Guild Wars 2

This is what Anet said that intially they were account bound then changed it to character bound? Why? This only increases the price of them and further increase the grind in the game.
This is a direct contridiction to their manifesto.

It is only a grind if you make it a grind. I am sure there have been other threads about this since beta.

Grind for cosmetic dye colors? Really? I promise, having Abyss dye will not make your character any better. You can pick it up at your convenience.

To create a market for them. Their thinking, I assume, is that as long as dye is soulbound it keeps the dye market alive after people acquire most/all dye on their main character.

It’s that way now because ArenaNet chose it to be that way.

Whether or not they said something early on doesn’t change the way it is now.

Honestly, dyes are one of those things that many people want. ArenaNet knows this and that’s why they sell dye packs in the Gem Store. They’ve also applied a generous amount of RNG to Unidentified Dyes, so getting a highly desirable one is less likely.

With the high RNG and making dyes Soul Bound, that will end up yielding more money for ArenaNet from Gem Store sales than if they made them Account Bound.

ArenaNet is in this to make money. It’s a sad, but true, fact. Given that dyes are considered a “vanity item” and give no edge to a player, they can sell them in the Gem Store without going against their “you don’t have to pay to win” philosophy.

I’m starting to get the impression that the use of the word “grind” on these boards is overused, misrepresented, or both. Anyone else starting to feel that way?

Oh, and same goes with the word “manifesto” as far as I’m concerned.

Revolution.6301:

This is what Anet said that intially they were account bound then changed it to character bound? Why? This only increases the price of them and further increase the grind in the game.
This is a direct contridiction to their manifesto.

Actually, the manifesto’s stance on grinding is that they don’t want players doing it for stats, i.e., BiS gear shouldn’t be a grind (according to the manifesto. Whether or not that is the case is not relevant to the topic at hand). ANet has always been comfortable with purely cosmetic grinds. Look at Guild Wars 1, and legendary weapon skins.

Since dyes fall into the category of “purely cosmetic,” grinding for dyes isn’t a contradiction of the manifesto.

As for why they’re character rather than account-bound, it’s a move to keep dyes relevant and marketable through the longevity of the game. Account-bound dyes eventually drop to effective worthlessness as each player obtains the dyes he or she wants.

It’s Revolution that is starting these grind threads to troll. He’s going to use that stupid quote from ANet about not making grindy games. That quote is taken out of context. They don’t want a game that makes you grind for better statted items that give an advantage over those that don’t. Grinding for vanity items like armor skins and dyes does not count because they don’t affect the game.

Blueshield.6291:

Since dyes fall into the category of “purely cosmetic,” grinding for dyes isn’t a contradiction of the manifesto.

Not entirely correct. While, yes, grinding for things that are cosmetic is a good way to keep people playing, grinding itself is somewhat contradicting their manifesto.

In a blog post (and I do not have the exact wording here) ANet has said that they want to largely do away with the grind. They may not want to eliminate it, but they do not want you to have to grind a lot of boring things to reach small pockets of enjoyment. Whether you enjoy grinding or not changes if this has been successful to you personally.

While you are correct in stating that purely cosmetic grinds do not effect your ability to play the game (and I will admit that even this is debatable, as the end game of GW2 is all cosmetic based), they are still a grind, and if found boring, are contradicting the original statement by ANet as to what Guild Wars 2 would be.

Simply because you do not agree with someone, do not think that they are overusing a word, or using a statement incorrectly. Just because it is not a problem to you personally does not mean it is not a problem. (And, perhaps a big one, as many of the people who have stopped playing this game have cited grinding as one reason. Whether that is true or they just feel like saying it because it is a buzzword topic at the moment is also debatable.)

I’d hate for them to be account bound. I love having different dyes on different characters. Always a thrill getting a dye for me. I have so many colors on my main I’d lose that thrill if they were account bound……..

Leriff.8362:

Not entirely correct. While, yes, grinding for things that are cosmetic is a good way to keep people playing, grinding itself is somewhat contradicting their manifesto.

In a blog post (and I do not have the exact wording here) ANet has said that they want to largely do away with the grind. They may not want to eliminate it, but they do not want you to have to grind a lot of boring things to reach small pockets of enjoyment. Whether you enjoy grinding or not changes if this has been successful to you personally.

While you are correct in stating that purely cosmetic grinds do not effect your ability to play the game (and I will admit that even this is debatable, as the end game of GW2 is all cosmetic based), they are still a grind, and if found boring, are contradicting the original statement by ANet as to what Guild Wars 2 would be.

Simply because you do not agree with someone, do not think that they are overusing a word, or using a statement incorrectly. Just because it is not a problem to you personally does not mean it is not a problem. (And, perhaps a big one, as many of the people who have stopped playing this game have cited grinding as one reason. Whether that is true or they just feel like saying it because it is a buzzword topic at the moment is also debatable.)

If cosmetic grinds were a contradiction of the manifesto, then legendary weapons wouldn’t be designed in the way they are. Period. End of story.

Leriff.8362:

Blueshield.6291:

Since dyes fall into the category of “purely cosmetic,” grinding for dyes isn’t a contradiction of the manifesto.

Not entirely correct. While, yes, grinding for things that are cosmetic is a good way to keep people playing, grinding itself is somewhat contradicting their manifesto.

In a blog post (and I do not have the exact wording here) ANet has said that they want to largely do away with the grind. They may not want to eliminate it, but they do not want you to have to grind a lot of boring things to reach small pockets of enjoyment. Whether you enjoy grinding or not changes if this has been successful to you personally.

You are taking that quote out of context.

Here’s what we believe: If someone wants to play for a thousand hours to get an item that is so rare that other players can’t realistically acquire it, that rare item should be differentiated by its visual appearance and rarity alone, not by being more powerful than everything else in the game. Otherwise, your MMO becomes all about grinding to get the best gear. We don’t make grindy games — we leave the grind to other MMOs.

If you read the entire quote, he basically endorses grinding for cosmetics, but not for stats.

