Guild Wars 2

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

It may be obvious but like I said in my previous version it was still necessary for co-ordination sake. Imagine if Sieran just fell back without saying anything, even you as a player what would you have done? backed her up?, kept going without a care? ask everyone to join you in the line of defense? without Sieran explaining what she planned to do and just doing it, it would have caused complete mayhem. It was a plan.

In anycase both lines were detailing events in the future (what would happen once they boarded the ships) Exposition doesnt deal with future events so no it is definitely not exposition.

Like I said earlier, we’re clearly talking at two different levels and continuing this discussion is a waste if you can’t recognize what is and is not exposition.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

2. You responded to my post, which was a response to someone claiming it wasn’t exposition. I’m not sure what you were trying to achieve but jumping into an argument and taking neither side.

This is a forum. I’m allowed to do that, especially when I have a point to make.

3. Idiot lecture isn’t a derogatory term, it’s an actual literary device where things that should be blatantly obvious to the characters are being stated solely for the audience, usually due to a perception that the audience isn’t sharp enough to pick up on these pieces of the story. Kind of like a character referring to his wife as “wife” and not by her name, just so the audience knows the relationship, although it’s highly unrealistic dialog (this being one of the classic examples).

Yeah, right about here I’m going to call you out. You need to try writing dialogue which sounds natural and not artificial, or forced. I had to do it as part of a creative writing class, and you know what came out all around the room from the exercise? Things which were really, really hard to use in a scene.

Dialogue is a tricky beast to write well. I see otherwise good writers fail at it, or alternatively writers which make dialogue sound good fail to have the rest of the writing work as well. It’s the #1 thing I hate to do when writing, and rough drafts have . . . by necessity . . . had the dialogue reworked to be more artificial so a scene could be understood by someone other than the person who wrote it.

But see, here’s the thing…I don’t claim to be a professional writer. Just as someone doesn’t need to be a professional quarterback to recognize a bad pass, you don’t need to be a professional writer to recognize bad writing. Are you trying to claim someone must be an excellent writer in order to recognize bad writing? That would be a logical fallacy sir.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

1. I already said it wasn’t good writing, but that’s also not the fault of “idiot lecture”.

2. I never said it wasn’t exposition. If you want to be completely technical, it’d count as exposition. It’s not what most laypeople think of as “exposition”.

3. I wouldn’t call it an ‘idiot lecture’, since I have a less derogatory term. Which, as it stands, better encapsulates the “why” writers do this. And, notably, doesn’t preclude “good writing” from doing it either. Start looking on the list for how many things thought of as masterpieces use it.

1. I agree with this point in full. I never said this was the sole reason for the bad writing, just one of the pieces that make it feel so forced and artificial.

2. You responded to my post, which was a response to someone claiming it wasn’t exposition. I’m not sure what you were trying to achieve but jumping into an argument and taking neither side.

3. Idiot lecture isn’t a derogatory term, it’s an actual literary device where things that should be blatantly obvious to the characters are being stated solely for the audience, usually due to a perception that the audience isn’t sharp enough to pick up on these pieces of the story. Kind of like a character referring to his wife as “wife” and not by her name, just so the audience knows the relationship, although it’s highly unrealistic dialog (this being one of the classic examples).

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Ehhh . . . no. Good writing can get away with that first line as the opening to a conversation. I’ve seen it done. It’s been done where the glaringly obvious (to the characters in scene) is spoken so the reader/observer can tell more about it.

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

Perhaps read my follow-up post on juvenile writing.

Secondly, you don’t seem to understand what exposition is.

Exposition – Exposition is the portion of a story that introduces important background information to the audience; for example, information about the setting, back story, context, etc. It contains examples such as “information dump” or “idiot lecture”.

In this case, both of the first two lines explicitly state the context of the situation (what is actually being shown on screen). This makes them exposition, specifically of the “idiot lecture” variety. If you’re unable to recognize that, I’m not sure it’s worth it to even continue talking about writing.

I disagree.

“The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow. "
“Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard. "

Thats not stating the context of the situation. Everyone realizes they need to retreat and they have one possibility of retreat open to them by ship. Thats discussing why the obvious plan of action will fail and what can be done about it. If they make a run for it, they will not be able to set sail before zhaitan’s forces are upon them. If the ones that are able to hold zaithan’s forces at bay there will be not enough people to carry the wounded to the ships.

Thats not describing the situation thats discussing the plan of action. Remove those first two lines and the whole thing crumbles. why would Sieran just go back towards zaithan’s forces and what is everyone supposed to do ? back her up? hold the line? run as the wind? Like I said thats not an example of exposition, it is not describing what is happening around them, its them formulating a plan of action.

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

I disagree, it’s far easier to deal with mature themes in a juvenile way than it is in a mature way. Which have you heard more of in your life; Holocaust survivor stories or holocaust jokes? You see, people often choose juvenile because it’s far easier, far less thought provoking, and takes far less effort.

if you want specific GW2 examples, I’ll provide you with the events at Claw Island. A thinly developed character, painted in certain arcs as a goofball, needlessly sacrifices them self for no conceivable gain. Sacrificing your life for someone else’s is a powerful mature theme, yet the way GW2 handled it was essentially just doing it because it was expected, which is quite juvenile.

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

Well and dont you think that holocaust jokes light up a nova level this feels wrong sign on them? Now contrast that with the example you gave. There is humor in there sure but humor != juvenile. In fact considering the character of Sieran thats exactly how it should have been conveyed as Sieran is a character thats alway been unsure of herself, always had that funny streak to her and now she’s about to face the ultimate threat and knows she’s not going to walk away from it. Wouldnt you except such a character to use humor as a defense mechanism? And before you argue against that humor has been used by people about to die in real life as well. Quick search found an outlaw called Tom Ketchum. His last word before being executed were good-bye please dig my grave very very deep.

Firefly if you watched the series is also an excellent example, each line said in that series is full of humor yet far from juvenile. It is not the humor that makes something mature or juvenile but rather the message it conveys. Holocost jokes arent juvenile because they have humor but rather because instead of recognizing the horror of the holocost and use stories to teach humanity why such things should never ever be repeated they push stories that belittle the whole dark human episode and make it seem like nothing.

also the example you gave has no exposition in it, not sure why you mentioned it here.

Perhaps read my follow-up post on juvenile writing.

Secondly, you don’t seem to understand what exposition is.

Exposition – Exposition is the portion of a story that introduces important background information to the audience; for example, information about the setting, back story, context, etc. It contains examples such as “information dump” or “idiot lecture”.

