Guild Wars 2

These forums need mandatory drug testing.

Metrics are tools, nothing more. It allows them to see what everyone is doing and not doing, not just forum posters. It gives they information as to where to look for improvements. Now what they do with this information and how to interpret it can be problematic. Not metrics themselves.

Remember Champ rewards? Reason it was added was metrics showed nobody was clearing champs. Reason? Rewards simply worth the extended time it took to defeat them. So the added the champ rewards and metrics then showed a drop in activities that weren’t champ centric. Even certain meta events were being allowed to fail because everyone was focusing on champs. So they had to turn the rewards down.

You’re right, individually we’re not metrics. Collectively, metrics illustrate what we’re playing, how long we’re playing it for, how often we log in, and how often we take long breaks from the game.

We are not metrics. Our collective behavior is quantified by metrics.

Brb, gotta press F to entertain the cow.

Great post!
Its really sad seeing a great company like Arenanet struggle with their game, but once a compay gets to large it has to rely on unreliable metrics and statistic rather than actual feedback from people who play the game every day.

It is understandable though. They would have to hire atleast another 20 people to read, sort and collect all the feedback. Filter things that get post multiple times etc.

Its probably a lot more than 20 people in the full pipe line until community feedback hits a patch.
All that costs money… because games this large have become a business rather than a hobby you do because you love it.

On the other hand indie companies manage to listen to their gamers (most of the time) and sell millions of copys of their game with just a handful of employees.
Thats life.

Yea Arena Nets answer for doing anything these days `because the metrics say so´.

I am sure metrics indicate that the game would be more popular with a first person view and an colour pallet of predominantly brown and grey, do not forget guns and perhaps some science fiction elements. Also I believe people love dragons and zombies so add a dragon zom.. oh wait, you did that already.

Vayne.8563:

You’re right, individually we’re not metrics. Collectively, metrics illustrate what we’re playing, how long we’re playing it for, how often we log in, and how often we take long breaks from the game.

We are not metrics. Our collective behavior is quantified by metrics.

And metrics are they only thing that Anet can measure in any meaningful way.

We are not “players with wallets.”

We are walking, talking bags of money.

As expected of businesses nowadays. Nothing more and nothing less.

All is vain.

In WvW terms, we are walking loot bags.

“I am a meat popsicle”

And, anyway, since we’ve all got numbers attached to us why can’t we be a metric. Better than being an imperial.

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more. It allows them to see what everyone is doing and not doing, not just forum posters. It gives they information as to where to look for improvements. Now what they do with this information and how to interpret it can be problematic. Not metrics themselves.

The issue with metrics is that they don’t show why we’re doing things.

Are we going to our home instance for those daily nodes because we enjoy doing it?

Or is it because that’s the best viable way to get Watchwork Sprockets and Blade Shards for that last Spinal Blade backpack we want to forge, and heck since we’re there might as well farm the other ones.

Or is it because we’ve done everything else that the only thing to do is something repetative, and that’s the closest and fastest repetative stuff to help with our dailies, or our daily gated content that we have to do if we want access to high level Fractals.

Metrics say what’s done. But never does it say why it’s done. Do we do it because it’s fun, or do we do it because we need to (or it’s the most profitable means of getting what we need) in order to begin what we feel would be fun?

And I think this is what the OP means by “we are not metrics”. Metrics is what we do, not why we do it. And most companies, sadly ArenaNet seems to be amongst them now, are too stuck on the “what” rather than the “why”.

If you give players 10 things to do, but 8 of them are one-time-only stuff to be able to do, then obviously they’ll be doing the last 2 more often. But does this mean they like those last two things? Not necessarily.

And before you go say “don’t do what you don’t want to do” or “if you don’t like it don’t do it” or whatever way of saying that, please take note that sometimes, designers make the fun stuff blocked by the boring stuff, and sometimes we become conditioned to do simple repetitive things not realizing we don’t like it except in general concept – see: Skinner Box.

I wouldn’t mind the metrics if we were atleast all Equal in them.

But that’s not how F2P shops work these days. They focus those metrics only on certain….people.

Ant.3415:

These forums need mandatory drug testing.

LMAO!!! Best post I’ve seen.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more. It allows them to see what everyone is doing and not doing, not just forum posters. It gives they information as to where to look for improvements. Now what they do with this information and how to interpret it can be problematic. Not metrics themselves.

The issue with metrics is that they don’t show why we’re doing things.

But it shows where and what to investigate to understand the why.

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

This is the worst argument I ever see to threads like this. You don’t have to be able to poor hundreds of thousands of dollars into a game and/or be able to design one to see how bad or good a game is. All you have to do is play it. Stop acting like people have to be able to create a better game in order to critique the one they are playing.

I don’t like Metric either.

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

This is the worst argument I ever see to threads like this. You don’t have to be able to poor hundreds of thousands of dollars into a game and/or be able to design one to see how bad or good a game is. All you have to do is play it. Stop acting like people have to be able to create a better game in order to critique the one they are playing.

