Curse

arredondo · Jul 01, 2005, 03:48 AM // 03:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by PieXags

Alright...Arredondo I'm going to ask you a relatively simple question because by this point I can't even tell anymore.

What are you arguing?

That PvP should be 100% skill based at all times without worrying about forced gear differences.

Quote:

Are you arguing that it takes too long to unlock the skills?

Best case scenario? All tools available from start. I'd settle for it all being available once you've beaten PvE once (I still think it is unnecessary).

Quote:

Are you arguing that it's not skill over time played?

PvP Guild Wars is very skillful once the action begins. Before the action begins, we should all have complete access to any tools we feel adds to our strategy and tactics to display our skill in battle or the skill of one is dwarfed by the system. Gear and full access to skills shouldn't be more than a second thought for serious competitive play.

Quote:

Are you asking for a UAS/R

Yes, and the all important need for them to drop the Attribute Refund Point requirement when in town.

Quote:

Are you asking for smaller faction requirements...?

I'd settle for prices that are 1/10th of what's required now. Still, the whole approach is uneeded in a serious competitive activity.

Quote:

I honestly can't tell because there's mixes of all of it.

Judging from personal experience and from the general feeling of everyone I've spoken to/read posts from, it doesn't take too long to unlock the skills so long as YOU'VE got the skill to get the faction.

It IS skill over time played because EVERYONE starts off with EXACTLY what you did when they created their accounts, they had to use their SKILL to get their gear. Now you have to use your SKILL to get the gear that you want.

UAS/R---would NOT make the game more skill based if the gear depends so much that you have to have it, it would always be simply the one with the better skill set wins. The skill, is to see if you can overcome the challenges in order to GET your gear.

And smaller faction requirements don't seem to be necessary, as good PvP players seem to be getting faction with their characters, just fine.

Gear unlocking is a by-product of your dwarfed skill used in battle, it is not a sign of skill in of itself. Me and my opponent, on the same level playing field with access to the same tools, going toe to toe with me coming out on top... that's the display of skill I'm talking about, and that's the focus of pure skill-based play mechanics used in almost all competitive activities except Guild Wars PvP.

PieXags · Jul 01, 2005, 03:50 AM // 03:50

There are LOADS of new PvP characters joining every day buddy.

Chances are the majority of your battles ARE with people on the same boat as you, just trying to get some faction.

Spark · Jul 01, 2005, 04:25 AM // 04:25

Quote:

Hmm... let me try this approach:

I know a lot of you are competitive Magic: the Gathering players. Do you consider it 'unfair' that some of you have rare cards that others don't? Do you ensure, before tournament play begins, that you all have access to the same cards, and can build your decks exactly the way you want? No? You mean to say that some of you have cards that others don't? But isn't that unfair?

All that ArenaNet has done with Guild Wars is move the 'buying of cards' from the real world into the pre-PvP portion of the game.

—Siran Dunmorgan

Did you know that in the Northeast USA there is a big Type 1 (Almost all cards available, up to $1k for 1 card) scene. Want to know one reason why it is popular? They allow 'proxies', or fake cards. This allows people who do not have access to the several hundred dollar cards to play with the competitive designs they make. Everyone, even those who don't use the proxies, enjoy this rule because it makes the competition tougher. Therefore, the people who own the cards arn't playing against 'Badjank.deck' and instant winning just because of what they own. Instead, they allowed to have a competition that tests their playskill and deck building.

Magic is an almost EXACT correlation to GW, as there are 3 important factors, playskill, creating your deck/build of 8 players, and aquiring the cards/items/skills you need to execute your design. Almost everyone agrees that the third is superfluous, and would rather it be done away with. In MTG its obvious why it exists, Wizards needs to make money to support the game. However in Guild Wars, we already paid our $50. The game makers get no direct benefit from making us unlock skills/items.

I can tell you honestly that I have played in No proxy vs 75 proxy (The entire deck) tournaments. The 75 proxy was far more fun as I got to see far more strong and diverse decks (rather than many people playing the few 'budget' decks that very often just lose) and everyone felt it was very fair.

