Ive spent $50 buying the game and $20 on gems and thats it.
I probably will spend another $20 on gems over the next year or so.
Cant see why on earth its necessary to spend more.
It’s not necessary. That’s one of the best parts of this game. You don’t have to spend money to play it. There are plenty of “free to play” games where that really isn’t the case. What you have here is a selling point.
I think the OP is right in saying what he’s saying, but then, I don’t believe Triple Trouble or Teq were made just for the average gamer.
There are 30 plus world bosses. Shouldn’t some of them be for the noisy minority?
Don’t worry there are enough complaints that Anet will scale it back soon enough.
People will still use spirit shards to upgrade siege and mats for WvW and PvE respectively, I don’t need to find quotes, you can google it. There’s plenty written about it. Frankly I’d upgrade siege to start. Look and see what it’s selling for on the TP.
why are they worth much more as spirit shards?
You need to read what the OP was complaining about. He was complaining he didn’t spend his skill point scrolls to unlock skills, which would have been worth nothing at all.
Do you disagree that spending them on upgrades, instead of saying unlocking all your skills last week is a downgrade?
You really do need to read the OP.
The problem is Teq was made to be harder content, we got better at it, till it was basically a farm that had very little chance of failing and so people expect that’s the norm.
But in reality, it was always supposed to contain some amount of challenge.
People will still use spirit shards to upgrade siege and mats for WvW and PvE respectively, I don’t need to find quotes, you can google it. There’s plenty written about it. Frankly I’d upgrade siege to start. Look and see what it’s selling for on the TP.
HoT Price Feedback + Base game included [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: Vayne.8563
The expansion is just $50, that is very cheap for a free to play MMO.
Eye of the North was like $30.
$50 is full-sized campaign money, what Prophecies/Factions/Nightfall cost. And each of those included a full continent worth of content!
Eye of the North was $30 7 years ago. What was gas, or electricity or phone bills back then? And it was $35, didn’t come with a class or any PvP changes.
Gratz on not using them. They’re worth much more as spirit shards.
It’s pretty surprising how much Areanet is making off their gem shop, makes the HOT price even more insulting…..
But still not as much as sub games are making off their subs. The only two games that compare to this traffic wise are FFXIV and WoW, both of which make more money off subs than Guild Wars 2 does.
In WoW’s case, of course, with 7.1 million subs playing $15 a month, as compared it’s making more than ten times what Anet is making. But I don’t think it’s ten times better. Hell, I don’t even find it better.
I could go to FFXIV or WoW right now and pay the sub, because I intentionally pay more for gems each and every month.
I do that because I don’t want to have to play those other games, because I don’t enjoy them. But since this game isn’t making nearly as much as sub games, I don’t really see the problem with an expansion costing $50.
I do believe Anet wanted to stay with the Living Story model, but it clearly didn’t work without also selling an expansion.
@ OP thank you man, genuine thank you.
If after this simple, illustrative, cold hard facts & logic post you people can’t see plain as day that something’s wrong here with the whole HoT offering then all i can say “i give up.”
I for one am giving high five to OP for noticing that something in today’s gaming market is seriously wrong. Back in the day we used to get awesome games with awesome deals.
Now days we get to pay awesomely high $$ for marketing expanses, and are offered deals that in old timem would be called a slap in the face and not “promotion” (0 slots for reve unless you pre-purchase).
I’m not gonna judge HoT content since it’s not out yet, but marketing & sales of this game has already earned my deep scorn.
There is definitely something wrong with the HoT offering. That is so many people are stuck 8 years in the past, they don’t realize the entire genre has moved on, that it’s far more expensive to make today’s games, that they require more in other ways then just quantity of content and that the prices have risen very little in 8 years.
So those people who are stuck in the past, and yes, that is the answer, are believing that somehow a pathed, completely instanced game with no Z axis in a field with no competition to speak of is going to be comparable to something you get for the same money today. But it’s not. Not with any expansion for any game. There might be a reason for that.
Those who have no clue about business will tell you it’s the greedy, horrible goblin-devs who sit in Grintgotts and count their money, while figuring out ways to rip us off.
Those who have some inkling that prices have gone up, and that an MMO is much much harder to make than a lobby game, and that there’s more competition and that the amount of voice acting alone is probably the entire price of what it cost to make Nightfall, and that the staff is five or six times larger, will probably not see that anything is wrong…except that some people seem to believe this industry doesn’t change.
Of course WoW and FFXIV do give quite substantial expansions for the same amount, but both of them charge a monthly sub and both of them have a much higher income than Guild Wars 2 does…and not necessarily because more play the game (at least in the case of FFXIV), but because many play the game and buy no gems.