But scerevisiae wasn’t critiquing, but slamming ANet management as a bunch of money counting Scrooges. Show me the “evaluate in a detailed and analytical way” presentation that defines a critique.

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

This is the worst argument I ever see to threads like this. You don’t have to be able to poor hundreds of thousands of dollars into a game and/or be able to design one to see how bad or good a game is. All you have to do is play it. Stop acting like people have to be able to create a better game in order to critique the one they are playing.

How good or bad a game is, that’s your opinion as a player. But you bet your sweet kitten there are objective measures of a game’s success as a business that most of us have not the foggiest clue about. Your denial of that fact makes it no less true. So my challenge stands. If you think you and your buddies can design a better game and make a go of it financially, go right ahead.

Like any statistic, metrics can tell a lot about what’s going on in a game, and they can be deceptive. They certainly don’t tell the whole story. Also, people can in many cases make statistics support whatever biases they have.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more. It allows them to see what everyone is doing and not doing, not just forum posters. It gives they information as to where to look for improvements. Now what they do with this information and how to interpret it can be problematic. Not metrics themselves.

The issue with metrics is that they don’t show why we’re doing things.

Are we going to our home instance for those daily nodes because we enjoy doing it?

Or is it because that’s the best viable way to get Watchwork Sprockets and Blade Shards for that last Spinal Blade backpack we want to forge, and heck since we’re there might as well farm the other ones.

Or is it because we’ve done everything else that the only thing to do is something repetative, and that’s the closest and fastest repetative stuff to help with our dailies, or our daily gated content that we have to do if we want access to high level Fractals.

Metrics say what’s done. But never does it say why it’s done. Do we do it because it’s fun, or do we do it because we need to (or it’s the most profitable means of getting what we need) in order to begin what we feel would be fun?

And I think this is what the OP means by “we are not metrics”. Metrics is what we do, not why we do it. And most companies, sadly ArenaNet seems to be amongst them now, are too stuck on the “what” rather than the “why”.

If you give players 10 things to do, but 8 of them are one-time-only stuff to be able to do, then obviously they’ll be doing the last 2 more often. But does this mean they like those last two things? Not necessarily.

And before you go say “don’t do what you don’t want to do” or “if you don’t like it don’t do it” or whatever way of saying that, please take note that sometimes, designers make the fun stuff blocked by the boring stuff, and sometimes we become conditioned to do simple repetitive things not realizing we don’t like it except in general concept – see: Skinner Box.

No, the OP just doesn’t understand math.

RC golems are gone. The metrics said they shouldn’t be there anymore. Of course they came to that conclusion. 4 out of 5 players probably stopped at the golems, spent 5 seconds trying to figure out what was going on, then gave up and moved on.

The metrics said to ignore that 5th player, brimming with excitement and anticipation having just created their first character, an asura, who spent enough time here to figure out what the golems were about. This person who was ready to explore this world of the asura, a world of cloistered tinkerers in the arcane and arrogant scholars, found a game crafted for the sole purpose of enriching this small virtual world. This person had a chance to learn and play game with its own set of rules, even its own programmed opponent, occupying its small corner of this Guild Wars 2 universe. And this fifth person may first have been baffled by the existence of this miniature game, but then they realized were upon the threshold of a truly deep and promising experience, one filled with nuggets such as these, and that it would be up to them to find and share them.

That small moment was never recorded, and thanks to metrics, this little gem has now been trimmed out of the game. No new player will ever have that experience again.

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

This is the worst argument I ever see to threads like this. You don’t have to be able to poor hundreds of thousands of dollars into a game and/or be able to design one to see how bad or good a game is. All you have to do is play it. Stop acting like people have to be able to create a better game in order to critique the one they are playing.

While what you’re saying is absolutely true, it doesn’t go deep enough. Because people who are playing games often don’t know what would be best for the game.

Most people see leaves, not forest. They see detail but not the big picture. And you can’t build a game, not a good game, on only details. Most of the complaints we actually see here are complaints about details and very often they overlook the main picture.

Take the warrior nerf as an example. A lot of people hate it. A lot of warriors are really not happy with it. But it was clearly something that had to be done, because whenever you see on a forum that the warrior is pretty much the best profession to use in every area of the game there’s a problem.

The warrior player might have left the game, totally kittened that his fun experience was ruined. He knows what’s fun and this isn’kitten But it’s not fun for the other seven professions.

It’s true that not everyone is going to go out and design a game, but it’s also true that not everyone who thinks something is better or good is necessarily right. They only know if it’s good for them.

I believe there are no real majorities on this forum. PvPers aren’t a majority certainly. But they want things that make PvP better and to hell with PvE. WvWers aren’t a majority but they too want things that make their experience better. PvE is probably a majority but it’s not just one thing. It’s broken into RP, which is not a majority, dungeon runners, who I don’t believe are a majority, and people who only do open world PvE or altoholics, neither of which I think are a majority. So if you have eight, ten groups of players, not counting cross players, who are all asking for different things, they all judge the game from their perspective.

