Guild Wars 2

I also wanted to add a thought regarding this “how practical are these robots” discussion.

I have no problem discussing this, but if we’re going to discuss how practical, or impractical these robots are, then we must do so in the context of the game.

In a game where Norns go shirtless, Asura build floating platforms in cities, towns are built in volcanoes, laboratories that require jumping to get through, sharks live under your workspace, etc….it seems a little strange to suddenly be focusing on high heels.

Thats not to say we shouldn’t have a fun discussion about these things, but we need to be very careful to not cross the line and start claiming sexism. These are not practical robots anymore than Robocop, C-3P0, or the many other humanoid robots in media.

They are robots designed with the intention to be interesting to look at. As well, if we want to talk about impractical robots, we really should be discussing the Golems….when has one of those not malfunctioned?

Morning All,

So, a few things I wanted to catch up on.

First. Please, I beg you, please, do not waste your time with Anita Sarkeesian’s video series. While we should be discussing gender issues in the media, these videos are cherry-picked, bias, inaccurate, and very damaging to the conversation.

If you are looking for better information, I suggest watching the following videos. Keep in mind that these videos were not made with a $150,000 budget, and that most of these people are not “pop-culture-critics” meaning they’re not professional speakers. Either way, listen to what they have to say, and while I don’t suggest you accept it all, at least expose yourself to different viewpoints.

Luetin09
dolldivine
The Gaming Goose
KiteTales
dangerousanalysis

Secondly….

I have to mention something that is bothering me regarding the words some people are using to describe these robots.

These robots are called WatchKnights. Based on the information we’ve been given, it can be concluded that these robots have been constructed as defenders of the city/realm. They stand watch in the city, and in the cutscene (spoiler), they are shown to be capable fighters.

When you put it that way, these robots sound pretty awesome. The problem is that some people continually use words, and focus on certain traits with the intention of demeaning any positive qualities they may have.

For example, throughout this thread people have often referred to them as “fem-bots”, “sex-bots”, dominatrix, etc. These words are all designed to ignore what they are, Watch Knights, and reduce them to nothing more than eye-candy.

Moreover, the focus on certain traits these robots have, and then forming a conclusion about their meaning, ability, or validity, or worse, the designers intention is concerning for me.

This would be akin to saying that Jodie Foster is nothing more than a porn actress because she’s been topless in some scenes. What is often referred to as kitten-shaming, is the idea that what a woman deserved to be shamed if they choose to engage in, or wear what something that others don’t approve of Wiki

In this case, there are some who feel it is ok to discount everything these robots are designed for, based on their physical characteristics, and/or outfit.

As I have stated before, we need to agree that these robots are indeed sexualized. They have features and outfits that are stereotypically associated with beauty, strength, health, etc. The problem is that some are not able to understand, or entertain the idea that what is true for them, may not be true for others.

What one person may see as highly sexualized, even bordering on pornographic, another may not think twice about it. This subjective difference means that no matter how many “buzzwords” you use, or how many times you mention high heels and nipples, that person simply won’t see what you’re seeing, and visa versa.

So, where does that leave us with the WatchKnights?

Well, in my opinion it is really up to the individual to determine what spin they want to put on these characters. You can choose to focus on the positive, or negative aspects of these characters, and that is your choice. What I would encourage you to do however is, regardless of what position you take, force yourself to look at the bigger picture.

If you focus on one one aspect, and ignore the context, you will not be in a position to come to a reasonable conclusion. That said, here are a list of traits that I have seen here. I haven’t put them under any category, so you can decide if they are positive or negative.

- Large mechanical robots
- Wearing high heel boots
- Designed for battle
- Capable of projecting other forms
- Exaggerated female proportions
- Tasked with defending the city/realm
- Beautifully designed with amazing detail
- Possible weak points at joints
- Visible representation of “areola”
- Serious expression
- Carrying formidable weapons
- Capable fighters
- Questionable hackability

Can you come up with more?

neon.4863:

And there is no in-game reason for this, either, since I’ve yet to see a single female human NPC walking around with their breasts bare in a way that implies this is somehow socially acceptable in Krytan society.

@Erasculio: The point is they do not even need those body parts to begin with, yet there they are, for some reason beyond anyone’s comprehension.

The point is actually that they are part of the design for whatever reason the designer felt was necessary. Because you personally don’t see a reason for them, doesn’t automatically mean they’re bad, or unnecessary.

Here is a thought experiment. In places like Italy, it is not the social norm for women to walk around topless. However, there are thousands of statues, paintings, and other forms of art that depict topless, and fully naked women.

Why do people flock to Italy to look at the art, and not just settle for looking at nudity on the internet? Perhaps, it is because it’s not about the nudity.

Perhaps, it is because some people are able to see the beauty in art. That some people are more interested in the design, craft, and function of an object, than they are about whether it is nude or not.

See, the thing is you seem to be making this a sexual thing. You see “nipples”, a curvy butt, and high heels on a robot and you make it a sexual issue. To me, this is the equivalent of going to Italy and arguing there is no reason why the statues must be naked, and then saying it must be because of some male power fantasy.

I would argue they do have a point. It adds to the aesthetic of the robot. And while I may view it as sexualized, I don’t view it as sexual…meaning I don’t get all funny in the pants because it has pixelated nipples, anymore than I do when looking at art.

neon.4863:

However, I said “young males”, not all males. Specifically because lbr, if you really, honestly play games to watch an NPC’s boobs bounce, you’re probably a pubescent boy.

Perhaps, but I feeding that stereotype probably isn’t constructive.

neon.4863:

So if this was a design decision intended to please the playerbase, it seems to be a misguided one (perhaps, again, influenced by the perception that the average player is a teenaged boy).

