Guild Wars 2

Bluebird.1890:

Dominae.3146:

Bluebird.1890:

Your analogy assumes that grind is an objective term, when it is subjective. Mushrooms are very easy to identify: If it is a mushroom, it is a mushroom. A restaurant can say “We are mushroom free!” because nobody can walk in and point at one of their pieces of broccoli, and call it a mushroom. They’d get laughed out of the restaurant.

This is not so for grind. People can misinterpret any part of the game that they don’t enjoy that has a reward for participating a “grind.” Anything that isn’t fun to some people get’s labeled “grind.” And with that, now Arenanet is guilty for going back on their word!

It doesn’t work that way.

And here we have the brunt of the argument. (And yes it does work that way.)

Yes, ‘grind’ is subjective. As I said above: as is ‘fun’ and ‘challenge’ and ‘effort’.

The whole gaming genre (and entertainment industry really) is built on subjective terminology.

Society … and in a business sense, your customers … they decide what the norms are, and define those subjective terms. “Mass subjectivity” happens … to the point where the subjective is nearly the objective.

If 1,000 people are at a concert, and all of them say “man that was terrible” … it was terrible. If the band shouts from the stage, saying it wasn’t terrible … well, they’re entitled to their subjective opinions but the people have spoken. Terrible just happened.

Obviously not everyone is going to be in agreement. BUT, sooner or later you’ll find that fulcrum point. Maybe 300 people think the concert is terrible. 700 liked it to different degrees though. Is that success? Either way, you should try better next time.

What if 700 people found it terrible? Is it worth listening to then? Do we still dismiss it as “well that is just their subjective/opinion.”

I’ll be ignoring the latter part of your post, as it is not relevant. If I wanted to gang up on people, I’d move my character to Jade Quarry and do WvW. It’d be much more satisfying.

You’d be better off joining servers that fight against Jade Quarry and then insulting the Jade Quarry WvW folks … that seems to ensure you’re in the majority of ganger-uppers.

See, now THIS is interesting.

It sounds like, in your opinion, the best solution here would be an avenue upon which we can actually judge the most popular opinion of the community instead of assuming the vocal forum contributors and Reddit community are the voice of the game.

Maybe a platform upon which we could vote for changes in gameplay design?

I like that a lot, actually.

Cant really see that happening at all. Unless what they gave us was already a list of options they knew they could make happen. Otherwise customers would invariably choose the options that were the most resource intensive because that is what we do.

Ditton.3149:

Bluebird.1890:

Dominae.3146:

Bluebird.1890:

Your analogy assumes that grind is an objective term, when it is subjective. Mushrooms are very easy to identify: If it is a mushroom, it is a mushroom. A restaurant can say “We are mushroom free!” because nobody can walk in and point at one of their pieces of broccoli, and call it a mushroom. They’d get laughed out of the restaurant.

This is not so for grind. People can misinterpret any part of the game that they don’t enjoy that has a reward for participating a “grind.” Anything that isn’t fun to some people get’s labeled “grind.” And with that, now Arenanet is guilty for going back on their word!

It doesn’t work that way.

And here we have the brunt of the argument. (And yes it does work that way.)

Yes, ‘grind’ is subjective. As I said above: as is ‘fun’ and ‘challenge’ and ‘effort’.

The whole gaming genre (and entertainment industry really) is built on subjective terminology.

Society … and in a business sense, your customers … they decide what the norms are, and define those subjective terms. “Mass subjectivity” happens … to the point where the subjective is nearly the objective.

If 1,000 people are at a concert, and all of them say “man that was terrible” … it was terrible. If the band shouts from the stage, saying it wasn’t terrible … well, they’re entitled to their subjective opinions but the people have spoken. Terrible just happened.

Obviously not everyone is going to be in agreement. BUT, sooner or later you’ll find that fulcrum point. Maybe 300 people think the concert is terrible. 700 liked it to different degrees though. Is that success? Either way, you should try better next time.

What if 700 people found it terrible? Is it worth listening to then? Do we still dismiss it as “well that is just their subjective/opinion.”

I’ll be ignoring the latter part of your post, as it is not relevant. If I wanted to gang up on people, I’d move my character to Jade Quarry and do WvW. It’d be much more satisfying.

You’d be better off joining servers that fight against Jade Quarry and then insulting the Jade Quarry WvW folks … that seems to ensure you’re in the majority of ganger-uppers.

