though orbs have mostly replaced medals for elite-leveling troops (at least for me), I like that Explore gives players a place to use their extra time while working towards extra medals and that elusive Hoard Mimic (ignoring the elephant in the room on that subject). I very much enjoy that PvP is also “sigil-less” and can be played infinitely each day.
TL;DR - While I don’t believe that a company needs to (or will) prioritize work-life balance for players, I do think giving “bonus goals” for players with more time is better than adding too many “daily tasks” players feel like they need to achieve to stay afloat. PvP especially may be able to improve in this aspect, with its high VP thresholds and daily citadel battles.
15 Likes
I think a good move would be to make the pvp legendary unlock at a lower vp level than the pvp mythic.
2 Likes
So why was it replaced when you call it being so easy? Maybe you don’t represent actually players on common?
1 Like
So, yes, sorry to change the above topic but….back to Guild Wars going forward.
I’m on record in believing that a GW mode is important for the continued success of this game.
HOWEVER, I also wish to remind that there are many players, almost certainly a majority, who are lukewarm to the competitive aspects of GW and are perfectly content not playing this format. There’s also a subset who strongly dislike, may I say even loathe Guild Wars.
The challenge for the devs is to recreate an event which is enjoyed by those who love GW but doesn’t chase away those who don’t.
Which finally comes to my point, and caution.
PLEASE don’t create a set of exclusive GW rewards, such as mythic troops, etc, which can only be earned by those who place highly in the event. This would assuredly chase away a set of players that GoW can ill afford to lose.
15 Likes
I totally agree with a trivial or no rewards needed for GW. The rewards are the feeling of winning the bracket or being promoted as a guild. Or as a single player, improving my GW ranking within the guild, like trying to be paragon, getting a 30-0 score, or having the year high score on a particular color day.
I do not want to see other rewards for it, because I want the players that flock to a GW guild to be players that share the same enthusiasm for it, the senseof achievement that needs no other reward. And I want the people that dislike GW being able to skip it and go to a non GW guild without consequences for their collection of resources.
10 Likes
Im one of the ones who loathes guild wars and doesnt want it back in any form
2 Likes
This might get long, because wordiness is my super power. heh…
We are here discussing this on the forums. We are not talking about designing the game around people who dabble casually. I doubt those folks even know there is a forum to discuss these things, or care.
It IS in fact a a dev’s job to design a game where the most compulsively active, dedicated players can fit the game into the reality of a 24hr day. If a player does nothing but eat, sleep, use the restroom and play GoW, they could probably progress at the developer’s intended snails pace (I’m not advocating speedy progression, because that’s also bad for different reasons.) Of course, that would require said player to not have a job (we will ignore things like family and other things because they vary.) In order to make money on a game, there needs to be people to spend money on it.
Yes, there are people who, by whatever stroke of luck or circumstance, have money without a job. We can probably agree that it’s not the norm and not enough to support a game, especially not an aging game. So, from a sustainable business angle, the game needs to be designed to get “regular” working people to play and spend money.
When people realize that the intended snails pace is actually not even achievable for them (because of the realities of a 24 hr day) they may still play, but they probably won’t spend. And, they are more likely to seek out games that actually do fit into the reality of how many hours a day that even the most voracious player can spend on a game.
I’ve got a pretty friendly guild, where most people interact in a social way (as opposed to silently doing their thing). So when people leave, most of them take a moment to tell me why. I don’t know why any of the few silent people leave, when they do. But of the people who take a moment to tell me and say goodbye? 100% of them have said some version of “I just don’t have enough time for this game, it’s too much.” That is not good.
11 Likes
I don’t even play PVP let alone GW if they bring it back, it was always way too confusing and complex for what should be a fun match 3 game.
1 Like
First off, thank you for for the friendly disagreement, that’s becoming all too rare here (and in the world in general). 
I understand the sentiment of what you’re saying, and I agree that games need to consider what players can realistically do each day, especially when considering how quickly they want the average player to advance on a given goal. The Hoard Mimic is a decent example of this - do the devs actually intend players to have to do 10000 (number completely made up - I’m too lazy to do the math) Explore runs to get it? Probably not. Same thought goes for Sentinel drop rates, or even PvP season goals and thresholds.
I’d argue, though, that the players are ultimately responsible for time investment (or lack thereof) in the game.