Grinding is a state of mind. Those people that find this game a grind probably play half a dozen MMOs a year simply because they get bored very easily. The amount of grind in this game for functionally better items is incredibly low compared to most games that I have played. If your tolerance is very low then spend a few dollars on gems and trade it for gold. It’s the least you can do for a game that has no sub. ANet is a business and it makes no sense for them to just give you a level 80 character with all ascended gear, skins and all dyes right off the bat.

Ursan.7846:

Here’s what we believe: If someone wants to play for a thousand hours to get an item that is so rare that other players can’t realistically acquire it, that rare item should be differentiated by its visual appearance and rarity alone, not by being more powerful than everything else in the game. Otherwise, your MMO becomes all about grinding to get the best gear. We don’t make grindy games — we leave the grind to other MMOs.

If you read the entire quote, he basically endorses grinding for cosmetics, but not for stats.

Precisely. The manifesto does not state that GW2 will never have any grindy content – only that the drive to grind will not come from motivation to have the BiS gear. It specifically embraces cosmetic grinding.

Leriff.8362:

Blueshield.6291:

Since dyes fall into the category of “purely cosmetic,” grinding for dyes isn’t a contradiction of the manifesto.

Not entirely correct. While, yes, grinding for things that are cosmetic is a good way to keep people playing, grinding itself is somewhat contradicting their manifesto.

In a blog post (and I do not have the exact wording here) ANet has said that they want to largely do away with the grind. They may not want to eliminate it, but they do not want you to have to grind a lot of boring things to reach small pockets of enjoyment. Whether you enjoy grinding or not changes if this has been successful to you personally.

While you are correct in stating that purely cosmetic grinds do not effect your ability to play the game (and I will admit that even this is debatable, as the end game of GW2 is all cosmetic based), they are still a grind, and if found boring, are contradicting the original statement by ANet as to what Guild Wars 2 would be.

Simply because you do not agree with someone, do not think that they are overusing a word, or using a statement incorrectly. Just because it is not a problem to you personally does not mean it is not a problem. (And, perhaps a big one, as many of the people who have stopped playing this game have cited grinding as one reason. Whether that is true or they just feel like saying it because it is a buzzword topic at the moment is also debatable.)

Their original statements where always about combat…not cosmetics. They never said anything that would indicate to a reasonable person that there wouldn’t be any sort of grind. Therefore, I still believe that those words are being highly misused, misunderstood, misrepresented, etc…

TLDR: misused, misunderstood, misrepresented, etc…

Blueshield.6291:

If cosmetic grinds were a contradiction of the manifesto, then legendary weapons wouldn’t be designed in the way they are. Period. End of story.

Legendaries are no longer cosmetic. They will now be upgraded to the highest weapon stats every time a new tier is introduced.

Ursan.7846:

If you read the entire quote, he basically endorses grinding for cosmetics, but not for stats.

That is not the quote I am referring to. I will edit this post with the one I was speaking off.

Edit: “In the past, we’ve talked about how in Guild Wars 2 we designed the game to avoid a common problem in many MMOs: grinding through chunks of boring, repetitive content to get to the occasional pockets of fun. With Guild Wars 2, we wanted the entire gameplay experience to be something that players enjoyed, regardless of how much time they could dedicate.”

Now, if you read this, you can understand what I was referring to. You complain I am taking the words out of context, and then you do that to mine. I did not say they wanted to eliminate grind. I said they wanted to largely eliminate it. Grinding is put into games to increase the amount of time it takes to achieve goals, and to make players feel accomplished when receiving something. It is a good thing.

Their manifesto was not to eliminate grind, but to make it enjoyable throughout the entire grinding experience. (What I said in my post.) If it is not enjoyable, then you have needless grind that no one enjoys, and it needs to be changed. If it is fun, then you have good grind that people don’t mind doing.

Stating that grinding cosmetics is fine because it’s not stats isn’t the point at all. The point is grinding and having fun while doing it, not doing it and feeling like you are forced to for what you wish to obtain.

Legendaries are fine IF you are having fun doing that much work. A lot of people wish they would make it more grindy, in fact, but remove the RNG. That’s GOOD. That’s what will make people enjoy it more.

Leriff.8362:

Blueshield.6291:

If cosmetic grinds were a contradiction of the manifesto, then legendary weapons wouldn’t be designed in the way they are. Period. End of story.

Legendaries are no longer cosmetic. They will now be upgraded to the highest weapon stats every time a new tier is introduced.

Which is exactly why they remain cosmetic. Currently there is no statistical difference between an exotic weapon and a legendary one, only a cosmetic one. With the advent of ascended weapons there will be no statistical difference between an ascended weapon and a legendary one. Therefore legendaries remain purely cosmetic.

Leriff.8362:

Legendaries are no longer cosmetic. They will now be upgraded to the highest weapon stats every time a new tier is introduced.

You know what, if you want to grind a legendary weapon now just so that you don’t have to get another Ascended weapon (which, I imagine, will be far easier than getting a legendary) like, a year down the line, by all means…

Leriff.8362:

That is not the quote I am referring to. I will edit this post with the one I was speaking off.

That doesn’t matter. This is Mike O’Brien, the studio president of Anet, specifically endorsing cosmetic grinding.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/21/guild-wars-2-interview-monetization/

Ursan.7846:

That doesn’t matter. This is Mike O’Brien, the studio president of Anet, specifically endorsing cosmetic grinding.

It matters because it’s a valid point. I have stated that I did not think grind was a bad thing. Twisting my words to make it seem like I am against cosmetic grinding makes you look silly. It’s a matter of if that grinding is fun or not that is the issue.

“Storage was always a factor when it came to dye colors in Guild Wars. The new system would cripple most inventories if we required characters to lug all the dyes around. Fear not! The dye hues themselves will be unlockable through various means, both in-game and out. Once you unlock the color, it will be available across your entire account, not just the individual character.” -Anet blog 2010

Most things that were changed to create money sinks are almost all proposed by Crystin Cox, the former Nexon employee, which is no surprise at all.
http://www.guildwarsinsider.com/written-red-dye-unlocking-character-based-account-based/

Leriff.8362:

It matters because it’s a valid point. I have stated that I did not think grind was a bad thing. Twisting my words to make it seem like I am against cosmetic grinding makes you look silly. It’s a matter of if that grinding is fun or not that is the issue.

