Guild Wars 2

New Valentine event with the Hobo-Tron couple.

What?! I actually wanted Deceptive Evasion changed…I was hoping for some more careful clone/phantasm balancing rather then just being all BOOM everywhere.

Oh well. My mesmer will just have to start wearing safety goggles.

I don’t know how popular this idea was, but in interest of preemptive defense: I am serious.

That’s just going to attract negative official responses.

Gotta stay on topic! Quick! Think of something intelligent to say!

So…

What about axes and sickles? How much longer until they get a extra feature?

And what if ArenaNet added a unique sprocket-like item for each tool? Like, the molten tools: …some kind of molten thingy. Plant-ish tools: Pristine toxic spores and stuff. Each individual tool skin has a chance to get a single specific item. So, the logical money maker here would be to get one of each. I personally wouldn’t be surprised if it happened at this point.

On a scale from 1-10, how mad would you be?

I’d be 6. A little frustrated but still on the verge of indifference. Until I see proof that this infinite tool idea is going to screw everything up (especially if it will actually set a solid precedent), I’ll reserve my judgment.

So we’re talking reserved judgment for a good 4-6 months or so.

If anything, the only precedent this is setting at the moment is a silent publisher in the face of a handful of public outcry about infinite gathering tools 2.0…

What would be cool is if we could convince everyone to start praising ArenaNet like crazy. See if they’ll respond to positive feedback instead.

Experiments!

And remember to be civil or the thread will be locked again.

I agree that polymock should be brought back first. The two ideas are too similar, and polymock already has a foundation set up from GW1.

How much of this topic can we be 100% sure of?

Or even 90%. I’d settle for 90%.

Gene Archer.8560:

Theundersigned.4761:

I’m not sure if giving players more opportunities to get sprockets (without spending gems or finishing achievements) would help the core issue of this matter, but it might temper some frustrations.

It would not at all help the core issue, as the core issue isn’t sprockets. The issue is that there is an item, available only through the gem store and nowhere else in the game, that gives a distinct advantage to those with said item compared to those without. Added to that is the issue this creates with past owners of the permanent tools and the lack of consumer faith this creates.

The core issue, then, is the entire precedent this creates and the damage it can do now, and in the future, to the integrity of the game.

That’s okay. You don’t need to explain it to me; I already understand. I just try not to speak in absolutes when voicing my opinions.

“I’m not sure” = I can’t tell the future

“core issue” = advantage the tool gives

“temper frustrations” = compromise that doesn’t make everyone happy but sympathizes with ArenaNet’s reasons.

Just to avoid confusion.

This is my reasoning.

“We need to get some more gem store sales because [reasons]. What do we do?”

“Well, what’s sold a lot of gems?”

“Unlimited gathering tools, maybe. But players basically only need to buy them once since we made them account bound.”

“Is there more potential here?”

“There could have been if they were still soulbound. We could always make them more attractive, but we’ve already done new skins.”

“If new skins aren’t enough, how can we sell more?”

“What about giving them a new use? Add an effect like swiftness, aegis, might. Or we could take one of those crafting materials we just introduced and incorporate them somehow.”

“Add sprockets. We haven’t used those in awhile.”

“Makes sense. Those could definitely sell some additional tools. But what about the unfair advantage to people without gems?”

“We could give the tool a small chance of actually harvesting the sprockets. Player’s get so little advantage they can’t possibly complain. Plus most people have their new node anyway.”

“Okay. Sounds good. Now, which tool should we use?”

“I think the pick makes the most sense…”

…

Yeah. I’m sure ArenaNet did this with the best of intentions, but I can’t imagine that they gave the playerbase’s reaction much thought. Maybe they were betting the 20% would limit the new tool enough? I don’t know. Seems a little weak to me.

Unless…unless their reason was further hampered because of some plans us players are still unaware of. Maybe they were working on incorporating a more universal method of gathering sprockets at the time? Perhaps that’s why they threw things together seemingly haphazardly. ArenaNet didn’t think it was an advantage in the first place because they plan on making new ways to get sprockets.

I’m not sure if giving players more opportunities to get sprockets (without spending gems or finishing achievements) would help the core issue of this matter, but it might temper some frustrations.