The devs do not expect the average person to spend 24 hours playing the game, nor do they expect the average player to spend as much time playing as the average forum-dweller. Their “intended pace” is NOT doing every possible daily task (Dungeon, Dailies, Delves, Guild Event, Underspire, PvP, class/pet event, bounty, Arena, etc.) every day. Do they allow players to do that much content each day and progress a bit faster? Sure, but they have the stats to show that the players doing that much make up a miniscule amount of their player base.
Unless you are in a guild with requirements (guild membership being a voluntary choice made by the player), this game functions no different than Candy Crush. Obviously, GoW is a very different game with many different forms of progression compared to Candy Crush. But neither game (in fact, NO game I’m aware of) requires you to play or progress a certain amount each day. Players set these goals for themselves, and it becomes overwhelming when their goal for ourselves is beyond what we can feasibily do in a day. This is often caused by FOMO.
Does that mean some players might move on to other games? Sure, but that’s not because the game has too much content, it’s because they feel the need to do more than they are able to.
The same could be said for theoretical avid Pong players who are tired of spending so much time playing the game and want to prioritize other things in their lives.
Is it Pong’s fault for having too much content? Of course not - it’s the player deciding where to draw the line in how much of the game they choose to engage in.
1 Like
OK I think the disconnect here is that you didn’t really understand the point I was making when I said:
Because nowhere did I say that players are not ultimately responsible for time investment (or lack thereof) in the game. I can kind of get where the misunderstanding can creep in, though. So I will try to clarify (apologies again, for the inevitable length 
)…
There are as many reasons people play/enjoy games as there are people. But if we simplify it down, it’s basically 1) People that play passionately with primarily a focus on “winning” (I’ll circle back to that.) 2) People who play primarily for social connection/interaction. 3) People who just need something amusing to do, here and there.
An imperfect analogy would be the game of golf. Some people play with a focus on winning. Some people play with a focus on getting together with their friends on the regular. Some people play to have something to do on a walk. haha All three reasons are valid and the game itself does not tell people what focus to have. However, the game of golf itself, is not a product and the game of golf itself, is not trying to make money.
The game of GOW itself, is trying to make money. In order to do that, they need to sell things to either the people focused on “winning,” the people focused on getting together with their pals, or the people focused on just having something to click and tap on once in awhile.
The “something to click and tap” people are not going to spend money on the game. The “social focus” people might, if the game doesn’t churn players too fast, and if there is a benefit to their social group. Most of the spending will come from those with a focus on “winning.” (Just like its the competitive golfers, spending on equipment upgrades.)
Circling back to “winning.” In a live service game, there is no winning, in the traditional sense. Generally, though, it’s a sense of progress toward an end that we all know will not be the end, by the time we get there. haha Even though, intellectually, we know the goal posts can’t and won’t be static, seeing the distance get shorter for awhile, scratches the same itch. If no matter how much we play or how much we spend, that distance just keeps getting longer, it doesn’t.
When I turned Kafka’s statement around on them, it wasn’t to say that the game was forcing people to do all of the things in the game. It was attempting to say that the people who play a lot and spend, are losing the thing that makes them want to play and spend. And that thing is the ability to see some teeny progress (even temporarily) without devoting every waking moment to GoW.
But to your point… there is plenty to appreciate and enjoy about GoW without making one bit of further progress. There just isn’t much reason to buy anything.
7 Likes
Back on topic…
One thing I would very very much love to see in a new Guild Wars is for it to be implemented to run as the only guild event of the week. I distinctly remember this once being a thing.
Depending on how close we stay to the old GW format, it might even serve to ease up on some of that time burden issue.
6 Likes
That’s what “she” said? 
I actually think you make your point well, without being overly wordy, so I wouldn’t worry about it, but an advance warning is usually a good idea when getting wordy, so fair play.
I think this is an important point that sometimes gets missed when players talk about there being “too much to do” or feeling “burned out trying to keep up”. There isn’t an actual endpoint, but we do all have an idea of where our goal is leading towards, compared with where we are currently, and if we don’t feel like we’re moving towards it, even very slowly, it can give a sense of not making any progress. And, given that it’s a live service game, with new stuff constantly getting added, no progress usually equates to negative progress. If you aren’t moving closer to your goal, and your goal keeps moving away, you’re just moving further from it.