There is perhaps another possibility. That this design is actually well received by the majority of players and was influenced based on other factors that have nothing to do with a players age, or gender.

I just feel jumping to conclusions like this are not constructive. They make too many negative assumptions.

Faowri.4159:

I think it’s negative when it’s exclusionary of a great deal of the playerbase, especially when you are a company that has been very outspoken about ensuring your game design is inclusive, and have many staff on board who are very passionate about representation issues in gaming. There are lots of people who do not enjoy sexualised content, full-stop, just as there are lots of people for whom a sexualised female figure (which is hardly a lacking resource in the gaming industry) does nothing, or may even find to be a turn-off. There’s not a whole lot of justification for pandering to one section of your playerbase and forgetting the rest.

How is this exclusionary?

Does the presence of these character models diminish anyones ability to participate in the game? Are you required to accept these before you can enjoy Guild Wars 2?

There are a lot of people who don’t enjoy a lot of things. I don’t enjoy the drinking games personally, but I know some do. I like the design of the WatchKnights, but some don’t.

You’re arguing one side of the coin here. You’re saying that because some people are offended, that the rest of us should pander to that. I don’t agree.

The viewpoint that some people like design elements, is just as valid and being offended does not give anyone the right to dictate how it should be for everyone else.

Faowri.4159:

I don’t believe that all straight men enjoy this kind of content because I don’t generalise the preferences of an entire gender, but when you have sexualised female figures as art and decoration, it’s usually designed, intentionally or through internalised patterns, to appeal to the straight male demographic. I don’t think that’s unfair to say?

I think it is unfair to see that as a negative. Many sports cars are designed with curves and such that are pleasing to the eye. Many things take elements from what we consider “feminine” to make them more pleasing.

The problem is if you conclude that this is bad. There is nothing wrong with designing a robot that appeals to people. To say that it applies only to the male demographic would be very one sided to me.

So, if you were to say that this was designed to appeal to anyone who finds the female form appealing, then ya, I could get behind that.

Faowri.4159:

(and they do look cool, but in context I still feel they’re out of place and I’m still annoyed that sexualised content is yet again targeted at men, and only men).

This is an assumption I don’t agree with. There is nothing to support this claim at all, nor do I think it’s realistic to assume only men find this sexualized, or even all men for that matter.

neon.4863:

No, please, explain. Don’t just quote me, say it’s wrong, and then say “let’s not derail” without actually explaining what you mean.

Quickly.

The stats that most people are quoting state that 45% of gamers are female. However, the part that most people leave out are where those females are distributed amongst game types. This means that while almost half of gamers are female, many genres of games still have a relatively larger male percentage.

This is why you see some games becoming much more neutral (or even female centric), and others aren’t changing much.

I’m not commenting on whether this is right or wrong, or whether some games are “legit” or not, I’m simply saying that we have to consider all the variables when using these stats.

neon.4863:

And even if they didn’t specifically consider the male players, there’s such a long-standing belief that the gaming community is primarily young males (I’ve seen this debunked by actual statistics already) that they may end up unconsciously designing things based on what they believe young males would like to see.

This is a topic for another day, but this is a bit of a misrepresentation of the stats. There is more to this story than this. But….lets not derail.

Faowri.4159:

Still, it’s a good example of how the watchknight design could have been both desexualised and gender balanced, if that was the aesthetic they were going for.

Just wanted to add. I don’t think that everything necessarily needs to be desexualized and gender balanced.

What we need to do is create characters that are best for the story. If they happen to be all one gender, then cool. If they happen to be sexualized, then cool. As long as it fits within the context of the story.

In this case, if I take into consideration the design aesthetics of the city/queen, and previous models/situations in the game, I don’t feel they’re that far out of context. Sure, they could have added male versions, and sure they could have made them less sexualized, but I’m not sure what that would have done other than to just appear “token.”

It’s ok to have female robots. It’s ok to have them sexualized. The trick is to make sure it’s in context, and to make sure it’s not one sided. With all the shirtless, muscle bound, speedo wearing, manly-mans, in this game, I’m not too concerned that it’s suddenly sexist and unequal.

Kal Spiro.9745:

The things is, I’m not seeing much of that at all. What I’m seeing is people saying that they feel it’s sexualized and objectified and the opposition saying, they are wrong and shouldn’t feel that way.

We are seeing this on both sides.

The degree to which someone says robot design is sexualized is based on the personality and experiences of the individual. This means, when you have people claiming it is sexualized, then the opposition will claim it isn’t.

This is because there is a big difference from saying, “In my opinion, this design is very sexualized.” and just stating it as a fact.

I don’t have a problem if someone finds it overly sexualized. What I have a problem with is them claiming this to be a fact, and then additionally shaming others for creating it, liking it, or not seeing it as a problem.

Kal Spiro.9745:

You are completely right that they have every right to feel that way, and the opposition also has every right not to see it. But the opposition should not be opposing what they see and should be willing to accept what they see and why they see it without claiming it’s not a thing.

Your wording is a bit strange here. The opposition has the right to feel differently. I just wanted to be clear here because the way you worded it seemed to imply that the default conclusion is that it is sexualized, and that anyone claiming otherwise is simply covering their ears and eyes in denial.

What we all need to do in this thread is try and see things from another perspective. If you have a problem with this, I want to know why. If I don’t, I would hope that you would listen to my opinion as well.

In the end, the goal is to make sure that in the future game designers are creating content that works for as many people as possible. We can’t pander to one side or the other if we want well rounded, and diverse games.

The solution to this is to get rid of all the stupid buzzwords (patriarchy, mansplaining, misogyny, Dudebro, "What about teh menz?, kitten culture, etc). We need to discuss this rationally and objectively. Only then will we create equality and a cool gaming environment.