It’s obvious a company can’t do that. They can’t listen to everyone all at once, if for no other reason than adding harder content for one guy would ruin the game for another. So they have to use some method to figure out who’s playing what and for how long. Enter metrics.

The metrics Anet is using is showing poor uptake for players just starting out. They don’t want to move on until they get the core game right. That’s what they’re doing now.

There are going to be growing pains. Some people won’t like it. Some people will quit. Some people will threaten to quit. Some people will stop buying gems. I like the changes so I’ll buy more gems this month.

But at the end of the day, most players have no idea how to make a game better….they only know how to make a game better for the minority they represent.

ANet needs to be more candid with their pre-update blog posts and so on. Less fluff and dressing it up with PR words and maybe they can prevent some of the outrage, because by just reading blog snippets that are dressed up with optimism, people are going to be elevated only to come crashing down even harder once they actually get in game and witness everything for themselves.

That’s what happened here.

As to the poster above (vayne): details are what make the picture a flop, or a legend. Just because someone focuses on details does not mean they are not taking the big picture into account. Often times they are, because one little bad smudge can ruin the whole picture, like a large wart on an otherwise beautiful face.

That too is what is happening here.

Vayne’s point is as players we see details. That all we normally care about is how some change affect us and our characters and don’t really give a darn about how this impacts other players. But as developers ANet has to look at the big picture and figure out what is best for the game as a whole without wholesale alienation of their current customers.

And that’s what the mighty M word can provide, a look at all players and not one subset at a time and when properly used, can help figure out priorities as to what to fix first when a problem is detected.

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more.

The problem with too much focus on metrics is that you tend to design a game to match the metrics instead of innovating. I hope that ArenaNet understands this or they will fall pray to the same problem that the social game industry fell into. Too Many Clones. (Or is the AAA gaming industry already at that problem).

Extra Credits: Metrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqGcXOksFGg

The above video explains another reason that is applicable to Guild Wars 2. Often metrics based games create inaccessible products only accessible to a niche player-base. This is perhaps what happened in the initial development of this game. Leading to a complete re-design of core systems.

Of course we are metrics, it was created to study group behaviour not the other way around. That you don’t believe it does not really change anything. People still believe the sun orbits the earth, does not change anything at all.

I’m a metric.

Kamui.4038:

ANet needs to be more candid with their pre-update blog posts and so on. Less fluff and dressing it up with PR words and maybe they can prevent some of the outrage, because by just reading blog snippets that are dressed up with optimism, people are going to be elevated only to come crashing down even harder once they actually get in game and witness everything for themselves.

That’s what happened here.

As to the poster above (vayne): details are what make the picture a flop, or a legend. Just because someone focuses on details does not mean they are not taking the big picture into account. Often times they are, because one little bad smudge can ruin the whole picture, like a large wart on an otherwise beautiful face.

That too is what is happening here.

I’ve always been a guy short on the details and big on the big picture. I usually hired detail guys. I was quite successful at the stuff I turned my hand to, because big picture guys are rarer than detail guys. It’s just the way it is. You don’t have to believe it, but it’s true.

Saying that people often take the big picture into account is a massive assumption. Maybe, possibly you do. Maybe you think most people are like you. I’m pretty sure most people aren’t. I don’t only think most people don’t take the big picture into account, I think most people can’t…any more than I can suddenly be detail oriented. It’s not just something you do, it’s a mindset.

Making the assumption that people complaining are taking the big picture into view is demonstrably untrue in many cases.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Metrics say what’s done. But never does it say why it’s done. Do we do it because it’s fun, or do we do it because we need to (or it’s the most profitable means of getting what we need) in order to begin what we feel would be fun?

And I think this is what the OP means by “we are not metrics”. Metrics is what we do, not why we do it.

Yes, that is true normally for all metrics and KPI (key performance indicators).

The numbers have shown “that” (too much) players had left early in the leveling but they do not say “why”.

And it was up then for the A-net folks to find out with their own expertise the “why” and how it could be made better. They tried. They did. People make errors. Not everythings works as expected.

So the metrics did not tell A-Net what to do, but show only hints where to look at.

Greetings.

No they should use forum whines from handful of whiners on the forum!

What a revolutionary idea!

anzenketh.3759:

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more.

The problem with too much focus on metrics is that you tend to design a game to match the metrics instead of innovating. I hope that ArenaNet understands this or they will fall pray to the same problem that the social game industry fell into. Too Many Clones. (Or is the AAA gaming industry already at that problem).

Extra Credits: Metrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqGcXOksFGg

The above video explains another reason that is applicable to Guild Wars 2. Often metrics based games create inaccessible products only accessible to a niche player-base. This is perhaps what happened in the initial development of this game. Leading to a complete re-design of core systems.

