Guild Wars 2

ColinJohanson.2394:

What if every major thread offered a dev sticky at the top that summarized the key discussion points around that area we’re aware of as a dev team? We’d track the last major update(s) to those areas that shipped live in the sticky thread, and each time a new update is made update that thread accordingly.

What do you mean exactly with “summarized the key discussion points around that area we’re aware of as a dev team”?

Also, you should use the Question/Answer thread thingie, so the dev post can be seen on all pages of the thread.

In principle, it all sounds good, except this part:

Per company policy (see Mike O’Brien’s post for his summary of ArenaNet’s dev communcation policy) we wouldn’t be able to discuss what is currently in development, or what progress we’re making on it.

I think this is a step forward to getting more information and letting us players know what is going on in the developers heads. General but key points I personally feel its a good middle ground.

If fear in the public was you guys/gals not paying attention to our suggestions I think this covers it.

Kool I appreciate it but will we be seeing these types of threads turned into stickies on essential topics like?:

#Condition damage stacking issues in open world
#Rewards system revamp and the removal of systems like DR/RNG
#Diversity in PVE (which includes weapon choices, locations/types of traits)

I like this. At lest well know what might be coming instead of not knowing at all. I don’t mind when things come and/or if that changes. What bothers me is the unknown of what’s going on. I’m looking forward to see what comes up.

I think this would be a positive thing. It would allow the players to know what the devs currently think are the most important issues in GW2, i.e. what is most likely to be worked on, and allow the players to use those points to guide their feedback and suggestions.

It obviously won’t satisfy everyone, but I think it is a step in the right direction. A good compromise after all is one in which no one is happy with the result.

ColinJohanson.2394:

What if every major thread offered a dev sticky at the top that summarized the key discussion points around that area we’re aware of as a dev team?

Sounds p. neat.

tigirius.9014:

Kool I appreciate it but will we be seeing these types of threads turned into stickies on essential topics like?:

#Condition damage stacking issues in open world
#Rewards system revamp and the removal of systems like DR/RNG
#Diversity in PVE (which includes weapon choices, locations/types of traits)

+1 to this. I would like to see an end to DR. And a better way of getting “wanted” weapons like precursors or named weapons. In GW1 if you wanted a ice dragons breath sword. You would go to the one map where it dropped. I know you have that with regional skins. But it would be nice if named weapons dropped in diffrent zones. That way if you wanted a weapon you would know where to go to get it/or have the best chance of getting it drop. Just an idea. And it would I get players in to the “quiet” maps. Sure you can buy it from the TP, but if you knew you had a good chance to get it in an area, I know I’d go looking for it.

Yes please. It is very important (at least to me) to know that devs have seen these suggestions. Maybe one sticky in almost every subforum would be nice?

There should be a topic about the living world and the living story personal instances being the focus. I think this because something has been fundamentally forgotten with the “living world.” While I think Dry Top is a good example of the direction of the game, the living story sequences are not.

What do those story missions give me that a good single-player RPG cannot already do so, except much better? They aren’t challenging and they don’t allow me to role-play since there are zero dialogue choices. You basically click through a cut-scene until you get to areas of game-play, all of which can be (and usually are) completed by yourself.

The reason I find those story missions so offensive is that they don’t encourage me to play with other players. In dungeons, WvW, sPvP, and the open world I am actively interacting with other players which is what a MMO is about. If you want a single-player RPG, then there are plenty of them out there that let you roleplay much better than GW2 does. Do you really feel like it’s your character talking when dialogue options pop up, spouting the same thing everyone else is going to say? Did you really want to give Tiami’s hard work away to a corrupt Asura politician?

Once you finish th story missions (2 hours a month) and achievements, you have zero reason to return to them. The players however will continue to breathe life into dungeons, WvW, and sPvP – game types which to my bafflement are being neglected.

I don’t fully get it (what are major-threads?) but I think it sounds like a good idea.

So I just write all my ideas in this thread that would improve the game in my opinion?