Here’s the meat of the expansion for PvE’ers:
“Journey into the Heart of Maguuma
Making the Most of Maguuma
New region with a high amount of verticality built into the maps
Multiple open world jungle maps3 made up of three distinct “biomes”
The core, the floor of the jungle itself
The roots of the jungle, that run deep beneath the jungle
The canopy, way up above, where the Pact fleet is scattered across the top of the jungle
Outposts – centralized locations for events that evolve over time and which help the overarching objectives in each map
Adventures – repeatable, on-demand challenges in the open world with their own leaderboards
New events and storylines
New boss battles
Challenging group content
Contains a secret legacy left in the heart of the jungle by Glint, right as the story of Guild Wars concluded"Add Adventures to the list.
Challenging group content has the familiar ring of meta events with a twist. You can include the one PvP map and the one WvW map, the new class and Masteries to the purchase price. Precursor crafting and Guild Halls should not be included with the expansion IMO since these were asked for and talked about since launch. It is what it is, however.
So is the explorable content of HoT on the light side? Certainly. Is it worth $50? Probably not. Will Anet lower the price anytime soon? Doubt it. We can either pay $50 and enjoy what HoT offers, or we can move on. There’s certainty enough competition to at least explore what’s on the other side of the fence.
The problem is, there really isn’t that much competition. Maybe of us are here because we don’t like the WoW style MMOs and most MMOs are patterned after it. Every MMO that was supposed to be the death of this one has more or less fallen flat. There’s games that have “optional” subs that are not really optional. There are games that are pay to win. But this is still the most popular MMO that doesn’t require a sub. That’s pretty impressive, when you consider most of the others don’t require a purchase to play them.
Try to imagine this story when you didn’t know it, the first time, without any assistence, without knowing what’s coming.
You really can’t judge an instance of any kind after you’ve done it a few times.
They fixed the living story…finally.
The open world was always too easy. Apparently the explorable paths of AC are harder though. Maybe you should stop trying to find your difficulty in world bosses and the open world?
Maybe you don’t understand that out of over 140 possibilities we now have 27. Who’s the troll??
I bought a house recently. There were literally hundreds of options. Just not them were VIABLE options.
Options don’t really matter. Viable options do. Do you have any evidence that there are less viable options now?
HoT Price Feedback + Base game included [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: Vayne.8563
Keep in mind that not every ‘veteran’ is a veteran who “enjoyed three years of the game”. Many of us paid for the original game and for one reason or another, (for me, a few very difficult semesters while working towards my degree) meant not getting to play the whole three years. Many of us are just coming back now with news of the upcoming expansion, so it is a bit hard to stomach that after buying the game and just now getting a chance to enjoy it, we will be asked to pay the equivalent of another game if we want to progress or enjoy all the game has to offer. I add my situation to the conversation to ensure that players in all situations are thought about when talking about the business decisions made by the company.
I bought a car 3 year ago. I didn’t get to drive it much. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t come down in value. The game was selling for $10 on multiple occasions. It’s what happens with games.
What happened to people not quoting catch phrases and twisting it to mean something other than was was originally said. Play your way has never meant that you can do every single thing you want to do no matter what it is, period. That’s not what Anet was talking about.
What they were talking about was being rewarded for doing different things without being forced into running dungeons or raids. If you WvW you still can get rewards and make progression in the game. If you want to level in PvP you now can.
Otherwise you could say that the argument is I want weapon swapping to unlock at level 2, I don’t want to be downleveled when I go to lower level zones and I want all dungeons and fractals to be soloable. Play your way was never meant that every single thing in the game would suit every player.
Anet makes decisions based on what’s good for the game,. but within the context of that, you can still level in multiple ways. You can do some crafting, you can WvW, run edge of the mists, clear zones…and when Anet used that phrase, that’s what they were talking about.
They weren’t talking about traits, or skills.
snip
I played GW1 since vanilla and I am one of the veterans who isn’t upset about the pre-purchase pricing. It is, what it is. I think people may be a bit premature with all their gripes, we will see what all there is in the expansion in time, and we will continue to see the story unfold through the expansion. There will continue to be content regardless of how much this expansion costs. It won’t release for quite a bit of time yet..Expect an August release if we go by the initial GW2 release.If people really can’t spend 50 bucks on an expansion then they shouldn’t be gaming at all, honestly. Some PC games are going to cost 50 bucks expansion or not, anyway. The amount of content won’t matter, it just depends on the company developing the game. For console games, they usually cost 50 bucks for like a Playstation game and that game is all you get for good til they release another sequel to it that will cost another 50 bucks. Say you buy Assassins Creed, it cost you 50 bucks and you got maybe 100 hours of a first play through, all you have left for that game is to keep playing it over and over, with it never really changing. PC gaming is far cheaper than console gaming is, in regards to the games themselves, and also offer more.
I understand a lot of people think it’s unfair, but what is all this complaining really going to do anyway? They most likely cannot change their pricing but they can alter what they put into the package for pre-purchasing.
Nice only people from the middle class in the rich western world countries should game it seems. And the 10% from the not as rich second world world countries and only 1% from the third world countries because hey video gaming is for the fortunate, smart and hard working. If you do not have all 3 of them you do not deserve to game.