Of course, but read OP. He actually suggest directing your game by forum whines.

I know i wouldnt play THAT game, and most of this changes are partially based on forum whines (whines of GW1 skill hunting (which was bad), whines that game doesnt have any sense of direction and character feels complete when you ding 30, and theres no gear grind)

Metrics are part of the decisions making, and whining of forums should just be ignored if theyre smart.

MikaHR.1978:

anzenketh.3759:

Behellagh.1468:

Metrics are tools, nothing more.

The problem with too much focus on metrics is that you tend to design a game to match the metrics instead of innovating. I hope that ArenaNet understands this or they will fall pray to the same problem that the social game industry fell into. Too Many Clones. (Or is the AAA gaming industry already at that problem).

Extra Credits: Metrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqGcXOksFGg

The above video explains another reason that is applicable to Guild Wars 2. Often metrics based games create inaccessible products only accessible to a niche player-base. This is perhaps what happened in the initial development of this game. Leading to a complete re-design of core systems.

Of course, but read OP. He actually suggest directing your game by forum whines.

I know i wouldnt play THAT game, and most of this changes are partially based on forum whines (whines of GW1 skill hunting (which was bad), whines that game doesnt have any sense of direction and character feels complete when you ding 30, and theres no gear grind)

Metrics are part of the decisions making, and whining of forums should just be ignored if theyre smart.

But also if they’re smart they’re able to look through some of the whine to find truth. Its there occasionally, which is why I don’t bail the constant complainers up as much I’d like.

Vayne.8563:

Kamui.4038:

ANet needs to be more candid with their pre-update blog posts and so on. Less fluff and dressing it up with PR words and maybe they can prevent some of the outrage, because by just reading blog snippets that are dressed up with optimism, people are going to be elevated only to come crashing down even harder once they actually get in game and witness everything for themselves.

That’s what happened here.

As to the poster above (vayne): details are what make the picture a flop, or a legend. Just because someone focuses on details does not mean they are not taking the big picture into account. Often times they are, because one little bad smudge can ruin the whole picture, like a large wart on an otherwise beautiful face.

That too is what is happening here.

I’ve always been a guy short on the details and big on the big picture. I usually hired detail guys. I was quite successful at the stuff I turned my hand to, because big picture guys are rarer than detail guys. It’s just the way it is. You don’t have to believe it, but it’s true.

Saying that people often take the big picture into account is a massive assumption. Maybe, possibly you do. Maybe you think most people are like you. I’m pretty sure most people aren’t. I don’t only think most people don’t take the big picture into account, I think most people can’t…any more than I can suddenly be detail oriented. It’s not just something you do, it’s a mindset.

Making the assumption that people complaining are taking the big picture into view is demonstrably untrue in many cases.

Conjecture. Conjecture everywhere. Whether most people understand as I do is irrelevant: they and I are on the same page here, and if they can’t consciously see the big picture, I can, which ultimately means they do understand what is happening, they just may not phrase it in so many words all the time, but they feel it instinctively. A brilliant game of freedom and potential reduced to fenced cribs and safety helmets. That’s the future of the current path and what everyone unanimously sees happening to the game.

Maybe all the resistance will veer us off that course – who knows what ANet is thinking behind closed doors at this point – but if it doesn’t, there is no hope left. We all get that, and that is the big picture here.

I wish I could shower this game with praise, I really do, and I did do that when it launched as did millions of others, but I’m not blind enough to do that in its current state, nor am I unethical enough.

Metrics tell a company where to investigate. They are not a solution but rather an indication of where to start looking for one.

Metrics might indicate that a given class is played less. Proper use of those metrics would be to take that as an indication that the underplayed class might need to be examined, that players might need to be polled or interviewed, and so on. Metrics can give an indication of where to start but not where you should finish. They are an extremely valuable tool.

Kamui.4038:

Vayne.8563:

Kamui.4038:

ANet needs to be more candid with their pre-update blog posts and so on. Less fluff and dressing it up with PR words and maybe they can prevent some of the outrage, because by just reading blog snippets that are dressed up with optimism, people are going to be elevated only to come crashing down even harder once they actually get in game and witness everything for themselves.

That’s what happened here.

As to the poster above (vayne): details are what make the picture a flop, or a legend. Just because someone focuses on details does not mean they are not taking the big picture into account. Often times they are, because one little bad smudge can ruin the whole picture, like a large wart on an otherwise beautiful face.

That too is what is happening here.

I’ve always been a guy short on the details and big on the big picture. I usually hired detail guys. I was quite successful at the stuff I turned my hand to, because big picture guys are rarer than detail guys. It’s just the way it is. You don’t have to believe it, but it’s true.

Saying that people often take the big picture into account is a massive assumption. Maybe, possibly you do. Maybe you think most people are like you. I’m pretty sure most people aren’t. I don’t only think most people don’t take the big picture into account, I think most people can’t…any more than I can suddenly be detail oriented. It’s not just something you do, it’s a mindset.