Your original statement.

Leriff.8362:

Not entirely correct. While, yes, grinding for things that are cosmetic is a good way to keep people playing, grinding itself is somewhat contradicting their manifesto.

But in my quote, Mike O’Brien clearly endorses cosmetic grinding. So I don’t see any contradictions there.

Your quote doesn’t touch upon that subject. Also I’m pretty sure you’re interpreting it wrong.

In the past, we’ve talked about how in Guild Wars 2 we designed the game to avoid a common problem in many MMOs: grinding through chunks of boring, repetitive content to get to the occasional pockets of fun. With Guild Wars 2, we wanted the entire gameplay experience to be something that players enjoyed, regardless of how much time they could dedicate.

In this quote, I’m pretty sure he’s talking about his philosophy on end-game, how he didn’t like how you had to “grind” through most of the game to get to the “fun” end-game. He wants the entire game to be fun, not just the endgame. Yes, he does use the word “grind” but this quote is more indicative of his stance on endgame than anything else.

Context is important.

Ursan.7846:

But in my quote, Mike O’Brien clearly endorses cosmetic grinding. So I don’t see any contradictions there.

Somewhat, as in if it wasn’t enjoyable, it contradicts what they wished to have the game be. Let’s look at legendaries. To get a legendary item (minus the RNG part that seems to be largely disliked) you must partake in many parts of the game. It’s a grind in that you have to get 500 WvW badges, and dungeon badges, and tier six materials and what not, but people who have accepted it do it mostly without complaint. (Except for complaining about the aforementioned RNG part.)

The people I have spoken to who have obtained or are working on their legendary (a small, anecdotal sized evidence pool), state that they wouldn’t even mind grinding more if the RNG was removed. It would be more enjoyable to them to have to grind out more, because they want the reward at the end and don’t mind the work. That right there is good grind.

Referring to this thread about dyes not being account bound (which we horribly hijacked and I apologize), this person does not seem to like grinding multiple dyes for multiple people. It’s not fun to him. Another person in this same thread enjoyed getting a new dye on each character because he liked the feeling of opening a dye he did not have.

To the OP, the dyes not being account bound is boring grind, while to another person, it’s fun. You can’t just state: “Oh, because it’s cosmetic, it’s ok to have to grind it.” What if dyes cost 1,000 gold each from a vendor. Would that be okay simply because it’s cosmetic grind? Some will say yes, but most will say no. Just because something isn’t required, (and, once more, as the end game is cosmetic in nature, the idea of required is a tough one to map; If the cosmetics are too much grind and no one goes for them, they stop playing and the game fails. So, in theory, cosmetic grinds are required for the game to prosper) doesn’t mean that people are not allowed to dislike the way it functions, and ANet isn’t allowed to to improve upon the system.

In this quote, I’m pretty sure he’s talking about his philosophy on end-game, how he didn’t like how you had to “grind” through most of the game to get to the “fun” end-game. He wants the entire game to be fun, not just the endgame. Yes, he does use the word “grind” but this quote is more indicative of his stance on endgame than anything else.

Context is important.

It is possible that is the case, but even if that’s the idea, the quote holds relevance to the discussion at hand.

Leriff.8362:

Ursan.7846:

But in my quote, Mike O’Brien clearly endorses cosmetic grinding. So I don’t see any contradictions there.

Somewhat, as in if it wasn’t enjoyable, it contradicts what they wished to have the game be. Let’s look at legendaries. To get a legendary item (minus the RNG part that seems to be largely disliked) you must partake in many parts of the game. It’s a grind in that you have to get 500 WvW badges, and dungeon badges, and tier six materials and what not, but people who have accepted it do it mostly without complaint. (Except for complaining about the aforementioned RNG part.)

To the OP, the dyes not being account bound is boring grind, while to another person, it’s fun. You can’t just state: “Oh, because it’s cosmetic, it’s ok to have to grind it.” What if dyes cost 1,000 gold each from a vendor. Would that be okay simply because it’s cosmetic grind? Some will say yes, but most will say no. Just because something isn’t required, (and, once more, as the end game is cosmetic in nature, the idea of required is a tough one to map; If the cosmetics are too much grind and no one goes for them, they stop playing and the game fails. So, in theory, cosmetic grinds are required for the game to prosper) doesn’t mean that people are not allowed to dislike the way it functions, and ANet isn’t allowed to to improve upon the system.

You’re applying a double-standard to the same issue here. On the one hand, you say legendary grinding is a violation of the manifesto purely because it’s not enjoyable. On the other hand, you admit that enjoyment is not quantifiable.

Either way, it’s essentially a moot point. Cosmetic grinds are central to GW2’s long-term player retention plans, and span far beyond dyes and legendaries (extravagant Mystic Forge exotic recipes, dungeon gear, fractal weapons skins, etc). The manifesto states in no uncertain terms a comfort with grind-based, thousand-hour content for cosmetic returns.

Really what it all comes down to in the end is that there’s no such thing as a grind for cosmetics. You don’t need them. They do absolutely nothing in terms of the rest of the game. If you want to ‘grind’ to get them, go for it. Personally, just through playing the game normally I can get any dye I want off of the trader. I’ve got the gold to do so. But, I’ve just been slowly collecting a whole slew of dyes through random drops.

I don’t consider anything that is purely optional and cosmetic to have anything to do with a ‘grind’.

Blueshield.6291:

You’re applying a double-standard to the same issue here. On the one hand, you say legendary grinding is a violation of the manifesto purely because it’s not enjoyable. On the other hand, you admit that enjoyment is not quantifiable.

It’s not a double standard. The main and really only point is that the system can be improved. In fact, I stated that about legendaries plainly. If they took out RNG, I imagined many more people would find enjoyment out of it. I cannot give an example as to how the dye system can be improved. Perhaps let you choose ten of your favorite dyes to make account bound, and you have to pay gems to choose another ten, or something.