Plox don’t kill me for my english, I tried my best ^-^

PVE

- More Skins achivable through pve content (maybe hard content)
- Hard Mode (like in GW1)
- Guild Halls
- Capes
- A way to remove the gold (the ecconomy is broken in this game atm)
- Combat Tonics for example Gold @ some traders (to remove gold from the game)
- More races (Largo as example)
- More classes (we are still missing the Derwish and the Ritualist from GW1)
- 5+ people Dungeons / content
- More Dungeons
- More Titles (We have so much achievements for example slaying giants but we
get no Title for it)
- Maybe a special kind of armor like the obsidian armor in GW1 but for acc bound
materials (so the ecconomy don’t get f!cked up like with ascended armor)
- More fun / party items like the Firework that is sold from an npc in Rata Sum
- Make outfits so that you can use for example only the gloves etc.
- Bring back more GW1 skins (im speaking of obsidian edge voltaic spear etc.
- Bring back GW1 minis (Mini Oni, Mini Ghost Hero etc.)

That’s all ideas I have for pve in my mind at this moment, I maybe write more but atm I can’t come up with more ideas.

For pvp and wvw I have no ideas atm since I am not playing that often, all I could say to pvp is we need more modes like ctf or team deathmatch and maps.

You know Colin there is such a thing as giving people hope, without giving any specifics or dates or talk of new continents, that thing is called a pic.
You devs used to do this very thing a lot before launch. Artist like Daniel Dociu for example who has been missing in action since March 11th 2011.
Simply post future in game pics from time to time and let the player base speculate on it. It can even be a painting that has been included in the future development of the game which would give us only a vague look into the future. Don’t do it so much for me but for the rest of the player base since the silence treatment has already killed the game for me. The last L.S chapter I did Divinity’s Reach and didn’t bother finishing the rest. Since then all I do is only daily then I log out. I got all professions at 80 and all fully mapped but now the motivation to stay online is all but gone. Even for me pics would give me something to look forward to besides the usual rumor of a 2015 expansion which I simply do not believe in anymore.
Best regards an ex full time player and supporter who’s already contributed to more than 10 expansions which we have yet to hear about. I don’t regret my gems contribution they added to my enjoyment, but it’s all water under the bridge.
Make no mistake about this silence can also kill a game it has for me.

Now that my rant is over here’s something I would have like to see since launch hard LV 80 heart missions. Missions at the end of an expert jumping puzzle and the chest only opens after the mission.

Colin, apologies if this comes off aggressive.

The problem I’ve had in the past is that while there would be topics asking for feedback on various subjects, there would be no response from developers and certainly no actual implementation of the good ideas or backing down from the bad ones.

If you’re going to ask for our thoughts and input on topics as you have suggested, we really need to know a) that you are listening and b) the reasons behind the outcome that was chosen.

Take for example the class balance threads several months ago. There were only 2 posts from 1 dev after hundreds of posts in the guardian forums. Here are the main changes that were discussed, the discussion points, and the outcomes:

Zeal V – Shattered Aegis. Damage instead of Burning.
We said the damage needed to be decent or we would have preferred the burning. We were promised numbers before it went live. It went live without the numbers being given to us. The numbers were underwhelming. Very few people now use this trait and we would have preferred you had not touched it in the balance pass.
Zeal XII – Kindled Zeal. Increased conversion from 10% to 13% power->condition damage
We told you this was pointless and made numerous suggestions on how to make condition guardian viable. It still went in.
Radiance V – Searing Flames. Reduced cooldown from 20s to 10s.
We told you the problem was not just the cooldown but the boon stripping priority (might stripped first!?) and ease of boon reapplication. We offered alternatives. It still went in.
Radiance X – Powerful blades. Increased damage from 5% to 10%.
We told you sword didn’t need a dps buff, in fact it was already one of our top dps options. We asked for some kind of functional or interesting change rather than a passive increase. Jon agreed and asked for suggestions. It still went in as a passive 10%.
Symbol of Swiftness: This skill now applies 4 seconds of swiftness per pulse, rather than 8 seconds if you have no swiftness and 1 second if you have swiftness.
Everyone hated this. It still went in.

Fair enough for whatever reason you didn’t like our ideas. But why not tell us why you didn’t like our ideas, and why you preferred the original ones?

Too many times have these ‘CDIs’ or developer discussion threads turned into us talking to a brick wall. In fact, the majority of the people who would probably have incredible input to give you have either been banned from the forums or simply don’t bother anymore. If you want us to put the effort in and engage in the sorts of discussions you’re proposing, you need to show us you can acknowledge public sentiment and comment on it, even if you don’t bend to it.