What is happening here is that we have a character design that has sexualized elements. This is a fact.

The amount to which this offends us is subjective. Some, don’t think twice about it, while others are highly sensitive, or even offended by it.

So who is right?

Well, in my opinion, everyone is. If you have a problem with the design of this robot, your feelings are perfectly valid. You have every right to feel offended by something you see in the game (Bathing suits, skimpy armour, shirtless males, half naked statues).

What you don’t have the right to do however, is tell others they’re wrong for not feeling offended, or to claim they’re sexist, insensitive, misogynistic, or whatever.

We can all argue the practicality of this robot all we want. If you think high heels, or breasts on a fictional robot are a stupid idea, then by all means voice your opinion.

What we need to stop doing here IMO is throwing out buzzwords and assumptions without regard. We need to be careful not to make assumptions about people, and not belittle people for their views.

I have no problem discussing this stuff, but we need to stay rational. If we start posting videos of radical feminists, or calling each other names, then the only thing that will happen is that it will further divide people on an already volatile topic.

TottWriter.8591:

My main problem with them is that they have been designed to suggest nudity, and they have been designed to emphasise and glorify a figure which a lot of women develop serious eating disorders and lifetime health problems attempting to emulate.

Nudity isn’t bad.

A lot of women have a lot of growing up to do if they look at a robot in a video game and somehow feel they need to starve themselves to emulate it.

I’m sorry, but what would you have them do? Make chubby versions, muscular versions, short ones, tall ones, black ones, white ones, asian ones, ones with big breasts, small breasts? What about short legs, long legs?

What amount of variation would make you happy? How many versions of this robot should have been in the game to make sure that everyone is fairly represented?

TottWriter.8591:

That they look “sexy” would also be less irritating were it not a phenomenon I encountered near enough at every turn. A break would be nice. I wonder how many men would be comfortable surrounded by scantily clad or nude men bearing large pelvic bulges, all with smouldering, thoughtful expressions; like they really care about you.

I would be perfectly comfortable. Why? Because I am able to separate a video game design from reality.

TottWriter.8591:

Likewise, I’m a practical person. I see someone running around in heels, and I wince. That much is maybe just me, I’ll admit, but dear lord. Heels for me equate to pain for the wearer, not some daft dominatrix image. What can I say. Fantasy or not it bugs me when something makes that little sense, even when it can’t be fetishised.

This is a robot, in a fantasy game.

You want to start talking about practical outfits in Guild Wars 2?

Dahkeus.8243:

My faith in humanity has just declined a bit after reading some of the replies in this thread…

Same, I would have thought by now we could have females in games without it being an issue.

Kal Spiro.9745:

So do you think Norn women are more masculine? I don’t. Just because they’re bigger doesn’t make them masculine, it just takes them away from the danty flower appearance they have. I don’t care if they’re robots and therefore their form has no impact on anything, they look like underwear models.

At least if they were big they would look like they were designed to crack skulls, which they were, not to whip you and tell you that you’re a naughty boy.

LOL, wut?

These robots are taller than Norn. They’re carrying giant blades, and they can transform into anything they want.

The problem here is that you have a gender stereotype problem. You equate certain traits with certain qualities. So, because someone looks like an underwear model, they can’t be strong and, “crack heads.”

Because someone is wearing high heels, they automatically want to whip you sexually and call you a naughty boy?

Are you seeing how these generalizations are hurting the argument here?

Kal Spiro.9745:

Honestly, I think everyone would have been perfectly happy with these fembots if they were at least twice as wide which huge muscles. Leave everything else exactly as it is, big boobs, tight butt and stilettos but make them giant monster women and everyone would have said amazon fighting women or norn, seems fine, moving on.

I wouldn’t have been.

I don’t think they need to make them more “masculine.” I don’t see them as being any less for being feminine. They’re giant robots with blade weapons. They are beautiful and capable at the same time.

Despite what some may want us to believe, being strong, and being sexy are not mutually exclusive. There is more to strength than your body type, what clothing you’re wearing, or what gender you are.

TottWriter.8591:

I would think of them like athletes if they had a body structure which I considered athletic. – snip -

Yes, but you’re arguing design from a practical perspective. This is a video game, not an MIT tech experiment. To argue that the design of these robots is, or isn’t practical in this fantasy word simply makes no sense.

This is the problem here. We are trying to justify a design idea to fit our own arguments. The reality is that it’s no more, or less practical/realistic than the rest of the game. They’re robots, they have boobs and high heels, and ya?

TottWriter.8591:

And in all honesty, that they are a female figure with breasts doesn’t concern me as much as the fact that the designers have gone to the effort of adding details which go above and beyond implying that the figure is nude (nipples, and contoured buttocks, for example). Once you get into a “nude” figure wandering around, that tends towards sexualisation in my view, be that figure male or female. I would have just as much problem were they male robots with nipples and a suspiciously ornate package and buttocks.

And you seem to be seeing this as negative. There are lots of characters in this game running around with outfits that are sexualized. The detail that goes into those characters and outfits are just as sexualized (for both genders).

To me, this isn’t a negative thing. I don’t view sexuality as negative. I’m not offended by males or females being sexual.

TottWriter.8591:

I’m not exactly sure what I have said to insult or offend if I’m honest. I’ve stated my point in as general a manner as I could, simply because that is the best way, in my opinion, to avoid going down a tangent towards personal attacks. My opinions differ from yours, yes, but that’s all they are. Different. I don’t see how my experience and viewpoint can be insulting.

Go back and look at the assumptions and generalizations you were making.

