Guild Wars 2

I’ve been around the forum awhile now, seeing many people having good ideas but also many players always staying on the conservative side by bashing these bold ideas. Well let me begin by saying that; the lastest move by Anet to implement Ascended Gears into the game, to say that is a bold move would be an understatement.

Sure – they could have also had mana in this game. Or have characters be able to advance in their respective classes in the game. But they chose not to. Those were all options which people can argue both sides of the arguments all day long. But is that an actually productive way for Anet to ‘listen’ to suggestions?

I think, if more than anything, our suggestions are simply ideas for them to go upon revelating/helping them to expand on the ideas that they’ve already have. It’s highly rare for them to just take ideas, good or bad, and implement that as the core of their changes; because they see the layout of this game more so than we ever will (because we don’t have the architectural guidelines in front of us like they do).

At the end of the day, every idea would be possible, although it’s almost impossible to know if what suggestions we’re giving will actually help the developers with what pieces in the problem that they’re missing, or will it just be a sort of borderline irritation to their thought process.

At the end of the day, I think the worst thing they can do is listen to players that is telling them that this & that change won’t work, as oppose to listening to players giving out ideas for changes.

Changes is the step forward while the struggle to keep what’s belong to the keepers is the step down the spiral paths to ‘no-where’.

LT;DR – I think all your suggestions are mostly more than valid. And in some way they’ve suggested possibilities that are out there in open, none-conservative & bold; as many of the suggestions in this forum are.

I just wish that people can really be more open-minded as oppose to always saying “just keep it the way it is and I’m happy”. I think that would save a lot of the negative posts on this forum; and people would not get all defensive before the post has even yet to be commented on. And vice-versa.

I’ve been around the suggestions forum a lot. I remember ideas like a new class, that has a ground targeted AoE capable of doing millions of damage in five seconds, on a twenty second cooldown. That’s not an exaggeration, it was really an idea. Suggestions to remove all 5 man explorables, and replace them with 40 man raids. Suggestions to remove all 5 man dungeons, and nothing else. Suggestions to add nudity instead of underwear to character models.

I’m not “bashing these bold ideas” when I tell people who post them that nudity, millions of damage per second, complete removal and replacement of working content, and any number of other bad ideas are bad.

Nels the Cornwhisperer.8025:

I’ve been around the suggestions forum a lot. I remember ideas like a new class, that has a ground targeted AoE capable of doing millions of damage in five seconds, on a twenty second cooldown. That’s not an exaggeration, it was really an idea. Suggestions to remove all 5 man explorables, and replace them with 40 man raids. Suggestions to remove all 5 man dungeons, and nothing else. Suggestions to add nudity instead of underwear to character models.

I’m not “bashing these bold ideas” when I tell people who post them that nudity, millions of damage per second, complete removal and replacement of working content, and any number of other bad ideas are bad.

Okay. Those ideas are bad.

But some ideas are debatable, while nudity and having the skills even more spammy than they aready are; a) those ideas don’t even need debates to say that they’ll likely not be implement, because it goes against Anet’s philosophy like we all know, and b) I think people who bashes those guys, outta know better that the devs. are smart enough to know that making ‘those types of changes’ are risky and provide no real significant benefits to the gameplay of the game itself; and yet, some players still take these baits & bash at those guys for no reason.

People in this forum likes to make the attack personal, when it’s not necessary, when all that is needed is simply getting the idea out of the way, not getting those ppl out of the way – because then you’re just provoking them & participating in a battle that didn’t need to happen.

If GW2 really is a game for matures, then we outta not see people saying things like “we don’t need people who have the type of ideas that you have in this game….” “this game will be better off without you”…..; as if they are how you would actually invite others to leave this forum. Those are purely immature ways to treat people and more so, the perfect motivations for trolls to want to post on these forums.

People in this forum likes to make the attack personal, when it’s not necessary, when all that is needed is simply getting the idea out of the way, not getting those ppl out of the way – because then you’re just provoking them & participating in a battle that didn’t need to happen.

If GW2 really is a game for matures, then we outta not see people saying things like “we don’t need people who have the type of ideas that you have in this game….” “this game will be better off without you”…..; as if they are how you would actually invite others to leave this forum. Those are purely immature ways to treat people and more so, the perfect motivations for trolls to want to post on these forums.

Just a note – if I stood before you now and told you that your suggestion was horrible, ill conceived, and completely imbalanced THAT is NOT a personal attack. When I add a comment about after lights activities between family members being likely THEN it is a personal attack.