I can say I like this update, as its better than nothing, but I REALLY think UAS/UAR is the answer.

Siren · Jul 01, 2005, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

Siren:

I've compared it to dozens of competitive activities... I've talked more on tennis than chess, lol. The thing they all have in common, that GW shys away from, is that you don't have to jump through hundreds of hoops to have access to all options from the beginning.

That design is anti-competition at it's very core. Goal oriented play for starting with what you need to succeed belongs in PvE only, not as a pre-requsite to having access to the same gear as your competitors. What does chess have that GW doesn't? Like all the rest I've mentioned, competition based purely on skill developed, not on top gear grinded for.

Okay, let's examine your Tennis analogy then, since you're now so eager to toss aside your Chess analogy (interestingly enough, after it's been chipped away at to the point of being utterly irrelevant).

Quote:

No other serious competitive contest is heavily influenced by some having better GEAR (i.e. a better tennis racket or shoes) except Guild Wars. Everyone has great gear from the get-go.

Regardless of what Nike or Adidas commercials say, there are definite advantages to certain types of footwear in athletics. The more support a shoe has, the easier it will be to play in it. There will be less strain on the heel, various tendons, etc...any doctor can tell you that. So that's your first mistake in assuming that "all shoes are created equal," because they're not. Not by a longshot. Even as we have this discussion right now, right this very second, there are engineers in the world designing a better tennis shoe.

And to claim that everyone has great gear from the get-go would be outright ignoring the novice high school tennis player who doesn't have access to the total top-of-the-line equipment that Venus or Serena Williams do. The difference in quality of the equipment of a high school tennis team and that of a multi-billion dollar tennis star is almost too wide to even quantify, and no amount of conjecturing on your part is going to magically transform high school equipment into the sports equivalent of ruby slippers. Simple as that.

You want to say that every single tennis player has access to the exact same quality equipment from the start? Are you aware of what a high school's sports budget looks like compared to Venus or Serena Williams'?

But I won't completely destroy what you're saying, because I'm sure high school tennis teams being compared to professional athletes isn't what you had in mind originally anyway, so I'll just compare high school tennis teams to each other, and nothing will change: people can try extremely hard to "level the playing field" in high school sports, but there's always going to be a difference in the quality of equipment, and also a difference in the ease and means of acquiring equipment.

So are you referring to your tennis arguments like what I quoted above? You're making sloppy analogies and then turning right around and trying to declare them to be cogent arguments.

Did you want to refer me to your football points...which are so extreme and absurdly unrealistic that nobody can possibly take them remotely seriously?

C'mon, man, be sensible here. Your points aren't points at all; they're just nonsensical and unrelated ramblings.

DrSLUGFly · Jul 01, 2005, 05:10 AM // 05:10

and then add steroids to the mix also

which though generally outlawed are still ever-present through non-outlawed drugs giving similar effects.

PieXags · Jul 01, 2005, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spark

Did you know that in the Northeast USA there is a big Type 1 (Almost all cards available, up to $1k for 1 card) scene. Want to know one reason why it is popular? They allow 'proxies', or fake cards. This allows people who do not have access to the several hundred dollar cards to play with the competitive designs they make. Everyone, even those who don't use the proxies, enjoy this rule because it makes the competition tougher. Therefore, the people who own the cards arn't playing against 'Badjank.deck' and instant winning just because of what they own. Instead, they allowed to have a competition that tests their playskill and deck building.

Magic is an almost EXACT correlation to GW, as there are 3 important factors, playskill, creating your deck/build of 8 players, and aquiring the cards/items/skills you need to execute your design. Almost everyone agrees that the third is superfluous, and would rather it be done away with. In MTG its obvious why it exists, Wizards needs to make money to support the game. However in Guild Wars, we already paid our $50. The game makers get no direct benefit from making us unlock skills/items.

I can tell you honestly that I have played in No proxy vs 75 proxy (The entire deck) tournaments. The 75 proxy was far more fun as I got to see far more strong and diverse decks (rather than many people playing the few 'budget' decks that very often just lose) and everyone felt it was very fair.