Making the assumption that people complaining are taking the big picture into view is demonstrably untrue in many cases.

Conjecture. Conjecture everywhere. Whether most people understand as I do is irrelevant: they and I are on the same page here, and if they can’t consciously see the big picture, I can, which ultimately means they do understand what is happening, they just may not phrase it in so many words all the time, but they feel it instinctively. A brilliant game of freedom and potential reduced to fenced cribs and safety helmets. That’s the future of the current path and what everyone unanimously sees happening to the game.

Maybe all the resistance will veer us off that course – who knows what ANet is thinking behind closed doors at this point – but if it doesn’t, there is no hope left. We all get that, and that is the big picture here.

I wish I could shower this game with praise, I really do, and I did do that when it launched as did millions of others, but I’m not blind enough to do that in its current state, nor am I unethical enough.

Have you ever seen me shower this game in praise? Once even?

There’s a difference between showering a game in praise, and not accepting criticism that doesn’t make the game particularly better.

One easy example is the big backlash to the elite skill not being unlocked to level 40. All people see is a number. I used to get it at 30, now I get it at 40. I’m disadvantaged.

But since the leveling process has changed. according to Colin who tested it (and the first 15 levels are certainly faster), you get the elite at roughly the same number of hours played.

Seeing the small picture, the level number, you never look at the whole picture. If you got the elite at 30 hours before and you get it at 30 hours now, it’s not really a problem.

This is just one recent and simple example of people who think they know what’s going on, because they focus on a detail.

We have a relatively big patch and people are focused on a tiny portion of it. It happens all the time. A lot of people on these forums have hot button issues.

A lot of the complaints about one of the paragraphs in the manifesto takes the line out of context. Why do people pick one line and focus on it? Because that one line is the one thing that related to what they wanted. It doesn’t matter if the rest of the paragraph changes the definition of that line, they don’t care. They’re not seeing the big picture. They’re seeing the detail.

This is relatively normal. Those who think outside the box are by far the exception to the rule, or there wouldn’t be a box.

Metrics are why all the shows about science and history and culture have been replaced by reality shows about pawn shops and logging operations. The networks might be happy with the higher ratings the latter bring in, but it sure sucks for those who enjoyed the former.

@ MikeHR: Please. The Op isn’t suggesting anything specific. Where on earth did you get that the idea he/she was referring specifically to forum posts? Because they posted this on a forum? Surely you see that idiocy in that. Is there somewhere else they should express this without the bias of people like you assuming simply because you post your opinion on virtually the only place it can be viewed by Anet that it should be inherently disregarded simply because they voiced their opinion on the only means of expression Anet can see? Is there a democratic meeting that’s held monthly I wasn’t made aware of?

Irrelevant. I’m not here to debate. I’m here merely to express that I acknowledge the personal expression the OP has conveyed here. Whether I agree with his/her complaints or not I don’t see worth voicing right now. The point of my post is simply to point out that some here, whether their complaints are justified or not, serve to show that Anet has some pretty dedicated fans behind it. I’m simply looking at things outside the box here. For a company to have someone communicate their emotional investment in the game like this, is something to consider, regardless of how you feel about what their specifically trying to express.

Some will take what I’m pointing out into consideration. Those that won’t will disregard my and the OP’s post as, simply, different form their own, and therefore, unimportant.

Either way, I find it comforting people here are able to voice their disapproval with anet (which seems to be, like a newly buffed class, the new flavor of the month from the forums) in an actual way that involves more than just, Anet omgwtfbbq do you even lift, which I have seen (granted this is in.. simplified terms-ish) so frequently on the forums these past few days.

dwillikers.2348:

@ MikeHR: Please. The Op isn’t suggesting anything specific. Where on earth did you get that the idea he/she was referring specifically to forum posts? Because they posted this on a forum? Surely you see that idiocy in that. Is there somewhere else they should express this without the bias of people like you assuming simply because you post your opinion on virtually the only place it can be viewed by Anet that it should be inherently disregarded simply because they voiced their opinion on the only means of expression Anet can see? Is there a democratic meeting that’s held monthly I wasn’t made aware of?

Irrelevant. I’m not here to debate. I’m here merely to express that I acknowledge the personal expression the OP has conveyed here. Whether I agree with his/her complaints or not I don’t see worth voicing right now. The point of my post is simply to point out that some here, whether their complaints are justified or not, serve to show that Anet has some pretty dedicated fans behind it. I’m simply looking at things outside the box here. For a company to have someone communicate their emotional investment in the game like this, is something to consider, regardless of how you feel about what their specifically trying to express.

Some will take what I’m pointing out into consideration. Those that won’t will disregard my and the OP’s post as, simply, different form their own, and therefore, unimportant.

Either way, I find it comforting people here are able to voice their disapproval with anet (which seems to be, like a newly buffed class, the new flavor of the month from the forums) in an actual way that involves more than just, Anet omgwtfbbq do you even lift, which I have seen (granted this is in.. simplified terms-ish) so frequently on the forums these past few days.