You want to make the grinding fun, and if it’s not, you want to improve upon the system. You don’t have to make everyone happy. You simply want to give the players the tools to make themselves happy enough that they like and continue playing the game.

Rhysati.4932:

I don’t consider anything that is purely optional and cosmetic to have anything to do with a ‘grind’.

and, once more, as the end game is cosmetic in nature, the idea of required is a tough one to map; If the cosmetics are too much grind and no one goes for them, they stop playing and the game fails. So, in theory, cosmetic grinds are required for the game to prosper

Because anet wants you to waste money on their unid dyes crap from gem store.

They changed their minds, it’s not the end of the world. Getting enough gold for 99% of the dyes isn’t hard, and there are plenty of near-look-alikes that work until you can save up.

Really now? We’re QQing because of Dyes? And we’re now grinding dyes? O_O

Revolution.6301:

*This is a direct contridiction to their manifesto. *

Here’s another point. Putting aside discussion of whether or not grindy gameplay is or is not a violation of the manifesto, consider this.

The manifesto is not a money-back guarantee to players about how the game’s content will be formed. Rather, it’s a mission statement from ANet about how they establish their goals internally.

So if something about the game appears inconsistent with the manifesto, it means that ANet’s designers most likely made the conscious choice to depart from their mission statement. There’s nothing wrong with that.

I feel like these forums have an argument topic cycle that renews every few weeks.

I’ve seen this topic before.

People are much too focused on this manifesto bit. It’s not about whether or not it violates the manifesto.

The true issue at hand here is that current state of dyes is directly contradicted by a developer’s statement on how the dye system would work.

http://www.arena.net/blog/live-and-let-dye-kristen-perry-on-the-gw2-dye-system

Storage was always a factor when it came to dye colors in Guild Wars. The new system would cripple most inventories if we required characters to lug all the dyes around. Fear not! The dye hues themselves will be unlockable through various means, both in-game and out. Once you unlock the color, it will be available across your entire account, not just the individual character.

There is absolutely no way for anyone in this thread to argue that the developers haven’t gone back on their word with regards to the functionality of dye. Because we have a direct, unambiguous quote from a developer about how dye would function. And they have never given an official answer as to why they changed this policy.

And my guess as to why that is? It’s awful hard to spin “we’ll sell way more dye packs this way” as positive PR.

Why do they need an official answer on this policy. It’s obvious they need to make money off a game that has no subscription fee. People seem to think that ANet runs on water.
They made this statement 2 years before the game came out. Are you saying they have to purposely make design choices that would bankrupt them just because they said something early in development?

kokocabana.8153:

Are you saying they have to purposely make design choices that would bankrupt them just because they said something early in development?

No, I’m saying don’t make a promise if you’re just going to break it the moment you smell an opportunity for a cash grab.

It’s called integrity and honesty. You don’t promise a customer one thing, then deliver something else, no matter how “minor” of an aspect you feel that it is. They owe their customers an explanation when they change the product those customers bought into something that doesn’t match the original promise.

But I have to say that I love how your post leaps to a conclusion that doesn’t match the contents of my post. Ooo, let me try it on for size!

Why do they need an official answer on this policy. It’s obvious they need to make money off a game that has no subscription fee. People seem to think that ANet runs on water.

Are you saying that without the fees from dye packs, the game would definitely go under? That even though they have all sorts of other crazy cosmetics and account upgrades in that store, not being able to sell dye packs as regularly would just bankrupt them completely?

Now you know what it’s like to see your valid points twisted to such an extreme that it no longer resembles what you actually said. Maybe next time you’ll avoid doing it, lest the same be done unto you.

I’m actually rather tempted to link a video from the Jimquisition (the one revolving around Naughty Dog’s declaration that “at some point, ya know, games have to make money”) in response to this post, I truly am. But I’ll refrain for now, unless of course this discussion continues down this “ANet’s gotta do it to make money” line of thinking. Yeah, it’s about ad-supported games, but the point he makes is perfectly applicable for business arguments like this.

critickitten.1498:

People are much too focused on this manifesto bit. It’s not about whether or not it violates the manifesto.

The true issue at hand here is that current state of dyes is directly contradicted by a developer’s statement on how the dye system would work.

http://www.arena.net/blog/live-and-let-dye-kristen-perry-on-the-gw2-dye-system

Storage was always a factor when it came to dye colors in Guild Wars. The new system would cripple most inventories if we required characters to lug all the dyes around. Fear not! The dye hues themselves will be unlockable through various means, both in-game and out. Once you unlock the color, it will be available across your entire account, not just the individual character.

There is absolutely no way for anyone in this thread to argue that the developers haven’t gone back on their word with regards to the functionality of dye. Because we have a direct, unambiguous quote from a developer about how dye would function. And they have never given an official answer as to why they changed this policy.

And my guess as to why that is? It’s awful hard to spin “we’ll sell way more dye packs this way” as positive PR.

Your forgetting the date on when that was said in the blog. It says 2010 so 2yrs before the games release. Hell it wasnt even in Alpha testing then let alone beta testing. Things change in 2yrs and miracously the only thing that changed was Account bound to Soulbound. Usually in those 2 years something massive changes. They wanted it to be more like GW1 but even better still. Just be happy they didnt make it exactly like GW1 dyes considering how costly they would be if they did.

Its also a statement by 1 developer who may not be working with Anet still. As well its a statement not a promise. Plus Dyes were soulbound during the beta for those who played it then. People knew about this long time ago and was fine with it. Now we are just beating a dead horse over and over again.

Suddenflame.2601:

Your forgetting the date on when that was said in the blog. It says 2010 so 2yrs before the games release. Hell it wasnt even in Alpha testing then let alone beta testing. Things change in 2yrs and miracously the only thing that changed was Account bound to Soulbound. Usually in those 2 years something massive changes. They wanted it to be more like GW1 but even better still. Just be happy they didnt make it exactly like GW1 dyes considering how costly they would be if they did.

You obviously weren’t around before August, so allow me to explain a few things to you.

1) The game was originally announced in 2007. There were several playable demos of the game available by 2010 shown off at several major conventions, a policy which continued all through 2011.