I find this to be unfair. Saying the game isn’t worth $50 because some people can’t afford it might make sense if the other two most popular MMOs weren’t both subscription that charged $15 a month plus the price of the game. So if you think $40 plus $15 a month is more expensive than $50 for a period of time longer than a year, you’d be wrong.
The cash shop is optional. Everything else in the game you can access for free. It’s not like some games where you buy areas, classes and races separately. It’s not like other games where if you don’t pay an “optional” monthly fee, you might as well not play at all. And it’s not like subscription games.
Guild Wars 2 is the cheapest MMO to play without some sort of ‘catch’, at least as far as the current AAA MMOs go.
If you’re only looking at the price of the box and nothing else, maybe you’d have a point.
So the most popular MMO being WOW who has 10 million players out of 1.2 billion people that play video games on this planet. Maybe this will put things in perspective.
I will change some with the overwhelming majority.
The most popular MMO is Dungeon Fighter Online not WOW and guess what kind of subscription plan it has?Is Dungeon Fighter a AAA MMO? I didn’t think so. If you think you can get more value out of it go ahead.
A Prius and a Lexus are both cars, but I know which one I’d rather have. I’m comparing the top 3 MMO with each other. You’ve got to compare the whole package or nothing at all.
So what if its not a AAA MMO its still the biggest MMO in player population and in profit. Just because you are a AAA MMO you need to have a worse payment model and less profit?
The american version basically closed up shop in 2013 and now they’re going to offer an international version, because the Western version couldn’t cut it. Great example.
Yes, it’s popular in China. It’s not popular here. Not yet. Let’s see how it does. Let’s also see if it’s not a pay to win game, since it currently doesn’t exist in the west.
I just checked the Dungeon Fighters reddit. It has 58 people online. Guild Wars 2 reddit has 865 online. If you think this game is in the same league as the top games, you’d probably be right…for China. But it’s like saying that Lineage is the 2nd most popular MMO. It still has to close it’s western operation. China has more people than any other country in the world, but they still couldn’t make Dungeon Fighter work as a western title, and now they’re trying again. AAA? lmao
You all do realize..that it isn’t only just up to Anet, for what they charge for their game right? NCSoft can pretty much tell Anet they have to do something or drop sponsoring their game altogether..yeah 50 bucks might seem high to a lot of people, but to me..50 is what I’ve always expected from GW expansions. GW1 expansions were 50 bucks, besides EoTN, so I didn’t expect any different. They’re constantly adding more content through living story. They will build on what HoT has and go from there. If anything, they should have added all LS episodes for free with the expansion so brand new players as well as players who came in before HoT, can get caught up on everything instead of having to buy them, to truly catch up.
I played GW1 since vanilla and I am one of the veterans who isn’t upset about the pre-purchase pricing. It is, what it is. I think people may be a bit premature with all their gripes, we will see what all there is in the expansion in time, and we will continue to see the story unfold through the expansion. There will continue to be content regardless of how much this expansion costs. It won’t release for quite a bit of time yet..Expect an August release if we go by the initial GW2 release.
If people really can’t spend 50 bucks on an expansion then they shouldn’t be gaming at all, honestly. Some PC games are going to cost 50 bucks expansion or not, anyway. The amount of content won’t matter, it just depends on the company developing the game. For console games, they usually cost 50 bucks for like a Playstation game and that game is all you get for good til they release another sequel to it that will cost another 50 bucks. Say you buy Assassins Creed, it cost you 50 bucks and you got maybe 100 hours of a first play through, all you have left for that game is to keep playing it over and over, with it never really changing. PC gaming is far cheaper than console gaming is, in regards to the games themselves, and also offer more.
I understand a lot of people think it’s unfair, but what is all this complaining really going to do anyway? They most likely cannot change their pricing but they can alter what they put into the package for pre-purchasing.
Nice only people from the middle class in the rich western world countries should game it seems. And the 10% from the not as rich second world world countries and only 1% from the third world countries because hey video gaming is for the fortunate, smart and hard working. If you do not have all 3 of them you do not deserve to game.
I find this to be unfair. Saying the game isn’t worth $50 because some people can’t afford it might make sense if the other two most popular MMOs weren’t both subscription that charged $15 a month plus the price of the game. So if you think $40 plus $15 a month is more expensive than $50 for a period of time longer than a year, you’d be wrong.
The cash shop is optional. Everything else in the game you can access for free. It’s not like some games where you buy areas, classes and races separately. It’s not like other games where if you don’t pay an “optional” monthly fee, you might as well not play at all. And it’s not like subscription games.
Guild Wars 2 is the cheapest MMO to play without some sort of ‘catch’, at least as far as the current AAA MMOs go.
If you’re only looking at the price of the box and nothing else, maybe you’d have a point.
So the most popular MMO being WOW who has 10 million players out of 1.2 billion people that play video games on this planet. Maybe this will put things in perspective.
I will change some with the overwhelming majority.
