Guild Wars 2

My prediction for an upcoming feature addition:

Vouchers good for one forum response by a dev will go on sale in the trading post for 800 gems.

But but but … we just had a CDI on the commander system. That means we’re going to see positive changes within in our lifetime, right?

Oh wait …

lobo fett.4705:

can we please get some kind of statement from developers?

Because they’ve done that so many times before?? Just be glad they haven’t yet created a CDI around account-bound wxp … that’s the kiss of death.

Cecilia.5179:

Now would be a great time for Ally or someone to clear the air about this dilemma and soothe our minds before this thread (and many others) fills with negative comments and gets locked…

WvW Forum Score:

ANet clears the air ………… 7
ANet locks/deletes thread ………………. 345,078,746

Given that realistically speaking nothing is going to come from the more important CDIs for a very long time I don’t really see how it matters which ones we get.

Viking Jorun.5413:

I’m sick of Burnfall getting alt accounts.

^this^ ……………

Julie Yann.5379:

I tried ESO beta last weekend. While I love their map design (towers and keeps really feel like towsers and keep, not some legoland fortress.) While the frame rates were solid, the skill lag was ridiculous and nearly unplayable, and there wasn’t hundreds of people on the map. It would take seconds for skills to fire. After an hour or so I went back to playing GW2 cause the controls were just too unresponsive. I do wish Anet would take a page out of ESO’s UI design. Let me get rid of the stuff I don’t want to have cluttering my screen.

ESO is in beta and the devs have been testing all sorts of different things each week. Earlier in the beta hundreds of players were together in mass battles that had virtually zero lag and zero fps drop. It seems that almost everybody had lag issues this last weekend, so most likely they tried something and it didn’t work very well. ZeniMax has been constantly trumpeting the ability to ESO to handle huge numbers of players at the same time so I’d practically guarantee that they will have that fixed by launch or soon after. It’s probably the key virtue of ESO and an obvious swipe at GW2 and other MMOs that choke on the mass battles that many players enjoy.

There may indeed be some aspects of ESO that turn me off (not sure I’m going to like the combat ability mechanism), but I’d bet that lag won’t be one of them.

Straegen.2938:

Numbers are certainly down on BP. We used to queue several maps pre-leagues and now a queued map is very rare. We also aren’t falling in tiers so the migration is probably happening to other T3 and lower servers at a similar rate.

As for ESO… ughhh… not a great AAA MMO especially for the $240 it will cost to play it in the first year. I am sure some will like it. It has a good combat system but implemented in the worst possible way. Basically it is the GW2 Combat Mod only with a TON more clicking and fewer skills.

Well, at least you have to give ZeniMax credit for paying attention to feedback from players during the beta and for addressing issues quickly. I think ZeniMax has probably already changed more things in ESO in a couple of months than ANet has done in WvW in the 18 months since launch, and there is actually evidence that the ESO devs care. AvA in ESO is clearly intended to be the major focus of that game’s endgame … you can’t say the same at all about WvW in GW2. Who would you trust more to fix issues with open world PvP over the next few months … ANet or ZeniMax? I know where I’ll be placing my bet.

iggybl.5034:

Massive blob capping empty towers then switching to different borderland; it doesn’t matter which side is doing it, it is fun for no one. It doesn’t matter if ESO will be any good or not; it is at least somewhat different.

Any game (such as ESO) where the devs are at least TRYING to craft a viable open world PvP mode is more deserving of our attention than GW2 has been. ANet isn’t even pretending anymore …

Malediktus.9250:

EotM might run on new, better servers than the old WvW maps.

LOL. You apparently don’t understand that ANet does not use their own servers. They lease server capacity in bulk from Akamai (in NA … not sure who they get it from in EU) and ANet can’t even tell which physical servers their game is running on.

Zepher.7803:

I have to ask the Moderators to get this thread back on track. 3 pages of multiple posts that don’t have anything to do with the CDI Topic is killing it.

Most of those posts have everything to do with this CDI. Aside from the new map, the single biggest difference between EOTM and WvW is the manner in which matchups are created. Posts that reflect on that are entirely relevant.

Heezdedjim.8902:

EOTM and sPvP actively obstruct communities by forcing constant, random churn between “sides.” That’s why EOTM-style random server mash ups won’t work.

<snip>

There are other server-less games as well where players have no problems forming and maintaining strong communities. TSW and STO never had servers or shards or anything like that to segregate players. TESO, when it comes out also will be a singe-shard game. “Single-shard universe” is even a buzzword and a selling point today, and it’s because it obliterates the obstacles to community that come from any architecture that segregates and separates players.

Servers in fact have, when poorly managed, been more often the instrument of death and destruction of communities in games that rely on them. The disastrous crash and burn of SWTOR in the first year was due in very large part to Bioware refusing to wake up and confront the utter collapse of the population, which left players stranded on graveyard servers for months on end until they finally did forced merges down to just three NA servers from what had been dozens.