TottWriter.8591:

Elsewhere on the forums are posters requesting screenshots of the Watchknights’ chests and backsides so that they can use them as wallpaper. That is ample evidence, so far as I can see, that these figures are being fetishised. Do I think all men and all the designers fetishise them in this manner? Of course not. Heck, my boyfriend saw them before I did and he was more irritated by them than I was.

So?

There could be a lot of reasons why people want photos of them. You’re making gross assumptions again.

My question to you is. Why is it bad of some find these designs pleasing sexually, or otherwise?

TottWriter.8591:

Given ANet’s stated intention to not over-sexualise the game in the past, they are clearly a company aware of the potential for game assets to be taken in this fashion. I cannot imagine that this aspect of the Watchknights was something which no one brought up at any point in the design process.

Maybe that is because they don’t feel they are. Maybe you’re taking them out of context, and focusing too much on individual aspects of the design, instead of looking at them in context of the game?

I don’t see them as any more or less sexualized as anything else. The only reason I noticed them is because they’re new. I’ve been looking at centaurs, trolls, golems, and such for a year. Suddenly there is something new and I took notice.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

I am in two minds about the watchknights.

• I like that they’re female. Not because I prefer female models over male models as a default, but because it makes for a nice change from the Asura golems and, well, most robots out there. (And of those who are out there, almost all of them are either firly-pink or sex-bots, so we definitely need more variety of female robots, for diversity.)

I agree, it’s awesome to see robots of ANY kind honestly. Robots are awesome! In media we’ve seen all kinda of robots (many aren’t firly-pink or sex-bots – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_female_robots_and_cyborgs).

Iron Giant, Johnny 5, Pris, T-800/1000/X, C-3P0, Bishop, False Maria, Dot Matrix, Eve, etc.

In general we need more cool robots, and as I said before, I welcome the change from the glowing blue Asura, golem robots.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

• I find the design lovely. I stood in front of one and admired it for a long time, two nights ago. I don’t know if the Metropolis-esque-ness is a deliberate reference, but it’s lovely. Love the art deco style.

Same, I love art deco to begin with, so these were really cool to me. I would like to see more of this style in the game honestly.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

• That being said, I do feel they are sexualised. They do not just have a female form, they have an exaggerated female form, and stilettos (which, sorry, I wouldn’t wear for fighting or running ever, no matter my weight distribution), and nipples that serve no function and are clearly for the looks. All three of these design choices are used in sexualised depictions of women. Any one of them I would have maybe just raised my eyebrow at and whatevered if off, but in combination, yes, there is a sexual component. (See also Sorayama’s illustrations of robots, easy to google.)

They are sexualized yes, but not in a sexual way. These are sex-bots, nor are they doing anything that is sexual in nature. For me, there is nothing wrong with this. I don’t see being sexy as being a bad thing.

P.S. Bat-nipples

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

• I don’t have a principal problem with that. It is okay to depict women and men in sexual ways. (If only men and women were depicted in sexualised ways in roughly similar proportions, overall. There’s disproportionally little sexualisation out there for straight females to look at.)

The new Wolverine is out in theatres. :P

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

• However, this is not what I expected to see in GW2, which in other design choices has been a lot more conservative (in an “American” and “suitable for 13+” kind of way) so these really stand out. Otherwise, they might not even be a discussion about this.

And thank goodness for that! I’m kinda tired of seeing Quaggan plushies, and other cute things. I’m not saying that these things are bad, but having these more mature, and realistic designs are a breath of fresh air.

I really wish they would keep going in this direction. We’re all adults (or we should be…why aren’t you in school?") and so it would be nice to see more mature designs.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

• I am not offended by the art, or by the form, or the quality. What bothers me about this is the lack of context. Are they supposed to be eye-candy, or sexual, or fighting machines? They can be all three, but context was given to only one of the three – fighting machines. (Maybe two if you count general “eye-candy” as “Jennah wants to show off”, which I believe was said in the live stream.) So in the end, it is awesome, beautiful fight-bots which have overly sexual visuals tagged on for… no real reason (that I can see) other than “let’s make them… sexy!!” And I can totally see why that would offend some.

The question I have is why is this choice any more, or less valid than any other choice? Are we questioning it because they’re female?

Would we be asking the same questions if they were big “male” robots? Would be be asking why they’re big, muscular, and mean looking?

Alleluia.1320:

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Kiriwar.7382:

I’m mostly upset that they had to have -high heels.-

I mean… really? really?

Wearing high heels means you’re no longer capable?

Not capable of running around and fighting enemies? Yes. You can’t sword fight in heels, especially heels like that, effectively. Just b/c the mechanics of the game ignore that doesn’t make it less true. The game’s mechanics could make a fish levitate rather than swim, too. Doesn’t change the fact it’d be ridiculous.

The heels are there as part of the aesthetic and the aesthetic is overtly sexualized in nature.

Yes, I suppose the difference is that while you see this is as a negative, I don’t.

There are a lot of outfits in fantasy games that are not practical for the task at hand. This applies to both Genders (A Norn with no shirt, have you ever lived through a Canadian winter?).

Here is the thing though, just because you don’t think it’s practical, or even cool looking, doesn’t mean therefore sexism. You can argue that it’s not practical all you want, and I might even agree with you on that point.

But you need to be very careful to not then come to the conclusion that just because something isn’t realistic, or even practical, therefore it is sexist.

Kiriwar.7382:

I’m mostly upset that they had to have -high heels.-

I mean… really? really?

Wearing high heels means you’re no longer capable? You do realize these robots transform into other creatures to fight ya? But, even if they didn’t what does wearing high heels have to do with their abilities or presence?

Women choose to wear heels all the time, and I don’t think that makes them any less of a women.

Now….lets look at this from another perspective. When you fight, or play sports, you don’t typically stand flat footed. Humans distribute their weight on the balls of their feet so they can quickly move.