So the narrative that the game “wasn’t even in alpha” is completely false. It was actively playable in a limited form by the general public as early as 2010, and they had several closed/press betas in 2011 prior to the open betas of 2012.

2) The original dye system shown in the first open beta weekend was nothing like the one in the game right now.

During the first beta weekend event, players were required to obtain Colorful Dye Seeds that required cultivation back in the “Home” area. Cultivation took either 24 real world hours, or the purchase of an item from the Gem shop. Once cultivated it would drop a soulbound, unidentified dye; that dye would unlock a new color. This system has since been replaced.

Notice that I’m not complaining about the fact that the dye system is no longer like that (probably because the old system was inferior to the current one), but I am complaining about the fact that it has gone from account-bound to soulbound (probably because they changed a good thing into something that is inferior).

Developers are totally allowed to change their minds. It is their game. But the paying public has every right to ask for a reason, and the devs do owe them an honest answer, especially if they promised it would be handled differently. The lack of response to this and many other perceived “negatives” about the game is part of what fueled all of this mistrust between devs and players to begin with.

Coming clean would be a good step towards real communication.

critickitten.1498:

Suddenflame.2601:

Your forgetting the date on when that was said in the blog. It says 2010 so 2yrs before the games release. Hell it wasnt even in Alpha testing then let alone beta testing. Things change in 2yrs and miracously the only thing that changed was Account bound to Soulbound. Usually in those 2 years something massive changes. They wanted it to be more like GW1 but even better still. Just be happy they didnt make it exactly like GW1 dyes considering how costly they would be if they did.

You obviously weren’t around before August, so allow me to explain a few things to you.

1) The game was originally announced in 2007. There were several playable demos of the game available by 2010 shown off at several major conventions, a policy which continued all through 2011.

So the narrative that the game “wasn’t even in alpha” is completely false. It was actively playable in a limited form by the general public as early as 2010, and they had several closed/press betas in 2011 prior to the open betas of 2012.

2) The original dye system shown in the first open beta weekend was nothing like the one in the game right now.

During the first beta weekend event, players were required to obtain Colorful Dye Seeds that required cultivation back in the “Home” area. Cultivation took either 24 real world hours, or the purchase of an item from the Gem shop. Once cultivated it would drop a soulbound, unidentified dye; that dye would unlock a new color. This system has since been replaced.

Notice that I’m not complaining about the fact that the dye system is no longer like that (probably because the old system was inferior to the current one), but I am complaining about the fact that it has gone from account-bound to soulbound (probably because they changed a good thing into something that is inferior).

Developers are totally allowed to change their minds. It is their game. But the paying public has every right to ask for a reason, and the devs do owe them an honest answer, especially if they promised it would be handled differently. The lack of response to this and many other perceived “negatives” about the game is part of what fueled all of this mistrust between devs and players to begin with.

Coming clean would be a good step towards real communication.

That’s the point. Why the change?

kokocabana.8153:

It’s Revolution that is starting these grind threads to troll. He’s going to use that stupid quote from ANet about not making grindy games. That quote is taken out of context. They don’t want a game that makes you grind for better statted items that give an advantage over those that don’t. Grinding for vanity items like armor skins and dyes does not count because they don’t affect the game.

Then why is getting the stats you want so expensive?

critickitten.1498:

Suddenflame.2601:

Your forgetting the date on when that was said in the blog. It says 2010 so 2yrs before the games release. Hell it wasnt even in Alpha testing then let alone beta testing. Things change in 2yrs and miracously the only thing that changed was Account bound to Soulbound. Usually in those 2 years something massive changes. They wanted it to be more like GW1 but even better still. Just be happy they didnt make it exactly like GW1 dyes considering how costly they would be if they did.

You obviously weren’t around before August, so allow me to explain a few things to you.

1) The game was originally announced in 2007. There were several playable demos of the game available by 2010 shown off at several major conventions, a policy which continued all through 2011.

So the narrative that the game “wasn’t even in alpha” is completely false. It was actively playable in a limited form by the general public as early as 2010, and they had several closed/press betas in 2011 prior to the open betas of 2012.

2) The original dye system shown in the first open beta weekend was nothing like the one in the game right now.

During the first beta weekend event, players were required to obtain Colorful Dye Seeds that required cultivation back in the “Home” area. Cultivation took either 24 real world hours, or the purchase of an item from the Gem shop. Once cultivated it would drop a soulbound, unidentified dye; that dye would unlock a new color. This system has since been replaced.

Notice that I’m not complaining about the fact that the dye system is no longer like that (probably because the old system was inferior to the current one), but I am complaining about the fact that it has gone from account-bound to soulbound (probably because they changed a good thing into something that is inferior).

Developers are totally allowed to change their minds. It is their game. But the paying public has every right to ask for a reason, and the devs do owe them an honest answer, especially if they promised it would be handled differently. The lack of response to this and many other perceived “negatives” about the game is part of what fueled all of this mistrust between devs and players to begin with.

Coming clean would be a good step towards real communication.

They didn’t promise you anything. They didn’t say it was going to be for certain and dude i been playing GW1 and GW2 from long time ago which is why i got 30 points in my HoM. The devs do not need to give an answer unless it was explicitly stated that it was going to be that way which it wasn’t. I don’t hear you crying out when a Politician says one thing then does another thing. Its 2 years ago “one dev” said that and coming to 1 year ago that it showed that it was something completely different. Which means my statement was still correct from before considering I said that it went from Account bound to Soulbound which the seed article also shows considering that it says soulbound right in it lol.

Like everyone else said before me if they were account bound and not soulbound the economy for dyes would be dead and worthless after a small period of time. This would be completely different from GW1 where Black/White dyes were even used as currency cause of their worth. It is not inferior system if it helps the economy stay afloat. They are not forcing people to buy the Dye packs from the store cause dyes drop often from monsters.

As they have said everything can be gained outside of the gem store that is not cosmetic in nature.

edit: Also the one dev who said it is unknown at this point if they still work for Anet or not and it was not the lead Dev. It was also posted in a blog for Anet but anyone could have posted it with/without permission from the lead dev. Which does not make it an official Anet statement.