I can say I like this update, as its better than nothing, but I REALLY think UAS/UAR is the answer.

This is the best argument for UAS/R I've heard in a long, long time.

The only problem is then that PvE characters who use their PvE characters in PvP might feel cheated because the PvP players they face in the arenas won't have worked nearly as hard to get the skills/runes/elites as they did. And since this is supposed to be a game where PvE and PvP intertwine, we just can't have that. So what, then all players are supposed to use reserve one or two of their spots for PvP characters? Why would someone limit himself by making a character that can only go into PvP, if they like both? I don't know about you, but I want all my 4 slots for PvE characters, and then I'll use those in PvP. That way I can get the best of both worlds.

UAS/R wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for one group of people.

Those who enjoy both PvE and PvP. I myself enjoy both. And we're the ones who get screwed by it. If we tried to bring our PvE characters into PvP we'd be outmatched because our PvE characters had to work for their gear. If we created PvP characters we'd be limited in a sense that we wouldn't be able to use the character in both.

And since I'm sure Anet would rather see people play both PvE and PvP, they're not giving out the UAS/R, as to make it fair for people who like the whole game.

If it was JUST PvP players, and JUST PvE players, no problem would arise from UAS/R. Unfortunately that's not the case.

Quintus · Jul 01, 2005, 06:00 AM // 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by PieXags

This is the best argument for UAS/R I've heard in a long, long time.

The only problem is then that PvE characters who use their PvE characters in PvP might feel cheated because the PvP players they face in the arenas won't have worked nearly as hard to get the skills/runes/elites as they did. And since this is supposed to be a game where PvE and PvP intertwine, we just can't have that. So what, then all players are supposed to use reserve one or two of their spots for PvP characters? Why would someone limit himself by making a character that can only go into PvP, if they like both? I don't know about you, but I want all my 4 slots for PvE characters, and then I'll use those in PvP. That way I can get the best of both worlds.

"They can make it so that when you enter a PvP staging area, you temporarily recieve all skills, runes, and weapon upgrades for the matches you participate in, and when you leave the staging area, you lose the skills, runes, and weapon upgrades you didn't have already." -Quintus (1st Page)

Go ahead and tell me if you think that this is a bad idea. I can take it.

PieXags · Jul 01, 2005, 06:08 AM // 06:08

I remember reading over that, actually. And I really liked the idea at the time, I still do. I just wonder how difficult it would be to implement. That seems like a bit of a hassle 'eh?

If they could implement that, I think it'd definately fix the problem, I like to play both PvE and PvP. So to be able to have all PvE characters, and still have PvP available materials when I enter a PvP zone, would be great.

That's a good idea, it was suggested in another thread a long while ago as well. I'm just not sure if they could implement it or not.

Cheers.

Quintus · Jul 01, 2005, 06:14 AM // 06:14

Yeah, I was thinking that when I wrote it, too, but Anet has shown that they have amazing flexebility with updating their game. So I won't give up hope.

Mister Pie · Jul 01, 2005, 07:25 AM // 07:25

The reason you see more negative posts is that human nature favors whining. If someone enjoys something, they'll maybe say it once: "hey this update is great!". No one is gonna make multiple topics saying "Wow, love the update".

On the other hand, there are PLENTY of whiners who have no problem spamming every thread with the same complaint as well as making multiple threads on the same subject. It's not necessarily a knock against people who dislike the update but rather an observation on human nature in general. We seem to repeatedly whine more than we repeatedly praise.

arredondo · Jul 01, 2005, 11:04 AM // 11:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Siren

Okay, let's examine your Tennis analogy then, since you're now so eager to toss aside your Chess analogy (interestingly enough, after it's been chipped away at to the point of being utterly irrelevant).

Lol, WHAT!? I only mentioned a factual statement of my infrequent use of an activity, but was in no way commenting on its validity (it's ALL still very valid).