Honestly, my faith has been slightly jostled after this. For the meantime, I’ve replaced those bits of lost faith with hope, but developer clarification would not go unappreciated. I’d like to know their reasoning.

Edit:

“I’m not sure” = I can’t tell the future

“core issue” = advantage the tool gives

“temper frustrations” = compromise that doesn’t make everyone happy but sympathizes with ArenaNet’s reasons.

Just to avoid confusion.

This is what I’m mostly hearing from some people in this ‘discussion’: “C’mon, ANet! Jump to get your carrot! C’mon, boy! A little higher! Oh! Too slow! Ha. You fell on your face.”

Basically, a lot of ‘customers’ are acting like ArenaNet is their pet. Or slave. I don’t really see the difference here.

I’m convinced that the ArenaNet took this under consideration at some point during development. How couldn’t they?

Really, this seems more like a question of why they chose to drop the idea in the first place. I’d like to know their reasoning.

It’s bizarre how many people hold their money over ArenaNet’s head like some kind of carrot.

There has to be another reason. There’s even some constructiveness here, unlike some of the other threads.

Haven’t you been reading all the negativity and criticism? If what you say is true, then ArenaNet would have deleted most of the forum by now.

Examples: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/What-GW2-feels-like

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Am-I-the-only-one-being-disappointed

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Face-it-devs-open-raid-content-doesn-t-work

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/2000-hours-0-precursors-why-keep-playing

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Gem-store-dyes-and-other

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Any-word-on-what-s-after-the-living-story

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Guesting-Overflows-Desolation

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/madness/Well-I-defended-these-new-events-at-first

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/madness/Thanks-for-the-Overflow-fest

There are literally dozens upon dozens of threads just like these, and some of them are worse. If these were constructive (some of them have their moments), then one of the things people would do is offer solutions. A lot of this is just overall complaining or arguing about complaining.

This post (from an active thread): “No! Get rid of the stupid scarlet crap now.Ugly content with rewards which are dreadful is not conducive to fun gameplay.”

Is really similar to this post (from the thread in question): “Yes that is such a garbage reward getting Scarlet story for all of that collecting.”

It’s worthy to note that in both threads there are instances of negativity and constructive criticism.

Again, there has to be another reason.

“The author of Johnny Got His Hatchet is writing himself into the ground. He’ll be out starving on the street if his next book is as bad as this one.”

This criticism uses pessimism in a way similar to the other example. And like that example, the writer uses a prediction to enforce how strong his beliefs are. However, this prediction benefits no one. Even supposing that the critic had fantastic reasons for making the prediction, the critic has benefited neither the reader nor the author of this work. All he did was presume of his own excellence.

How would most people react to this case? Someone in absolute agreement would likely shout a vehement “YEAH” or “GOOD RIDDANCE.” But what does this do but breed bad blood with the community? Even someone who disagrees completely would most likely say, “SCREW YOU, CRITIC!” or “HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE?”

This only serves to ignite a war of emotions between both parties, and very little is accomplished.

There are times when someone reasonable comes along and tries to settle things. “I think this guy might have a point, but I don’t agree with everything he says,” or “I don’t think this guy’s right, but I can understand some of his criticisms,” even, “Yeah, this guy’s right, but we never know what could happen in the future,” are attempts to get the feedback back on a constructive track. These people use reason. They assume that they don’t know everything. They assume the critic doesn’t know everything either.

The problem here is that these “middle-men” and “middle-women” flourish in the case of well-written pessimism and optimism but are drowned out in this second case. They can be seen as weak of will for choosing compromise over a fight to the death. They can be mocked for being “on the fence”. As a result, their view is completely toppled and trampled to the ground. Needless to say, the middle-people usually stay away from these arguments. Let the emotion junkies run wild.

However, the subsequent unmitigated disaster leaves both parties sour towards the rival cause (and sometimes even their own). This happens far too often on the internet. Unfortunately, excessive pessimism or optimism often pushes these people’s buttons a little harder than normal, resulting in an army of power-hungry sociopaths with bazookas.