A similar toxic mechanic has taken hold here in the narrow world of WvW, where almost the entire active population of WvW players has wound up on just three servers. In the absence of any action by ANet to address the population balancing problems, players have addressed it themselves by just reducing the number of worlds where WvW actually happens to a minimum, ensuring that all those worlds have a high and reasonably balanced population.

<snip>

What if we had only three servers instead of twenty-four to start with?

Second, just imagine for a minute that ANet made some sort of revolutionary change to their back end load balancing code that allowed them to host eight times as many players on a server as they can support today. So ANet decides to merge servers from twenty-four NA shards down to just three.

Would our communities fall apart overnight because now they’re on servers with three or five or eight times the population? No. Your guilds and friends and groups of friends would go right on doing what they do every day now, with the same people they do those things with today. You would just see some more new faces around for a while (until you get to know them). You might even make some new friends.

Server alliances would basically be that; making a few bigger cities out of what are now a lot of mostly small, isolated, and in many cases deserted neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods would still exist. They just would be part of something bigger and better as well, and they would have a chance at least to thrive and grow, rather than being left to wither and die.

Great post! Awesome post, actually.

The problem is that ANet has built so much visual clutter into the combat that I simply don’t think they could handle a three-realm scenario. GW2’s “server” capacity is already a misnomer since ANet leases server capacity in bulk from Akamai for NA (not sure who they use for EU). The concept of “server” is purely artificial so indeed ANet should in theory be able to aggregate players as you propose, but I don’t think their game engine can handle the breadth of abilities and effects that they’ve built into the game and handle large numbers of players at the same time.

Some players have complained that the combat abilities, graphics, and effects in TESO are more constrained than those in GW2 and I’m not surprised that’s the case, but on the other hand TESO runs all player accounts on the same massive realm with virtually zero lag, fps drops, or other stumbles even in huge battles. The two games just seem to have a different focus. The incongruity for me is that ANet has done almost everything imaginable, whether for PvE (most Living World activities are zerg fests) or WvW and whether intentionally or not, to promote a zerg play style even though their game doesn’t handle it very well.

Deli.1302:

Chris.3290:

The desire for shorter matches, comes from the problem that once a dominant server has momentum out of the weekend; you rarely see a reversal.

So the answer isn’t necessarily to shorten the week, but to change the momentum.

Proposal: “Against All Odds!” a buff that increases in intensity as the score gap increases

Functionality: At 25,000, 50,000, 75,000, and 100,000 points behind the matchup leader; a server gets a progressive buff that will slow down the leading server.
+3%/6%/9%/12% to siege power and structure HP (for the server(s) behind in score).

Consequences: This gives the server(s) that are behind a lot of incentive to keep pushing, knowing that their structures will be more defensible while giving them greater ability to capture enemy structures. This will cause winning servers to see the consequences of running up the score; and will actually make the upcoming Tournament A LOT more interesting.

I like this idea.

One of the warfronts (PvP battleground) in Rift kinda sorta did something similar. It had a capture-the-flag format with three flags representing a win, except that enemy flags could be recaptured for your side. The mechanism was totally different, of course, but the principle was the same … no matter how far behind you were throughout the match you always had a chance to pull out a win at the very end. It was the most exciting warfront they had and most players loved it.

If there was some way for an outmanned server in WvW to catch up at the end I think it would have huge benefits, but only if the matches were shortened to something like the eight hours Devon suggested (or even less) … it wouldn’t make any sense to play for for 168 hours knowing that you could lose it all at the end.

DevonCarver.5370:

I’d say there is a pretty strong sentiment against the idea of collapsing all of WvW into 3 colors, rather than the current world set up. Which I agree with. I think world pride and association is an important part of the way that WvW works currently.

Here’s a possible version of shorter matchups that wouldn’t necessarily sacrifice the long term fight of a WvW matchup currently and wouldn’t involve merging everyone into one of three teams.

Matches last 8 hours, there are 21 matches in a week with the same 3 worlds, the winner of the week is the world that wins the most matches over the course of that time.

This solves some of the problems we see currently, namely the issues that can arise as matches get out of hand towards the end of the week. However, it would still give worlds with better coverage a leg up on their opponents. It also loses the feeling that you’ve had a long term battle for victory.

I’m curious what you all think of that? Does it retain the feeling of victory in WvW right now and solve problems or does it just introduce more issues without solving any core concerns?

Devon, I applaud you for offering an open minded approach, but I’m not sure I agree with your conclusions. First of all, there are LOTS of people who are less concerned about the pride and association with any particular server than you might gather from the comments in this thread. Just about every player who jumped servers to get into better matches (more activity, different skill levels, better coverage, etc) implicitly decided that server pride was a secondary consideration … and we all know how many players that includes. What happened to using in-game polls to get more statistically accurate assessments of such issues? I thought that was one of the assurances we got from an earlier CDI Process thread with Chris.