The most popular MMO is Dungeon Fighter Online not WOW and guess what kind of subscription plan it has?
Is Dungeon Fighter a AAA MMO? I didn’t think so. If you think you can get more value out of it go ahead.
A Prius and a Lexus are both cars, but I know which one I’d rather have. I’m comparing the top 3 MMO with each other. You’ve got to compare the whole package or nothing at all.
Nightfall was a full game though, not just an upgrade. Why not compare it to what you get with Eye of the North?
Aside from which, until we see how much content we’re getting, which hasn’t been discussed yet, any comparison is premature.
I’ve spent quite a bit of money on the game. I don’t know how much off the top of my head, but considering I bought the collectors edition and my wife and I each have four accounts, plus we buy gems regularly….it’s well over a thousand, probably over two.
I’m quite happy with the purchase since this is our main form of entertainment.
I’m finding more builds this way, but, I’m also finding more choices. Like having to sacrifice one thing I want to get another thing I want. Which is what it always should have been, but I can see why some people are unhappy with it.
You all do realize..that it isn’t only just up to Anet, for what they charge for their game right? NCSoft can pretty much tell Anet they have to do something or drop sponsoring their game altogether..yeah 50 bucks might seem high to a lot of people, but to me..50 is what I’ve always expected from GW expansions. GW1 expansions were 50 bucks, besides EoTN, so I didn’t expect any different. They’re constantly adding more content through living story. They will build on what HoT has and go from there. If anything, they should have added all LS episodes for free with the expansion so brand new players as well as players who came in before HoT, can get caught up on everything instead of having to buy them, to truly catch up.
I played GW1 since vanilla and I am one of the veterans who isn’t upset about the pre-purchase pricing. It is, what it is. I think people may be a bit premature with all their gripes, we will see what all there is in the expansion in time, and we will continue to see the story unfold through the expansion. There will continue to be content regardless of how much this expansion costs. It won’t release for quite a bit of time yet..Expect an August release if we go by the initial GW2 release.
If people really can’t spend 50 bucks on an expansion then they shouldn’t be gaming at all, honestly. Some PC games are going to cost 50 bucks expansion or not, anyway. The amount of content won’t matter, it just depends on the company developing the game. For console games, they usually cost 50 bucks for like a Playstation game and that game is all you get for good til they release another sequel to it that will cost another 50 bucks. Say you buy Assassins Creed, it cost you 50 bucks and you got maybe 100 hours of a first play through, all you have left for that game is to keep playing it over and over, with it never really changing. PC gaming is far cheaper than console gaming is, in regards to the games themselves, and also offer more.
I understand a lot of people think it’s unfair, but what is all this complaining really going to do anyway? They most likely cannot change their pricing but they can alter what they put into the package for pre-purchasing.
Nice only people from the middle class in the rich western world countries should game it seems. And the 10% from the not as rich second world world countries and only 1% from the third world countries because hey video gaming is for the fortunate, smart and hard working. If you do not have all 3 of them you do not deserve to game.
I find this to be unfair. Saying the game isn’t worth $50 because some people can’t afford it might make sense if the other two most popular MMOs weren’t both subscription that charged $15 a month plus the price of the game. So if you think $40 plus $15 a month is more expensive than $50 for a period of time longer than a year, you’d be wrong.
The cash shop is optional. Everything else in the game you can access for free. It’s not like some games where you buy areas, classes and races separately. It’s not like other games where if you don’t pay an “optional” monthly fee, you might as well not play at all. And it’s not like subscription games.
Guild Wars 2 is the cheapest MMO to play without some sort of ‘catch’, at least as far as the current AAA MMOs go.
If you’re only looking at the price of the box and nothing else, maybe you’d have a point.
Biased list is biased.
Anyone who even thinks to claim that all bad posts are removed from this forum hasn’t been paying attention.
I like them much better this way too.
So GW2 is now a platform for various world views, huh? I kinda liked it better when it was just a video game.
One tweet doesn’t make it a platform for anything.
Then you forget about the Living Story 2, the Diversity’s Edge, to an extend it become the main primary focus. I mean I chill about sylvari being new and actually bisexual or whatever, but you cannot deny the fact it is overtaking the whole story.
And imma tell you the truth, I’m not trusting them to preordering HoT because of the story being butchered for the sake of “world view” I’m pretty sure they gonna pull off some story worse than those on fanfiction.net
Stop hiding the fact.
I can actually deny the fact that it’s taking over the whole story. In fact, it’s very much a sideline unless you’re so sensitive to it, that it’s all you can see. To me the whole story is about the Sylvari and the Dragon and that relationship is almost an afterthought because, you know, there’s a lot of other stuff happening.
But people who aren’t cool with it, of course, focus on it to the exclusion of the plot. You do realize plot has nothing to do with backdrop, or even necessarily characters. This isn’t about the romance, it’s just there. It’s about the war.
You just can’t see that.
So GW2 is now a platform for various world views, huh? I kinda liked it better when it was just a video game.