That is why soccer cleats have more spikes at the toes, and only a few at the heels. So, from a fighting perspective, these “high heels” aren’t really an issue.

In the end, it’s just a design choice. It’s meant to make them look taller, and more sleek (just like real high heels). I don’t think the intention was to make them some porn-bot with the intention of being someone secretary, and bending over to pick up dropped Skritt bottles.

Delvoire.8930:

Can’t believe there is seriously a thread on this……

people must be extremely bored.

Not bored so much as sensitive. There are some out there that have been so conditioned to associate certain things with sexism, that they start to see it in many things.

This kind of pattern building is natural to humans. Think of people who believe in UFO’s. They see something that convinces them that UFO’s exist, and then more things start to become confirmation of that. That confirmation, feeds back and makes them more susceptible to more confirmation.

The problem is that it takes a lot of effort to not fall for confirmation bias. It’s much easier for people to see feminine robots and conclude sexism, than it is to use context, reason, and logic to determine whether this is in fact the case.

I don’t blame anyone for that, but I do wish that we were able to have a decent debate on the topic without throwing around loaded buzzwords, and accusations.

Is there any problem in questioning the design of characters in a video game? No, of course not. The trick is to try to remain objective.

chronometria.3708:

They are art deco, reminds me a lot of the bronze statues in rapture city, from bioshock.

What disturbs me about their inclusion in the game, however, is that they seem to come from nowhere. Where is the factory that makes them? Surely they are not hand made in little backstreet clockmakers shops?

What would have been awesome would be if these were a symbol of the human union with the charr. They would combine charr clockwork cleverness with the human sense of beauty, resulting in an elegant yet merciless army of incorruptible clockwork agents.

Without the factory, without the charr involvement, they just seem too deus ex machine and have been conjured from thin air, which is unsatisfying.

Well, to be fair, there are always stuff popping up into the world and we have no idea where it comes from.

I get what you’re saying, but at this point any real explanation would work. The queen, being a queen has access to resources that others don’t. She may have had them commissioned in some other part of the world, by someone we don’t have access to.

In the end, I think they are just really awesomely designed robots. It is such a nice change from the clunky Golums, and Ausra glowing stuff.

When I first walked up to one and looked up, I was like, “Whoa, cool!” I saw the giant staff and wondered what it would be like to fight them.

Actually, my biggest disappointment with these is when I was fighting in the arena thing, these Watchknights are as large as I am. That made me sad because I thought about how epic it would be to go toe to toe with one of these robots.

Other than that nitpick, I think these are really well designed.

Meriem.3504:

Did you really have to give them something that looks like areolas? x.x

Are areolae bad? Are areolae only exclusive to females?

Does the presence of these areola make these robots any less capable, formidable, or respectable?

I guess for me, I don’t see how having feminine traits makes something negative. I don’t look at that robot and think that the queen should have opted for strong, shirtless, robo-men.

I’m personally happy to see awesomely designed, feminine robots, in a position of authority, power, and equality. It doesn’t make me feel like less of a man, it doesn’t make me feel like women are just robots to command.

To me, they are just a really cool design in a video game.

Here are the reasons why the Watchknights are NOT concerning for me.

When I look at these robots, I see strong, towering symbols of power and beauty. I see robots designed with the purpose to be respected and even feared.

I guess for me, I don’t see being female/feminine as a weakness. I’m not the kind of person who judges ones value or capabilities based on what they are, or aren’t wearing.

That being said, I’m going to switch gears for a moment here.

Lets be honest with what is happening here. There are some players in this thread that are claiming sexism. They are projecting their personal beliefs onto these characters and looking for reasons to support those beliefs.

That is their right to do so, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this.

Sexism is something we need to be aware of and discuss. We need to make sure we keep the conversation going so we don’t make the mistake of anyone being treated unequal.

However, we also need to be reasonable. We can’t allow ourselves to simply react when we see something, without first looking at it in context. Calling “foul” just because these robots happen to be feminine, and are “sexualized” is, in my opinion, being overly sensitive.

There is nothing about these robots that say anything about being weak, objectified, or undervalued.

I admit that my post is a little haphazard. The reason is because whenever someone walks into a conversation and starts throwing around claims of sexism, peppered with buzzwords, it becomes very difficult to have a counter opinion.

We have already seen in this post how because of the design of these robots, these automatically become some assumed sexual fantasy for males.

We need to be very careful here to keep our critical thinking hats on.

Lord,

Try reading the first sentence of my post. Ok, done?

Good, now try the rest.

This is a failure in the UI.

Basically, the torch runs are all considered one in the same by players. However, ANet has made it so only one actually gives you credit for dailies.

Can you guess which one?

Well, the UI / achievement panel doesn’t state specifically which one it is, not do they have specific names, so players are forced to try them all, or assume its broken.

For many who don’t frequent the forums I can only imagine how confused they are. The answer is as others have stated, the only one that counts is the one in the middle of the map.

ANet could easily fix this by changing the text in the achievement panel, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Bugs, they’re inevitable. No matter what you do, some will always slip through the cracks.

In the world of programming, its pretty common knowledge that the faster you go, and the less time you have to test, the more likely there will be conflicts (bugs).

This happens all the time in the game industry where deadlines need to be reached and so developers rush to finish the game. It’s common practice to have a giant patch go out shortly after the release of the game to fix those pesky problems that couldn’t be sorted out prior to launch.

Guild Wars 2 is no different. It launched a year ago with some pretty consistent bugs. Some, were minor annoyances, and some, as many of you know, are still a major issue. To be fair, over the last year ANet has been slowly addressing these bugs, and really solidifying the core game.

Then came the Living Story.