Spot on. Someone else that can think critically. Most of the naysayers that seem to think ANet can do no wrong are really just hiding under blankets and scared at the angry mob this update has brought upon itself. Well you can’t wish away us monsters that easily this time…

And yes, OP is not speaking about only the forums, obviously. “We” does not mean “those of us that post on the GW2 or other forums”, “we” means “we”: the players playing the game. ANet could make in game surveys if they wanted to take in information and make decisions based on that, for one. Even better: they could make a Public Test Server. It’s all within their power to do so.

Mistakes happen and ANet made a booboo with this update. The important part is that we learn from this so that we do not continue repeating it.

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

Metrics are only good when the right things are measured and the right conclusions drawn. Otherwise they just paint the wrong picture.

Word on the street is that Anet management are overly obsessed with their graphite dashboards and the continued misreading of same is why the game continues its march into mediocrity.

If you can do any better, give it a try. Make a game and see how many people you can get to play it. See if you can put enough financing into it to make it financially viable for one year, let-alone the two that GW2 has already existed for. Go ahead. Try it. I’ll wait.

This is so skritardet attitude it literally hurts.
I’m a video editor – I edit movies for living. If I’m doing poor job – I rather have constructive criticism while I’ll still can fix my thing, rather than sending people to school, so they can learn how to do my job. First of – I would be creating competition, second – it’s just rude… and even better – if the PAYING costumer gives me feedback – it’s part of my job to check it.
Don’t get me wrong – it’s my job, and I know what I am doing. That means that 99,9% of feedback will come from people who can not see the bigger picture of what I am doing, so they are not in position to correct me. But sometimes they see what I’ve missed.
But when I catch some unhealthy mannerism, it’s usually invisible to me, but on plain sight to others. Look at Michael Bay craptastic supercrapductions, or overdose of lense flare in J.J. Abrams movies – the latter took the constructive criticism and is working on it, the first one is… protected only by “do it better yourself” bullkitten. But still making millions, which can translate to smaller scale with Anet situations.
Long live the metrics!

Kamui.4038:

dwillikers.2348:

@ MikeHR: Please. The Op isn’t suggesting anything specific. Where on earth did you get that the idea he/she was referring specifically to forum posts? Because they posted this on a forum? Surely you see that idiocy in that. Is there somewhere else they should express this without the bias of people like you assuming simply because you post your opinion on virtually the only place it can be viewed by Anet that it should be inherently disregarded simply because they voiced their opinion on the only means of expression Anet can see? Is there a democratic meeting that’s held monthly I wasn’t made aware of?

Irrelevant. I’m not here to debate. I’m here merely to express that I acknowledge the personal expression the OP has conveyed here. Whether I agree with his/her complaints or not I don’t see worth voicing right now. The point of my post is simply to point out that some here, whether their complaints are justified or not, serve to show that Anet has some pretty dedicated fans behind it. I’m simply looking at things outside the box here. For a company to have someone communicate their emotional investment in the game like this, is something to consider, regardless of how you feel about what their specifically trying to express.

Some will take what I’m pointing out into consideration. Those that won’t will disregard my and the OP’s post as, simply, different form their own, and therefore, unimportant.

Either way, I find it comforting people here are able to voice their disapproval with anet (which seems to be, like a newly buffed class, the new flavor of the month from the forums) in an actual way that involves more than just, Anet omgwtfbbq do you even lift, which I have seen (granted this is in.. simplified terms-ish) so frequently on the forums these past few days.

Spot on. Someone else that can think critically. Most of the naysayers that seem to think ANet can do no wrong are really just hiding under blankets and scared at the angry mob this update has brought upon itself. Well you can’t wish away us monsters that easily this time…

And yes, OP is not speaking about only the forums, obviously. “We” does not mean “those of us that post on the GW2 or other forums”, “we” means “we”: the players playing the game. ANet could make in game surveys if they wanted to take in information and make decisions based on that, for one. Even better: they could make a Public Test Server. It’s all within their power to do so.

Mistakes happen and ANet made a booboo with this update. The important part is that we learn from this so that we do not continue repeating it.

I don’t know, I’ve seen the pendulum swing quite far back on this one already and it’s only been a couple of days. A post about leveling being more fun now on reddit with over 300 upvotes for example.

A lot of people watched a popular video, got enraged and came to the forums without even trying to level. How do I know? Because people said so in their posts. Then when people tried it, a lot of people seemed to think people were over-reacting and others liked the experience.

So I don’t know what mob you think we’re scared of. Maybe wishful thinking on your part.

This too shall pass.

Vayne.8563:

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

…

…

….