See, now THIS is interesting.

It sounds like, in your opinion, the best solution here would be an avenue upon which we can actually judge the most popular opinion of the community instead of assuming the vocal forum contributors and Reddit community are the voice of the game.

Maybe a platform upon which we could vote for changes in gameplay design?

I like that a lot, actually.

Cant really see that happening at all. Unless what they gave us was already a list of options they knew they could make happen. Otherwise customers would invariably choose the options that were the most resource intensive because that is what we do.

Your suggestion is exactly what I was envisioning.

“We have the resources to go in these directions. Which does the community prefer?”

And then you have nobody that can claim that the developer isn’t holding true to the players wishes.

Conner.4702:

Because you can’t appease both sides. One wants to go west the other east. Anet says let’s go north instead. the end result neither gets what they want. That’s what will happen if you try and keep both horizontal and vertical player groups. They will be left with the indifferent people that don’t care.

I beg to differ, it seems the PvE crowd got exactly what they wanted, and Anet showed it’s true color on which side they want to cater to.

See, now THIS is interesting.
It sounds like, in your opinion, the best solution here would be an avenue upon which we can actually judge the most popular opinion of the community instead of assuming the vocal forum contributors and Reddit community are the voice of the game.
Maybe a platform upon which we could vote for changes in gameplay design?
I like that a lot, actually.

Use the in-game system they used for feed back during the betas, it would work perfectly and would be input from people actually in the game.

Morrigan.2809:

See, now THIS is interesting.
It sounds like, in your opinion, the best solution here would be an avenue upon which we can actually judge the most popular opinion of the community instead of assuming the vocal forum contributors and Reddit community are the voice of the game.
Maybe a platform upon which we could vote for changes in gameplay design?
I like that a lot, actually.

Use the in-game system they used for feed back during the betas, it would work perfectly and would be input from people actually in the game.

Man, this would be so exciting to me. I really wish Arenanet would look at something like this.

Bluebird.1890:

Your suggestion is exactly what I was envisioning.

“We have the resources to go in these directions. Which does the community prefer?”

And then you have nobody that can claim that the developer isn’t holding true to the players wishes.

The problem we run into is when it’s a close vote. Something like a Presidential vote where one candidate gets 55% of the vote and the other gets 45%. I don’t think a content decision coming down that close should be acted on just because it barely won. This is about everyone’s entertainment, not the side that just barely has more people voting for it.

Archmortal.1027:

Bluebird.1890:

Your suggestion is exactly what I was envisioning.

“We have the resources to go in these directions. Which does the community prefer?”

And then you have nobody that can claim that the developer isn’t holding true to the players wishes.

The problem we run into is when it’s a close vote. Something like a Presidential vote where one candidate gets 55% of the vote and the other gets 45%. I don’t think a content decision coming down that close should be acted on just because it barely won. This is about everyone’s entertainment, not the side that just barely has more people voting for it.

this is why i think the beta pop-up would work so well.
For anyone who doesn’t know, it was basically a rating from 1-5, with a series of questions e.g.
was this fun
how would you rate the difficulty
did you feel like you contributed
how much do you feel you have impacted the world
etc with a little box at the end where you could add comments

This way you can get a good idea of how the players actually view the content and make decisions accordingly or not if people are basically split about it.

ps: the questions aren’t accurate I basically paraphrased them from memory

Morrigan.2809:

Archmortal.1027:

Bluebird.1890:

Your suggestion is exactly what I was envisioning.

“We have the resources to go in these directions. Which does the community prefer?”

And then you have nobody that can claim that the developer isn’t holding true to the players wishes.

The problem we run into is when it’s a close vote. Something like a Presidential vote where one candidate gets 55% of the vote and the other gets 45%. I don’t think a content decision coming down that close should be acted on just because it barely won. This is about everyone’s entertainment, not the side that just barely has more people voting for it.

this is why i think the beta pop-up would work so well.
For anyone who doesn’t know, it was basically a rating from 1-5, with a series of questions e.g.
was this fun
how would you rate the difficulty
did you feel like you contributed
how much do you feel you have impacted the world
etc with a little box at the end where you could add comments

This way you can get a good idea of how the players actually view the content and make decisions accordingly or not if people are basically split about it.

ps: the questions aren’t accurate I basically paraphrased them from memory

I remember the interface you are talking about. I wonder why that is gone now :/

Anet made a huge mistake by letting the ascended gear release only in a fotm dungeon which can and obviously is being viewed by many as a direct violation of the manifesto..