Suddenflame.2601:

They didn’t promise you anything.

Yes, they did. There is no questioning that fact shy of outright denial, and I’m not obligated to humor denial.

They didn’t say it was going to be for certain and dude i been playing GW1 and GW2 from long time ago which is why i got 30 points in my HoM.

Then why do you know nothing about the game you’ve supposedly been following since the beginning? You claimed that the game “wasn’t even in alpha” in 2010 which is outright false, and anyone who has been following GW2 since the days of GW1 would know that’s not true. You state that the devs never made promises about anything, yet anyone following GW2 would remember the countless blog posts made by active developers and cleared by ArenaNet’s head of development that established countless details about the game’s lore and functionality. And I assure you, dyes are not the only thing they’ve changed their minds on.

The devs do not need to give an answer unless it was explicitly stated that it was going to be that way which it wasn’t.

But it was. We have the quote. Honestly, you’re being ridiculous now. We have a quote direct from a developer of the game, approved by ArenaNet for public posting, that says the opposite of what was released. That’s a contradiction.

I don’t hear you crying out when a Politician says one thing then does another thing.

You obviously know nothing about me, either. That’s two things, then.

Its 2 years ago “one dev” said that and coming to 1 year ago that it showed that it was something completely different. Which means my statement was still correct from before considering I said that it went from Account bound to Soulbound which the seed article also shows considering that it says soulbound right in it lol.

Do you read posts when you reply to them? Like, really read them?

Because if you had, you’d note that I said there is nothing wrong with developers changing their minds. They just owe their players an explanation when they change a design construct to move away something from what they’ve already said. It’s a matter of honesty. Not explaining it to your players breeds mistrust, which is where all these “Nexon has taken over OMG” posts came from.

Like everyone else said before me if they were account bound and not soulbound the economy for dyes would be dead and worthless after a small period of time. This would be completely different from GW1 where Black/White dyes were even used as currency cause of their worth. It is not inferior system if it helps the economy stay afloat. They are not forcing people to buy the Dye packs from the store cause dyes drop often from monsters.

The economy in GW2 does not run on dyes, and certainly would not “collapse” as a result of dyes being account bound. Your argument is completely invalid.

As they have said everything can be gained outside of the gem store that is not cosmetic in nature.

Er, dyes are cosmetic items. And this is rather irrelevant to the discussion at hand, that being that the devs promised account bound and delivered soulbound instead.

edit: Also the one dev who said it is unknown at this point if they still work for Anet or not and it was not the lead Dev. It was also posted in a blog for Anet but anyone could have posted it with/without permission from the lead dev. Which does not make it an official Anet statement.

You actually think that a developer for ArenaNet would be allowed to come out and make blog posts stating how the game will function without having to clear everything they say with the game lead?

I have nothing more to say to you if you actually believe that. You have got to be trolling. I’ve worked in game design before….forget blogs, nearly every public statement I made had to be cleared through my superiors to ensure that players weren’t being promised anything that they couldn’t deliver. That’s how a well-run game is operated.

Without the change, dyes would have been worth a lot less on the auction house and wouldn’t contribute to the economy at all. Now if you want a black dye, you have to get one for each character. It makes them more salable and raises their price.

Those who play the marketplace should be quite happy that dyes aren’t account bound.

critickitten.1498:

I have nothing more to say to you if you actually believe that. You have got to be trolling. I’ve worked in game design before….forget blogs, nearly every public statement I made had to be cleared through my superiors to ensure that players weren’t being promised anything that they couldn’t deliver. That’s how a well-run game is operated.

And when you worked in game design, you locked yourself permanently into trajectories and never made any changes when you realized that systems wouldn’t work the way you thought they would?

ANet has every right to make changes to content before pushing it live – and in 2010 the game was still very much in development. By your own admission, there were plenty of closed/open beta opportunities after the comment was made. If you were so distressed at the change in dye system, why didn’t you say something then? Why are you still here?

critickitten.1498:

Suddenflame.2601:

They didn’t promise you anything.

Yes, they did. There is no questioning that fact shy of outright denial, and I’m not obligated to humor denial.

They didn’t say it was going to be for certain and dude i been playing GW1 and GW2 from long time ago which is why i got 30 points in my HoM.

Then why do you know nothing about the game you’ve supposedly been following since the beginning? You claimed that the game “wasn’t even in alpha” in 2010 which is outright false, and anyone who has been following GW2 since the days of GW1 would know that’s not true. You state that the devs never made promises about anything, yet anyone following GW2 would remember the countless blog posts made by active developers and cleared by ArenaNet’s head of development that established countless details about the game’s lore and functionality. And I assure you, dyes are not the only thing they’ve changed their minds on.

The devs do not need to give an answer unless it was explicitly stated that it was going to be that way which it wasn’t.

But it was. We have the quote. Honestly, you’re being ridiculous now. We have a quote direct from a developer of the game, approved by ArenaNet for public posting, that says the opposite of what was released. That’s a contradiction.

I don’t hear you crying out when a Politician says one thing then does another thing.

You obviously know nothing about me, either. That’s two things, then.

Its 2 years ago “one dev” said that and coming to 1 year ago that it showed that it was something completely different. Which means my statement was still correct from before considering I said that it went from Account bound to Soulbound which the seed article also shows considering that it says soulbound right in it lol.

Do you read posts when you reply to them? Like, really read them?

Because if you had, you’d note that I said there is nothing wrong with developers changing their minds. They just owe their players an explanation when they change a design construct to move away something from what they’ve already said. It’s a matter of honesty. Not explaining it to your players breeds mistrust, which is where all these “Nexon has taken over OMG” posts came from.

Like everyone else said before me if they were account bound and not soulbound the economy for dyes would be dead and worthless after a small period of time. This would be completely different from GW1 where Black/White dyes were even used as currency cause of their worth. It is not inferior system if it helps the economy stay afloat. They are not forcing people to buy the Dye packs from the store cause dyes drop often from monsters.

The economy in GW2 does not run on dyes, and certainly would not “collapse” as a result of dyes being account bound. Your argument is completely invalid.