In this case, both of the first two lines explicitly state the context of the situation (what is actually being shown on screen). This makes them exposition, specifically of the “idiot lecture” variety. If you’re unable to recognize that, I’m not sure it’s worth it to even continue talking about writing.

Labjax.2465:

NewTrain.7549:

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

I felt like Tybalt’s was because I knew exactly what he was implying. Sieran I never really connected with, so I can’t say.

I’m kind of jumping into the discussion here, but I feel like the example you’re giving is less a matter of “mature vs. juvenile” and more a matter of “robotic vs. realistic.”

It pains me to criticize a writer bluntly because I know it’s not an easy craft and it’s not exactly one full of objectivity either. But I think the flaw with dialogue like Sieran’s there is that 1) she’s basically confessing to being an adult child and 2) her change of heart seems like it came out of nowhere. (In other words, it doesn’t fit her character at all.)

I had moments with both Tybalt and Forgal where I felt companionship long before Claw Island, so when they “opened up to me,” it felt more real. When Sieran did it, I felt like her sacrificial speech was coming out of nowhere – like it didn’t even fit her personality.

And therein (being fair) lies part of the struggle of writing dialogue for a video game. You have to shoehorn bs in sometimes because that’s just how the story goes. Maybe Sieran doesn’t even fit as a self-sacrificing character – at least not in that context – but the overarching design said “this is what she has to do for it to fit the gameplay.”

I honestly didn’t think Tybalt was much better. It was just so…expected (and Tybalt was the first character I experienced this scene with). Simply based on his characterization I had guessed what would happen to him far before this scene simply because of the generic tropes that permeate the GW2 writing.

But perhaps you’re correct. Perhaps juvenile isn’t the correct word. I simply meant it in the sense of “this is what a juvenile would read/write”, akin to my previous statement of the GW2 writing reading like a young adult novel. And with that meaning in mind, I stand by my opinion of GW2’s writing. No poster who has volunteered “good” writing from this game has shown me anything that has made me think otherwise.

I mean, there’s a huge problem when someone who can recite the entire Tudor dynasty from memory (and the Stuart dynasty as well) had to look up the names of characters from this game. It means that the writing is less interesting than Edward VI, which is saying a lot.

Galen Grey.4709:

When you got mature themes dealing with them in a juvenile way is pretty hard, possible but hard and when you do its glaringly obvious because you’ll get the mother of all wrong feelings as you see it. So I guess you’ll have no trouble pointing out what you’re refering too. Saying (proof: Gw2) doesnt really tell anything to anyone. Be specific.

I disagree, it’s far easier to deal with mature themes in a juvenile way than it is in a mature way. Which have you heard more of in your life; Holocaust survivor stories or holocaust jokes? You see, people often choose juvenile because it’s far easier, far less thought provoking, and takes far less effort.

if you want specific GW2 examples, I’ll provide you with the events at Claw Island. A thinly developed character, painted in certain arcs as a goofball, needlessly sacrifices them self for no conceivable gain. Sacrificing your life for someone else’s is a powerful mature theme, yet the way GW2 handled it was essentially just doing it because it was expected, which is quite juvenile.

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

Yunielesca.2850:

There is an expansion in preparation. Colin Johanson said

Now that China has launched we’ve freed up a lot of development resources back to get to those things. We also have a lot of people at ArenaNet and you’ve only seen what some them are working on this last year or two. Since we can’t share a road map of what they’re doing per our company policy, all I can answer is I hope when we’re able to show you what all we’ve been doing in total someday in the future – you’re as excited as we are about it.

Yeah, that to me sounds like they actually don’t have much in the works, but don’t want people to abandon the game. Every developer I’ve ever known has at least teased at future content with a handful of tidbits. Colin’s words here sound like that one kid in elementary school who claimed he had a Canadian girlfriend, but no picture and no chance of anyone ever meeting her.

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Zaklex.6308:

Thanatos.2691:

NewTrain.7549:

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The writing feels more like fan-fiction than legitimate GW2 lore. I completely hate it.

I disagree, none of what is happening now is new, it’s actually GW history repeating itself. I can see you going ‘huh?’ right about now…well, it’s simple, this isn’t the first time the Elder Dragons have risen now, is it? Therefore what we’re experiencing is past events in a current world context. The concept is hard to understand, I know…

That response has nothing to do with the problem we’re discussing. You’re talking plot line, we’re talking writing. There’s a difference.

The writing is uneven in both games. There are some pretty good and pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 2. There are also some pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 1.

But most of us were much younger and less discerning when we played Guild Wars 1 for the first time.

I never mentioned Guild Wars 1. I was only talking about Guild Wars 2, in which the writing is overwhelmingly shallow and juvenile. I’m not sure what you bringing GW1 into the equation has to do with my post, unless you’re trying to put words into other people’s mouths yet again.

Shallow and Juvenile? Most characters where forged in fire. Marjory is what she is today cause she has indirectly contributed to killing a kid to a hide some ministers secret. Kasmeer from a life of nobility ended marginalized and loosing her father because of her brothers mistakes. Taimi has a debilitating decease.

Gw2 has touched on subjects like Same Sex Relationships, People displaced due to war but not just, they were taken advantage of because of their predicament, Death, loss of Loved ones, Torture, self sacrifice to ensure a future for your children etc…

Gw2 employees humor a lot sure but that doesnt mean its juvenile. As MMOs go they got some of the darker streaks actually.

Just because it deals with mature themes doesn’t mean it’s not juvenile. Everything you list can be dealt with in a juvenile manner (proof: GW2).

Galen Grey.4709:

There are not many MMos who’s writing can make you feel sorry for the NPCs involved.

You’re right, there aren’t many. GW2 is just another example of one that fails to draw you into the characters.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Zaklex.6308:

Thanatos.2691:

NewTrain.7549:

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The writing feels more like fan-fiction than legitimate GW2 lore. I completely hate it.

I disagree, none of what is happening now is new, it’s actually GW history repeating itself. I can see you going ‘huh?’ right about now…well, it’s simple, this isn’t the first time the Elder Dragons have risen now, is it? Therefore what we’re experiencing is past events in a current world context. The concept is hard to understand, I know…

That response has nothing to do with the problem we’re discussing. You’re talking plot line, we’re talking writing. There’s a difference.

The writing is uneven in both games. There are some pretty good and pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 2. There are also some pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 1.

But most of us were much younger and less discerning when we played Guild Wars 1 for the first time.