If we could just settle down and take an easier outlook on the world, then we could have some really engaging, constructive discussions. If we could avoid making unsubstantiated predictions or putting ideas into people’s heads (“This game will be dead within a year the rate they’re going.” / “Anyone who doesn’t like this game should just get out. They don’t know what a good game is.”) and admit that we only have one opinion out of many, many others, then we could all end on better terms with one another. Truthfully, no amount of “proof” or “experience” can make a person objectively right.

I realize that it may be hard to do this. Many people here or there share our same views, so it seems perfectly okay to voice our opinions without having to think about a whole lot of annoying stuff. It may even feel nice listening to all the support people have for your similar opinions. However, if we hope to truly make improvements, we have to assume that every side of the argument is here with us, listening intently to what we have to say. Talking about how “everyone” hates one thing or loves another only alienates constructive dialogue with a variety of different people.

I’ve gotten into some stupid arguments lately, and I don’t think I’ve explained very well why exactly I believe certain negative criticisms to be detrimental, not constructive. So, this will be an opportunity to give it a shot.

“This patch is pretty fun.”

“This patch blows chunks further than humanly possible.”

This is pretty much what I’ve been hearing. Well, that’s all well and good. Criticism is criticism is criticism. The latter is criticism, the former is criticism. However, neither benefit the game as an overall whole. This type of criticism just provokes people into a rage or a mocking attitude.

So, let’s try again.

“I really enjoy the mechanics of the new Wurm world boss. Everything feels unique and inspired and really fun. In particular, the three-way boss fight is an interesting take on how boss fights have been in the past. I feel that the mechanic of having the wurm swallow you in order to weaken it especially stands apart from the rest. I think the developers are really on the right track with this one! But why is everyone so whiny? If you think this is bad, then you obviously don’t have any idea what good design is. GW2 ftw!”

“The new Wurm world boss is atrocious. This is just more zerg warfare (something players have specifically told the developers we do not want) and the mechanics are just gimmicky. How drab and ordinary is carrying kegs of gunpowder from one spot to another? And what’s with all the champions? We can hardly see what we’re doing. The developers should really reevaluate their design choices. But they won’t. They’ll ruin the game at this rate. So much fail.”

…

Well, it’s gotten a little better. Now we can see the specific pros or cons of the Wurm world boss from two very different perspectives. However, there is still one huge problem with both of these critiques, one problem that should have been left out of the post entirely. Why is everyone so extremist? Why do they know everything? How can they make these sweeping generalizations so halfheartedly? This is the problem of extreme pessimism and extreme optimism.

Pessimism and optimism can be powerful tools in writing. They evoke strong emotions. They rally people together. They create an emotional mob with a single, driving force towards revolution. By using pessimism and optimism, a writer can make something easier and more fun to read. Not many people have fun reading through a dry report of the pros and cons of a subject. But emotion can eliminate this dryness and engage the reader where stale reasoning and thousands of facts cannot.

For example, if the reader’s opinions contradict the writer’s pessimism, then the reader is more engaged (either they are spurred into rebuttal or praise). If the writer tells someone how much they love the new combat system of Spaceman 64 and about how revolutionary it is, a person’s curiosity is piqued. Hype and negative reviews for movies, books, and video games are extremely important in relating an opinion effectively to the rest of the world. A dry, “This is good because [reasons],” is nowhere near as effective as an emphatic, “Wow!” Likewise, criticism that sounds like, “Bleh,” carries nowhere near the same weight as, “This movie is the spawn of a twisted mind.” However, excessive optimism or excessive pessimism can damage good arguments by violating this one simple rule: “too much of a good thing”.

I can’t wait for the new update. I don’t care if it’s good. I don’t care if it’s bad. I just want to knoooow.

Honestly, that’s the only thing that goes through my mind come patch day. I don’t care about anything except solving the “Great Update Mystery”.

Otherwise known as G.U.M.

I experimented with a couple faces to try and make them unattractive and/or unique…I met with very limited success. But Norn supposedly can live for centuries (or even longer), so I don’t even know if they technically age the same way humans do. I would still enjoy more faces like the male Norn, though.

Personally, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting “ugly” models. Ugly = Unique especially in video games because a lot of people go the purty route.