Secondly, although I really like the idea of shorter matches (and 8 hours seems fine to me), it doesn’t change the fact that the server with the greatest average population and and greatest coverage will still always win. In essence, all you’re proposing is making 8 hour ticks in addition to the 15 minute ones. We still need to come up with some way to balance population and broaden coverage … or remove their leverage.

titanlectro.5029:

DevonCarver.5370:

Matches last 8 hours, there are 21 matches in a week with the same 3 worlds, the winner of the week is the world that wins the most matches over the course of that time.

Could you weight the matches, based on how “lopsided” they are?

Hypothetical Scenario:
Green team has a large “morning crew” and brings three times more players than Blue or Red team. Obviously, Green team will always win the “morning” match. The “evening crew” for each team is equal.

Could the “value” of winning any 8 hour match depend on the ratio of participation between the teams? In this way, Green will always win the “morning” match, but it would not be as significant as the “evening” match where the teams are balanced.

That’s a very bad idea. Servers that know they will be undermanned in a particular session could simply boycott that session to minimize the points gained by the opposition.

Nike.2631:

“Collaborative Development Initiative”

It’s been described by the Developer leading the effort as a think tank. Most of the discussion is between players/peer review, but the host occasionally comments or guides the topic through questions. Towards the end ideas are gathered and carried off to be discussed by the full team that handles those issues.

Except, of course, for WvW.

Wanze.8410:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Survior

Never existed.

Wrong. Well, actually you’re correct since “survior” isn’t really a word, but …

mugen.4763:

I remember few months ago one of the devs/staff said that we will get a chance to spend our Empyreal Fragments and Bloodstone Dust, so I decided to save up any fragments and dust I got. I have currently almost 2 bank tabs full of these stuff and I’m wondering if this ‘sink’ they were talking about was ascended armor? If so 1.5k fragments and dust isn’t enough of a sink as you get these from literally everything you do. It would be nice to know if you guys have anything planned for these materials before I get rid of em.
Cheers.

You need to go back and consider the credibility of the source of that encouragement to hoard those things. That particular dev, if I remember correctly at least for the bloodstone comment, hasn’t been the best ally of the players.

Shadey Dancer.2907:

Sorry, perhaps I should have been a little more clear. I meant for the new maps in EotM, not the regular WvW maps. It is my understanding that the overflow maps of EotM can consist of two or more servers fighting on the same side. So how are they allocated?

The color your server has in WvW determines which team you will be on in EOTM. If you are on the red team in WvW you will be on the red team in EOTM. All NA servers are pooled together for EOTM, but there is some sort of total player cap and if that is exceeded a new parallel instance of EOTM fires up at the same time. All EU servers are pooled as well.

Sandpit.3467:

They said that the one big mistake they made with GW1 was blowing up “home”. I know technically home in GW2 is your starting cities, but come on, they are useless ghost towns. Home is LA, and they just blew it up.

Makeshift LA sucks

Uhh … you really think that blowing up Lion’s Arch tops the list of mistakes ANet has made with GW2?

Zero Day.2594:

Wait and see what actions they take from the CDI’s…

LOL. I literally laughed out loud when I read that. Thanks for the chuckle!

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Dos.7052:

please support chinese font input in eu/us clients ( both simplified and traditional), since there is no “asian servers” , there are many players from taiwan, Hongkong and mainland of china even Chinese students aboard play at eu/us server, but gw2 dosen’t support chinese input (both simplified and traditional) quite well.

it is not a difficult issue, please support chinese language input so more player will benefit from the change.

thank you very much.

American is the official language of GW2.

“American”??

LOL … and I’m an American.

Mishee.5719:

When will the new patch be able for downloading?

About 45 minutes before the next one … and about 3 hours before the one after that.

Romek.4201:

yes i like the vertical progression and im happy anet go atleast with babysteps this way

im an oldschool gamer and MY games years ago had no lvl cap or things like this and im really annoyed by this facebook generation which want everything for free in games so gamecompanys dont make good games anymore and castrated the gengre MMORPG over the last years

That’s a silly perspective. Video games are recreation … nothing more. We “earn” our right to play the game when we pay our fee, and any one of us has the right to choose games … or lobby for changes to games we’ve bought … that fit our interests.

Some people want to climb ladders for the hell of it, and that’s fine. Others want to jump right into the fun they paid for, and that’s fine as well. When you buy a ticket to a movie you don’t expect to have to memorize all the actors’ names before you see the show. When you buy a ticket to a concert you don’t expect to have to learn how to play every instrument before you’re allowed to hear anything. When you go to a restaurant you don’t expect to have to run around the block seven times before they let you in the door. When you go to the park to play basketball you don’t expect to have to sew up a new jersey before you’re allowed on the court.