Now, imagine for a moment you wanted to run to the store to get milk before it closed. I throw you my car keys, and you rush out to start it up. Turns out, I forgot to inflate the tires. You run back in and tell me know there is a problem. I stare at you while you explain the issue, but you’re not quite sure whether I’ve acknowledged it or not.

You go back out and try to find a solution. You look around the shop for a pump, or spare tires, or something. A few moments later I walk in and say, “My mistake it wasn’t my intention to leave the tires empty.”

You look at the clock and realize that no matter what you do, the store will close long before you get there.

Guild Wars 2 has become like this. Every few weeks we are given a long list of tasks that each of us must find time to accomplish. For many of us, the frequency of the updates, and the amount of time required to participate is already putting a lot of strain on us.

When you add a game breaking bug into the mix, the entire thing breaks down. No amount of playing can rectify this. The players, are now stuck in a position where the clock is ticking, and are at the mercy of whether or not ANet decides to fix the issue.

Every day new post pop up with detailed reasons as to why the Living Story isn’t working, and in my opinion, this is just another reason. ANet does not have the resources to bug fix fast enough.

In the end, if the speed at which you’re releasing content means that the frequency of the bugs are bound to increase, and you insist on only allowing that buggy content to be available for a limited time, then something needs to change. You either need to have a team dedicated to addressing, and fixing issues ASAP, you need to slow down the development/testing schedule, or you need to allow the content to be around longer to give players an opportunity to complete it, after it is fixed.

I want to like these updates. I want to play them, but you’re burning me out. The pace at which you’re running leaves little room for error, and if something isn’t addressed right away, it can mean the difference between experiencing your content, and finding something else to do.

Please…slow down before you’ve created a bigger problem than a few bugs.

I have been playing since day one, and still can’t get this achievement. I try every single time I fight this boss, but no luck.

I’ve tried guesting, playing off peak hours, and just about every skill I have.

First, I’m probably doing it wrong.
Second, half the time I don’t see crystals
Third, I’m not even sure what counts when I do it it (damage, or killing blow)

I hate this achievement and I wish they would adjust it somehow.

Here is why your argument is flawed.

You forgot to factor in two things, TIME & REWARDS.

You see, before a few weeks ago, doing the “Slayer” achievement was just something to work towards as you were playing. If the little icon popped up on the screen, you would be like, “Oh, cool.”

However, now things are different. That “Slayer” achievement helps you get stuff like gear, and gold. What was once a casual achievement that gave you some interesting feedback, is now something that directly affects you.

Not only that, but take the Living Story achievements.

These are multiple achievements, that are required to obtain better gear, gold, and resources. They are also only available for a limited time.

So, if you’re wondering why suddenly people are complaining. It isn’t because they feel entitled, it is because they feel pressured.

That said, I’m going to address your list:

A player does not need every achievement in the game.

A player does not NEED to play this game at all. We WANT to play this game and that is a big distinction. We’re not getting paid to play this game, we choose to because we enjoy it. To say we don’t need something is pointing out the obvious.

A person is not forced to do content they don’t want to do, save for by their own will.

Of course, so what is your point? Again, this game is something we want do to. If there is no desire to play the game (get the achievements set out by ANet) then why waste time? Your argument makes no sense, because my own will is an important enough reason.

Achievements are rewards for accomplishing content completion within the game.

Of course they are, and most people have no problem doing them. The problem, as I said above is that when the rewards are tied to a timeline, players must start assessing time vs. reward.

If the reward doesn’t justify the time required, then players will look for alternative ways of accomplishing the goal. They will take the easy route.

Achievements are EARNED, not handed out.

Again, most players are perfectly willing to earn their own achievements, because they enjoy playing the game. However, again…you’ve completely neglected to put this into context.

Achievements are not a requirement, only a want by personal/self reasoning.

You’re repeating yourself. Lets put aside the fact that this is a want, and not a need for a moment.

Achievements ARE a requirement. If you don’t gain achievements, you will not get the latest and greatest rewards. If you choose not to, or are unable to complete a task, you run the risk of missing out on the reward.

The closer to that reward players get, the more desperate they become. They see the clock ticking down, and they see the amount they have ahead of them. They start to feel that if they don’t find some way to get the rewards (within the time they can, or feel they can dedicate to it), then all they have done to that point has been, in some ways a waste.

This is not a hard concept to understand.

Take university for example. People want educations. The university sets out achievements you must earn, but puts a time limit on them. As you become more financially and emotionally involved, the more at stake you have to lose if you don’t complete it.

This is why students are super stressed. They want to graduate, they want the achievements, and some…not able to complete them will resort to cheating, corner cutting, and/or otherwise cheating the system to earn it.

So, you need to understand that the reason that people are complaining is because they are faced with a new dilemma every two weeks. How do they accomplish the goals in the game that they have chosen to play, and what hurdles do they face?

Make sense?

Lets say I gave you a task, to gather 250 onions.

Not a particularly difficult task, however for your troubles I will give you 1 gold. Now, wait a moment, before you get started, you only have 30 minutes to accomplish this.

Ahhh, see how a seemingly easy, albeit repetitive task suddenly became much harder?

What if I were to then say, that it has to be completed in 30 minutes, but you also have to start right now regardless of what else you’re doing. I don’t care if you’re in the middle of class, about to go to bed, in line buying groceries…..you must start now.

See how a simple task suddenly becomes a bit of a hassle? So what are you going to do? Buy them off the trading post, ask your friends, beg map chat?

I’m fairly certain you’re going to start looking for other ways to accomplish this.

BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE!

In addition, I want you to accomplish this with at least two of the following.

- only using your left hand
- only using the keyboard
- while downloading your entire dropbox folder and streaming Netflix
- while you prepare hotdogs for your best friend
- with your graphics setting set to twice what your computer can handle

There, now you’re set. All you have to do is this super easy task of collecting 250 onions.