As they have said everything can be gained outside of the gem store that is not cosmetic in nature.

Er, dyes are cosmetic items. And this is rather irrelevant to the discussion at hand, that being that the devs promised account bound and delivered soulbound instead.

edit: Also the one dev who said it is unknown at this point if they still work for Anet or not and it was not the lead Dev. It was also posted in a blog for Anet but anyone could have posted it with/without permission from the lead dev. Which does not make it an official Anet statement.

You actually think that a developer for ArenaNet would be allowed to come out and make blog posts stating how the game will function without having to clear everything they say with the game lead?

I have nothing more to say to you if you actually believe that. You have got to be trolling. I’ve worked in game design before….forget blogs, nearly every public statement I made had to be cleared through my superiors to ensure that players weren’t being promised anything that they couldn’t deliver. That’s how a well-run game is operated.

I didnt say the economy would fail without soulbound dyes reading comprehension is needed here. And yes Devs have in the past and will continue to in the future say stuff that wasn’t first approved by the lead dev. Dude look at League of legends, WoW, ect. The problem occurred in all of them. The devs also dont owe you squat since you were aware of this change since 2 years ago and now decide to complain about it. If the devs have to explain every design change they make they will be on the forums more then actually designing the game. Your not entitled to a reason for every change made in a game. Come to think of it i have never heard of any dev team giving out a reason for every change that they make.

If they made dyes account bound, then they’ll have to drastically lower the drop rates for dyes.

That would make dye finding feel slower, right?

critickitten.1498:

The fact of the matter is, we as players should be told what happened to change the dye system. And if it’s a gem shop thing as people suspect it is, hey, I’d actually be okay with that explanation, because at least then they’re being honest and telling us why they changed it. But not knowing and refusing to even acknowledge that the question has been asked? That fosters distrust, and that’s why these forums are such a wreck these days: because no one trusts ANet to do things “right” any more. Communication would go a long way towards fixing that.

Actually funny enough you apparently really really really need to reread the posts and actually read them cause Anet has already given a statement about the change. Go figure right? How could someone like you miss them so? Just so you cant miss them again here you go I will copy the link that a guy had given earlier. You complained saying that i didnt read like really dude you missed it.

http://www.guildwarsinsider.com/written-red-dye-unlocking-character-based-account-based/

Suddenflame.2601:

I did read what you said but apparently your having troubles rereading what you said. For instance you said that i said the economy was going to fail without soulbound dyes. When in the matter of fact I did not say that.

Orly.

Like everyone else said before me if they were account bound and not soulbound the economy for dyes would be dead and worthless after a small period of time.

Strange, it looks to me like that statement very clearly reads that you think account bound dyes will kill the economy.

Your trying to get an answer for something said 2 years ago which has extremely minor impact on the game itself. Everything Colin has been giving answers to are posts that actually effect gameplay. Your posts for an explanation on why dyes are soulbound and not Accountbound is pointless.

No I’m not. I’m pointing out that this argument of “it’s not against what they said” is false, because it clearly is against their original design. I think they should tell us why it changed, but I’m not demanding an answer. I don’t particularly care what system is used any more to be honest, I’m just tired of people lying about what ANet said when we know for a fact exactly what was said.

One dev said it 2 years ago give it a rest considering it has no effect on the game itself and obviously makes more sense the way they did it now.

The dev who said it was in charge of the dye system at that time, and received clearance from the game’s head developer to make that statement. That makes it officially sanctioned. Please stop trying to suggest otherwise, it’s getting old.

Soulbound allows there to be money to be made using dyes by the players. Accountbound would make the prices fall drastically and make selling dyes worthless. Dyes right now are worth a lot and sell often.

See, you’re saying it again right here! You’re claiming that account bound dyes would destroy the economy, and then trying to say “well I didn’t say that”. Yes, you did. It’s right here in plain sight for everyone to see. Stop lying.

Also to help with your words Promise: noun: A declaration or assurance that one will do a particular thing or that guarantees that a particular thing will happen. verb: Assure someone that one will definitely do, give, or arrange something; undertake or declare that something will happen.

Based on the statement she did not promise that this was going to be in there. She gave an idea of what might be there. For there is not words in her statement that say for sure, it will happen, Its going to be, ect. The words used were ambious about their certainty.

Actually, that definition supports my conclusion, not yours. You don’t seem to have a firm grasp of English so allow me to explain to you what that definition means, since you don’t understand it.

A promise is not always started with the words “I promise” or “we promise”, you know. It is given with affirmative statements of fact, using strong language (such as “will” instead of “may”) to affirm that something will be done in the manner expressed. When a developer makes a statement that is not intended to be a developmental promise, they tend to append this to their statement. I would lead my statements off with “What follows is my opinion” or something akin to that, to ensure that no one was confusing my statements of speculation or opinion for 100% certified fact. ANet’s development blogs, however, have always served as official statements from the devs that would reflect the design practice that shows up in the game itself. They didn’t make these posts simply to say “hey, I think X would be really cool”, they made these posts to say “hey, we’re going to do this in our game”. Knowing this, let’s look at the original statement I quoted, bolding where the reading comprehension is most critical.

Once you unlock the color, it will be available across your entire account, not just the individual character.

Note that the developer uses the verb “will”, instead of “may” (which would suggest that this is merely her own ideas for how to implement dye rather than how the dye system was intended to work). You do not say that you “will” do something if in fact you’re only thinking about doing it, you say it when you intend to do it. This signifies rather directly that this is not intended to be speculative, this is their current operating policy for dye and this is how they intend to implement it.

Again, though, it’s irrelevant, because I don’t honestly care if they change it back or not. All I’ve been trying to establish (and what continues to elude you) is that the devs were very clear in stating how dye was going to work. And then they changed their minds. And that’s perfectly okay, but they should try to explain why they changed their minds. That helps build trust with your community when you confide your reasons with them. When you refuse to answer the question or even acknowledge that it was asked, that makes players angry and fosters distrust and suspicion. It’s what helped to fuel all these “Nexon” posts, and it’s helped lead to the disaster of a forum community they have now.