“- What kind of game mode(s) would be best in PvP for Gw2 on top of the current conquest game mode type given the games fast past action combat style?”

Guild versus Guild implementation!
We certainly would be able to come up with the best and fastest way to do this.

Wow Colin I feel so bad for you. People really like to type but don’t like to read. Or maybe its reading comprehension. Like I said before I think its a good idea would give players an idea of what you guys see as points of interests and a general idea of things that can be changed in future updates.

first off, not to be a smart kitten, but I think you mean:
“What if every sub-forum offered a dev sticky at the top that summarized the key discussion points around that sub-forum’s topic, that we’re aware of as a dev. team and hope to solve at some point.”

As a reply: I think this would be helpful to us, especially if at some point some of our feedback/concerns were to turn up on those lists. And quite personally I would find it interesting to read what other people might discuss on those topics, as you can be assured threads on each and every one will arise…

Do realize though, that you will also find yourself in many “why isn’t this on there” discussions, and that just putting things on that list will not make it less likely for us to at some moment ‘point out’ that X has been on there for so long, why isn’t it dealt with already … which at some unfortunate point may lead to a ‘carrot on a sticky’ kind of feel towards these lists.

So yeah, pro’s and con’s, from my personal pov. I see the benefits over the negatives, but you guys should likely be well aware of those negatives, and make sure you deal with them properly.

Such a list would be a help for the community.

(1) It fulfills an important role to let the players know an issue is acknowledged. That makes a difference perception wise. And let’s not forget that those are often issues coming up after hundreds hours of having played the game, so they are not as all encompassing problematic as they might sound. (Except stuff in the vein of first time PvP viewers wondering what the hell is going on, but developers worry about that more than the players).

(2) They allow the community to discuss whether the right topics are on the list and without the pressure of a CDI having to produce results by a certain date, there is a framework for reasonable discussion and ArenaNet to simply observe it. Even if the topic presenting the list is closed, make no mistake, there will be a lot of talking about it, back and forth, day and night. Armchair development is the one entertaining feature every MMO has, but never lists on the box.

The list is no substitute for:

(1) Being highly reclusive about anything not in the final stages of development. Nobody wants ArenaNet to fake assertiveness, just show some more and don’t panic about negative outcomes. As was said, other thread.

My suggestion for a really interesting list:

You want my money, I know you do. Make that list. High level design goals don’t pay the bills and there is definitely stuff people would pay for. Not every monetization method needs to be a guilty pleasure you rather not talk about.

I think that sounds like a fine idea to gather feedback about what is important to players. Imput is nice. But I want you guys to have definitive plans that have had a lot of energy put in to them before execution so that you aren’t wasting resources mid-stream and then can announce in broad strokes to the community what you’re doing and then do it so you don’t have to be so hush-hugh about your plans.

The fact is discussing with players is nice, but you know that you’re going to have contradicting needs. Everyone wants different things, and you’re going to end up always having a segment that feels they weren’t listened to because you went the opposite way of what they wanted. We just want to hear what direction you’re thinking.

I think it’s a great idea and it might actually reduce post count in the thread (with the same thoughts), because pople never read all pages and just post again and again what theay got in mind and it’s often something similar that was already spoken about. Plus it’s just good to have everything important in one place =)
BTW: the missing “[link goes here]” link is this one: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/3283865

These look like some pretty solid ideas, and whilst I haven’t had the time to look over the dev posts thoroughly, (apologies if anything below is massively uninformed) I would say:

- Listing issues you are “aware of” seems to be an attempt at skirting around the company policy of not discussing active development, this is sad, but I will take the next best thing. Especially if it also involves some idea of how heavily you currently weight each issue.

- Please date stamp each thing on the post for your own benefit, even if some issues get overtaken in priority, letting some of the less important ones go unattended for a long time can be worse.

- Maybe have one overarching thread somewhere listing some of the most significant pieces from all of the forums, to help the player base know that although something at the top of their forum’s list haunt been addressed, there were other more significant issues or other areas that hadn’t seen much love in a longer time than them.

I think that something like this would be useful, largely due to the fact that it constitutes acknowledgement from the developers, which is one of the things that people often feel we’d like more of (in my experience). Oftentimes it’s hard to know whether or not the developers are even aware of certain issues, and that’s what results in community uproar like we saw recently. This would be a small step in the right direction.

