Curse

thiagobnu · Jun 12, 2008, 07:46 PM // 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

The vast majority just plays, that says it all.

Avarre's letter can only state his opinion, for he has no right to speak for all and I don't think he ever implied he was speaking for all. I respect his thoughts, but I don't have to agree with all he says, as he won't agree with mine. It's just that I am not in awe of what he says as many in this post seem to be.

I respect yout thought's too.
I dont expect you to agree with him, but i do expect you to say what is your opinion.

I'm here just to give my support to avarre.... to let him know that he is not the
only one that thinks that arenanet it's doing a terrible job lately.

Darksun · Jun 12, 2008, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The problem is only saying "I disagree".

Nah, I've voiced my opinion before and other people who like certain changes have been shot down by the people who think they know over and over. The only constant on game forums is that disapproval rules. It's easy to do and you sound smart because you can always suggest "better" ways and sight unprovable evidence: "90% of the people who started this game don't play anymore"
I'd like to see changes (that I've suggested) but I don't agree AT ALL that GW is now an unbalanced pile of crap.(btw saying "this isn't a rant" and then shouting the sky is falling doesn't smack of honesty) I can't even take that outlook seriously, that's why I suggest taking ideas like this with a grain of salt.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 08:16 PM // 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darksun

I'd like to see changes (that I've suggested) but I don't agree AT ALL that GW is now an unbalanced pile of crap. I can't even take that outlook seriously, that's why I suggest taking ideas like this with a grain of salt.

If you don't agree with why anything in GW is unbalanced then you're going to have to provide acute reasons for believing so, since many here have had trouble finding reasons for it - "for it" meaning "balanced".

Tyla · Jun 12, 2008, 08:29 PM // 20:29

Anet have already changed the game on a high scale by reducing it's potential.
By introducing new imbalances, by changing the direction of their original vision....

Rocky Raccoon · Jun 12, 2008, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Anet have already changed the game on a high scale by reducing it's potential.
By introducing new imbalances, by changing the direction of their original vision....

Perhaps the game play changed their view of the original vision. It is their game and they may change it as they desire. If you don't like the new vision just move on to a new game, it's not the end of the world.

Darksun · Jun 12, 2008, 08:39 PM // 20:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

If you don't agree with why anything in GW is unbalanced then you're going to have to provide acute reasons for believing so, since many here have had trouble finding reasons for it - "for it" meaning "balanced".

I see.. so that only goes one way? So I can't just say: "many here have had trouble finding reasons against it - "against it" meaning "balanced"."

NO MMO is balanced. None. I want somethings to change too, but combined they still don't kill the game for me.
Ursan? yeah it's too powerful. SF? yeah, too much. ER? yeah. Soul Reaping, oh geez, that whole fiasco was so over blown. (No, removing e from spirits didn't magically balance everything.)
Heroes are not the end of the world, they added a great dynamic and tried to answer the issues people had with henchies (which now people complain make it too easy) HM got slammed by people on the forums who pointed out how cheap it was, now people complain it's too easy..People hated the PvP vs PvE balance, now they hate the split skills.. bla bla bla...

point is, people have suggestions. Voice them in the suggestions forum, why act like you can read everyone's minds and have the definitive answer to what should be done and must lament the travesty of GW's fallen state.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

Elitists and veterans are the specialists amongst the many users of this program, in general they know much more about the mechanics and what not compared to the average user. Their feedback is important, even though you may not like it.

So what do you do when the feedback is conflicting? Not easy anymore, huh?

Tyla · Jun 12, 2008, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Perhaps the game play changed their view of the original vision. It is their game and they may change it as they desire. If you don't like the new vision just move on to a new game, it's not the end of the world.

And even then, they reversed the original design of the game still.

Yeah, it's just a game, but people care about games because they are fun. Guild Wars still carries it's cup as the king of PvP games despite all of this crap, at least in my opinion.

Buster · Jun 12, 2008, 08:42 PM // 20:42

I think the OP did a nice job of not flaming but yet lending constructive criticism to GW1. Though I must say that games do not last forever and there will always be something better. In Arenanet's case it will be in the form of GW2. Yeah, we all know GW1 has flaws but for the most part just about every Guild Wars player loved the games. GW1 is just mearly scratching the surface of how Guild Wars in general can be come even better.

Rocky Raccoon · Jun 12, 2008, 08:43 PM // 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by thiagobnu

I respect yout thought's too.
I dont expect you to agree with him, but i do expect you to say what is your opinion.

I'm here just to give my support to avarre.... to let him know that he is not the
only one that thinks that arenanet it's doing a terrible job lately.

My opinion is, I will play the game until it is no longer fun and when it isn't I will play something else. Right now I am still having fun.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 08:45 PM // 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Perhaps the game play changed their view of the original vision. It is their game and they may change it as they desire.

But that's what this whole thread is about - that the direction in which ANet is taking their game is not for the better, and that we don't want to see this direction in GW2. ANet doesn't need to cater to the annoying portion of their playerbase (note: this is not the majority) to be successful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darksun

point is, people have suggestions. Voice them in the suggestions forum, why act like you can read everyone's minds and have the definitive answer to what should be done and the travesty of GW's fallen state.

Well, first off you agree that "this and this are too powerful", yet don't find the game "unbalanced", or you don't see them as problems...Alright. Anyways.