I never mentioned Guild Wars 1. I was only talking about Guild Wars 2, in which the writing is overwhelmingly shallow and juvenile. I’m not sure what you bringing GW1 into the equation has to do with my post, unless you’re trying to put words into other people’s mouths yet again.

I never said you mentioned Guild Wars 1, but enough people have. In reality, this is how Anet writes. This how they wrote 10 years ago.

It’s not Shakespeare. It was never going to be Shakespeare.

It’s not all or even mostly juvenile, those it is aimed at a certain audience. Clearly you’re not that audience.

It doesn’t have to be Shakespeare. I doubt anyone is asking for Shakespeare. It does however need to be a little bit more mature than Dr. Seuss for players to feel any sense of gravitas and this is something the GW2 story repeatedly fails to achieve. You claim the writing is aimed at a certain audience. What audience is that? People who like the Twilight novels?

So how is this Dr. Seuss?

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Lionguard_Brenn_Hillow

Yes I posted this link higher, but apparently you ignored it. It’s definitely not Shakespeare, but it’s certainly not Dr. Seuss either.

No, I read it. It is fairly juvenile.

Lionguard Quatta: Your first patrol. Think you’re ready?
Lionguard Brenn Hillow: The armor, it’s so heavy. I don’t… I don’t remember my route. I don’t… I can’t…

It reeks of artificiality and forced exposition.

Lionguard Quatta: Ferkinna! How’s my favourite keg thrower?
Ferkinna: Quatta, you gill-sauced squeaker. Didn’t see you there. Who is this runt? Looks like he stumbled out of the crib.

“Gill-sauced squeaker”? Sounds a lot like a star-bellied sneetch. Seussical.

If this example was your evidence of good writing, you’re going to have to try a lot harder.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Zaklex.6308:

Thanatos.2691:

NewTrain.7549:

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The writing feels more like fan-fiction than legitimate GW2 lore. I completely hate it.

I disagree, none of what is happening now is new, it’s actually GW history repeating itself. I can see you going ‘huh?’ right about now…well, it’s simple, this isn’t the first time the Elder Dragons have risen now, is it? Therefore what we’re experiencing is past events in a current world context. The concept is hard to understand, I know…

That response has nothing to do with the problem we’re discussing. You’re talking plot line, we’re talking writing. There’s a difference.

The writing is uneven in both games. There are some pretty good and pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 2. There are also some pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 1.

But most of us were much younger and less discerning when we played Guild Wars 1 for the first time.

I never mentioned Guild Wars 1. I was only talking about Guild Wars 2, in which the writing is overwhelmingly shallow and juvenile. I’m not sure what you bringing GW1 into the equation has to do with my post, unless you’re trying to put words into other people’s mouths yet again.

I never said you mentioned Guild Wars 1, but enough people have. In reality, this is how Anet writes. This how they wrote 10 years ago.

It’s not Shakespeare. It was never going to be Shakespeare.

It’s not all or even mostly juvenile, those it is aimed at a certain audience. Clearly you’re not that audience.

It doesn’t have to be Shakespeare. I doubt anyone is asking for Shakespeare. It does however need to be a little bit more mature than Dr. Seuss for players to feel any sense of gravitas and this is something the GW2 story repeatedly fails to achieve. You claim the writing is aimed at a certain audience. What audience is that? People who like the Twilight novels?

tigirius.9014:

NewTrain.7549:

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

The fact is, if you’re afraid to develop new content because you may anger a small group that possibly doesn’t even exist in significant numbers (players who want hard content but only if it’s tied to exclusive rewards), then you have no business making video games.

It’s your assumption that it’s a small group. However, you have no data to support that assumption. It’s my contention that the small group could well be those who are willing to settle for somewhat better drops. The thing is, you want to use your lack of data to restrict the discussion and I don’t think that’s a good idea.

And it’s your assumption that it’s a significant group. However, you have no data to support that assumption. It’s my contention that the small/nonexistent group could well be those who will only run challenging content for exclusive rewards. The thing is, you want to use fear of a complete unknown quantity to restrict design choices and I don’t think that’s a good idea.

Actually every demographic study so far by multiple mmo developers have shown that the number of people who want harder raid like content with exclusive rewards is really just 1% of the population of their games in each and every study.

Thank you. You just completely supported my argument, which was that people who want exclusive rewards from raid-like content are a vast minority.

But, even though you inadvertently supported my argument while trying to disprove it, I’m still going to ask for a link to these myriad so-called “studies”.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Zaklex.6308:

Thanatos.2691:

NewTrain.7549:

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The writing feels more like fan-fiction than legitimate GW2 lore. I completely hate it.

I disagree, none of what is happening now is new, it’s actually GW history repeating itself. I can see you going ‘huh?’ right about now…well, it’s simple, this isn’t the first time the Elder Dragons have risen now, is it? Therefore what we’re experiencing is past events in a current world context. The concept is hard to understand, I know…

That response has nothing to do with the problem we’re discussing. You’re talking plot line, we’re talking writing. There’s a difference.

The writing is uneven in both games. There are some pretty good and pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 2. There are also some pretty bad examples of writing in Guild Wars 1.

But most of us were much younger and less discerning when we played Guild Wars 1 for the first time.

I never mentioned Guild Wars 1. I was only talking about Guild Wars 2, in which the writing is overwhelmingly shallow and juvenile. I’m not sure what you bringing GW1 into the equation has to do with my post, unless you’re trying to put words into other people’s mouths yet again.

Zaklex.6308:

Thanatos.2691:

NewTrain.7549:

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The writing feels more like fan-fiction than legitimate GW2 lore. I completely hate it.

I disagree, none of what is happening now is new, it’s actually GW history repeating itself. I can see you going ‘huh?’ right about now…well, it’s simple, this isn’t the first time the Elder Dragons have risen now, is it? Therefore what we’re experiencing is past events in a current world context. The concept is hard to understand, I know…

That response has nothing to do with the problem we’re discussing. You’re talking plot line, we’re talking writing. There’s a difference.

The writing is just plain bad. It can involve me as much as I want, but if it’s written like a young adult novel, I’m still not going to be interested.

Guild Wars has a tremendous amount of rich lore to draw from, and I feel like we get the video game equivalent of a choose your own adventure novel from the 1980s. Sure, we get to participate and make some choices, but it all just feels so contrived and artificial. The story would be vastly improved if some time was taken to really focus on the writing. Season 2 has bored me to tears so far largely because the dialogue and story arc is so atrociously bland.

KngGilgamesh.3481:

Why do people believe that post history and ad hominem are in any way relevant to an argument?

Probably the same way that people feel passive aggressive digs are relevant, eh?