On a completely unrelated note, when do we get to add some pudge to our characters?

Well, I disagree that the personal nature of the stream was a bad thing. However, I think this comes down to personal preference, and how you view professionalism vs. “personalism”.

I think Donari’s opinion pretty much jives with my own. Personally, I’d rather there not be the “stiff-necked” businessman air if only because it would most likely eliminate that bothersome staple businesses often carry.

Could ArenaNet have found a happier middle ground? Perhaps. But I don’t think they ever really went off the deep end (like the Saturday morning cartoons you mention). In fact, I admire their attitude. If it weren’t for people like you, I would say that they should not find any middle ground at all.

The informality of it made me feel as if I were actually listening to the developers’ discussion instead of a business advertisement.

I got the impression that ArenaNet was more concerned that the more popular element of the releases (either story or gameplay) was lost in the less popular once.

I don’t think they were implying that players couldn’t follow one or the other; I think what they were saying was that players would ignore the less interesting part of releases in favor of the more interesting parts.

Most of the time, anyway, it would seem that the (rather weak) story was often lost in the more overwhelming gameplay portion of updates. Therefore, it seems that when they say they plan to “separate the two” it’s more for the benefit of developing each to be able to stand on its own.

Basically, I feel that ArenaNet is criticizing themselves for not being able to make both parts equally interesting.

Have you ever tried to make a male human character? It seems like almost everyone chooses to make females…

I think I managed to make my human pretty “unique”, but I could feel character creation fighting me the entire time.

Wanted to make the oldest, most unattractive human possible (to combat all the pretty boys). I think I can still push the system harder, but this is as good as I did.

Just wish there were more “aged” options. Wrinkly, gnarly, bumpy skin. Have you seen the “old women” in this game? They are in desperate need of some gnarl. Moles…Gimme moles!!

Edit: I think I managed to make a woman reasonably old…ish. At least she doesn’t look young and springy like a good deal of the other characters in-game. Would still like more options, though…

This is similar to what happens to my Charr’s eye…

This is a decent enough explanation, right? It covers its bases, addresses player concerns. However, I feel that the overall premise of a “godlike” entity in the form of the Pale Tree is far too contrived.

There are times when this can work effectively in other fantasy settings, but in this case the whole concept is difficult to grasp. How can something that emerges physically from what is basically a leaf womb not be physically related to others born from the same being?

If the Pale Tree were truly “godlike”, then the Sylvari would have been born around the Pale Tree from completely unrelated plants. There would have been no misconception this way. In this alternate universe, perhaps a connection with the Pale Tree could be maintained by the Sylvari “basking” in the Pale Tree’s magics. Or perhaps the connection could be reduced to simple adoration of the Sylvari’s “god”. The biggest problem with ArenaNet’s clarification here is that it should not have been necessary in the first place.

However, even if there was never any contention about the Sylvaris’ incestual habits, I believe it would have been preferable to completely alter the players’ conception about what it truly means to be Sylvari. ArenaNet’s goal was to make the Sylvari a completely unique race, right? Well, why couldn’t they have made the Sylvari into something that completely baffles our human brains?

For example, the Sylvari don’t have romantic relationships. Period.
“Are you two dating?” you ask a Sylvari couple. “What’s dating?” they reply.
In this alternate universe, the Sylvari consider their entire race one literal family. No misconceptions, no awkward, contrived explanations. What race in the entire history of MMOs or even fantasy literature has ever done that? Well, I’m not going to rule it out, but I would hazard a guess that it isn’t very common.

And why stop there? Humans communicate by talking. Bah. Sylvari communicate through touch. All they need to do is to touch a fellow Sylvari in order to talk directly into their mind. Imagine what the first encounter between humans and Sylvari would have been like. (Gameplay problems would include adding the dialogue snippets players can hear in game.)

Humans eat to survive. Boring! Sylvari stand out in the sun to restore energy and store the subsequent nutrients inside their only organ for later. Everything else in their body is designed to transport these nutrients…like some sort of leaf. (Xylem and phloem, anyone?) You invite a Sylvari over for dinner, and he stands outside all evening. “How rude,” we humans would say. But we just don’t understand. (Gameplay problems would include eating food to get buffs in game.)

