Curse

Fril Estelin · Nov 18, 2008, 10:25 AM // 10:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

False, as was pointed out by several people such as Cluebag.

The thing is we, GW players, make up numbers. We have absolutely no idea what the real numbers really are, we conjecture and rationally theorise, but in the end the "common theory" is just a possibility (one among others) and we can't really say it's the reality.

I already said before that Regina, Linsey or someone who know the real numbers should explain clearly the reasoning behind this decision, it does not seem right to simply say "we didn't do it so as to not screw the economy" (it seems like something you read on Guru all the time, thus doubtful). And given the length of the update notes (GG Linsey), I think this update deserves that.

Quote:

There is a perfect way as has been pointed out several times. Let people with the title turn in the book once or twice depending on the title. Simple, and we know Anet has the ability to do it. Also stop with the "oh people who did it 60 times" argument. We aren't talking about that exagerrated example because it is stupidly rare. But it is NOT stupidly rare to have the titles.

/agree on the protector/guardians getting one NM or HM book. But I also agree with Shasgaliel, it's the door open to more QQ and "unfairness". Anet has at one point to stop pushing the line where players want it to be.

Quote:

No...now everybody who has already spent craploads of time doing the missions get slapped in the face because people who have done none of the missions get the same rewards for less work.

Less work? Are you talking about PvE skills? If so, then that's totally another discussion...

cataphract · Nov 18, 2008, 10:38 AM // 10:38

I too fail to understand how new players need "less work" for their protector and guardian titles.
Although, I did hear rumors of Leah Stone actually moving faster than a sloth.

Shasgaliel · Nov 18, 2008, 11:05 AM // 11:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Yea I agree 100%. Almost everything out of Linsey and Regina on this matter has been logically shown to be false...which is why I am stunned they have so many apologists on this.

"Logically shown" is a very subjective term. The problem here is that we cannot easily prove their reasoning to be wrong since we do not know all the premises. If they elaborated a bit more on "why it would be bad for the economy".

We base our reasoning on our observations only when it will take a few min for them to write a query which will provide them with all the price changes/fluctuation every time something giving money was added to the game. For us it is just guessing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

There is a perfect way as has been pointed out several times. Let people with the title turn in the book once or twice depending on the title. Simple, and we know Anet has the ability to do it. Also stop with the "oh people who did it 60 times" argument. We aren't talking about that exagerrated example because it is stupidly rare. But it is NOT stupidly rare to have the titles.

This stupid rare example seems to be common even on guru. Take all the mission runners from example. Take all the mission helpers. There are also people who were doing missions for fun not for the title. To have books filled you do not need masters/bonuses etc. So title grinders should be awarded and those who did the missions for fun not?

There is another perfect way. Remove those books from the game. No books no problem?

Other issues were answered perfectly already

cataphract · Nov 18, 2008, 11:09 AM // 11:09

How can logic be subjective?

Shasgaliel · Nov 18, 2008, 11:22 AM // 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

How can logic be subjective?

There is more than one "logic" and there is no universal one. Logic of ones arguments depends on what is seemed as logical by the other. What is logical for me might be not logical for you. This can happen even if we agree which logic to use. So it is all subjective and naming something logical does not make it different or more true cause at the same time other can name it illogical - that is why I was referring to subjectivity. Someone studying philosophy would be able to explain it in a better way than me.

Fril Estelin · Nov 18, 2008, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

How can logic be subjective?

(A=because people do NOT understand logic) AND (B=logic is used as an excuse to justify your point of view)

(I've been using in my research something called "subjective logic"

but you can also look at modal logic, etc.)

The only logical thing here would be that we have all the numbers of the GW economy, and 1) this is not going to happen (because Anet does not have the resources and even if they had, they wouldn't want to publish this); 2) given the inherent dynamic nature of an economy, you need to think it terms of evolution at a given point in time and theorise future evolutions.

Anyway, this discussion has been much longer than the update notes, and we're getting to the point where WoW will be mentioned (Guru's equivalent to Godwin's Law)

.

pumpkin pie · Nov 18, 2008, 11:54 AM // 11:54

100k faction! give it to them if they want, although I don't think its necessary, just to stop all this QQing.

ps: Question: Can anyone confirm, found out you do not need Master reward to fill the book. true of false?

Shasgaliel · Nov 18, 2008, 12:08 PM // 12:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

ps: Question: Can anyone confirm, found out you do not need Master reward to fill the book. true of false?

Look at the notes below any of the books in GW wiki. Myself I did consulate docks recently and I did not bother with masters. I got entry in the book.

upier · Nov 18, 2008, 12:12 PM // 12:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

ps: Question: Can anyone confirm, found out you do not need Master reward to fill the book. true of false?

Way ahead of you PP, way ahead.
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10337560

Riot Narita · Nov 18, 2008, 12:13 PM // 12:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

ps: Question: Can anyone confirm, found out you do not need Master reward to fill the book. true of false?