Take the warrior nerf as an example. A lot of people hate it. A lot of warriors are really not happy with it. But it was clearly something that had to be done, because whenever you see on a forum that the warrior is pretty much the best profession to use in every area of the game there’s a problem.
…

Depends. Warrior was best proffesion to use in every area of the game, not because magical overpower that had to be nerfed, but because of the design of encounters in the game.
As You said – You are looking at the leaves, not forest. Or the oher way around? We can debate on it for hours.
The thing is – there were 2 ways to “fix” this situation:
-nerf warrior.
-work on other professions to make them viable to a game design in comparable manner to a warrior.
Geuess which one was cheap and easy to do, and which one needed large amount of work? And again – which one is looking like a bandaid for a larger problem and guess which one I find right? More – which one was easy to read from metrics and which was behind our motivation?
Again – problem with warrior was a same problem, that Anet had with zerker builds. It’s not the players fault that almost all encounters in game goes same road. Players work with what they have, and the zerker was the answer. Changing zerker was the bandaid same way that changing warrior is. What Anet should do, is to keep the promise of a good fights in-game. Working on the battle model until it no longer gratify zerker above anything else. But again – nerfing zerker is easier. Cheaper. Faster. And it’s dumbing the game instead of enriching it.
But he-heeey – it’s my opinion.

Wizzlock.3492:

Vayne.8563:

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

…

…

….

Take the warrior nerf as an example. A lot of people hate it. A lot of warriors are really not happy with it. But it was clearly something that had to be done, because whenever you see on a forum that the warrior is pretty much the best profession to use in every area of the game there’s a problem.
…

Depends. Warrior was best proffesion to use in every area of the game, not because magical overpower that had to be nerfed, but because of the design of encounters in the game.
As You said – You are looking at the leaves, not forest. Or the oher way around? We can debate on it for hours.
The thing is – there were 2 ways to “fix” this situation:
-nerf warrior.
-work on other professions to make them viable to a game design in comparable manner to a warrior.
Geuess which one was cheap and easy to do, and which one needed large amount of work? And again – which one is looking like a bandaid for a larger problem and guess which one I find right? More – which one was easy to read from metrics and which was behind our motivation?
Again – problem with warrior was a same problem, that Anet had with zerker builds. It’s not the players fault that almost all encounters in game goes same road. Players work with what they have, and the zerker was the answer. Changing zerker was the bandaid same way that changing warrior is. What Anet should do, is to keep the promise of a good fights in-game. Working on the battle model until it no longer gratify zerker above anything else. But again – nerfing zerker is easier. Cheaper. Faster. And it’s dumbing the game instead of enriching it.
But he-heeey – it’s my opinion.

And your opinion on how to change things goes against what any game designer will tell you.

There are already complaints that the game is too face roll easy. If every single profession was buffed to where warriors were, everything in the entire game would need to be redone. Every encounter. Every creature. Every dungeon.

That’s the big picture.

Vayne.8563:

There are already complaints that the game is too face roll easy.

Just to take this little bit (and hopefully not derail the thread) but I’ve been thinking that the new early leveling is exactly this. Its become even more easy so I’m wondering if this where many of the current complains are springing from since many of the vets are more than capable of doing the early stuff blindfolded and this has made it even easier. Maybe if we knew exactly what was intended would help with that.

Vayne.8563:

Wizzlock.3492:

Vayne.8563:

cranked.3812:

gryph.8734:

scerevisiae.1972:

…

…

….

Take the warrior nerf as an example. A lot of people hate it. A lot of warriors are really not happy with it. But it was clearly something that had to be done, because whenever you see on a forum that the warrior is pretty much the best profession to use in every area of the game there’s a problem.
…

Depends. Warrior was best proffesion to use in every area of the game, not because magical overpower that had to be nerfed, but because of the design of encounters in the game.
As You said – You are looking at the leaves, not forest. Or the oher way around? We can debate on it for hours.
The thing is – there were 2 ways to “fix” this situation:
-nerf warrior.
-work on other professions to make them viable to a game design in comparable manner to a warrior.
Geuess which one was cheap and easy to do, and which one needed large amount of work? And again – which one is looking like a bandaid for a larger problem and guess which one I find right? More – which one was easy to read from metrics and which was behind our motivation?
Again – problem with warrior was a same problem, that Anet had with zerker builds. It’s not the players fault that almost all encounters in game goes same road. Players work with what they have, and the zerker was the answer. Changing zerker was the bandaid same way that changing warrior is. What Anet should do, is to keep the promise of a good fights in-game. Working on the battle model until it no longer gratify zerker above anything else. But again – nerfing zerker is easier. Cheaper. Faster. And it’s dumbing the game instead of enriching it.
But he-heeey – it’s my opinion.

And your opinion on how to change things goes against what any game designer will tell you.

There are already complaints that the game is too face roll easy. If every single profession was buffed to where warriors were, everything in the entire game would need to be redone. Every encounter. Every creature. Every dungeon.

That’s the big picture.