The Sylvari race was supposed to be something we had never seen before in a fantasy setting. However, what we got was a rather creative, flaky human. The Sylvari are great for their own reasons (as I mentioned earlier), but they could have been so much better. There could have been real reasons why the Sylvari were so bizarre, so difficult to understand. There could have been lessons about learning to accept things that are the polar opposite of us. There could have been humor between two drastically different, yet visually similar, races.

The Sylvari should have looked like a human, should have been based on a human, but on the inside, they should have been much more than a human.

So, what are your thoughts on the Sylvari? Are they too human? Are they clearly not human at all? Or does what humanity they have work for them? Obviously it hardly matters now, but I feel it is an interesting “what if” scenario regardless.

The Sylvari were announced a couple years ago during Guild Wars 2’s early development and joined the Asura and the Charr as ArenaNet’s answer to creating its own unique fantasy race. However, when hopeful players first got a good look at them, they were disappointed to find that the Sylvari were nothing more than generic, green humans. As a result, concerns began to erupt that the Sylvari would be nothing more than an elven-themed, human reskin. Luckily, ArenaNet managed to relieve players’ concerns as it continued to flesh-out both the Sylvari’s design and story, successfully bringing the race into a realm of its own.

Nowhere else could we find walking, talking, humanoid plants that played a crucial role in an MMO’s story. Nowhere else could we find a race’s birth as unique as the Sylvari’s. Nowhere else could we find a society quite like that of the Sylvari.

However, did ArenaNet achieve true uniqueness, or is it too often that the Sylvari fall back on standard racial tropes? Are the Sylvari truly one of a kind?

There are many new, refreshing themes the Sylvari adapt—I don’t deny that. After all, Sylvari are born from a tree, die after an indeterminate amount of time (possibly never), and sing clothing, houses, and even weapons into being from nature. They are literally walking salads that players can ravenously sink their teeth into. However, my question is: are the Sylvari too human? Or was their humanity necessary for the success of their design? Did ArenaNet stop too short?

I’ll attempt to explain myself.

First of all, the Sylvari appear human. From a design perspective, I can understand why the developers would do this. People respond positively to something they can relate to. Turning the Sylvari into something that looks like an Oakheart might create some friction with the other races and skew the Sylvari’s popularity. For example, none of the MMOs off the top of my head use a bestial design instead of humanoid for its playable races. This would be why I would argue that the decision to make Sylvari humanoid was largely one of safety. Were alternatives discussed? Most definitely. But I can see why the developers chose to drop the idea. Quite possibly, they compensated for this by giving the Sylvari a unique biology and image.

Second, the Sylvari are either male or female. In a similar way to the Sylvari’s humanoid design, I can understand why the developers would like to create something players can relate to. Players can choose the gender of their character, just like they can with all the other races. Is it the same gender they are? Is it the other gender? Pick one. Players have the freedom. Again, this gives the player something to relate to. Plants themselves have genders, anyway. And even if they didn’t, the reason behind a Sylvari’s gender is implied well enough in the lore to be believable.

However, the Sylvari can also enter into romantic relationships with each other. Now, this is where I lose track of ArenaNet’s reasoning.

Those who have played the game for a while may start to notice something: all Sylvari are born from the Pale Tree. They call “her” “mother”. They may even call other Sylvari “brothers” or “sisters”. From a human’s perspective, this all makes sense. Creatures who are born from the same mother are generally considered “siblings”. However, Sylvari can also enter into romantic relationships with each other. A little bizarre, “incest” definitely comes to mind (although the normal side effects of incest hardly matter as the Sylvari can’t reproduce). As a result of the confusion, the ArenaNet lore team has released an official clarification of this (then common) misconception about the Sylvari:

“Sylvari don’t breed like humans do, so they can’t inbreed like humans do. When they call the Pale Tree ‘Mother’ it’s more like Mother Earth—we are all ‘children’ of this godlike concept, but calling them such does not make us all related by blood.