Chess remains VERY much analogous. As does Checkers. As does Go Fish. As does Dodge Ball. As does playing a 2-year old in friggin' Peek-a-Boo. What, the baby has to earn her way into using both hands and at least one eye by not drooling for five hours first? Too funny!

No serious competition adds laborious nonsense just to achieve what's needed to begin on an equal level with your opponent. Rarely do I literally roll on the floor when laughing, but with your claims of imaginary logic victories, I may have to start doing just that. ROFL!

And the "tennis destruction" post falls on its face completely. As I've been saying, the professional tennis league does NOT force the players to do crazy acts of endurance just to access top equipment. Nothing keeps anyone from accessing the stuff they need but their OWN choice for not getting it in a professional, serious environment. Even your choice to bring up high schoolers is nonsense because the system deoesn't use its rules to prevent THEM from getting some $300 pair of shoes either.

If YOU choose not to use a Superior Vigor Rune and any Elite in UAS/UAR system, you have no one to blame but yourself if your win ratio isn't very high. But in the current system, feel free to complain that before you can fully exhibit pure skill in defeating your opponent on an equalized basis, you must first play the equivalent of 500 full tennis matches, 1,000 games of chess, or 1,000,000 games of peek-a-boo. Only then does the SYSTEM allow you to fully gear up with what you need for competition.

arredondo · Jul 01, 2005, 11:17 AM // 11:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by PieXags

This is the best argument for UAS/R I've heard in a long, long time.

The only problem is then that PvE characters who use their PvE characters in PvP might feel cheated because the PvP players they face in the arenas won't have worked nearly as hard to get the skills/runes/elites as they did. And since this is supposed to be a game where PvE and PvP intertwine, we just can't have that. So what, then all players are supposed to use reserve one or two of their spots for PvP characters? Why would someone limit himself by making a character that can only go into PvP, if they like both? I don't know about you, but I want all my 4 slots for PvE characters, and then I'll use those in PvP. That way I can get the best of both worlds.

UAS/R wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for one group of people.

Those who enjoy both PvE and PvP. I myself enjoy both. And we're the ones who get screwed by it. If we tried to bring our PvE characters into PvP we'd be outmatched because our PvE characters had to work for their gear. If we created PvP characters we'd be limited in a sense that we wouldn't be able to use the character in both.

And since I'm sure Anet would rather see people play both PvE and PvP, they're not giving out the UAS/R, as to make it fair for people who like the whole game.

If it was JUST PvP players, and JUST PvE players, no problem would arise from UAS/R. Unfortunately that's not the case.

Other video games that have single and multi-player components get along fine with their inherent "UAS" system. When you buy Half-Life 2, just because you haven't unlocked the Gravity Gun in the single player game does not prevent you from having it (and all weapons) in the PvP game. The enjoyment of playing either mode is in no way diminished.

I loved PvE. I'm really looking forward to the expansions and will play them just as fully as I did the adventures we have so far. But it serves a different purpose that shouldn't interfere with PvP in the way competition is meant to be played. I don't need to put handcuffs on one system just to get more enjoyment from the other. They can give more non-PvP rewards for playing PvE if you need a reason to play it, but I enjoy it just for the sake of playing cooperatively in a hack 'n slash environment.

Since PvP and PvE are exciting for separate reasons, there's no reason why one should have to go through PvE play mechanics (slowly unlocking) just to have a normal PvP experience. I'd say the same if I were forced into PvP play mechaics for PvE (full access to everything in Pre-Ascalon on forward).

Eonwe · Jul 01, 2005, 11:18 AM // 11:18

It's a step in the right direction... that's about all that matters right now.

arredondo · Jul 01, 2005, 11:24 AM // 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quintus

"They can make it so that when you enter a PvP staging area, you temporarily recieve all skills, runes, and weapon upgrades for the matches you participate in, and when you leave the staging area, you lose the skills, runes, and weapon upgrades you didn't have already." -Quintus (1st Page)

Go ahead and tell me if you think that this is a bad idea. I can take it.

I like it! I prefer using my PvE character all the time anyway. The only restriction is that you don't have access to other primaries, but that's why pure PvP is there. Either that or ascend a new character. We'd need more slots, but it is workable.