But, more than that, if we feel like the amount of gameplay we have to do, in order to make meaningful progress toward a goal (or even to overcome the movement of the goal, so we’re not making negative progress) is too large, it makes the game feel bad. Take the recent announcement that we were getting two new immortals for this season of PvP. Sounds good, because we get MORE new stuff. Except, the majority of players were unhappy about it, strangely. And that’s because the goalposts they saw (getting all the immortals and/or leveling up their immortals) just accelerated away from them. Instead of the goal moving one place every season, it now moves two, (and possibly more, since we don’t know what the pattern is, but it’s currently increasing each time) and players have to compare this to the progress they were making and it suddenly feels like their progress toward the goal has been harmed. Maybe it hasn’t, but that’s how it feels.
The point is that when we talk about feeling “burned out”, it’s not about how much we’re “forced” to play, but how much we need to play in order to make progress towards a goal we find reasonable within the game. And if we think that level of effort to achieve such progress is too much, many players will give up trying to make progress (and thus stop spending on the game, which is the opposite of what the devs want) or just stop playing altogether.
Yeah, exactly this. Well put.
10 Likes
I could not have said it better. In fact, I want to go back and say it your way.
One more fun part of the equation is that even any incentive to buy yourself out of needing to play an unreasonable amount, is damaged by the randomness of it. While I don’t love the idea of straight up pay to win (buy this and skip everything,) I also don’t love paying for nothing. RNG being what it is, random, means it’s entirely possible to play 24/7 AND spend a fortune and still not see/feel progress.
2 Likes
The one thing brought up very briefly that could probably use some clarifications:
How is the future content Bastions going to work in tandem with Guild Wars? Bastions was described in a way to help counterplay AI tactics… so…
4 Likes
Well said, thanks for the discussion both of you! Totally agree that some goal posts feel insanely far away, especially ones with multiple layers of RNG!
6 Likes
I have a very simple opinion on the subject of “work life balance”!
The devs are not there to educate the players! How much each of us plays and what priority each of us gives to the game is a question of personal reason and the personal maturity of each individual player and not the task of a game manufacturer!
3 Likes
On the actual topic of “guild war”
I would be in favor of either simply leaving out certain units like Stella, Takshaka or weapons like the magic wand, as in PvP!
Or another, also interesting approach would be that every unit, every weapon and every CLASS can only be used ONCE in the guild war for attack and defense teams in order to get the full bonuspoints.
This bonuspoints would have to be so attractive that there is no point in just playing with Stellarix every day!
5 Likes
I’d be ok with that too, just for practical reasons. However, at what point does this become absurd? Power creep is a thing. It’s foreseeable that that list of “troops we can’t use” will have to get longer. Maybe that is ok. Or maybe it will lead to a lot of confusion, later down the line. Not everyone reads the forums. I still see the occasional person asking why so many people use Prismatic Orb in pvp. 
This sounds good, but it completely erases the ability to build a team to counter an enemy team. Which is sort of the point of GW. I suppose it could work if we are shown every enemy we will face for the entire GW. If we had all of that information we could strategize. Without that info, it would be a lot of lucky and unlucky guessing.
4 Likes
At the moment, the game suits me completely. And I’m afraid of every update, because they always worsen the game and push us play more. New pvp seasons require people to play 2000-3000 battles to close it. Who needs it anyway? People pay for a season pass, but it’s not enough. You still need to spend 40-50 hours on monotonous boring battles. Who chooses the requirements? A very strange design.
Over the past year, there have been a lot of unbalanced troops and weapons. I definitely don’t want to play Guild War against Stellarix, Dragons and the Wand of Stars. Also, new gems turn any battle into random play. I’ve already lost the habit of guild wars and don’t want to play pvp a lot, it’s boring. If the Guild War will be in addition to current events, then it’s bad. And I as GM don’t want the guild war to come back. Everyone who wanted to leave because of the guild war has already left the game. But now those who don’t want to play guild war will start leaving. And according to the polls, they are the majority. Maybe 20 guilds from the first brackets still want the guild war. But here are too many battles in the game for me. And the fewer mandatory ones the better.
I also understand that each patch costs from 10 to 30 thousand dollars. And if something new is introduced in the game, it should be profitable. So any new version of the guild war will be pay to win as all game mode before.
So I’m glad that the guild war has been removed from the game. It was stressful every time. No one from my guild left because of the war. But some left because there were too many battles and it began to take a lot of time and feel like work.
3 Likes