‘Incest’ is a very mammalian taboo and one that doesn’t apply to sylvari. Because sylvari don’t reproduce in the same hierarchical manner as mammals, they don’t have to worry about reducing a gene pool to dangerous levels. They don’t have brothers or sisters like humans do, nor do they have true parents. They are brothers and sisters in the same way we are all brothers and sisters within the human race, whether of the same parents or not. The Pale Tree calls the sylvari her ‘children’ because they are born through her, but you can’t compare humans with sylvari in that way and extrapolate that all sylvari are siblings.”

You need a thumb. People, give this person a thumb.

I’m ashamed to share my name with you…

(Not really, but it sounded cool in my head)

Don’t answer; It’s a trap!

There are acceptable ways of voicing one’s opinions.

Therefore, “I hated Living Story the moment it crawled out of it’s dark, dank spider hole and shambled into the light of day,” would become: “I wasn’t a fan of the Living Story since the very beginning.”

Many of the opinions on these forums are decidedly hostile, which stamps out discussion before it even starts. It’s not a matter of different opinions (the dolphins are different, but they aren’t sharks), it’s a matter of effectively relating those opinions in a constructive manner.

I concede that metaphors are often confusing, but I did try to make the distinction between dolphins, sharks, and humans (although I considered using guppies instead of humans to avoid implying that the dolphins have inhuman opinions).

To clarify, this isn’t about criticizing one’s reasons or opinions, it’s about criticizing the way in which one relates those opinions. To put it more simply: sharks represent hostile language, dolphins represent the opposite. The tank represents these forums. Many posts on these forums (not all; that’s why I said, “many”) use hostile language; therefore, many people in these forums are sharks. However, some people are willing to engage in dialogue, representing the dolphins (note that they still have the same opinion as the sharks).

The dolphins represent the preferred way in which to express one’s opinion. Humans (probably should have used “guppies” here—but honestly, I would consider being a dolphin much more fun than being a stuffy ol’ human), they represent the other opinion. I implied humans (guppies) were usually neither shark nor dolphin because they represent somewhat of a minority in these forums and aren’t exactly central to the point I’m trying to make (although a human could take the form of a shark in order to swim more comfortably with them).

(On a side note, there are sharks in the world that are completely harmless. I can’t remember what they’re called, but I suppose unintentional hostile language could fall under that category. This actually fits really well since people often perceive these sharks as being vicious man-eaters, when in reality they just want a hug…)

Again, this isn’t so much about different opinions as it is about the way in which those opinions are expressed. Really, what opinion we’re talking about hardly matters at this point as the metaphor can be applied to practically anything.

There. I clarified. I hate clarifying. Now my entire metaphor is useless.

When one drops oneself into a shark tank to hang out with some sharks, one rarely comes away unscathed.

Therefore, it’s safer for some people to stay away entirely…

Or become a shark.

Maybe if the sharks looked a little more friendly this wouldn’t happen…

Or maybe they could be dolphins. Dolphins are nice. Fun to hang with. Make good friends for us seafaring humans (even though they play rough sometimes).

minbariguy.7504:

I hated Living Story the moment it crawled out of it’s dark, dank spider hole and shambled into the light of day.

I would most definitely classify these words as those of a shark (and not a particularly nice shark at that). But I’m happy in this tank, so I think I’ll stay.

Yes, I do. I understand where some critics are coming from, but I don’t often agree.

However, I’d caution you to be careful with what you support around these forums. You could be quickly crushed into a moist pulp for liking Scarlet.

/sarcasm

Conformity = Survival

/endsarcasm

Because everyone else hates the Living Story.

Because if I enjoyed the Living Story, I’d suffer the consequences.

Because if I said the Living Story was fun, no one would listen.

Because if the Living Story engaged me, I’d look like a fool.

Because if the Living Story seemed interesting, I’d be an uncultured, uneducated buffoon with objectively bad taste.

Because if I do, in fact, hate the Living Story, then I’d be taken seriously.

/endveiledcriticism

I really like the idea of elite healing skills.

…and new elite skills, too…

*wink * *wink * *nudge * *nudge *

Cyclic dynamic events and hearts. Events and heart quests that are different in each map every week (with possible connections between events), repeating the old ones every couple cycles. Perhaps this would help to return people to older zones?