One tweet doesn’t make it a platform for anything.
He said weed out people who didn’t agree with his lifestyle…… That doesn’t disturb you?
No, I said weed out people who are so intolerant that support for something will cause them to uninstall. That has nothing to agree with agreement or disagreement. Those people will leave anyway because there’s plenty of stuff in this game that shows Anet’s views as a company. My guess is that it’s not going to hurt them business wise.
in your scenario, who would be the griefer?
Well, let’s see. Someone is leaving the game, because they’re so intolerant, they can’t even bare to play a game hosted by someone with a contrary opinion. I’d say that’s a form of intolerance that goes beyond the pale.
If a person is going to stop playing a game for a single tweet, then that person is weeded out, in the same way that making something difficult in basic training weeds out those who aren’t serious.
This game has already shown a lesbian couple. There’s a gay male sylvari storyline. And a couple of other nods to the believe of the devs. The tweet is a minor thing, compared to those other things.
One would think that’s not going to change, and so those who can’t deal with it are weeded out. Because if that’s the position of Anet, and people can’t deal with it, there’s no point in arguing. It’s not like they’re going to change Anet’s mind on this.
“weeding out people”…… Nice!
Not necessarily a bad thing. I mean Anet created a game with no kill stealing and no node stealing. No ganking in PvE areas. This makes the game harder to grief in over all.
Which means it weeds out griefers. Nothing wrong with that.
And as a testament to my original argument that a company should never release stuff like this, is this very topic, and seems others that are created on this subject aswell.
This is a game community, topics like this should not be incentivized by the company.
For me, it’s another fail from Anet, think I tend to a see a pattern lately…
I see a pattern too. So many people who have no idea what the definition of the word fail is. Yes, it’s a definite pattern.
I am against the passing of this law.
I’m not even American, I’m Australian and I know if America does it Australia will probably follow suite.
Anyway.
Obviously the devs have their own views, opinions, political outlooks and the like as they are people too but it is important for them to remain neutral in such matters if we wish to keep some form of peace here in the forums and the like.
For example. Certain views could push some players away from the game if they don’t agree with the opinions and the like of the devs. Perhaps it seems stupid to some but it happens. Though of course a few devs don’t represent the whole team in terms of beliefs and such.
And well, this gay marriage thing. Of course many are glad it has happened but many are also disheartened by it.
Anything that has the attention of the devs carries some weight so what they say here on the forums means something…on the forums. Perhaps they have no real power but here on the forums their voices have influence.
Some may be delighted to know what the dev thinks whilst others may be grossly offended by their opinions. People might mistakenly believe that it would be okay to bash the devs opposition for example. Which would not be conducive to a nice, friendly, safe environment for everyone or w/e.
Though honestly it seems that the team is pro gay marriage or something as you know, Marjory and Kasmeer…There is that place where people can get married in Lions Arch. Yeah.
I can see it now, the two getting married in the game. Which sucks. Put us into a personal story instance with the marriage just so they can shove their political views in our face….kittenmit. My character would not be there. >.> Could you imagine if you couldn’t progress the story without completing it? Jesus.
See I’m already offended.
STILL, neutrality…please…for our mental health…
Some sort of peace on the forums? Which forums would those be? Can anyone remember a time when there was peace on these forums?
You can change that definition without ramifications. There are plenty of heterosexual couples who are married and abuse their kids, or who are married and neglect their kids, or who are married and don’t have kids. There are divorced couples and plenty of single parents. There are kids who are orphans and not enough people to adopt them.
By making marriage more inclusive, increase the number of families out there that might take some of those orphans and raise them in a loving environment. Sure things might change. They might change for the better.
How naïve, of course there are massive ramifications in this case…but yes we agree, change is both good and bad. The equal rights under the law portion of this, IMO, is good. But the use of the term marriage…no. The redefinition of marriage in stark contrast with tradition and basic biology is illogical.
Basic biology is a funny thing. Because trying to use it prove stuff gets in the way of other stuff. For example, primates are biologically not monogamous in nature. We’re primates. Therefore it is biologically unnatural for us to be monogamous. So the old “definition” of marriage goes against biology, and should be thrown out.
And you know, what we see going on around us tends to confirm the idea that monogamy is an artificial construct.
We are not apes, making that straight jump kills your argument. Also, many species are monogamous. And there are many different species of primates. Equating us to apes because we are both primates is idiotic.
Basic biology is, as I stated it, the need for a species to procreate to continue the species. This benefits societies as well, as it continues them and prevents them from perishing. Gay behavior is a biological dead end.
I never said we were apes. I said we were primates. And if you really think monagmy is natural, you’re just not paying attention. The divorce rate alone should clue you in, and that doesn’t even begin to delve into the number of married people who have affairs.
You can change that definition without ramifications. There are plenty of heterosexual couples who are married and abuse their kids, or who are married and neglect their kids, or who are married and don’t have kids. There are divorced couples and plenty of single parents. There are kids who are orphans and not enough people to adopt them.