And to their credit, they’re making strides to fix this, but they’re not there yet.

EDIT: Ah, so that’s why people are pointing fingers at Ms Cox and Nexon….how delightful.

I don’t agree with her reasoning at all, because dye clearly is a collection tool, otherwise you would not put it in the Gem Store and try to sell convenience to us….but again, I really don’t care.

My problem remains that they made a change and didn’t immediately tell people why. Instead, they answer the question in private on another website in a special interview. How is that talking directly to your players? Furthermore, how do they find time to “develop the game” (as you say they wouldn’t be able to do if they spent time on their forums) when they’re doing so many interviews?

It’s not really a grind if you don’t need to do it, and if you are not forced to do it.

critickitten.1498:

My problem remains that they made a change and didn’t immediately tell people why. Instead, they answer the question in private on another website in a special interview. How is that talking directly to your players? Furthermore, how do they find time to “develop the game” (as you say they wouldn’t be able to do if they spent time on their forums) when they’re doing so many interviews?

What were you expecting then? A forum note for every little change and an explanation for every little tweak?

If there was a forum outburst about this issue, they’ll probably respond immediately. If not, well i think it’s pretty much safe for them to assume it’s not something so important they had to spend time making a post about it, when they could be developing the game/ doing interviews to promote the game.

critickitten.1498:

Again, though, it’s irrelevant, because I don’t honestly care if they change it back or not. All I’ve been trying to establish (and what continues to elude you) is that the devs were very clear in stating how dye was going to work. And then they changed their minds. And that’s perfectly okay, but they should try to explain why they changed their minds. That helps build trust with your community when you confide your reasons with them. When you refuse to answer the question or even acknowledge that it was asked, that makes players angry and fosters distrust and suspicion. It’s what helped to fuel all these “Nexon” posts, and it’s helped lead to the disaster of a forum community they have now.

And to their credit, they’re making strides to fix this, but they’re not there yet.

EDIT: Ah, so that’s why people are pointing fingers at Ms Cox and Nexon….how delightful.

I don’t agree with her reasoning at all, because dye clearly is a collection tool, otherwise you would not put it in the Gem Store and try to sell convenience to us….but again, I really don’t care.

My problem remains that they made a change and didn’t immediately tell people why. Instead, they answer the question in private on another website in a special interview. How is that talking directly to your players? Furthermore, how do they find time to “develop the game” (as you say they wouldn’t be able to do if they spent time on their forums) when they’re doing so many interviews?

Umm dude how many times must i put that link. That link is the last record of them talking about it on their official forums during the beta. They did tell us why they changed it your just not reading it.

critickitten.1498:

Suddenflame.2601:

I did read what you said but apparently your having troubles rereading what you said. For instance you said that i said the economy was going to fail without soulbound dyes. When in the matter of fact I did not say that.

Orly.

Like everyone else said before me if they were account bound and not soulbound the economy for dyes would be dead and worthless after a small period of time.

Strange, it looks to me like that statement very clearly reads that you think account bound dyes will kill the economy.

Your trying to get an answer for something said 2 years ago which has extremely minor impact on the game itself. Everything Colin has been giving answers to are posts that actually effect gameplay. Your posts for an explanation on why dyes are soulbound and not Accountbound is pointless.

No I’m not. I’m pointing out that this argument of “it’s not against what they said” is false, because it clearly is against their original design. I think they should tell us why it changed, but I’m not demanding an answer. I don’t particularly care what system is used any more to be honest, I’m just tired of people lying about what ANet said when we know for a fact exactly what was said.

One dev said it 2 years ago give it a rest considering it has no effect on the game itself and obviously makes more sense the way they did it now.

The dev who said it was in charge of the dye system at that time, and received clearance from the game’s head developer to make that statement. That makes it officially sanctioned. Please stop trying to suggest otherwise, it’s getting old.

Soulbound allows there to be money to be made using dyes by the players. Accountbound would make the prices fall drastically and make selling dyes worthless. Dyes right now are worth a lot and sell often.

See, you’re saying it again right here! You’re claiming that account bound dyes would destroy the economy, and then trying to say “well I didn’t say that”. Yes, you did. It’s right here in plain sight for everyone to see. Stop lying.

Also to help with your words Promise: noun: A declaration or assurance that one will do a particular thing or that guarantees that a particular thing will happen. verb: Assure someone that one will definitely do, give, or arrange something; undertake or declare that something will happen.

Based on the statement she did not promise that this was going to be in there. She gave an idea of what might be there. For there is not words in her statement that say for sure, it will happen, Its going to be, ect. The words used were ambious about their certainty.

Actually, that definition supports my conclusion, not yours. You don’t seem to have a firm grasp of English so allow me to explain to you what that definition means, since you don’t understand it.

A promise is not always started with the words “I promise” or “we promise”, you know. It is given with affirmative statements of fact, using strong language (such as “will” instead of “may”) to affirm that something will be done in the manner expressed. When a developer makes a statement that is not intended to be a developmental promise, they tend to append this to their statement. I would lead my statements off with “What follows is my opinion” or something akin to that, to ensure that no one was confusing my statements of speculation or opinion for 100% certified fact. ANet’s development blogs, however, have always served as official statements from the devs that would reflect the design practice that shows up in the game itself. They didn’t make these posts simply to say “hey, I think X would be really cool”, they made these posts to say “hey, we’re going to do this in our game”. Knowing this, let’s look at the original statement I quoted, bolding where the reading comprehension is most critical.

Once you unlock the color, it will be available across your entire account, not just the individual character.

Note that the developer uses the verb “will”, instead of “may” (which would suggest that this is merely her own ideas for how to implement dye rather than how the dye system was intended to work). You do not say that you “will” do something if in fact you’re only thinking about doing it, you say it when you intend to do it. This signifies rather directly that this is not intended to be speculative, this is their current operating policy for dye and this is how they intend to implement it.

Find my post on this? Oh right it was deleted over 30mins ago and you have yet to update. and you missed my latest post funny how that works when the latest post proves you wrong. It shows the link that is a combination of all forum posts from the Official Forums during the Beta test.