As you have seen there are a lot of opinions, wish-lists, and of course obfuscated agendas around these parts – most of them are bad at best, deceiptful wastes of time at worst. One could make the argument that not responding to some of this is actually negligent – after all smart people may never reach their potential without correction of bad ideas…

thisolderhead.5127:

People in this forum likes to make the attack personal, when it’s not necessary, when all that is needed is simply getting the idea out of the way, not getting those ppl out of the way – because then you’re just provoking them & participating in a battle that didn’t need to happen.

If GW2 really is a game for matures, then we outta not see people saying things like “we don’t need people who have the type of ideas that you have in this game….” “this game will be better off without you”…..; as if they are how you would actually invite others to leave this forum. Those are purely immature ways to treat people and more so, the perfect motivations for trolls to want to post on these forums.

Just a note – if I stood before you now and told you that your suggestion was horrible, ill conceived, and completely imbalanced THAT is NOT a personal attack. When I add a comment about after lights activities between family members being likely THEN it is a personal attack.

As you have seen there are a lot of opinions, wish-lists, and of course obfuscated agendas around these parts – most of them are bad at best, deceiptful wastes of time at worst. One could make the argument that not responding to some of this is actually negligent – after all smart people may never reach their potential without correction of bad ideas…

Actually, that’s just saying that “if I don’t correct them, nobody else would”. And my point was that:

FluffyDoe.7539:

I think people who bashes those guys, outta know better that the devs. are smart enough to know that making ‘those types of changes’ are risky and provide no real significant benefits to the gameplay of the game itself; and yet, some players still take these baits & bash at those guys for no reason.

I wish people would understand that calling an idea bad… it’s not a constructive critism, while pointing out flaws and debating over those points would provide much more usefulness for the devs. to interpret the response.

And the word ‘bad’ is used to describes a trait which has inferiority, which is not something of a constructiveness and often involved opinionated standards, while the word ‘flaw’ describes a trait which has some sort of imperfection – in which case, you are presumably saying that ‘the opposite of it equals perfection’.

Like in sports, losing is not a flaw, because a team can win and still have ‘flaws’ in their game. But on the other hand, if a team completes 5-10 passes (that means missing 5 passes), then that is a flaw, because ‘no flaw’ (or perfection) would mean it’s 10/10 passes.

Warm and fluffy (Edit: Sorry – just noticed the name above this post, was not intended) “you had an idea, now lets see if we together can make it grow” responses to outright stupid or otherwise poorly constructed/unreasoned ideas an opinions just encourages people to speak before thinking, wastes resources, and is how you end up with majority acceptance of horrible proposals – increasing the chance of them becoming horrible changes.

“presumably saying that ‘the opposite of it equals perfection’”
Well no – the opposite of flawed can be “otherwise flawed”, but I can see where your redefinition of “flaw” is going and actually recognise this tact so lets just knock that one over now:
5/10 passes is flawed, the fact that a related piece of data (Win: 1/1) exists doesn’t change that original 50% success on what was actually being evaluated.

“Bad” and “Flawed”, lets include “Wrong” too, do have negative associations – because they should, yes – everyone has a right to voice their opinon, but I don’t recall the right to opinon ever suggesting that anyone doing so should be protected from rebuttal, or the sad-making-icky-feeling outcomes of having malformed their opinon.

Putting these artificial limitations on language/tone perverts the messages – for example below:
1)
A “Flawed” leg might be able to be repaired, but for now its “Bad” at functioning and its possible that putting it forward might be “Wrong”.

2)
A less than entirely OK leg might be able to be repaired, but for now its only almost functional and its possible that putting it forward is a great starting point.

In either case the subject of the above quote is going to take a dirt nap when the starter’s pistol fires, the difference is in example one the facts are accurately stated and the subject able to make a better decision next time.

Oh god. No, I wasn’t looking to make this into some analytic word debate. Just saying, people should try to expand on their comments to a suggestion more than it just being “bad” or “good” overall (ie. saying grinding is entirely bad or good, there is a case for both based on opinons, and mechanically how it’s being implemented). I get your point, but I’m not saying that I disagree with you that people should have the right to share their opinions honestly, but only when they try to over-take their opinions as the right one without trying to explain it; I can’t see how that approach will benefits the discussions themselves. It becomes much less of a discussion and more like a ‘public voting’, and in that resulting the issue of a huge two side debate instead of letting all the ‘different’ voices be heard. I think it comes down always to being more than just being about good or bad… there’s always more to it if people talks.