By making marriage more inclusive, increase the number of families out there that might take some of those orphans and raise them in a loving environment. Sure things might change. They might change for the better.
How naïve, of course there are massive ramifications in this case…but yes we agree, change is both good and bad. The equal rights under the law portion of this, IMO, is good. But the use of the term marriage…no. The redefinition of marriage in stark contrast with tradition and basic biology is illogical.
Basic biology is a funny thing. Because trying to use it prove stuff gets in the way of other stuff. For example, primates are biologically not monogamous in nature. We’re primates. Therefore it is biologically unnatural for us to be monogamous. So the old “definition” of marriage goes against biology, and should be thrown out.
And you know, what we see going on around us tends to confirm the idea that monogamy is an artificial construct.
Religions don’t own marriage. Besides, marriage differs between different religions.
The mistake you make is thinking that the government legally allowing a different type of marriage changes your version of marriage.
How does that make any sense if they already allow different forms of marriage from other cultures? The vows are different, the traditional clothes and ceremonies are different, and the cultural understanding of married life is different.
By your logic, those types of marriage being allowed already ruins your version of marriage.
There is no official state religion. So the laws on anything including marriage are not, and should not be determined by the standards of any religion’s standards of marriage. With that established, what argument do you have against gay marriage?
Where did I use the word religion in my post? Citing different forms of marriage is not the same thing as fundamentally changing what marriage is…most religions don’t do that…but again, I didn’t bring religion into this, you did.
Marriage is about bringing together a man and a woman, creating a stable, procreating environment. This benefits society, as it provides continuity of that society and falls in line with our biological imperative of reproduction. In other words, it made sense, and took into account our nature and biology. Few would argue that a stable home is best for child rearing, and it is inarguable that without a man and a woman you wont be producing children. Biology is simple that way. Gay marriage does not meet those criteria. The gay lifestyle, by definition, is a biological dead end.
Thinking you can change that definition, without ramifications throughout a society, is ridiculous. So the argument that gay marriage doesn’t represent change for virtually every part of our society, is just as ridiculous.
You can change that definition without ramifications. There are plenty of heterosexual couples who are married and abuse their kids, or who are married and neglect their kids, or who are married and don’t have kids. There are divorced couples and plenty of single parents. There are kids who are orphans and not enough people to adopt them.
By making marriage more inclusive, increase the number of families out there that might take some of those orphans and raise them in a loving environment. Sure things might change. They might change for the better.
I’m at the point in conversations that if someone interupts me to tell me their gay, I just continue on with the conversation before.
Wouldn’t that be an odd thing to do, though? I’ve never had a convo with someone that made a point of telling me they’re straight or hetero or whatever.
Here’s a part of the conversation that it did happen.
Me: “…so this gay guy was talking to his boyfriend-”
Friend: “oh, I’m gay too”
Me: “about how he thought the last airbender wasn’t that bad of a movie. I started to feel my brain melt”True conversation, just cleaned up because I do have a potty mouth.
And looking at those tweets. Did I seriously read a guy defending his parenting by denying his kids a game cause of the same sex and trans stuff? Alcohol, violence, hostile threats, swearing, those are OK.
Kids learning bout same sex stuff? Whoa whoa whoa! Let’s not get crazy here!
My brain is melting again.
Maybe the guy was saying he’s gay because sometimes people start saying stuff and what they’re going to say could easily become offensive, and thus he’s giving people warning that they might get a reaction. However, if the conversation were like this:
Party 1: So anyway this guy is a huge Yankee fan and he said…
Party 2: Oh I love the Yankees.
No one would have said anything about it.
To post on this forum you have to use words.
I was very tempted just to post a picture in response to this. I didn’t do it, though. Sorry. lol
I’m purely heterosexual and I certainly wouldn’t join a guild like that, but I do believe you can make it. Of course, if your guild name is offensive, the guild will be closed, and rightly so. So it depends on how you name it.
I think you’re going to name it something you know will be offensive, trying to make some point, in which case, you’ll have not made any point,. because trying to be offensive is against the ToS.
Vayne, Thank you for pointing me in the right direction, clearly I have misdirected my efforts. I also feel if I have a grievance I should be able to express them.
I will also venture a little further and say most of the people who have replied saying get over it and move on all have a number of max level characters and are not really effected by this, and as a result do not understand the frustration it caused, also for your information I have done more HP challengers and now have 19 points to play with (after patch I had zero left), but not the 30 odd I would have had if this had not happened and now having to work my way through levels 30 to 45 using a specialisation that does not fit my play style or the weapons I like making this less fun than it should/could be…..
You can absolutely express your grievance, but since this is a transitional problem, I doubt it will be fixed as aggrieved as you are. It might take you a couple of hours of playing to change the situation from what it is to something else.
It would take Anet a lot longer to program in what you want programmed in. Remember, this won’t affect any new characters after this point, it doesn’t affect 80s, who are most of the population at this point, and it doesn’t even affect very low level characters.