I feel like this would help alot but I think a follow up of you guys crossing things off the list for each thread once you feel a topic has been addressed in game would be helpful.

Zesbeer.8365:

I feel like this would help alot but I think a follow up of you guys crossing things off the list for each thread once you feel a topic has been addressed in game would be helpful.

I agree to be able to see the progress. Or if not crossed off replaced with new ideas.

Zesbeer.8365:

I feel like this would help alot but I think a follow up of you guys crossing things off the list for each thread once you feel a topic has been addressed in game would be helpful.

Maybe not always a strikethrough though. Goals can always change or a development may only solve half the problem.

Maybe each of the sub-questions that address the core issue could be checked off though.

I think putting them at the top of forums is a great idea to centralize these suggestions and make them easier to view for developers instead of seeing ten bazillion threads on the subject. I would have to of course go to the suggestions folder and copy paste many of these ideas into these stickies because they were missed the first time. I’d love to see this personally.

ColinJohanson.2394:

If your feedback is something like what I’ve proposed isn’t useful and you’d prefer more discussion initiatives, that’d be totally valid in this thread as well.

Thanks Colin. I get that the CDI would be the discussion pool and these Dev stickies at the top of major threads would be a summation of a subject, it’s just that what you’ve proposed has the potential to not be very useful, if the discussion/CDI threads simply turn into players discussing or making suggestions that go ignored.

Obviously not all of our ideas are great, but if discussion reaches a common consensus but the developer updates/key discussion points are heading in the opposite direction, it would be useful to understand the thought process behind it – whether that communication is done in the CDI or the summation sticky you’ve proposed I don’t know, but what I think you would want to avoid is updating the summation sticky with info that will come as a shock to the players and possibly be different to what they were telling you they wanted.

I think overall a summary somewhere is useful and will avoid newcomers to the discussion having to trawl through pages and pages of info to find the state of things, but it needs to accurately reflect the discussion on the subject rather than potentially be something we don’t like being forced upon us.

I fully support this initiative. It would indeed give us at least an idea about the issues aknowledged by the devs. One suggestion though: instead of removing the items that have been dealt with, it might be better to just cross them off.

That being said I do have on issue with this. How are you going to identify and, more importantly gurantee the existence of such major threads? Wouldn’t it be better to have only one sticky thread where you guys post those summaries and just reference the relevant posts? I think it would make for a better experience. You could have for example one thread per sub-forum dedicated to some aspect of the game.

In any case, I totally approve of this idea

I will spend some time thinking on these stickies. It’s a good idea. I think something that should go in these is if for some reason these things are decided upon by the Dev team to stop developing them due to iteration, that the community be told that development is being stopped. Otherwise, what is the point of these types of things being stickied if they aren’t actively being developed? There have been quite a few things where that has happened and the community doesn’t find out for months that they aren’t being actively worked on any more.

I know this is about starting these types of things, but having a long term “development termination communication policy” in place would go a long way in quelling forum and player outbursts.

Wouldn’t hurt, but the topics shouldn’t be there just to rot, some interaction would be nice. It will be easier for you to find specific feedback too, so that’s good. Still leaves a blank spot for lesser topics, that might be important anyway (Fractal Rewards being weak, Dredge being awful..). I was a bit disappointed that it took a CDI to get the feedback about Dredge.

Bambu.4270:

Yes please. It is very important (at least to me) to know that devs have seen these suggestions. Maybe one sticky in almost every subforum would be nice?

It is very important to know that devs have seen these suggestions

This, for everyone. It is important for us to know. And we appreciate when you take the time to respond to us.

So yes, please.

ColinJohanson.2394:

fadeaway.2807:

Too many times have these ‘CDIs’ or developer discussion threads turned into us talking to a brick wall. In fact, the majority of the people who would probably have incredible input to give you have either been banned from the forums or simply don’t bother anymore. If you want us to put the effort in and engage in the sorts of discussions you’re proposing, you need to show us you can acknowledge public sentiment and comment on it, even if you don’t bend to it.

Thanks fadeaway, I want to be clear this isn’t a discussion initiative. As stated back in my first post, the concept here is to simply provide more visibility by providing a list of top tier game areas we’re aware of or concerned about so it’s visible to players.