On topic: Simple statements as to development priorities would go a long way to appeasing the forum community. Many of us (or maybe just me) get the sense that ANet is a ship without a rudder, simply going randomly where the wind takes it. We’d (I’d) like to know that ANet has some sort of direction, because right now that’s not entirely clear. Also, in the past, ANet has disregarded some very constructive criticism from members of the community that it has invited to test unreleased content (certain guilds’ dismissal from test servers due to negative reactions towards ascended gear cough cough). This is also an area of concern. We (I) want to know that you actually care about player enjoyment and not just the bottom line. In short, if we (I) felt as if ANet cared about our enjoyment and had a plan other than “how do we milk them for more money?” we (I) wouldn’t be constantly asking for better communication.

Vayne.8563:

Chrispy.5641:

Vayne.8563:

Paul.4081:

It strikes me as that place where your dad knows he’s lost but keeps driving ahead. This is Anet.

I recently re-installed and the TP was removed from Queensdale, uhm, why? Probably because the new TP layout is rubbish. Why is selling to bids the auto choice? This will lose new players money because they’ll assume that the game has their interests at heart.

Eg. New player get’s an exotic, bid of 1 copper is there…gratz new player you just lost a ton of gold.

Maybe I’m wrong but if I am it means the new TP is more confusing than the old one. You see my point? Lose lose, WD Anet, WD. Slow clap.

New TP isn’t more confusing than the old one and the overwhelming response to it has been positive. Even with all the people who enjoy pointing out flaws in the game,. the response has been overwhelmingly positive.

Admittedly it’s hard to change from one system to another but that’s something that new players won’t have to worry about.

I’m relatively certain this is better for new players than the last one.

You should define overwhelmingly positive response. 1 person typing overwhelmingly positive posts on every thread does not mean that the response to the change was overwhelmingly positive. That doesn’t mean the response to the change was particularly negative either, but just because the response wasn’t negative doesn’t automatically make the change an 11/10.

When I say overwhelmingly positive, in every single thread that people posted negative stuff in,. more than 80% of the posts on those threads were positive. You can go back to any thread complaining about it and check that if you want.

Do you even read the forums?

Let’s also be fair here. Your comments are usually “positive reactions” and in many threads comprise roughly 50% of the posts. Skews the data a bit, eh?

The game absolutely has a future as a casual game, but nothing more than that (if ANet continues along the same path it has been on).

I simply don’t understand what’s so offensive about seeing another written language that a person has to publicly launch a tirade against it. If it personally bothers you, quietly block the player and move on. It’s my opinion that doing so still demonstrates some major personality flaws, but at least you’re being somewhat classy about it. There’s nothing classy about berating people for not writing in your own primary language.

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

The fact is, if you’re afraid to develop new content because you may anger a small group that possibly doesn’t even exist in significant numbers (players who want hard content but only if it’s tied to exclusive rewards), then you have no business making video games.

It’s your assumption that it’s a small group. However, you have no data to support that assumption. It’s my contention that the small group could well be those who are willing to settle for somewhat better drops. The thing is, you want to use your lack of data to restrict the discussion and I don’t think that’s a good idea.

And it’s your assumption that it’s a significant group. However, you have no data to support that assumption. It’s my contention that the small/nonexistent group could well be those who will only run challenging content for exclusive rewards. The thing is, you want to use fear of a complete unknown quantity to restrict design choices and I don’t think that’s a good idea.

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Do you have any data about how many:

• Want hard content and don’t care about rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with exclusive rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with the same rewards but with better drop rates?

Do you? If I claim that there is a large subset of players who want nudity in Guild Wars 2, it’s my duty to prove it; just as its the duty of those claiming the majority of people who want harder content want it tied to exclusive rewards. It’s needless speculation that detracts from the discussion and it creates a false dichotomy that divides people on a topic where there’s no need for binary choices.

I’m making no claims to know the size of various demographics, beyond knowing they exist in some numbers. There is also a demographic that does not want to see a ton of rewards exclusive to hard content in thee game, just as there is a demographic that does. Because we don’t know what percentage of the total player base is in either camp, I’m afraid that that discussion is very relevant to the issue of hard content. How do you expect people to make up their minds if they don’t know the whole proposal? I would accept your claim that the issue is not relevant only if there were overwhelming numbers who did not think exclusive rewards were an issue.

So you claim that if group X is a certain size than the issue is not relevant and in the same post that you admit not knowing the size of group X. And this “issue” is simply speculation at that. Think on that a bit.

You missed the target there. The unknown size of one group would be irrelevant if the size of a group that is also unknown, were both known and large enough that the other groups would no longer matter.

I’ll admit, I have no idea what point you’re trying to make here. “The unknown size of one group would be irrelevant if the size of a group that is also unknown…” doesn’t make much sense.

The fact is, if you’re afraid to develop new content because you may anger a small group that possibly doesn’t even exist in significant numbers (players who want hard content but only if it’s tied to exclusive rewards), then you have no business making video games.

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Do you have any data about how many:

• Want hard content and don’t care about rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with exclusive rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with the same rewards but with better drop rates?

Do you? If I claim that there is a large subset of players who want nudity in Guild Wars 2, it’s my duty to prove it; just as its the duty of those claiming the majority of people who want harder content want it tied to exclusive rewards. It’s needless speculation that detracts from the discussion and it creates a false dichotomy that divides people on a topic where there’s no need for binary choices.

I’m making no claims to know the size of various demographics, beyond knowing they exist in some numbers. There is also a demographic that does not want to see a ton of rewards exclusive to hard content in thee game, just as there is a demographic that does. Because we don’t know what percentage of the total player base is in either camp, I’m afraid that that discussion is very relevant to the issue of hard content. How do you expect people to make up their minds if they don’t know the whole proposal? I would accept your claim that the issue is not relevant only if there were overwhelming numbers who did not think exclusive rewards were an issue.

So you claim that if group X is a certain size than the issue is not relevant and in the same post that you admit not knowing the size of group X. And this “issue” is simply speculation at that. Think on that a bit.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Do you have any data about how many:

• Want hard content and don’t care about rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with exclusive rewards?
• Want hard content coupled with the same rewards but with better drop rates?

Do you? If I claim that there is a large subset of players who want nudity in Guild Wars 2, it’s my duty to prove it; just as its the duty of those claiming the majority of people who want harder content want it tied to exclusive rewards. It’s needless speculation that detracts from the discussion and it creates a false dichotomy that divides people on a topic where there’s no need for binary choices.

tigirius.9014:

No, because these 1%ers are called 1%ers for that very reason. Gone are the days of raiding and they’ll just have to adjust.