Yes, I can see why you’d think it was annoying. That doesn’t mean that it’s going to change. It doesn’t even mean that some people aren’t over-reacting. Sure it’s inconvenient.
The old trait system was far more inconvenient, and we had it for more than a year. I’m happy this has finally changed.
The fact that this inconvenience is purely temporary makes a big big difference.
I’m sorry but this is a ridiculous point.
The people against marriage equality aren’t speaking for themselves. They’re saying those people over there, a group I’m not part of, can’t do something.
The people in that group aren’t saying that the first group can’t. One side is speaking for the other. That’s the issue here.
Your oversimplification is amusing. What some people for traditional marriage are saying is that you should not REDEFINE marriage. That redefinition affects everyone. Profoundly. How small to think it doesn’t affect everyone and everything.
Marriage equality as a term is about as accurate and meaningful as climate change. The left realized global warming was a loser, so they had to change it…except that the climate always changes and has historically been both warmer and colder before man came on the scene. So in a similar fashion, the left rebranded gay marriage as marriage equality. The playbook is always the same, redefine terms in order to cheat in any subsequent debate in order to dishonestly claim the high ground.
The gay marriage advocates are demanding that society redefine roles, traditions, and relationships that are based in moral and biological imperatives that are millennia old…or older. They aren’t simply asking for new rights, they are demanding that everyone accept their definition of an institution that many people have very strong feelings about. Some would label that a clear case of tyranny by a tiny minority.
Most people are fair minded. So having couples get equal treatment under the law is beneficial. But no one should kid themselves into thinking gay marriage is marriage. It is fundamentally something else, no matter how many times people want to pull Orwellian rabbits out of their hat and play word games. Certain biological truths cannot be redefined away. Marriage is about bringing together two FUNDAMENTALLY different genders that have fundamentally different roles and capabilities.
Why shouldn’t three people be allowed to marry? Or four? Why not allow bigamy, polygamy? Where does marriage equality end? It’s a laughable notion, as laughable as the current notion of tolerance and political correctness, which demands conformity to whatever daily wind is blowing about what might offend some group somewhere. Who cares. No one has a right to not be offended.
But I’m not redefining marriage. Before this decision, right now, at this very moment, two athiests can marry , even if neither can have children and they don’t plan on or what to have kids. That’s marriage. It’s not redefining anything.
The fact is, marriage is only a holy union between to people to people who are religious in the first place. And all words change definition . Even the word gay has changed definition. This is what happens in language.
Anyone who wants to lock language in place, and say it shouldn’t change, should go back to speaking the way we did 400 years ago, or even longer. Again, it’s a ridiculous point.
In the past, marriage wasn’t monogamous and the religious changed it to be this way. King Solomon has 700 hundred wives. So why is it different today? Why was marriage changed by religious people.
Oh, I see, it’s okay for them to change the definition of a word but no one else? Good job if you can get it.
I’m sorry but this is a ridiculous point.
The people against marriage equality aren’t speaking for themselves. They’re saying those people over there, a group I’m not part of, can’t do something.
The people in that group aren’t saying that the first group can’t. One side is speaking for the other. That’s the issue here.
Far as I understand, on the marriage issue the chief argument Christians against gay marriage have is the belief that marriage is a religious thing. A large part of the faith revolves around marriage and it’s very traditional. To me that’s hardly a reason to deny gay people marriage due to marriage hardly being only a religious practice.
However, a church is not a business and not a government program. They can’t “refuse service” because it’s not a service (well, not the business type of service…). A large number of people against gay marriage think one thing will lead to another and eventually they would get in trouble for refusing service. My opinion? Just laws shouldn’t be kept out because they might lead to unjust laws. However, it’s a justified fear given how the LGBT community has acted in the past. Well, that’s my understanding.
The problem is you CAN get married non-religiously, no matter what anyone believes. Factually speaking, you can have a non-religious ceremony. Two atheists can marry. Two atheist can marry, even if neither of them is capable of having children.
I don’t care what anyone believes. But when your beliefs tell you to tell other people how to live or what they can or can’t do, you’ve crossed a line.
I personally hate cigarette smoke. It makes me choke. I hate it. People who smoke in my presence are directly affecting me. People who smoke in the privacy of their own home, I have nothing to say about that. That’s not directly affected me.
Gay people who get married aren’t actually affected anyone but the people getting married. And saying it devalues marriage isn’t an answer either. The divorce rate devalues marriage.
Out of curiosity, of those people who like the new system, how many played from launch? I ask because a lot of the “I love it” posts appear to be people who fell victim to the horrible trait acquisition changes made (relatively) recently.
I’ve played since launch and I still prefer the new system. But I’m not a theory crafter or a min-maxer. This is easier to play without going nuts making a build. Some people love to build, some people love to get that over with so they can go kill stuff.