I’ll bet I’m way older than you are, and I think your comment about “the Facebook generation wanting everything for free” is just a rude, erroneous, and petty way to denigrate folks who don’t happen to think like you do.

Deniara Devious.3948:

If the new map is anything like the Edge of the Mists map or the new redesigned Borderlands, I really do NOT want any new maps at all. Currently Eternal Battlegrounds is the only WvWvW map, which has decent design (it could still benefit from balancing the different colors).

Instead of new maps and new overpowered features, please give us:
- more balanced match ups
- improved commander UI
- less lag and disconnects

I’ve been playing WvW for well over a year and have spent a lot of time on these forums. Those are three of the top five issues that players have complained about … culling and the commander system being the other two. The only one that ever got any attention was culling.

As far as WvW being fun, it was a LOT of fun originally, when players actually took the point system seriously. I remember servers getting themselves organized on TeamSpeak, splitting into different groups to mislead the enemy, learning where to place siege and how best to take it out, defending towers and keeps, making use of small teams for scouting/killing yaks, and actually plotting strategy and counter strategy while still fighting awesome battles.

In my opinion, two things killed that:

The most important was the gradual realization that population and coverage trumped EVERYTHING else in WvW and that ANet wasn’t going to do anything about it … even to the point of publicly stating that WvW was never meant to be balanced.

The second was the addition of individual rewards that made mindless zerging more relevant than paying attention to PPT.

ANet could have salvaged the fun that once was WvW, but they’ve ignored every plea since then to do so.

chemiclord.3978:

Yes.

Guild Wars 2 uses Cloudflare, as does League of Legends, World of Warcraft, and many other game and software services.

kitten Trolling is attacking Cloudflare with massive DDoS attacks.

It shouldn’t take a degree in calculus to put 1 and 1 together here. Now stop.

Arena.net isn’t at fault. There is nothing they can do about it. Stop trying to blame them. You’re wrong.

Cloudflare isn’t a server hosting service … it’s a safety/performance network intermediary. ANet has publicly stated that Akamai provides the actual server capacity.

That being said, here’s a rather humorous link given the circumstances:

http://www.cloudflare.com/ddos

Merus.9475:

gidorah.4960:

i think i am mostly disappointed that you didnt keep your word about getting a redo on population balance for wvw as the next topic and are going to make players waste the next vote getting it to the top again.

Here’s how this discussion will go:
Players: Move people out of servers that have WvW overpopulation, and prevent new players from transferring in.
ArenaNet: No, this is a user-hostile idea.
Players: We have no other ideas.
ArenaNet: Likewise.

That was pretty lame. Go scan the original Population Imbalance CDI and you’ll find dozens of ideas on how to deal with the problem. Many of them probably aren’t viable and some may even be conflicting, but there is stuff to work with there and all of it was, as far as anyone can tell, totally ignored.

I’ll say it again … there is nothing COLLABORATIVE about a one way flow of information.

videoboy.4162:

gidorah.4960:

videoboy.4162:

Your concerns (in that response) address only Tier 1. That’s hardly WvW as a whole. You pretty much left out everything else I said. LOL

It just looks to me like they’re actively trying to figure out a solution, judging by their experiment with EotM. If they are, I don’t see why they’d have another CDI that was specifically about Imbalance.

don’t be silly the coverage and population imbalance problems arent just on t1. the winners of every tier is predetermined based on population and it only changes when servers recruit or lose guilds. the changes they have mode don’t fix the base problem at all they should have another cdi on it because it is still the number 1 problem in wvw and anyone who actualy plays wvw knows this and they didnt have a conversation on it the first time. anet not wanting to talk about it didnt make it go away and the tournament and eotm doesnt do anything for the problem itself. the torunament is only going to highlight the population disparity and eotm will simply bleed players from unfun lower pop servers and alleviate the ques in t1.

I didn’t say that they were T1 problems. I said that you only addressed Tier 1.

I went and checked that thread like you suggested. Based on what Devon’s closing post says, they do see the issues with imbalance and are actively working to find the best way to address it. It also sounds like there is no reason whatsoever to have a repeat CDI, because the Devs got a lot of info out of it to help them out.

My point is: You should insult the Devs and/or act like they aren’t addressing problems, just because they aren’t actively speaking to the community about them at the moment.

Nonsense. On at least three different occasions (once directly to me) Chris has promised to have someone summarize what ANet gleaned from the first WvW CDI on population imbalance … i.e., which ideas coming from the player base fit Anet’s view of what WvW should be and which ideas were worth further investigation. We have gotten nothing of the sort each time, and there sure as hell isn’t anything collaborative about tossing ideas over a wall with zero feedback on them.

Phule.1968:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Note: We will disclose the ideas we do or don’t like as a group but we will not discuss schedules or timing around implementation. If there is still concern surrounding how seriously we take community collaboration then please do take the time to think about how much impact the community has had on the working of this game over the year.