CDI is intended to be a discussion initiative, if you have feedback on that or how it (or other discussion initiatives) work please make sure to put those in the CDI thread. If your feedback is something like what I’ve proposed isn’t useful and you’d prefer more discussion initiatives, that’d be totally valid in this thread as well.

In order for those things to become a reality, you will need to provide the tools in which to do this. First and foremost, doing stickies, how many are we talking about here? You could easily fill a page worth of stickies of things you are aware of and working on. Even just limiting your selves to “big” hot-button topics.

May i suggest a blog post? simple stating these things? I really don’t think you guys need to swing 180 and turn the forums into red-posts.

You’re a gamer, and so is Chris (from what i’ve read anyway). When you play any other game in recent years, you can see players get SotG posts that map this out, get creative with it and give out the information in a way that’s not side-stepping and PR speak.

One thing that bugs me and has actually bitten you, personally in the past (i think) is the example “an expansions worth of content” (in talking about living world). While it doesn’t say anything about what you put into the game, it does say something about what players can expect with these releases and that bit me personally, pretty hard, now that we are half (or even a 1/4 way through season 2). Gotta remember what you released in GW, this isn’t even close, from my PoV. This is a good example of a broad stroke, one that fits policy, but is so generalized and so subjective that players could easily take away some crazy ideas of what that really means.

Without going into “the company policy sux”, i REALLY want you to take even an hour and look at some of the games (recent) that have focused on communication as a method to not only promote the game, but give players a feel for it’s future and the tools in which get’s them to their goal. It’s really vital to long-term retention and satisfaction on a player level, especially in this genre.

Also, you really need a Gaile to handle, at least the US crowd. While GW wasn’t as big of a game, she did an amazing job at communicating with players, on an external website, in the midst of controversy and i’m sure under pressure.

As i mentioned in one of the other threads, I would be happy to (and i think other community leaders/organizers) extoll the importance of the CDI’s and feedback threads. This means taking a good deal of time to at least try and organize our specific server communities to formulate opinions based on your direction. Unlike these forums, and the game itself, we actually have the tools, in as much as we can try to get people to participate in using them. Right now, at least on NSP, the mega-server wiped out a lot of our efforts, even though some of use have over 1000 members. I know a few of ue have invested heavily in this game and would rather not see our efforts and time go entirely to waste.

Per company policy (see Mike O’Brien’s post for his summary of ArenaNet’s dev communcation policy) we wouldn’t be able to discuss what is currently in development, or what progress we’re making on it. It would purely be a list of core high level topics we are aware of and think are important in Gw2.

Whatever else you do, that company policy needs to change as soon as possible. It is toxic to the health of the community and needs to be cut out like the gangrenous limb that it is.

That said, until you resolve that crippling bloodclot, whatever information you can squeeze past it would be appreciated.

First off, thank you for responding to the communities concerns! Having these discussion points in the forums would be a step in the right direction. But I think you should go a few steps further and have some sort of monthly (or quarterly) Dev live-stream that discusses possible features and ways you might implement them.

I agree that something to capture any progression should be quite of value. Look at the CDI threads and the feedback now, people cannot see how their contribution helped the development. Maybe they haven’t seen all of the posts in there (the threads were massive) or maybe they can’t remember, but those threads had influence on the game as it is today imho.

It could look like this:

• Oct.14 Character development pre- and post lv.80

• Nov.14 Character development pre- and post lv.80 —> we tried to open up new ways for horizontal progression by adding …

• Jan.15 Character development pre- and post lv.80 —> we tried to open up new ways for horizontal progression by adding … --> Feedback shows that it didn’t work out exactly as we thought, we think development pre 80 is fine now but post lv.80 needs work still

etc.

Edit: sorry, I didn’t read the post well enough, Colin mentioned that updates will be made; my mistake.

Zoso.8279:

Zesbeer.8365:

I feel like this would help alot but I think a follow up of you guys crossing things off the list for each thread once you feel a topic has been addressed in game would be helpful.

I agree to be able to see the progress. Or if not crossed off replaced with new ideas.

Even better, have an UPDATE under it, like if the topic has been initially addressed, but a new issue arose or something even more specific.