It's not just "suggestions," it's the quality of the suggestions. The quality and amount of the evidence for the suggestion. It's the understanding of the game as a whole in the suggestion, knowing why it should or should not be implemented.

Rocky Raccoon · Jun 12, 2008, 08:52 PM // 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

But that's what this whole thread is about - that the direction in which ANet is taking their game is not for the better,

This is the statement of a self proclaimed elite player, one of a few who know what is best for all.

thiagobnu · Jun 12, 2008, 08:53 PM // 20:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

My opinion is, I will play the game until it is no longer fun and when it isn't I will play something else. Right now I am still having fun.

Glad to know that.
Im still having fun .... but that fun is almost ending;
Every time i go to TOA and try to find a FOW or UW group ... all i can hear
is REQ10 ursan LFG. This disappointment me.

I look for builds, i try to understand the mechanics, i learn about
conditions\hexes, i ask for help, i learn from experienced players,
i cap skills .....

but look, why have all this work if a bear can solve this problem and make everything easy.

As i said ... this disappointment me.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 08:55 PM // 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

This is the statement of a self proclaimed elite player, one of a few who know what is best for all.

...And unlike most other statements, I among many have provided our reasoning for believing so.

Yichi · Jun 12, 2008, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darksun

So what do you do when the feedback is conflicting? Not easy anymore, huh?

I'm pretty sure that most if not all of the "Elitest" and "Veteran" players that actually voice their opinion on these or other forums have all posted almost the identical response already posted and have posted it many times before, or have just left the game due to the same reasons as posted here.

Darksun · Jun 12, 2008, 09:01 PM // 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Well, first off you agree that "this and this are too powerful", yet don't find the game "unbalanced", or you don't see them as problems...Alright. Anyways.

If this is your standard, you are lying to yourself that GW was EVER balanced and should state this from the get go. Don't try to pretend that my standard for what makes an entire game "unbalanced" is so far below yours that you can sit on your horse demanding evidence then shrug off all other views with a "Alright. Anyways" as your acute retort.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yichi

I'm pretty sure that most if not all of the "Elitest" and "Veteran" players that actually voice their opinion on these or other forums have all posted almost the identical response already posted this same thing and have posted it many times before, or have just left the game due to the same reasons as posted here.

The problem is that when people are ok with the game, they don't really need to say anything. btw, I'm veteran and I don't necessarily agree with the OP.

Gun Pierson · Jun 12, 2008, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

Perhaps the game play changed their view of the original vision. It is their game and they may change it as they desire. If you don't like the new vision just move on to a new game, it's not the end of the world.

There are no other games out there that reflect the original brilliant ideas and implementations of GW. The engine is unique and the code is only available to NCSoft.

Name me a game that has all of the following:

- streaming technology
- skill > time view
- great graphics engine that can run on lower systems too
- server system that allows you to play with people from all over the world
- free to play
- henchies and heroes
- regular updates and events
- low level cap so most of the game is made for level 20 and we don't loose a lot of areas you never return to.
- instancing
- fast and easy map travel
- vanity is optional, no über weapons or armor
- almost no grind
- revolutionary PvP
- etc.

The above is part of the formula that made GW a success story. Now pls name a game that has all that if you can. You simply can't.

When it comes to gameplay, at least two things changed, the 'no grind' and 'skill > time' view and they are connected too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darksun

So what do you do when the feedback is conflicting? Not easy anymore, huh?

I agree it isn't easy and I don't have all the answers either.

However, I think on the communication part, an official Anet forum can do the trick. As for implementation, common sense can't be that bad.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 09:04 PM // 21:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darksun

If this is your standard, you are lying to yourself that GW was EVER balanced and should state this from the get go...

Before I go any further, is this in respect to having monsters having higher levels than the players?

Lopezus · Jun 12, 2008, 09:06 PM // 21:06

Quote:

Anet have already changed the game on a high scale by reducing it's potential.
By introducing new imbalances, by changing the direction of their original vision....

You all who think the same imo give too much credit for game developers: they aren't omnipotent beings, they made decisions but often they just have limited choices and sometimes it even turns out that there was no choice. I for one belive that the current state of game (whether you think is trash/flawed/enjoyable ) was determined the moment it turns out that PvE gw is succes and their money making scheme is based on selling new campagins and expansion.

Quote:

When it comes to gameplay, at least two things changed, the 'no grind' and 'skill > time' view and they are connected too.

however sad and frustrating it may be i for one think it was inevitable.

Bryant Again · Jun 12, 2008, 09:10 PM // 21:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lopezus

You all who think the same imo give too much credit for game developers: they aren't omnipotent beings, they made decisions but often they just have limited choices and sometimes it even turns out that there was no choice. I for one belive that the current state of game (whether you think is trash/flawed/enjoyable ) was determined the moment it turns out that PvE gw is succes and their money making scheme is based on selling new campagins and expansion.

Part of the conflict is that other choices have already been suggested, and a lot of those alternatives involved expanding PvE with little conflict on PvP. So no, it wasn't that ANet had any alternatives. It was that they thought that they would be able to provide so much and be able to balance it all. Unfortunately, things didn't turn out as planned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lopezus

however sad and frustrating it may be i for one think it was inevitable.

How is that? GW was selling well over four million copies when things started to hit the fan.

Inde · Jun 12, 2008, 09:11 PM // 21:11

Please stop with the back and forth name calling and bickering of what an elitist is, who gets to voice their opinion and who doesn't... any further posts will be deleted on the matter.