No, you call them 1%ers because you want to trivialize their playstyle. They neither compose 1% of the playerbase (most likely much larger) nor pose a threat to your precious casual content. Using the term reflects more poorly on you than it does on “them”.

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

Then the discussion you want to have is about exclusive rewards, not about challenging content, since the two subjects are not intrinsically linked. Again, the fear about elitism and exclusive rewards is tangentially and a distraction from the actual topic.

It’s difficult to separate the idea of content difficulty and reward. They’re linked to each other in the minds of groups on both sides of the issue. In fact, rewards are linked to content in peoples’ minds in MMO’s in general.

As long as some proponents of harder content demand that there be better rewards for harder content, the issue of rewards has to be settled. After all, whether people actually will play the harder content needs to be considered. If they won’t play content in sufficient quantity and over time (repetition), then it might very well not warrant the effort to produce it.

“Rewards” does not mean “exclusive rewards”. Those who are all up in arms about some huge influx of economy wrecking elitists are trying to claim that challenging content cannot be implemented without exclusive rewards. This is false and spending anymore time even discussing it is a waste.

If we want to talk “rewards” for challenging content, I’ve already made a suggestion earlier about how I think they can be implemented so that everyone feels as if they’ve gained something just by attempting the content. My suggestions also deals with the issue of replayability.

NewTrain.7549:

Also: Throwing out an idea for those people who say challenging content causes some players to cry in a corner out of frustration and uninstall the game; why not offer incremental rewards for challenging content. Something like a reward for reaching a certain point within an instance, a new reward for being able to survive against waves of enemies every 2 minutes, rewards for reducing boss health to 75%, 50%, 25%, etc. There are ways to reward players for attempting and improving performance in challenging content without alienating them.

Astralporing.1957:

NewTrain.7549:

No. You’re talking about elitists. The thread was simply about challenging content. It was the anti-challenging content crowd that introduced the fear of elitism into the discussion. Frankly, it’s misdirection and has no place.

Elitism appeared in this topic the very moment we started discussing rewards. Difficult content that does not offer increased rewards is not so strongly contested, after all, if you haven’t noticed.

Then the discussion you want to have is about exclusive rewards, not about challenging content, since the two subjects are not intrinsically linked. Again, the fear about elitism and exclusive rewards is tangentially and a distraction from the actual topic.

Astralporing.1957:

Yes. it can. Problem is, we’re not talking here purely about difficult content. We’re talking also about unique rewards tied to that content.
Basically, hardcore and casual can indeed coexist in the same game. When we’re talking about elitists however, the situation changes. Elitist people do need casuals to exist (you cannot be special when everyone else is special as well, to be “better” you need people that are “worse” than you are). Casuals on the other hand would do better without elitists around. Game that caters to elitists always does it at the expense of casuals.

No. You’re talking about elitists. The thread was simply about challenging content. It was the anti-challenging content crowd that introduced the fear of elitism into the discussion. Frankly, it’s misdirection and has no place.

Why are most of you creating a false dichotomy in this thread?

A game doesn’t have to cater to the hardcore crowd by neglecting casuals or vice versa. A game can contain elements for both communities (and everyone in between).

That being said, there is no good argument for not including more challenging content, especially since some of the biggest complaints about the game are lack of new permanent content.

Also: Throwing out an idea for those people who say challenging content causes some players to cry in a corner out of frustration and uninstall the game; why not offer incremental rewards for challenging content. Something like a reward for reaching a certain point within an instance, a new reward for being able to survive against waves of enemies every 2 minutes, rewards for reducing boss health to 75%, 50%, 25%, etc. There are ways to reward players for attempting and improving performance in challenging content without alienating them.

Beldin.5498:

NewTrain.7549:

Beldin.5498:

NewTrain.7549:

Fact is, more challenging content (that you wouldn’t be forced to do) would greatly increase the fun of the game for a large group of players and yet you’re against it because it’s not something you personally enjoy.

The real “fact” is that those that want “more challenging content” mostly just want stuff
that 95% of the playerbase will never have a chance to get, so that they can show off
how great they are.

And THAT is what i am against.

You’re confused on what actually constitutes a fact. Where is your proof that 95% of the people who advocate for harder content only want superior rewards. I want harder content because I find challenges to be fun. The reward can be on par with what’s currently offered and as long as it’s exciting and engaging I’ll keep playing. hence why I enjoy PvP (though not much in GW2) because of the variable challenge.

Oh common .. just read the forums .. read thos thread .. next post already :

hard content needs either greater, or different rewards, because it is harder.

And that in the end again says : (nearly) nobody wants harder content .. they just
want “exclusive” rewards that not everyone can get.
If they want hard content just because its soooo much fun, then they rewards only
need to be “fair” .. 1 hour hard content gets the same reward then 1 hour easy content
because the reward is doing the hard content instead of the lame boring easy stuff.

I’m sorry, 1 post somehow equates to 95% of the playerbase? Perhaps you skipped over all of the posts in here in which players state they want harder content just so they have something more to do. Once again, you seem really confused as to what constitutes a fact and are merely arguing from an extremely selfish standpoint of “I DEZERVE ANYTHING EVERY1 ELSE HAZ!111!!!”

Beldin.5498:

NewTrain.7549:

Fact is, more challenging content (that you wouldn’t be forced to do) would greatly increase the fun of the game for a large group of players and yet you’re against it because it’s not something you personally enjoy.

The real “fact” is that those that want “more challenging content” mostly just want stuff
that 95% of the playerbase will never have a chance to get, so that they can show off
how great they are.

And THAT is what i am against.

You’re confused on what actually constitutes a fact. Where is your proof that 95% of the people who advocate for harder content only want superior rewards. I want harder content because I find challenges to be fun. The reward can be on par with what’s currently offered and as long as it’s exciting and engaging I’ll keep playing. hence why I enjoy PvP (though not much in GW2) because of the variable challenge.

Khisanth.2948:

First we need some sort of agreement on what is and isn’t challenging content.

Then there is good challenge versus bad challenge. Good challenges would make the game more fun. Bad challenges would not. More isn’t automatically better.

All true. However none of that is a reason to take the view that “NO CHALLENGING CONTENT BECUZ PPL MIGHT GET THINGS I CAN’T GET!!!11!!”

Beldin.5498:

NewTrain.7549:

Beldin.5498:

I’m just a person who doesn’t play content anymore if i don’t enjoy it. So i don’t even
do any instanced dungeons anymore since i was never a fan of them, but for long time
i forced myself to do them in other games just for the rewards.