Doesn’t get any more unrealistic than that :d

I might be wrong, but it feels like the developers mentioned something along this line long, long ago…

One character…one day…in my dreams.

Or, you know. If I’m feeling particularly ambitious :d

Maybe we just need better shampoo.

Are you saying we shouldn’t shut down Guild Wars 2 servers on Christmas?

I seriously doubt it comes down to something as superficial as stubbornness.

Maybe they know something we don’t…Maybe we’re the ones at fault…?

Maybe some outside force in the world is conspiring against us to ruin our fun in order to harvest the fun particles that fall off our hair when bored, manufacturing them into an evil doomsday device that will end the world as we know it, replacing our current lives with drab, grey replicas of utter boredom and listlessness from which there is no escape.

…no escape.

I don’t think they should work on certain days, such as holidays. Honestly, I would prefer that they take the day off on Christmas Eve at least. That’s what I would do, anyway. A little vacation is great for everyone.

Actually, I’d say they should be able to take most of December off. I know I would really enjoy that if it were me xD

That would be nice to know. I still have 9 more camps to take…and 125 more sentry points :d

Was debating on whether or not to do this…but what the heck.

Mesmer: Jatoro’s, Masquerade, Starter, and Tactical bits.

Citation needed.

I have to back up Arena Net and coglin on this one. I’ve noticed quite a few instances of support on both their Facebook and Twitch pages. They’ve been up for awhile now.

I guess it wouldn’t be all that different from carving pumpkins during the two Mad King events, finding those dragon claws and stuff, or transcribing krait obelisks.

But these are really the only achievements I don’t mind doing. They give me reasons to travel and explore the world.

Polls can be useful tools in recording a community’s thoughts on something, but only when made correctly. This means that a random sample representing the entire player base would have to be selected. Otherwise, only those that feel the most strongly about this topic will be most interested in replying. This bias is known simply as “Non-Response Bias.” (Now that I think about it, even a response bias might have a role here considering the number of “I don’t like Scarlet” threads.) The very nature of bias means that a conclusion cannot be reached about voters’ overall opinions of something.

If Arena Net was truly interested in figuring out Scarlet’s true, unbiased reception, they would have us fill out information about our age, race, and gender, sending surveys to a random selection of these people.

Now, if we use a biased survey, we can only conclude how many people that feel strongly about this topic vote. This doesn’t take into account the many, many other people that have an opinion, but for some reason have chosen not to vote, are unable to, or don’t know this poll exists. This isn’t even taking into account sample biases such as a skewed age, gender, or racial demographic (each of which plays an important role in opinion making).

However, even a biased poll can be effective (if used with the knowledge that it was biased). Under certain circumstances, for example, biased surveys can be used to follow the general trend of strongly-voiced people. But to assume that everyone feels the same way would be a mistake.

So long as the poll is biased in this way, we won’t be able to conclude that the general populace of GW2 likes or dislikes Scarlet Briar simply because the poll is not recording the opinions of the general populace but rather a very small portion of the community.

I think “literary critic” is giving this guy too much credit.

I would disagree, using examples of many successful authors that have written numerous books. I don’t believe people just run out of good ideas. There may be rough times where one story seems to be pretty poor compared to the author’s other works, but I don’t think we should assume that rut will last forever.

Artistic inspiration is a fickle beast.

I voted, but unfortunately this is going to be extremely biased towards people that feel most strongly about the topic. This means that it’ll be impossible to draw any conclusions from this poll, which is disappointing.

Curious about the results anyway, though.

Sytherek.7689:

I am so tired of people claiming to speak for everyone. ANet does not owe me, or many people I know, an apology.

It’s become fashionable for some to join the hysterical anti-Scarlet bandwagon. She is, in my opinion, a poorly-presented character written by writers who desperately want to tell their prove that their new supercilious story about an insane rhubarb is better than the original GW story about dragons. I’m hoping ANet ties her to the dragon story firmly.

But to constantly harp on Scarlet is ridiculous. It’s a game, folks.

Thank goodness someone finally said this.

Please. Immortalize this reasonable, wise, and intelligent post in the forums for all eternity.