I've done a few Tyria missions for the "Young Heroes of Tyria" book - didn't do the mission bonus for any of them, but still got the book entry...

Takeko Nakano · Nov 18, 2008, 01:05 PM // 13:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

A-net didn't just update bugs. A-net didn't change "nothing" about the game. They changed PLENTY in this update.

And indeed, none of it is detrimental. After the update, people have the same as they had before or more, and there are great improvements to the game. Exactly as HawkofStorms said. Nothing wrong with his logic.

He was implying that because the change was not detrimental it was "ok" - that's why I asked whether there would be no cause for complaints if all further updates were bug fixes only because they would not be "detrimental" either. Somehow I doubt most people would be happy with that.

Quote:

Unlike your logic - you think we should complain, when there is nothing to complain about?

More proof that the posts of critics are not being read properly.

Quote:

only greedy people who got stuff for free, but still want more.

What did I get for free? I can't remember the last time I ever got something for free, other than there being changes to how titles were arranged, etc.

Quote:

And who don't want other people to get something now, that they didn't get before.

A complete lie. Please quote where I have said such a thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

It does not prove it. Reading and understanding someones concerns does not mean that we have to accept and support them........

If the retroactive rewards were added anywhere in the real economy we would have a serious financial crisis in a few days... That is why argument that it was bad for in game economy is understandable in this case.

You've just proved my point! Most of us who have been criticising the update have said we'd accept just the XP and faction/whatever - the money could be taken out for anyone who wanted a back-dated book!

Quote:

I do not think providing rewards to people who did something in the past is justified. I think it is asking for too much.

Why?

Quote:

I will use example of projects.

No, don't use silly examples - this is a game, not real-life.

Quote:

Believe me most of the people do understand why so many people do not like the lack of the rewards for things done before the update, we just think it is asking for too much and not necessary for the reasons mentioned above and not only for those.

I'm not sure how you can understand why people are criticising the lack of back-dated rewards if you keep ignoring suggestions they make.....

Quote:

Amazing in this discussion is that if anet did not introduce any book at all, there would be no issue. Did they gave us too much then?????

No, the problem was they gave something that would be far more interesting to new/lazy players (and yes, I say lazy if you had the game for years and never finished it) than ones who had played the campaigns through several times in both NM and HM.

pumpkin pie · Nov 18, 2008, 01:11 PM // 13:11

woot!!!!

thanks for all the answers

can i have more faction? i did all but one without master lol

Jongo River · Nov 18, 2008, 01:23 PM // 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

No, the problem was they gave something that would be far more interesting to new/lazy players (and yes, I say lazy if you had the game for years and never finished it) than ones who had played the campaigns through several times in both NM and HM.

Or, to put it another way, ANet gave more options to players still enthusiastic about playing the game, and not ones who just wanted to log in for the cheap thrill of adding a new title to their HoM.

Rocky Raccoon · Nov 18, 2008, 01:35 PM // 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

No, don't use silly examples - this is a game, not real-life.

Yes it is a game, so maybe you shouldn't act like it is a real life problem. Can someone explain why if you already have titles for which the books would be used you need compensation now? It is my opinion that it is all simple greed that motivates most of the complaints, nothing about fairness.

Takeko Nakano · Nov 18, 2008, 01:44 PM // 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jongo River

Or, to put it another way, ANet gave more options to players still enthusiastic about playing the game, and not ones who just wanted to log in for the cheap thrill of adding a new title to their HoM.

Nice try, but if people were still enthusiastic why didn't they complete the campaigns by now? Probably because they weren't enthusiastic about playing the game, or at least those campaigns. The addition of the new books was a bribe to try to get people to play again who weren't, not to reward people who had played or were already playing through.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Yes it is a game, so maybe you shouldn't act like it is a real life problem.

How is complaining about something in a game acting like it is a real life problem?

Quote:

Can someone explain why if you already have titles for which the books would be used you need compensation now?

Because I'd like to get the titles higher without so much grind?

Quote:

It is my opinion that it is all simple greed that motivates most of the complaints, nothing about fairness.

How is it greedy to want to max a title without grind for doing something that you have already completed? I might as well say that it is selfish and mean-spirited to refuse a reward to someone who has already played through the campaigns, even if they offer to lose the gold reward.

Frozy · Nov 18, 2008, 02:01 PM // 14:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Can someone explain why if you already have titles for which the books would be used you need compensation now? It is my opinion that it is all simple greed that motivates most of the complaints, nothing about fairness.

Last time i checked, getting Legendary Guardian doesn't automatically max your Kurzick/Luxon title.

And as i said earlier in this thread (and a different one), this is NOT Fair.
The new players get these rewards for playing normally, in order to reduce the grind.
If we want these rewards, we have to play again - we have to grind, missing the entire point.