Last night I reached 2500 points. I averaged between 30 and 114 points per game, and played a total of 60 games.

If you say each game was roughly 10 minutes, then I played for somewhere in the ballpark of about 10 hours.

And now….I never want to see that place again.

As I said before, the problem is that when ANet creates achievements that take 10 hours to complete (whether you do them in one day, or spread out), it means that players who want the achievements are required to spend a LOT of time playing these games in a relatively short period of time.

When you factor in the other mini-games, dailies, monthlies, Living Story achievements, world completion, legendary crafting, socializing, fractals/dungeons, crafting, questing, and any number of other things, it means the casual/average player (1.5 hours a day according to recent numbers), is fighting a losing battle.

What I would like to see is the following:

- Make achievements based on how much you WANT to play, not how much you HAVE to play.

For example, in the Southsun Survivor game we are required to reach 2500 points. I would rather the points be open ended, and you receive a “loot bag” for every X number of points. If you’re better, you get loot bags in less games.

This way, people are being rewarded for doing something they enjoy anyway, but aren’t required to grind it out for 10+ hours. This could also be combined with a “Reach 250 points” achievement (something that would work in comparison to the other achievements).

- Achievements based on skill, not luck.

Remember Crab Toss? The backlash for creating achievements where all other players had to participate is a nightmare for most. In comparison, the “Headshot” achievement in Southsun Survival was nice because it was based on my skill.

- Achievements not based on being “first”

As I stated in another post, there are a lot of factors that contribute to a player being unable to compete with others. Lag, ability, disabilities, computer specs, etc can mean the difference between coming in first, and coming in 13th.

When players are required to beat others on an unfair playing field, it can be very frustrating. These usually result in players just “cheesing” it and helping each other out so they can get out and never come back.

In the end, I agree with Pixelpumpkin that these two new mini-games are a nice step in the right direction. The trick now is to create achievements that encourage players to participate and play the game well, but avoid burning them out on the game, or requiring them to “cheat” to win.

Also, I wanted to add that aside from Southsun Survival, I have had groups get tired of grinding the game and just help each other get the achievements.

This is another example of how the achievements are not well done.

The more I try and get the achievements in the mini-games, the more it feels like getting a job at your favourite restaurant. At first it is totally radical that you can eat all the stuff you like, but after a few months you hate it so much you don’t even want to smell it.

The problem of course is that ANet for some reason tends to create achievements that, for the average player, require a lot of games to get.

For me anyway, it means that by the time I’m done the achievements, I never, ever want to see the game again. Even the ones I liked at first are now the last thing I want to do in game.

There must be a better way to integrate achievements, with out ruining the games.

Hello Folks,

Today I would like to talk to you about what I believe to be a very important issue concerning the future of GW2.

In my opinion, the up and coming vote is much more serious than just another fun Living Story chapter. Your vote, may have real world consequences.

Here is a quote from Gnashblade (posted on the website).

I’ll slash prices on Black Lion Keys for four whole weeks

At first, this sounds like a good thing. Why wouldn’t we want the keys to be cheaper?

The problem is, by voting for Gnashblade you are sending a clear message to ANet, RNG is good!

For those of you out there who may be new to the game, or simply haven’t spent that much time debating the issues with RNG, the idea is basically that ANet has decided to use a form of gambling to make money in the game.

For example:

ANet releases a rare weapon skin. In order to get that weapon skin, you are required to purchase chests. These chests, which can and are often purchased with real world money, offer you a chance to get a weapon, a weapon ticket, or a scrap of ticket which can be saved up.

The problem is of course that this form of gambling means that some players whom either have large amounts of disposable income, or those who have gambling tendencies will purchase large amounts of these chests.

The causal gamer, or those without the means to spend $20+ per weapon, are often left with no options.

In the past, ANet has tried various approaches to this. For example, during the Dragon Bash event, Dragon Coffers were sold in the Gem Store, which gave players a slightly better chance of gaining a weapon ticket, or you could grind in the open world and gain coffers by killing mobs and holograms. Where as during the current event (Cutthroat) weapon tickets are contained within the Black Lion Chests, which can only be opened using keys purchased in the Gem Store (with very, very rare drop rates outside of that).

This means that over the last year or so, players have found themselves a slave to ANets experiments on RNG.

Despite the large amount of backlash over the RNG model, ANet continues to ignore suggestions that would make it a fair system for all. They have constantly found ways to punish casuals, reward those with deep pockets, and feed gambling addictions.

It is my opinion that the community needs to take a stand against ANet and let them know that there is a fair way to make money. We need to let them know that we are more than willing to support the game, if they treat us with respect.

If you vote for Gnashblade, you are sending a clear message to ANet that the community supports RNG. This will mean that in the future, your only chance to obtain rare weapons is to spend real money, and hope for the best.

Please, consider not voting for Gnashblade.

duckgirl.8769:

Thank you guys! For your kind words and patience

Fyi for the newer people asking to be queued – you get queued when you send screenies

Can I just give you half the gold to be queued? It will probably be a while before you get to mine and I still have some tweaking to do to my character.

Romek.4201:

ghostform is very frustrating when the people sit in bushes with 8rations and hide like lil girls

Is it really necessary to be sexist?

The problem, as you know are as follows.

1. Some players use instruments to annoy others
2. Some instruments you want to listen to, are drowned out by others you don’t.
3. Some don’t want to hear instruments at all.

In my opinion, a 100% effective solution is to allow players to mute all instruments via a slider like it is now, but also include a checkbox to mute individual player instruments (sounds).

The problem, as you know are as follows.