Reasonable: The writer doesn’t throw mud at people (including writers/developers) and concedes some points of opposing arguments.

Wise: The writer urges people to avoid making broad assumptions and enforces the “it’s just a game” argument. “It’s just a game” only serves to remind people not to feel like the world is ending when something they don’t agree with happens (generally leading to verbal abuse of some form, of which there has been a good deal on this topic).

Intelligent: The writer is both reasonable and wise.

I hope people from here on out use this writer’s post as a model for excellence.

Now, this may just be me with rose-colored glasses, but I believe that many other cultures don’t manifest these problems nearly as clearly. Perhaps our problems stem more from differing cultural values. (Although things may have become more and more diluted as the world has become more and more “westernized”).

Personally, I would be tempted to place the blame on the consumerist mindset we have here in the United States and…nearly everywhere else with a system of mass production and a putrefaction of values.

For example, we seem to become self-entitled so quickly when raised in a society of individualism and rabid consumerism. If things don’t meet our standards, often we take it as a personal assault and lash out violently at the “oppressors” of our personal pleasure. However, whose fault is it that we become so offended? It’s ours. Without a doubt it’s ours.

This isn’t to say that all criticism is a bad thing. Where would improvement be without criticism? Nowhere. I’m only trying to say that if we were to demand an apology for something so trivial, we would demonstrate a severe issue of self-entitlement.

If we want change, we should not achieve it because we were the ones that shouted the loudest. These changes would be biased, catering to only one group of people, and most likely they would feel forced and hollow.

Rather, we should achieve change through reason, intelligence, well-structured arguments, and empathetic concession. These changes would be fluid, enthusiastic, and unbiased—all the better for an MMO.

In fact, I’d say that a method of well-structured dialogue (rather than argument) would yield much more satisfactory results. In an argument, we are only concerned with us coming out on top and beating the other people.

When dialoguing, we collaborate together to find the objective truth (or, in this case, an enjoyable game). By the end, we each have to make sacrifices, and we compromise. And if we don’t come in here ready to compromise, then I doubt we’ll come away with anything at all.

Jornophelanthas.1475:

@Theundersigned:
While that would be a nice idea, the game currently has no proper way to present the contents of such books. Currently, you interact with books in the same way as with NPCs: through dialogue windows. However, these dialogue windows only have very little room for text, and multi-page dialogue trees cannot be navigated very intuitively. In short, the dialogue windows are suitable for representing fictional conversations with NPCs and for registering player choices in the Personal Story, but they are not suitable to be used for looking up information in a user-friendly way.
If a new interface can be created for in-game books and bookshelves that allows them to properly serve as containers of information (rather than presenting snippets of text, two sentences at a time), your idea has merit.

Actually, this was apparently part of the “very roughly implemented” book system. The books at the time of the press release seemed to be in a format very much like an actual book—with paragraphs and pages, not snippets. (Although very rough and ugly, obviously)

So, again, more precedent.

And for a while during development, there were a lot of people excited about Arena Net’s whole “There’ll be books in our game about the lore!” thing. But people’s excitement just sort of sputtered into nothingness and they were removed by the time the Beta started.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/lwd/Living-Story-Lore-vehicle-needed/first#post2783300

Bobby Stein talks a bit about it a little over halfway into this thread.

I love your take on the matter. Nice and reasonably unbiased, very clear. Nice, nice, nice. Great idea.

Bring back in-game books? Please? It was a good idea, and I don’t think it should be abandoned. They could solve the fleeting Living Story problem and more…so much more (Stories only found on the official site? Fixed).

And dare I also ask for a book shelf in the home instance to collect these books? Unlocked after finding them in the world…? Good idea? Probably been suggested already, though (because it’d be insanely cool).

The only plus side to this over the OP’s suggestion is that these books were already very roughly implemented in the press release of the game, so there’s a precedent. Or so I’ve heard.

Whips sound kind of gimmicky to me. I’m not sure whether or not they’d have a future in-game.

That said, I think whips would fit the standard Necro, Theif, Ranger definitely. I also love the idea of a Mesmer with a whip ‘cause they’re such a unique class anyway.