I find it inappropriate for this company, or any company. If you want to be an activist, fine. Support whatever. If you want to engage your company and your product in that activism…well, that is very foolish, regardless of what side of whatever issue you are on…it shows remarkably poor judgment.
I find the intolerance and the demands for conformity by those who claim to bow down to the secular gods of the state and of liberalism…well, that is equally foolish. Labeling anyone that doesn’t agree with your view point as intolerant, is hypocritical, and intolerant. Especially when the concept of tolerance, and what should be tolerated, changes overnight. Three years ago POTUS was against gay marriage legalization.
As far as the law, and the experts…remember, it was a 5-4 decision. The “experts” fundamentally disagree. We get to do that in this country. Some people think this is a victory for liberty or equality. Others think this is a departure from moral and biological first principles, imperatives, that are beyond the reach of politically correct whimsy.
I’m sorry but this is a ridiculous point.
The people against marriage equality aren’t speaking for themselves. They’re saying those people over there, a group I’m not part of, can’t do something.
The people in that group aren’t saying that the first group can’t. One side is speaking for the other. That’s the issue here.
Not confused just annoyed, For example my Warrior, no points in defence at all, duel axe and rifle all points (I had left for later) went into defence and shield skills. How is this helping, please, mtpelion.4562, enlighten me!?
It’s not helping you. It’s also not forever and the time you spent complaining about it you could have done a few hero challenges and moved on like some of us.
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. There, now before I receive my infraction:
It is clear that this game is not accepting of everyone, only those who accept their politically correct viewpoint. And all those ‘tolerant’ folks who aplaud Anet and can only stand to play a virtual game filled with people who have the same thoughts and beliefs as those them, I don’t blame you. It’s much easier not to have to discuss or argue or having your beliefs challenged. Good luck with life.
For me, I believe in God, shocking as that sounds. And many of my friends don’t. Unlike many, I believe you can disagree with someone and his/her lifestyle and still care for them. I realize that it is only a matter of time before the feds start fining and jailing churches who don’t perform same sex marriages, like in Canada. But I will continue to follow my core beliefs.
I am uninstalling after countless hours of play. My biggest regret is that I just prepurchased HoT. I’m asking for a refund, doubt I’ll see it. Now lay on the hate, I can take it.
You make it sound like someone who believes in God can’t be in favor of marriage equality. I assure you, not everyone who believes in God is against marriage equality. What you actually believe in is a literal interpretation of the bible, which is not the same thing as believing on God.
Many who believe in God believe the bible is allegory. Many believe that numerous translations and changes have altered the original intent of the bible. And many believe in God without believing in the bible at all.
I think that probably only a small percentage of people who believe in God believe in a literal interpretation of the bible.
As for uninstalling the game because you don’t like the politics of the company that makes it, that’s actually okay. I have no issue with that.
But it won’t change anything at all, except you don’t get to play a game you previously enjoyed. To me that’s cutting off your nose to spite your face.
OP only asked that ANET not try to represent the entire player base by posting political statements since the entire player base doesn’t agree
But Anet isn’t representing the total player base, any more than they are when they say anything. I mean if Anet said the old trait changes were good, the playerbase wouldn’t be represented by it. Anet’s comments represent Anet’s believe as a company. Not everyone in the playerbase is going to share Anet’s belief as a company.
But Anet sure has the right to express a belief.
Rift had a public test server and stuff like that still happened. Didn’t make a kitten ed bit of difference.
It never surprises me how big the wave of hatred and discrimination from “open-minded” people is.
Just FYI, there are far more people who don’t approve of this than what you see on the forums. The issue is that whenever they speak up, they are heavily censored by the moderating staff. We can’t have an open discussion about these topics because Anet has taken the rather close minded view that anyone who disagrees with them is evil.
You’re right. There are far more people who don’t approve than we see on the forums. That’s because gamers tend to be smarter and more forward thinking in general. And it’s not what people say but how they say it, often, that gets them moderated.
You may think your point of view is perfectly natural, because it’s perfectly natural to you. You might think that how you express it is perfectly okay, because to you that’s a normal natural point of view. You might believe your point of view as you express it isn’t hurtful.
But you might be wrong about that too.-
I don’t care how many people agree or disagree with the court’s decision but I do find it annoying when a company takes a position on political issues.
There are a bunch of reasons why and I’d rather not get too deep into it. To keep it simple; just do your job ANet, which is making Guild Wars.
They’re already taken a position with Jory and Kas for years and recently added a transgender NPC.
These things shouldn’t be in the game for the purpose of taking a position. They should be there for the purpose of making characters deeper and more interesting.
Anet never said they were in game for taking a position, even if someone on the forums said. Of course, art of any kind was always meant to challenge preconceptions and stereotypes and that’s as valid a reason for including something in a game as anything else.
What are we doing now? Talking about it. That’s publicity. That’s another reason to put something in a game.
But I don’t see the stuff Anet has put in the game as being there just to take a position. As a writer, I know that characters sometimes just show up, and when they do I welcome them in, unless there’s a compelling reason not to use them.