Chris

We better make our efforts count guys.

Because they did the last two times?

zamalek.2154:

1. No company has ever done this type of thing before. Therefore there is no pre-existing framework that they can draw on to streamline the process. They are figuring it out as much as we are.
2. Things take time to implement and test. In a recent interview ANet said that some of the results from the earlier CDIs are in development but a ways off from release. They always stated up-front that there were no guarantees on the results of the CDIs anyway. Keep in mind that EotM was in development before the CDIs.
3. The WvW team have always been one of the more transparent and engaged teams – even before the CDI. They have also been punished for being transparent by the community. Give them a break.
4. You are living in a reality distortion field. ANet is making an effort that nobody else is – even if you don’t like the results of the CDI at least they make an effort. You have been treated far too well for far too long and you may be out of touch with how other game developers are treating paying customers. ANet are by far one of the best examples of how to treat customers. Even I rage at them sometimes, but all it takes is to go and try and play a game of BF4 – with the crashes and outright denial that said issues exist – and I start appreciating what I have very quickly.

I don’t know how you wrote any of that with a straight face. I know that I laughed out loud when I read it.

1- Several companies have done a FAR better job of keeping engaged with their customer base than anyone associated with WvW has. Rift is the best recent example that I can think of. I played Rift for 18 months, and although I left that game because I thought GW2’s WvW would be better than Rift’s Conquest, I truly miss the openness and candor that the Rift devs maintained with players on the forums. Mistakes were readily acknowledged, problems were explained, and fixes were projected. I no longer play that game, but I recently visited their forums and the devs are still just as active as they were before even though the game is in decline.

2- Most of us aren’t asking for overnight action. We’re asking for acknowledgement and feedback. We want to know which suggestions from players match ANet’s vision for future direction of WvW, and we want to know what is viable and what isn’t. We want participation from ANet and yet can’t even get a summary of what they gathered from the CDIs.

3- This one made me choke. By all indications the WvW team has been the LEAST transparent of any group at ANet, at least since Habbib left. We get zero participation and zero feeedback. Don’t believe me? You tell me … what have you learned from any ANet dev that gives you any idea which things in WvW will be addressed or what direction the game is headed?? Please be specific and for god’s sake don’t say Season 2.

4- ANet is the poster child for how NOT to treat customers. The WvW forums are full of pleas for responses and expressions of frustration that players aren’t being listened to. Please identify a single idea from either of the previous two WvW CDIs that ANet has even acknowledged as being viable, much less indicated they would act upon.

Tekyn.5376:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

WvW: What aspects of Edge of The Mists do you think could carry over to the rest of WvW and how? – Owner- Devon Carver

Is this a joke?

With all due respect Chris please re-read the first CDI thread before starting a new one. There are already SO MANY good ideas on these forums that it’s shocking that you would ask the community to provide additional feedback before the design team responds to what’s already out there. The level of communication the WvW community receives from you guys is horrible. If you don’t like what the community is suggesting then tell us that, and tell us why. Share with us what your vision is for the future of WvW so that we know what issues are still up for debate and what’s already been decided. Not everyone will like the end result but at least you’ll get some genuine feedback.

The more you keep the wvw community in the dark the more we feel that WvW is dying and that you guys have no idea how to fix it.

Sincerely,

-Tekyn

^this^

I can’t believe you guys are starting a third WvW CDI before even giving us any summary feedback on the first two. Devon can spend the time to “participate” in another CDI but he can’t find the time to even summarize whatever ANet might have gleaned from the others?? Do you have any idea how ridiculous this looks?

Fool me once, fool me twice … but never thrice.

timmyf.1490:

All-

I might be off here – and Chris, please correct me if I’m wrong – but a lot of your complaints aren’t being addressed by Chris because it’s not really his responsibility. It would not surprise me at all if the Community team (which likely handles moderation) isn’t “below” Chris on the org chart.

And even if they do somehow report up to him, I imagine it’s a small part of his job.

While handling forum moderation may be a high priority for you, the CDI, I thought, was a place for us to talk about the long-term direction of the game. That’s an opportunity that gaming communities are rarely afforded, and I find it a bit concerning that the same topics keep coming up over and over and over again.

If we do a CDI on the gem store, that’s an appropriate time to have a discussion about which “bonuses” are okay and which are not. This thread is not an appropriate place.

Furthermore, I’ve seen players on the WvW forums physically threaten devs. I’ve seen players state that specific devs should be fired. NO manager in his right mind would tell his employees that they must engage and respond to a hostile crowd like that.

In my job, if I had somebody tell me that somebody should punch me in the face for a decision I made, I’d walk out. If my boss told me I had to sit around and deal with them, I’d quit. The expectation for game developers shouldn’t be any different.

If you want to get responses, clean up the threads, and maybe devs will return.