What is funny – I never said other professions should be buffed. It’s your assumption. What I did say – classes other than warrior are insignificant from the game design point of view and that need to be changed. That is the game design flaw that sooner or later will had to be adressed. Nerfing warriors stats ain’t enough, while he is most suited to playing the game design only road.
Diversity – that’s something that Anet failed to deliver at the beggining of the journey, and what will drag game down for months and months (2 years now, with nerf bandaid fixes that leads to another nerf bandaid fixes, that will lead to… ), or become irrelevant in future if the games move to another level (moving the lvl cap or redoing some parts of game like they did with “Tequilla”).
Of course my opinion goes agains what every game designer would tell me. That’s why I’m getting paid for geting jod DONE not “done”. And I said – they took cheaper road, not the right one and I stand for that. It’s easier to shift the problem from one side to another, than eliminating core of the problem. Easier and for a quite a long time – cheaper. I think 2 years of juggling with this and it’s still cheaper (not that it’s better for players – because I belive it’s not).
Your opinion on the other hand… well – it’s in almost every post I’ve seen in this forum, so yeah – hard to argue

dwillikers.2348:

@ MikeHR: Please. The Op isn’t suggesting anything specific. Where on earth did you get that the idea he/she was referring specifically to forum posts? Because they posted this on a forum? Surely you see that idiocy in that. Is there somewhere else they should express this without the bias of people like you assuming simply because you post your opinion on virtually the only place it can be viewed by Anet that it should be inherently disregarded simply because they voiced their opinion on the only means of expression Anet can see? Is there a democratic meeting that’s held monthly I wasn’t made aware of?

Irrelevant. I’m not here to debate. I’m here merely to express that I acknowledge the personal expression the OP has conveyed here. Whether I agree with his/her complaints or not I don’t see worth voicing right now. The point of my post is simply to point out that some here, whether their complaints are justified or not, serve to show that Anet has some pretty dedicated fans behind it. I’m simply looking at things outside the box here. For a company to have someone communicate their emotional investment in the game like this, is something to consider, regardless of how you feel about what their specifically trying to express.

Some will take what I’m pointing out into consideration. Those that won’t will disregard my and the OP’s post as, simply, different form their own, and therefore, unimportant.

Either way, I find it comforting people here are able to voice their disapproval with anet (which seems to be, like a newly buffed class, the new flavor of the month from the forums) in an actual way that involves more than just, Anet omgwtfbbq do you even lift, which I have seen (granted this is in.. simplified terms-ish) so frequently on the forums these past few days.

becasue i doubt he means to have a hotline and pocket dev to do this.

Yes, i suggested looooooooong time ago that for major-ish decisions there should be non-voluntary survey ingame.

For some other things there could be voluntary surveys ingame.

zenleto.6179:

Vayne.8563:

There are already complaints that the game is too face roll easy.

Just to take this little bit (and hopefully not derail the thread) but I’ve been thinking that the new early leveling is exactly this. Its become even more easy so I’m wondering if this where many of the current complains are springing from since many of the vets are more than capable of doing the early stuff blindfolded and this has made it even easier. Maybe if we knew exactly what was intended would help with that.

The first fifteen levels of games are supposed to be easy. That’s their job. For vets, they should fly through them and get to more challenging stuff.

Are you really telling me that leveling the old way the game wasn’t too easy anyway? Making it even more easy doesn’t affect my experience, because I’ve already leveled through every area a zillion times. It just makes 15-25 zones the new starting area for basic challenge…and even that won’t be all that challenging.

But since they seriously upped the speed to get to that area, I’d say it’s pretty much a wash. It was very easy to level up. But it was easy last week too.

Low leveling shouldn’t be the challenge part of the game, people were complaining about dungeons being to easy or just zerging stuff to get stuff done faster. Level gating stuff doesn’t give a challenge, just makes it more tedious. They want to give a challenge? how about some hard end game dungeons than?

Vayne.8563:

zenleto.6179:

Vayne.8563:

There are already complaints that the game is too face roll easy.

Just to take this little bit (and hopefully not derail the thread) but I’ve been thinking that the new early leveling is exactly this. Its become even more easy so I’m wondering if this where many of the current complains are springing from since many of the vets are more than capable of doing the early stuff blindfolded and this has made it even easier. Maybe if we knew exactly what was intended would help with that.

The first fifteen levels of games are supposed to be easy. That’s their job. For vets, they should fly through them and get to more challenging stuff.

Are you really telling me that leveling the old way the game wasn’t too easy anyway? Making it even more easy doesn’t affect my experience, because I’ve already leveled through every area a zillion times. It just makes 15-25 zones the new starting area for basic challenge…and even that won’t be all that challenging.

But since they seriously upped the speed to get to that area, I’d say it’s pretty much a wash. It was very easy to level up. But it was easy last week too.

Nah mate, I’m in your boat here. Seriously, it was kitten easy before. I’m just wondering if one the things that others consider the issue is the easiness. Though, thinking about it while I type, maybe not. People have been “talking” the easiness of GW2 for a while.