However anet has admitted regret and owned up to that fact and has said it will not happen again..

So I chalk this up as a blunder made by anet and i do not view it as anet going back on their word but rather a mistake intentional or not that they will correct..

Many are making a mountain out of a mole hill imho..

This may explain the majority of the OP’s post:

There is always someone that will put RL asside, to get to Max on everything and gear in any game. What this leads to the; "Keeping up with the Jone’s Attitude. People will not like the fact the someone else has something that they where gonna get eventualy, now all of a sudden it turns out a rat race on people to get there first.

So what you left is? People that are annoyed that now, that they where planning on the goal eventualy, all of a sudden now have to rush to get there. Rushing to get somewheres always turns out to be a grind, on the people that where gonna take there time at first to their goal.

Bluebird.1890:

See, now THIS is interesting.

It sounds like, in your opinion, the best solution here would be an avenue upon which we can actually judge the most popular opinion of the community instead of assuming the vocal forum contributors and Reddit community are the voice of the game.

Maybe a platform upon which we could vote for changes in gameplay design?

I like that a lot, actually.

Thanks for finding it interesting. lol

Honestly, I don’t know the answer. If I did, I’d sell it and retire on a private island somewhere as “that dude that totally found a way to make an MMO mass popular for both horizontal and vertical progression advocates … and without it being considered too grindy too!”

Obviously the vocal people on either extreme end of an argument aren’t “the norm” though and cannot be made happy if their counterparts are to be made happy. One end of the spectrum attempting to understand the other will never happen, either. Ideologically it just isn’t possible.

ANet dropped the ball on this one. They admitted it after. If they’re truly searching for that fulcrum point … that spot where they fail to tick off the largest number of players (and note how I wrote that … there is no way to make everyone happy, or even make most players happy … but there IS a point where you make the least number of people unhappy) they totally misfired with Ascended stuff. I doubt there are many people that wouldn’t point at it and identify it as a grind. Nearly everyone at the concert pointed and screamed “stop doing whatever that is you are doing.” We’ll see if the band really does change tune.

So sure, they’re working on it. That will make some people content. Others aren’t going to be happy with it at all … the damage was already done.

You were right about the ‘shroom analogy. Thought about it on the way home. It is too objective. I’m strictly forbidden from using analogies at work, and basically got my Master’s Degree in “bullkitten & analogies” … so forgive me for spewing them here so much, but I enjoy it.

Revisit the restaurant … yet .. make it one that, prior to opening, said it would cater to people that do not like spicy food. “Every other restaurant is spicy,” they claim, “so we’re the restaurant for people that want a different experience!”

Spicy is obviously subjective. There are degrees of spicy and people will enjoy different amounts of it, tolerate other amounts, and downright dislike others. I love spicy, others do not.

Weirdly, I go to ANet’s restaurant. I guess I’m just so used to spicy restaurants I didn’t think they’d be different. Maybe I just liked the flashy advertising.

I blow through the whole menu … gobble it all down … then complain that it isn’t spicy enough. A bunch of other people did the same as I did … we all complain together. We want spicy.

Instead of saying “well maybe you should try the place across the street” as this restaurant wasn’t made for us, and many other restaurants exist that cater to us already; this is business after all, ANet want to sell food, why would they actively turn us away? So, they alienate their fanbase and not only add something spicy, they add something so spicy even people that love spicy food are like “zOMG”.

“Well you don’t have to order the spicy food,” I tell the people that are getting upset, “it is just for ME and MY friends.”

“Well why does HE get personal food content? Why is he getting special treatment? We were promised the whole restaurant was just for us.”

Then, some of the no-spicy people realize a couple chefs are going around with a spice grinder and getting spicy grinds in some of the old dishes. They fear the new dishes will be made with those spicy grinds in them too. Rightful paranoia, I’d say, because the restaurant already strayed from the extreme “no spice” stance and added the mega-spice option. The only obvious way for them to proceed is to cater to the middle.

Oh well … we’re all happy now, right?

Well no. I want more spicy. The other guys are mad spicy is even on the menu. Some people will leave, from both camps. Many ‘middle ground’ people … on either side of that fulcrum point will stick around.

Some will “wait and see” as you say … others will never come back, and are revolted their favorite restauranteurs “lied to them” … others just want to watch the world burn.