Anyway, looking forward to hearing the topics on Friday, Chris!

Agree on the fact that a few … a few … posts in the WvW CDIs crossed over the line. But there were 1,150 posts in the WvW Population Imbalance CDI and it is a total cop out to justify ignoring all the good ones because of a couple of bad ones. You don’t empty a basketball arena during a game just because one idiot throws a bag of popcorn out onto the court, and the refs don’t walk off just because one fan calls them idiots. I agree with the other posts here … just delete the abusive posts and get on with the process.

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Cactus.2710:

Psientist.6437:

Khisanth.2948:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Palador.2170:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Are we going down this path again Gidorah?

Chris

Nah. By now, nobody actually expects you guys to talk with us about it.

But even if you did, an entire CDI on it would be overkill.

Personally I think a CDI on the BLT would be good to do at some point.

Chris

It should be two separate CDI. One for the gem store. One for the part where players are trading stuff with each other. Stuff like the very obvious missing/broken bits in the search function. The two are different enough that they shouldn’t be discussed together.

I somewhat agree. A CDI about the gem shop would likely revolve around definitions of P2W and vertical item progression. We have discussed that amongst ourselves already and the only pertinent information Arenanet could offer is their own definitions. Personally, I think providing those definitions is necessary. Suspense is all well and good in story telling but not in the monetization of storytelling.

Hello Chris Whiteside and thank you for the response. Would you be able to describe the process the dev team used in deciding upon the next topic? I’m not looking for a gotcha moment, just think it would help in the process of mutual emulation. Knowing how the dev team chooses topics would help us choose future topics.

Say what?? You want us to chose topics that ANet wants to talk about instead of topics that we want to talk about. How sycophantic can you be? The whole idea of this thing is for players to be able to bring up topics and idea/complaints/suggestions that are important to us … irrespective of what ANet thinks. Not that any of that has worked, of course, but still …

The CDI group discussed determination of topics in this thread and decided to try having us choose the next topics for this round (previously topics were voted for). We will see how this goes and go from there. I would suggest you read the thread thoroughly before making just broad assumptions in future.

’ Not that any of that has worked, of course, but still ..’

Finally I am sorry you feel this way about the CDI. Should you have been following it closely you would already have seen the massive impact it has had in game.

Regardless thanks for your feedback.

Chris

You’re right … I shouldn’t have generalized. I am (or at least was) primarily a WvW player, and I’ve been extremely disappointed in the total lack of response (notice I didn’t say results) to the extensive WvW CDI threads. I think my comments apply perfectly to them. We poured our hearts out in them and believed you when you said we’d get some sort of summary and feedback on the many constructive ideas offered there. We got none of that, hence my “not that any of that worked” comment.

Brahmincorle.1264:

Cactus.2710:

Psientist.6437:

Khisanth.2948:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Palador.2170:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Are we going down this path again Gidorah?

Chris

Nah. By now, nobody actually expects you guys to talk with us about it.

But even if you did, an entire CDI on it would be overkill.

Personally I think a CDI on the BLT would be good to do at some point.

Chris

It should be two separate CDI. One for the gem store. One for the part where players are trading stuff with each other. Stuff like the very obvious missing/broken bits in the search function. The two are different enough that they shouldn’t be discussed together.

I somewhat agree. A CDI about the gem shop would likely revolve around definitions of P2W and vertical item progression. We have discussed that amongst ourselves already and the only pertinent information Arenanet could offer is their own definitions. Personally, I think providing those definitions is necessary. Suspense is all well and good in story telling but not in the monetization of storytelling.

Hello Chris Whiteside and thank you for the response. Would you be able to describe the process the dev team used in deciding upon the next topic? I’m not looking for a gotcha moment, just think it would help in the process of mutual emulation. Knowing how the dev team chooses topics would help us choose future topics.

Say what?? You want us to chose topics that ANet wants to talk about instead of topics that we want to talk about. How sycophantic can you be? The whole idea of this thing is for players to be able to bring up topics and idea/complaints/suggestions that are important to us … irrespective of what ANet thinks. Not that any of that has worked, of course, but still …

Cactus… entire forum is here for expressing our ideas, complains and suggestions. 99% of topics have no respons from devs which is fine since nobody can read everything but there are also highly popular topics with several hundred pages with no response and even whole forum sections (namely “dungeons”) with no Anet response whatsoever. It has clearly no point to talk about something ,that Anet doesnt want to talk about. Lets not waste time by talking about something that would be swiped under rug after end of the particular CDI.

I agree with everything except your conclusion. It’s like saying that you should vote for a candidate you don’t like just because the one you do like didn’t get on the ballot. Your approach doesn’t accomplish anything, and in fact reinforces behaviors you don’t want to see.

It is truly sad if we’ve gotten to the point where we just have to cave in because nothing else works.