1. Some players use instruments to annoy others
2. Some instruments you want to listen to, are drowned out by others you don’t.
3. Some don’t want to hear instruments at all.

In my opinion, a 100% effective solution is to allow players to mute all instruments via a slider like it is now, but also include a checkbox to mute individual player instruments (sounds).

The problem, as you know are as follows.

1. Some players use instruments to annoy others
2. Some instruments you want to listen to, are drowned out by others you don’t.
3. Some don’t want to hear instruments at all.

In my opinion, a 100% effective solution is to allow players to mute all instruments via a slider like it is now, but also include a checkbox to mute individual player instruments (sounds).

Was I totally unclear in my post or something?

Akari Storm.6809:

I think it’s fine. Let them spend time tweaking the actual instruments to work better. I personally don’t care if others want to play, train or go completely stupid with their instrument. If it gets annoying I will mute the entire game and listen to music or just leave the area entirely and hit up pvp or dungeons.

Seems like a pretty overkill solution. Wonder if there is a better way.

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Are you still convinced it is fine as it is?

It’s just fine the way it is. I don’t want to hear you at all.

It’s working, thank you very much.

So, just so I’m clear, you’re only concerned with yourself?

Erasculio.2914:

Definitely the above. When I want to listen to something, I will listen to that something. When I don’t want to, I won’t. I have never seen someone in game asking people if they wanted to listen to their music – they just played, even when they were not trying to be annoying. Now, we can choose to listen to their music or not, just like we can choose to listen to a music or not in the real world.

So, what would happen if you wanted to listen to music, but someone was blaring a TV in the same room? Would you put on headphones, or would you flip the breaker in the basement cutting off all power to the house?

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

It is fine as is.

If I want to listen to you all play your instruments…I am very much not likely to ever have such a desire…I will turn up the volume.

And what if I want to listen to some specific players on instruments, but not all?

Are you still convinced it is fine as it is?

Amun Ra.6435:

This topic has already been discussed. What you now suggest is to take away a player right…muting musical instruments.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

In my opinion, a 100% effective solution is to allow players to mute all instruments via a slider like it is now, but also include a checkbox to mute individual player instruments (sounds).

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Not to sound rude, but I’m fairly convinced that almost everyone from this point, did not fully read my post.

Not to sound rude, but I’m fairly convinced that almost everyone from this point, did not fully read my post.

Please, if you commented, take a moment to go back and read my post in full, then let me know your thoughts.

I don’t think I can risk anymore infractions since it is against policy to “promote” or ask about a possible exploit.

They won’t tell players if something is an exploit or not, they’ve said many, many times.

What I found could help a lot of players, but ANet won’t tell me if it’s intended or not. If I say anything, I could be banned, if I don’t say anything, then players may miss out.

Pretty lame situation if you ask me.

Mods, please lock/delete this post, people aren’t bothering to read the post, and the following discussion is simply ridiculous.. Thanks

While I completely understand the need to allow players to control the volume of instruments, I personally think the current solution is flawed.

Creating a slider for all instruments is kinda like using a sledgehammer to open an egg.

The slider does allow users to mute the instruments of those who would use them to annoy others, but it also mutes everyone who are genuinely nice to listen to. The solution provided is really not the right one for the problem.

The problem, as you know are as follows.

1. Some players use instruments to annoy others
2. Some instruments you want to listen to, are drowned out by others you don’t.

In both these cases, the solution isn’t that players want to mute all instruments, but that they want to mute specific instruments.

I think ANet should consider a better solution than a catch all slider. Here are a few that I thought of, but feel free to suggest your own.

1. Music Free/Specific Zones

Much like in most cities, you need a busking licence to play on the street. If ANet limited instruments to designated areas, it would allow players to gather there to hear, and play music.

2. Mute Individual Players

Ideally, we should be able to click on a player, and mute their instruments. Note, I don’t think this should be the same as blocking them because I don’t think learning to play an instrument is reason to block someone.

In my opinion, a 100% effective solution is to allow players to mute all instruments via a slider like it is now, but also include a checkbox to mute individual player instruments (sounds).

Thoughts?

If you report what you think is an exploit, but you get no confirmation from ANet either way, and they never fix it. How long before you can assume it isn’t an exploit, and discuss it as a valid strategy?

On the bright side, RNG!

Wilhelm.6894:

That’s not an issue with the game though or even with A-net on abilities. That is entirely an issue on that persons end and no amount of complaints about jumping puzzles will fix that, it’s either a get better internet issue or wtf are you doing playing this game with lag that bad issue. A disability is one thing to have a word on when it comes to accessability but user lag holds no ground when it comes to whether or not something should be handled differently with events.

I’ll admit. I am currently in this small little country that I’m pretty sure only got internet a few years ago. It’s called Germany, I dunno, some of you people may have heard of it.

As I’ve said many times in other posts, the SAB jump pads, and these new mechanics are the ONLY issue with lag I have.

The thing is, that what if a person with disabilities had even half this much lag? What if the person with a disability had no lag, but weren’t able to perform the fine motor skills needed to do complex jumps?

I feel that something should be handled differently in this case. There is no reason I can see not to make the voting accessible to all players by putting it on the lower waypoint.

Dagraan.2854:

even if he was effected by lag and he couldn’t press 1 then w he still has lightning pull which can not, i repeat CAN NOT be affected by lag. unless its so bad every leap skill puts you in place, and even then if you’re Internets that bad you shouldn’t be playing a online game to begin with.

Is that right? Not effected by lag? And if it is….I shouldn’t be playing an online game to begin with.

Very interesting conclusion Detective. Perhaps watch my video above…and then explain how I have all but one jumping puzzle completed, 100% map completion, and have completed most of the Living Story achievements before this current one?

Any more “facts?”