To make it fair, we should get the same reward for playing the game normally, it should be retroactive.

We want to be equal.

Fril Estelin · Nov 18, 2008, 02:07 PM // 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

The addition of the new books was a bribe to try to get people to play again who weren't, not to reward people who had played or were already playing through.

You seem to be contradicting yourself, in message #571 (also in message #494) you said:

the problem was they gave something that would be far more interesting to new/lazy players (and yes, I say lazy if you had the game for years and never finished it) than ones who had played the campaigns through several times in both NM and HM

Somewhat I doubt that they'd give a "bribe" to certain kind of players by providing a feature that is geared towards other kind of players. I even happen to believe that this has nothing to do with people having done or not done protector's/guardian's. IMHO this update is just an application of EotN principles (e.g., books) to other campaigns (a bit like tweaking part of the code they did for EotN for the 3 campaigns) and spreading more rewards accross the wide range of GW quests, missions, challenges and PvP AB/JQ/FA.

And it seems that the direct effect of that is that there are (a little) more players playing the game, which is IMHO what Anet is aiming at and a net benefit of this update, and why people should stop "shouting" in both directions. Most people here made their points clear already, no need to spread this over dozens of posts again and again.

As you rightfully said, it's just a game, so stop treating this so seriously. (oh and btw I completed the 3 campaigns and extension; haven't finished guardian yet but I'm not rushing as I want to use all the time until GW2, and I don't have much anyway)

P.S.: don't try again the "we want to voice you" (I will repeat one last time that I'm in favor of books being retroactively granted, but rewards would have to be changed; also don't ask me to help explain yourself to others, it's not my job as Earth said), and accept that you have the same right as others to voice your opinion, which is another way to say that your criticisms can also be criticised (or at least, the way you phrase them).

Shasgaliel · Nov 18, 2008, 02:07 PM // 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

You've just proved my point! Most of us who have been criticising the update have said we'd accept just the XP and faction/whatever - the money could be taken out for anyone who wanted a back-dated book!

That just covers the money argument. All other remain valid. So I do not see it as proving yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Why?

This thread is full of arguments for that.

However my favorite so far is that it will remove incentive for veterans to play a game.

Please look at it this way. We already have the titles and some of us do not want to do several of the missions ever again. Books are incentive to do them again. Can you think of any other incentive? I think that is the reason they did not make them retroactive. I agree that it is not the best way to make people happy, it is even far from it but it is still an incentive to play the game. Just for that I would be in favor it. I would like rewards myself. But I think the motivating players to play is more important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

No, don't use silly examples - this is a game, not real-life.

I will use whatever examples I wish to. Just because it is a game it does not mean we cannot use a real life or any other examples as a illustration of a mechanism/logic. I guess the issue is that in real life things you want, do not happen often so it is hard to find a common counter example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

I'm not sure how you can understand why people are criticising the lack of back-dated rewards if you keep ignoring suggestions they make.....

The point is as that understanding others concern does not mean agreeing with them. I do not agree on suggestions because in my opinion they are not justified enough and lead to more problems than they solve. There is a difference between ignoring suggestions and not accepting them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

No, the problem was they gave something that would be far more interesting to new/lazy players (and yes, I say lazy if you had the game for years and never finished it) than ones who had played the campaigns through several times in both NM and HM.

I think that is it the best part of this update and not a problem: to make "lazy" and new and old people play. The best thing which may happen to MMO is an increase of active people playing. Some previously deserted outpost are now full. Pugs are again possible in several places.

Those who played should have an incentive to play again. That is why I think giving those free additional luxon/kurzick points was not really good.....

Sjeng · Nov 18, 2008, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frozy

Last time i checked, getting Legendary Guardian doesn't automatically max your Kurzick/Luxon title.

And as i said earlier in this thread (and a different one), this is NOT Fair.
The new players get these rewards for playing normally, in order to reduce the grind.
If we want these rewards, we have to play again - we have to grind, missing the entire point.

To make it fair, we should get the same reward for playing the game normally, it should be retroactive.

We want to be equal.

I agree. They haven't reduced the grind for faction at all. They introduced new and more ways to gain it, but doing every quest and every mission (NM and HM) won't get you close to maxing the title. Vanquishing all areas will help a bit, but you're still far from there. That means you're going to have to REDO missions/VQ's over and over again, which is grind imho.

Fril Estelin · Nov 18, 2008, 02:21 PM // 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sjeng

I agree. They haven't reduced the grind for faction at all. They introduced new and more ways to gain it, but doing every quest and every mission (NM and HM) won't get you close to maxing the title. Vanquishing all areas will help a bit, but you're still far from there. That means you're going to have to REDO missions/VQ's over and over again, which is grind imho.

Totally true, let's hope that it's only the first (baby) step towards removing the grind. On the other hand, someone could simply say that you can now quite easily get your HoM statues.