Psientist.6437:

Khisanth.2948:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Palador.2170:

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Are we going down this path again Gidorah?

Chris

Nah. By now, nobody actually expects you guys to talk with us about it.

But even if you did, an entire CDI on it would be overkill.

Personally I think a CDI on the BLT would be good to do at some point.

Chris

It should be two separate CDI. One for the gem store. One for the part where players are trading stuff with each other. Stuff like the very obvious missing/broken bits in the search function. The two are different enough that they shouldn’t be discussed together.

I somewhat agree. A CDI about the gem shop would likely revolve around definitions of P2W and vertical item progression. We have discussed that amongst ourselves already and the only pertinent information Arenanet could offer is their own definitions. Personally, I think providing those definitions is necessary. Suspense is all well and good in story telling but not in the monetization of storytelling.

Hello Chris Whiteside and thank you for the response. Would you be able to describe the process the dev team used in deciding upon the next topic? I’m not looking for a gotcha moment, just think it would help in the process of mutual emulation. Knowing how the dev team chooses topics would help us choose future topics.

Say what?? You want us to chose topics that ANet wants to talk about instead of topics that we want to talk about. How sycophantic can you be? The whole idea of this thing is for players to be able to bring up topics and idea/complaints/suggestions that are important to us … irrespective of what ANet thinks. Not that any of that has worked, of course, but still …

Interesting idea … and about 379th on my list of what should be fixed/improved/added/removed from this game.

Is Tyler a new hire at ANet or did hell just freeze over?

Forzani.2584:

Any business will tell you keep your customer. Once they leave you have a hard time getting them back. Especially with the new WvW type games coming out. Anet had a chance to solidify their hold on this niche market and they are blowing it up.

Fixed that for you.

I can’t think of a single thing that ANet can do now to keep anyone who is leaning toward leaving GW2. Nobody believes ANet actually plans to do anything, and even the CDIs have seen a marked drop off in the number of people who even bother to post in them. Those who are mostly satisfied with the game as it is will stay because the game does have some very nice features. Those who are dissatisfied will almost for certain leave because god knows nothing is going to materially change.

Ouranoz.9275:

I know, this isn’t really a suggestion but even if they draw individual ideas out of it I think it would improve the current wvw experience that we have at the moment.

You mean like they drew ideas out of the last 18 month’s worth of forum posts? Or the ideas from the last two WvW CDI’s?

Yeah … right.

Allie Murdock.8152:

urieldhynne.2743, I completely understand your frustration. We would all love it if we could spend our time reading the forums and responding to feedback, but the reality of the situation is there are just not enough hours in the day to do that and develop the game, so we have to have a balance.

The Collaborative Development threads are a huuuuuuuge help for us to see what the consensus is from the community on the state of the game. It puts your feelings into 3 short suggestions that you would like to see implemented, which means we can read through them faster and get a better idea of how the majority is feeling.

I don’t mean to say that your efforts have gone unnoticed, because they haven’t. It just makes our lives much easier when your feedback is concise.

So that’s pretty much an admission that the great majority of the heartfelt suggestions that have been made by players over the last several months were really never even heard. Figured as much.

But if you folks can’t be bothered to actually scan and summarize the stuff that’s already parked in your archives, why don’t you just ask us to do it for you? I’m serious … there are probably enough players who would still be willing to do so and it should be trivial to scan those and pick out the “concise” and constructive ones that you might actually be willing to read. The way it is now, most of the players who truly cared about WvW have already thrown in the towel as far as expecting any action to come from their suggestions and most of what you’re getting now in response to your Cliff Notes solicitations is minor fluff compared with the core problems of the game.

Sanduskel.1850:

There are no problems to solve. People are playing as they want. Let it go. If you enjoy beating on doors and are motivated by ppt, go to regular wvw. If you enjoy killing enemies go to Eotm. Simple. Please don’t invent problems that don’t exist.

Congrats on sticking to form.

Qaelyn.7612:

Nike.2631:

I guess we’re a bit puzzled that the last WvW CDI on Commander tag functionality was LOADED with feedback and what we got was our own tags blocking our view (NOBODY asked for that…) and an increase in the price to buy them that specifically contradicts what was discussed about tags having value in both WvW and PvE situations.

All delivered in complete silence as to what was the goal of these changes is and without patch notes to boot.

This is a pretty legitimate complaint.

Asking for feedback is great, communication is helpful to all sides. But a valid argument can be made that asking for feedback, then ignoring it and in fact doing things contrary to what was requested, is worse than not asking for feedback in the first place. It’s frustrating and demoralizing.

The problems with WvW are manifest and well-known. A lengthy CDI process at this point strikes many players as simply kicking the can.

Great post. Somebody should write a script to bump it about once per hour for the next two months … after which I probably won’t care.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Cactus.2710:

Players complaining that the Living Story content isn’t well crafted. Who would have ever thought that could happen?