So i picked up GW2 because i read that this game doesn’t force me to do content
i don’t like, and could still get most of the best stuff. And i don’t want that to change.

Also if i already read things like more work .. it is a GAME .. not a job .. my god.

Whoever wants soo much that hard content .. Wildstar was created just for you
and i heared it does soo well because it caters only to the hardcore crowd.

Seriously, what kind of attitude is that? The addition of challenging content wouldn’t affect you at all, yet you still don’t want it added to the game. What about other people’s enjoyment, eh?

What about if i want to get 100 Gold whenever i log in ? it wouldn’t affect you but
i bet you also don’t want it .. right ?

What i don’t want is just that they don’t create content wher those ub0r players can
farm 10 times more money than others .. and of course not that too much developer
ressources are spent for a small minority. If they create content for just 1% of the
playerbase .. then they can use 1% of dev-ressources for that .. but not 20% or more.

If you’re trying to compare challenging content to “getting a free 100 gold for logging in” then you’re entire view of this subject is warped. Free gold is not content. Content is content. We’re talking about increasing the enjoyment of the game here.

Also, it’s pretty clear from this thread that people who want more challenging content are not a “small minority”. Hardly 1% of the population, as you claim.

Fact is, more challenging content (that you wouldn’t be forced to do) would greatly increase the fun of the game for a large group of players and yet you’re against it because it’s not something you personally enjoy.

Beldin.5498:

I’m just a person who doesn’t play content anymore if i don’t enjoy it. So i don’t even
do any instanced dungeons anymore since i was never a fan of them, but for long time
i forced myself to do them in other games just for the rewards.

So i picked up GW2 because i read that this game doesn’t force me to do content
i don’t like, and could still get most of the best stuff. And i don’t want that to change.

Also if i already read things like more work .. it is a GAME .. not a job .. my god.

Whoever wants soo much that hard content .. Wildstar was created just for you
and i heared it does soo well because it caters only to the hardcore crowd.

Seriously, what kind of attitude is that? The addition of challenging content wouldn’t affect you at all, yet you still don’t want it added to the game. What about other people’s enjoyment, eh?

I have a hard time understanding how anyone could think the OP was in the right. If anonymous internet chat gives you anxiety attacks, what were you doing in PvP in the first place? For that matter, what are you doing playing a genre of video game notorious for verbal abuse (MMOs)? It seems like the OP set himself/herself up for everything he/she received.

Elsdragon.5109:

NewTrain.7549:

You quoted me. I clearly said unpaid. You commented on that exact word. Context.

What is this? Grade school? Be mature and logical about your comments please. Don’t embarrass yourself making posts like this. It’s just sad.

It is sad when people, despite having the exact wording right in front of them, dismiss facts just to support the person they like. I suppose it is grade school, however I’m not the one embarrassed.

Vayne.8563:

But prior to that others were implying something else. So your statement is not on topic.

Then maybe you should have quoted one of them. I made it very clear what I was saying, which followed logically from your post.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

Nothing to explain away. I’m in Australia. As far as I know no one and I do mean no one in Australia could possibly say here, since Anet doesn’t have offices in Australia. I type fast all the time, I make lots of typos. There and here are exactly one letter off from each other.

If you really think Anet pays someone just to spend as much time on the forums as I do, you don’t understand business at all.

Yeah, working remotely is surely impossible. Especially if said work is volunteer based and unpaid.

Well if it’s unpaid, it’s not work. Pretty much the definition.

Anyone who thinks a paid employee will have as much passion as most fans is missing the point. I’m a fan of the game. I like the game. I post about the game. If I were paid, I’d get my check and go home. lol

“Pretty much the definition” huh? You want to rethink that? Only 2 of the 7 possible definitions below involve payment.

work
[wurk]

noun
1. exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.
2. something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking:
3. productive or operative activity.
4. employment, as in some form of industry, especially as a means of earning one’s livelihood:
to look for work.
5. one’s place of employment:
6. materials, things, etc., on which one is working or is to work.
7. the result of exertion, labor, or activity; a deed or performance.

Nothing to rethink. Those who claim I’m being paid by Anet are obviously implying I’m being employeed by Anet.

Bringing up dictionary definitions to try to win an argument in context almost never works. The context is clear. I was accused of being paid by Anet to write on these forums, as ridiculous as that is.

You can bring up all the definitions from all the dictionaries in all the world, but it doesn’t change the fact that I’m not employeed by Anet and they don’t pay me to do anything. Unfortuately, I’ve paid them. lol

You quoted me. I clearly said unpaid. You commented on that exact word. Context.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

Nothing to explain away. I’m in Australia. As far as I know no one and I do mean no one in Australia could possibly say here, since Anet doesn’t have offices in Australia. I type fast all the time, I make lots of typos. There and here are exactly one letter off from each other.

If you really think Anet pays someone just to spend as much time on the forums as I do, you don’t understand business at all.

Yeah, working remotely is surely impossible. Especially if said work is volunteer based and unpaid.

Well if it’s unpaid, it’s not work. Pretty much the definition.

Anyone who thinks a paid employee will have as much passion as most fans is missing the point. I’m a fan of the game. I like the game. I post about the game. If I were paid, I’d get my check and go home. lol

“Pretty much the definition” huh? You want to rethink that? Only 2 of the 7 possible definitions below involve payment.

work
[wurk]

noun
1. exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.
2. something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking:
3. productive or operative activity.
4. employment, as in some form of industry, especially as a means of earning one’s livelihood:
to look for work.
5. one’s place of employment:
6. materials, things, etc., on which one is working or is to work.
7. the result of exertion, labor, or activity; a deed or performance.

Vayne.8563:

Nothing to explain away. I’m in Australia. As far as I know no one and I do mean no one in Australia could possibly say here, since Anet doesn’t have offices in Australia. I type fast all the time, I make lots of typos. There and here are exactly one letter off from each other.

If you really think Anet pays someone just to spend as much time on the forums as I do, you don’t understand business at all.

Yeah, working remotely is surely impossible. Especially if said work is volunteer based and unpaid.

ipan.4356:

Vayne.8563:

Rage.9723:

I have heard that many of the major jobs were cut and most of the increase in hiring was for jobs such as customer service. This is really a reflection of modern society in general. Ultimately, a worse product is given for everyone. Happiness of one can lead to happiness for another and additionally the reverse can hold true. Care is then apparent in the final product. Living story season 1 in my opinion was much better than living story season 2. The long term affects can damage profitability over the long term and even the company’s brand image.