Example: new spvp map
-UPDATE max points and max time discussion.

I have to say this: When you start something, see it through to the end!

Example:
Ascended Aquabreather has been missing for over 8 months. We were told the FULL ascended armor was introduced, it’s not. The Aquabreather replaces your current helmet when going under water. If you are not going to implement an Ascended version of the Aquabreather, then at least remove Aquabreathers from the game and let us use our current helmet’s stats(and runes) instead. If something cannot be made, then scrap it clean and replace it, dont just leave it at that, halfway implemented and incomplete. That would make everyone more than happy.

Small things like this that seem unimportant to you or that you tell us “will happen” might actually have an huge effect on our gameplay. Look at the Blade Shards case. People have been holding onto them for months because they were told we would be able to trade them in for something valuable later. After a whole month, they were worth just a dozen bunch of greens.

Same with Ascended Trinkets with different stats. We were told we would get these over a year ago.
Same with SAB. We were told we would get purple and red versions of the weapons from World3&4. Almost a year since we’ve seen SAB.
Same with Precursor Scavenger Hunt.

These are the type of things that make players lose faith in Arenanet, that is halfway implemented stuff that never get completed. It also shows unprofessionalism. They might be very small things to you, but they are very impactful on how we feel about(and spend on) you.

i like the idea colin but how about a priority in the list or something along that line and if thing fall back on priority maybe a quick explanation why because if something is put on the back burner its nice to have some sort of reason why. could be hey we felt this needed more attention now then that

Nobody likes the company policy.

Hey Colin,
First Value, thanks to you and to ANet for the working to keep alive this amazing game.
I would ask you, and community too, what do you think about to introduce a new mode for PVP like a big arena, a sort of merge of arena/WvW?
A big arena (not big as WvW and not so small as Arena), with 10vs10 or 20vs20, with different modality such as conquest point, skirmish (the team who reach an high kills points will win the match) or capture some artifacts to bring it to the main base, and the artifacts are contested between the 2 teams.
Why I’m asking this? Because yes, I love the Arena, I really enjoy that, and I love WvW too, but WvW it’s for ppl that have a really nice Computer, and I, and I think I’m not the only, right now can’t support a nice run for the WvW (and I’m not willing to change hardware only for Wvw).
And I think it will be improve much more the Spvp, that right now is limited only to arenas!
What do you think about this idea?

ColinJohanson.2394:

So by key discussion points, I gave an example for PvP of something folks know we’re aware of above, but helped provide some more specifics for discussion. The PvP one is more detailed than maybe we could go on all topics, but helps give an idea. Other examples of things we’d provide summaries of things we’re aware of, and help provide some more details for discussion could be things like:

So with key discussion points, you mean concerns and wishes of the community that ANet is aware about?

I think that is a good start, but that isn’t enough.
You don’t only have to say what you are aware of, but also what you plan to do.
You have to say if a suggestion or a flaw is being discussed whether it should be addressed or not, if a fix or a suggestion is a long-term goal (you have planned to address that issue but not actively working on it) or if a fix or suggestion is a short-term goal (if a team is dedicated to this issue).

If your terms and policies forbid this kind of information, I would like to give an exaggerated example of how important communication is: During the Cold War, both sides almost started the third Worldwar multiple times. The lack of communication between both sides. The missing empathy caused hatred, disbelief and acrimony on both sides. That also happens, in a smaller scale, on these forums. Because ANet isn’t telling what they’re up to, the community is left behind clueless.

Quote:
This would not be a discussion thread – we’ll be using the CDI for those developer and player discussions. This would be a closed sticky that simply provides a list of what high level areas we’re aware of and what we’ve last done in those areas to help provide a road map for players of things we’d like them to discuss and brainstorm. This post would be in an effort to help drive, and help create discussion.
These lists would have no definitive time frame when they would be updated. Iterative development can be fast, it can be slow (hi precursors!) and sometimes priority’s can change over night based on player feedback, company needs, or even things that occur due to staffing changes from illness, vacation, etc.
If we decided something that was a key discussion point has either been completed, changed, or removed from our list – we’d update the sticky thread and also leave an open discussion thread in that forum with a summary of that change of status. If it hasn’t been removed from the list, you know it’s still a core discussion point for the Gw2 development team.

Yes, perfect, 100% do it.