I called it. I mean, I always am very clear. Players complain about anything, it’s just how things happen on MMO forums.

In this case though? I really wonder what they were watching that this wasn’t seen developing at all since the first time we saw Kasmeer and Marjory together.

I think you zeroed in too much on the “players complaining” part of my comment and missed the satirical reference to “well crafted.”

TeamBattleAxe.3901:

So, is Grouch gone already? We’re going through these community coordinators pretty quickly these days.

#VoteTaquitoNextCC2014

I think that’s ANet’s plan … cycle them through so each one can ask us to start from scratch again.

style.6173:

Merlin Dyfed Avalon.5046:

Well Eotm is build for zerging, door hp alone is a good example for that.

This ^^.

Also, WvW is in trouble. Why? This forum has given a ton of good ideas. A main rep for ANET (not allie) came and said we do not represent what people want and so most of those ideas are disregarded.

A perfect example of the CDI that was done here recently on population balance. There were a ton of ideas given. ANET barely responded and when they did, it was to ask about changing the transfer rate based on WvW population. That was pretty much it.

And the CDI on the commander system, which also had a ton of good ideas on improvements and enhancements, got only a half-hearted comment from the dev that maybe … just maybe … different colored tags might … just might … be worth investigating some day.

Why anybody would bother participating in a new WvW CDI is beyond me. Scratching scabs sounds more productive.

New things I’d like to see related to WvW? How about ANet actually following through on any WvW CDI? That would certainly be startlingly different.

warriorjrd.8695:

Cactus.2710:

warriorjrd.8695:

Cactus.2710:

warriorjrd.8695:

Qaelyn.7612:

Was even worse when I just rechecked it.

—

Jade Quarry +595
Blackgate +50
Sanctum of Rall +50

—

This is insane. Does Arenanet realize what they’ve done? I really hope they will speak up on this.

What do you expect them to do. People cry and cry about queues, now they give us a map that solves that. People cry for a new map, we get one. It’s the person’s choice where they want to play. It’s like asking Anet to remove EB because nobody plays the borderlands. You have no argument.

What part of “what we really want is for ANet to fix WvW” did you not understand?? WvW could and should be the superior PvP mode compared with EOTM (more extensive strategy, cleaner maps, less PvE, larger scale, more focused objectives, etc) but it has been crippled by an ignorantly designed matchmaking system and all it took was EOTM to prove the point. You act like we should be happy we got a turkey sandwich to replace the Thanksgiving Day meal that got ruined.

Dude people are going to play what they enjoy more. Also you are judging it;s population based on it’s first week of release. Of course it’s going to be high, but soon people may come back to wvw and play that again. You act like Anet should force people to play wvw instead of EOTM because you are shorthanded. It’s their choice. My server loses nearly half our wvw population every major PVE update, I don’t complain about that. People will play what they want to, nothing you can do to change that.

Work on your comprehension skills. I never said (or even implied) that ANet should force people to play WvW. What I said was that I and others would much prefer to play WvW if ANet had not ignored so many of its flaws … population imbalance and coverage dominance being the most egregious. You stated that we should be happy that ANet gave us EOTM and quit complaining that they still haven’t fixed WvW when the smarter play would have been to simply make WvW faction based like they did with EOTM. I ONLY play EOTM now … but the reality is that the success of EOTM mostly highlights what a blown opportunity ANet had with WvW.

Yes but how is that EOTM’s fault. You say the EOTM is bad because Anet didn’t fix any outstanding issues. EOTM is a step in the right direction atleast, but it didn’t make anything worse as you’ve implied.

Try again … this time harder. I never said that EOTM is “bad” … I said it falls way short of what WvW could and should have been. Players wanted ANet to fix WvW, but Anet didn’t. Instead they gave us a new map with some of the fixes we wanted for WvW but without the breadth and depth of WvW. Go back and reread my “sandwich instead of a burnt dinner” analogy.

Players complaining that the Living Story content isn’t well crafted. Who would have ever thought that could happen?

nirvana.8245:

Collaborative development is just a way to give people a place to complain logically in a nice manner and waste our time. The issues are pretty clear and the possible solutions are abundant and many of them simple.

^this^ about 100 times over

It’s simply inane to think that the devs haven’t been able to get a pulse of what’s wrong with WvW by now, and collect a few of the better suggestions from players on how to address those problems. Asking us to participate in one CDI after another with practically zero feedback or action from anything related to WvW is just a farce. Do I sound frustrated? kitten straight I am.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Hey all,

Just wanted to let you know that we’re working on another Collaborative Development initiative that we will be rolling out soon. So, start thinking about some things you would like to see in WvW, and watch out for the new thread!

- A

My three requests for a new CDI for WvW, in order of priority:

1. follow through on the first WvW CDI

2. follow through on the first WvW CDI

3. follow through on the first WvW CDI