You have heard? From where? I’ve never heard this? And because Anet is a public company, we’d have definitely heard this. You can’t keep stuff like this a secret in this day and age.

When SWToR lost half it’s staff, we heard it. When TSW lost a third of their staff, we heard that.

This is the worst kind of rumor. A completely unsubstantiated claim with nothing to back it up. It’s true that teams have been disbanded and moved around, but relatively few people have left or don’t work here anymore…nothing more than would happen in most companies through normal attrition.

I’m wondering where you get this information from…and who you heard it from.

You say “don’t work here” in a sense that implies you work at Anet – because when a person uses “here” they usually refer to where they are currently, and you also happen to be referring to Anet.

So when say “work here”, there is a strong implication that you work at Anet.

This fits your MO, of course.

Interesting…I’d like to see how this is explained away.

If someone choosing to not display all your character’s ridiculous affects on their screen bothers you, perhaps it’s time you take a good long look at your life.

I agree with the OP’s suggestion as well as the suggestion to be able to turn down/off particle effects.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Way to go literal on me to make me wrong. Stop that, it’s not funny.

It was literal the first time I stated it. I’m sorry you misinterpreted. I felt I was being pretty clear.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Also fun for you to go for “reductio ad absurdum” for bonus points.

Absolutely. If we’re making this into a binary (as the quote I originally responded to did) we have to take each argument to their conclusion. Responses to me have taken their scenarios in absurd directions, so why am I not allowed to do the same?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Now, you should stop right now and go back because I never suggested that at all.

I never said you did. I was restating my original argument because I got the sense (rightfully it appears) that you didn’t understand it.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

It’s called sarcasm, and I got tired of bottling it up through the entire post and had to let it out.

You criticize me for “reductio ad absurdum” and in the same post throw out a sarcastic non-sequitur. I hope you appreciate the irony in that.

I appear to me that perhaps before you post next, take a breath and calm down.

Vayne.8563:

I’m sorry can you repeat that. Championing a change is better than stifling a change? Doesn’t it depend on the specific change.

I’m against the new trait system, but I’m generally Pro the NPE. I stifle the changes I think are bad for the game while promoting the changes I think would be good for the game.

Trying to make it look like a “white knight” is about stifling changes is as damaging to the game as making changes that would hurt the game.

We have different opinions about what changes would be good for the game. No one is stifling change to stifle change, or at least I’m not.

Your original question on the topic sought to make it into a black-and-white issue. I responded to it exactly as you painted it. You now want to make it shades of gray because you didn’t get the response you sought? Interesting.

Some suggestions are matters of degree, but some are binary equations. In the case of a binary equation, either you like Suggestion X or you don’t. If you don’t, then the implementation of Suggestion X would make the game worse. Resorting to ad hominem personal attacks to stifle opposition to an idea is worse than opposing an idea by presenting reasons for said opposition.

As an example, some games feature non-consensual PvP in their open world. In such a game, the choice is, “If you don’t want non-consensual PvP, play a different game.” Suggesting that that game remove non-consensual PvP would be ruining it for the people who play the game because of that feature. They would be quite right to oppose such a change.

Posting opposition with reasons to an idea is no different than posting the idea with reasons. The forum exists to allow for such discourse. Unsupported (i.e., lacking rationale or reasoning) posts in favor of the status quo are no better than, but no worse than, unsupported posts saying, “Put X into GW2.”

As for, “How do they know?” Many MMO players have been around the block a few times. They’ve seen Suggestion Y in another game and didn’t like it.

I’ve tried sushi. I didn’t hate it, but didn’t fall in love with it either. I’d eat it in a zombie apocalypse if it was what was available, but feel no desire to seek it out. If friends wanted to go for sushi, I’d suggest a restaurant where they could get sushi and I could order Teriyaki.

You and I agree that posting a suggestion with supporting reasons is vastly more constructive than posting “I want X just because”. We also agree that changes are a matter of degree. However, let’s look at the example you give of non-consesual PvP. If a person were to suggest the removal of the feature and valid reasons why it’s hurting the game, would you still think an appropriate response is “this is not the game for you?” Wouldn’t it be FAR better to offer contrary reasons if you disagreed? Perhaps show the person why the change they support is not healthy for the game? And…what if they’re actually correct? What if non-consnsual PvP was actually hurting the game? A potential improvement on the game would have been dismissed with “this is not the game for you”. In my mind that outcome is far more damaging than someone saying “you only support non-consensual PvP because you’re a white knight.” In the first scenario, we lost a potentially positive change. In the second, nothing lost nothing gained.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

You certainly can build a wall with good intentions.

No, you cannot. You can build a wall with bricks and mortar. Structures are made up of actual physical material, not wishes and dreams.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

And you just dropped in “the ends versus the means” into the conversation, which is a tricky thing to handle. Mostly because often you can’t tell what the result of something is really going to be until after it’s done, especially when we’re talking about things with social components . . . like an MMO.

True. You don’t know the end result of changes until you try them. That doesn’t mean changes shouldn’t be attempted. If everyone took the view of “change is scary and might have unforeseen consequences” we’d still be nomadic hunter-gatherers.

Also worth considering is not all changes are positive (you just admitted it in your post, things with good intentions can still turn bad) and now you can understand it when I say: “change for change’s sake is not the answer we need to be embracing”.

I stated very clearly that not all changes are positive in my first post. The beautiful thing about feedback is that not all of it has to be implemented. Furthermore, if someone harmful is implemented, it can be reverted. The wonders of software. However, simply because not all changes are good doesn’t mean that people who suggest changes should be silenced.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

I mean we could, and if we have the absolute best of intentions, nothing could go wrong, right?

I’m not sure where you got that from or how it adds to the discussion. I never stated good intentions equal good results. My very first sentence in the post you quoted made it very clear I don’t care about intentions, I care about results. Specifically that the result of dismissing suggestions for change is far more harmful than that of dismissing defenders of the status quo.

IndigoSundown.5419:

I would say, “Stifling resistance to features that the poster believes is negative.” rather than, “…potentially positive changes.” Naturally, the person posting the suggestion will think otherwise. However, there’s no crime in liking the game as it is better than one would if change Y were implemented.

I’ve certainly seen game defenders posting negatively about many different things. Some of these posts seem more like knee-jerk reactions. Others are legitimate feedback. No post calling someone a white knight is legitimate feedback. They’re all personal attacks.

Your right. Calling someone a “white knight” is a personal attack. My point is that the effect of that particular attack is less harmful than attempting to stifle change. You’re also correct that someone may like the game better without change Y being implemented, but how do they really know? Take my friend who “hated” sushi. I convinced him to give it another shot and now he’s addicted. Had he been obstinate in his defense of the status quo (sushi hatred) he’d have deprived himself of something he now enjoys a lot.

IndigoSundown.5419:

NewTrain.7549:

Vayne.8563:

OP, I have a question for you. How is “this game isn’t for you” and more dismissive than “you white knights will defend anything even if it’s bad”.

Both sides of the equation dismiss completely legit commentary. Human nature at its finest.

I’m not the OP, but I’ll field this one.

No entertainment created by people is perfect. Everything can be changed (sometimes in extremely minor ways, sometimes in major ones) to improve their entertainment value for specific people/subgroups.

Suggesting changes is therefore a more potentially positive action than defending the status quo is (depending on the legitimacy of the change).

So when someone dismisses a suggested change with “maybe this isn’t the game for you” it’s stifling to potentially positive changes, whereas “you white knights will defend anything” is a criticism of those attempting to prevent change.

Is that saying that in every case “this game blah blah” is more dismissive than “white knights blah blah”? No. But, one phrase has the potential to prevent positive progress more than the other.

I still don’t think “…leave…” is a well-considered suggestion. However, it might be well-meaning. Say someone wants to change MMO gameplay to, say, shooter gameplay in an MMO. As positive as that might be for some, it’s unlikely to be for a lot of MMO players. In that case, saying, “You might be happier with another game.” could be well-meaning.

However, “white knight” is just another of the many dismissive means used to try to invalidate comments by others. All of those tactics are reprehensible and have no place in civil discussions.

Well meaning doesn’t help anything. You can’t build a wall with good intentions. What matters is the end result and the end result is that stifling potentially positive changes to the game is far more harmful then calling someone a “white knight”.

Vayne.8563:

OP, I have a question for you. How is “this game isn’t for you” and more dismissive than “you white knights will defend anything even if it’s bad”.

Both sides of the equation dismiss completely legit commentary. Human nature at its finest.

I’m not the OP, but I’ll field this one.

No entertainment created by people is perfect. Everything can be changed (sometimes in extremely minor ways, sometimes in major ones) to improve their entertainment value for specific people/subgroups.

Suggesting changes is therefore a more potentially positive action than defending the status quo is (depending on the legitimacy of the change).

So when someone dismisses a suggested change with “maybe this isn’t the game for you” it’s stifling to potentially positive changes, whereas “you white knights will defend anything” is a criticism of those attempting to prevent change.

Is that saying that in every case “this game blah blah” is more dismissive than “white knights blah blah”? No. But, one phrase has the potential to prevent positive progress more than the other.

airstu.2579:

Best balanced game ever and best esport game ever.

I hope you’re being sarcastic.

My take on it is this:

Skill selection was better in GW1.
Build diversity was leaps and bounds better in GW1.
The story/writing was better in GW1.
The balance arguably was better in GW1.
The amount of PvP game modes was better in GW1.
Repeatable endgame content was superior in GW1.
RNG was less apparent in GW1.
The combat mechanics are better in GW2.
The graphics are better in GW2.
The existence of a trading post is a plus for GW2.
The open world is plus for GW2.

I would have been greatly impressed had ANet simply used the GW1 mold, but in an open world, with updated graphics, a server-wide trading post, and the current combat mechanics (move-while-casting and dodge roll). Now that’s a game I would have loved.

Back on the subject of a PTR (before we got side-tracked with yet another Vayne-is-a-paid-ANet-poster-back-and-forth, who by the way, doesn’t criticize anyone making ridiculously overblown and unsubstantiated posts defending GW2), ANet has (or had) a PTR. My guild was on it to test the first rollout of ascended gear. Unfortunately we were booted for being too critical, and the system was implemented in exactly the same way we experienced it on the PTR.

Long and short of it is, those saying a PTR wouldn’t change GW2 for the better are correct. ANet doesn’t seem to care for feedback which encourages them away from their internal road map.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

Or, you know, people may just actually dislike the NPE. But no…that couldn’t be the case.

The NPE, however, is simply the most visible part of the patch. There’s other stuff to like in it too.

Like the sudden popularity of my ranger in groups . . .

Which makes the impact of the NPE all the worse, if people have such a dislike for the patch even despite the few positive changes it made.

Vayne.8563:

NewTrain.7549:

harrison fang.1874:

I bet more than 50% of the people taking the poll haven’t even tried the new leveling experience

I bet leprechauns are made of chocolate and I have the exact same amount of proof as you do.

That’s why he said I bet. It’s his opinion, or guess. I’d agree that a percentage of people didn’t play it and still commented, and I’m quite sure a number of people didn’t give it a fair shake, because they went in angry. That’s just human nature. When you’re already angry about something, you tend to exaggerate it’s importance in your mind. Everyone has had big fights with a loved one about little things that don’t matter.

I think part of the backlash of this patch comes from an overall discontent with part of the community, who was looking for a reason to attack.

Or, you know, people may just actually dislike the NPE. But no…that couldn’t be the case.

harrison fang.1874:

I bet more than 50% of the people taking the poll haven’t even tried the new leveling experience

I bet leprechauns are made of chocolate and I have the exact same amount of proof as you do.

MikaHR.1978:

And if you paid attention, to get somewhat acceptable result you need REPRESENTATIVE sample (unless you want certain outcomes in which case you use skewed sample)

Well, we don’t have a representative sample. We have this poll, created by someone who has stated he did it to show that the forum’s response to the NPE is disproportionally negative compared to players’ actual feelings. The poll failed to show that, and actually confirmed that a significant portion of the players are displeased. Now combine that with the displeasure being expressed inside the game and the probable silent portion of the playerbase that just stopped logging in and ANet has a serious problem. Whether or not a majority of the people dislike the NPE (and the ONLY numbers we have right now show it is a significant majority) is irrelevant. What is relevant is that ANet just alienated a significant portion of its players, a habit that is not healthy for any MMO.

You and Vayne can argue until you’re blue in the face that everything is dandy and there are no problems with GW2, but right now the evidence points otherwise.

MikaHR.1978:

Forums will never be sample for measuring success, let alone make decisions on. Forums represent tiny group which isnt in same category as 95%+ of playerbase.

You would have a point as it related to this issue if there wasn’t any displeasure being expressed in in-game chat. However, there is a significant amount. With that in mind, saying the forums aren’t a good indication of the true displeasure with the NPE is wishful thinking at best and outright deceptive at worst.