That would be an awesome reward.... after you ascend, you are able to have full UAS/UAR only when playing PvP. Absolutely brilliant idea. You pick your favorite primary and work hard through PvE... that proves you didn't get everything easy. You are allowed a lot of stuff in future added PvE zones, but only what you unlock. In PvP, you get it all so everyone's competing on the same starting level with their chosen primaries, and you can switch secondaries at any time.

If you want to switch primaries, go to pure PvP-only mode and construct them... but use the Faction points to unlock all the gear (I still hate this, but a 50% - 90% reduction in prces would be cool). The other choice is to ascend with another primary, which I personally would consider choosing since I do like PvE. Either way, you have a straight forward way to UAS/UAR that doesn't stomp on the pleas of PvE peeps who say you have to "earn" it some how. As an added bonus, give more Faction or Experience points to people who play their main in the single non-UAS/UAR PvP arena.

Quintus, when you get a chance, please put this idea up in its own thread in the Suggestion Forum as the best compromise solution to PvP vs. PvE. Does anyone see any flaws in his plan? Every play type has value and a purpose, but pure skill competition is still very much accessible without hundreds of man hours invested.

JoDiamonds · Jul 01, 2005, 03:06 PM // 15:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

Why close a well reasoned and civil thread because of intentional flames by people like this guy above? If they can't be civil, why not delete their posts, and if they continue, ban them for a few days from posting? No need to lock my thread since I am not flaming.

Once you post it, it's not really your thread anymore. It's free! =)

Seriously, it belongs to the community, and the moderators are doing what's best for the community. That said, the idea of temporary bans is fine too.

xaanix · Jul 01, 2005, 03:15 PM // 15:15

As an avid pvper, I think the new patch is a ray of light from anet. I'm very pleased they are taking steps towards the fair treatment of pvp players. Currently my only criticisms of the patch are that tombs and arena play dont tend to reward players enough to realistically enable players to gain unlocks in a reasonable amount of time.

GvG is fine though, as most people agree.

Siran Dunmorgan · Jul 01, 2005, 03:42 PM // 15:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

As does playing a 2-year old in friggin' Peek-a-Boo. What, the baby has to earn her way into using both hands and at least one eye by not drooling for five hours first? Too funny!

You don't have kids, do you?

Yeah. They earn it. They earn it by practicing nine or ten hours a day. At first, all they can do is wiggle. After a few weeks, they might be able to hold their heads up. After a couple of months, they 'unlock' coordinated use of their hands. It's considered a landmark day in the life of a parent when the baby can actually hold their own bottle.

Getting to a point where they laugh when you're playing 'Peek-a-boo' with them is something that takes a kid between four and eight months of intensive 'grinding' at the use of their muscles and their mind, enough to 'unlock' non-elementary emotional responses.

You were doing okay with the sports analogies. The 'baby' analogy really doesn't work, though: babies go through the most intensive unlocking grind imaginable.

—Siran Dunmorgan

P. S. I'm still interested to hear your analysis of my comments on—continuing the sports analogies—the difference between football as played by the player vs. football as played by the owner.

There are 'sports' that draw different levels of distinction between game and metagame:

• The NASCAR Association, for example, goes out of their way to ensure that there are as few differences between the cars and pit crew quality as possible, so that winning is principally a matter of driver skill.

• Formula One racing is principally a sport of engineering team vs. engineering team, and only secondarily about driver vs. driver.

• America's Cup yacht racing is almost all about engineering.

This has an interesting effect, by the way: F1 and America's Cup carry considerably more international prestige, but NASCAR races are more exciting to watch, and—I can only imagine—to drive in.

P.P.S What is your perspective on 'Junkyard Wars' as a competitive activity? That's another possible—and rather apt—comparison to Guild Wars.

—SD

nohooiam · Jul 01, 2005, 03:58 PM // 15:58

i don't understand why anet is INTEGRATING PvE with PvP when there needs to be more SEPERATION. what all the PvE players want to do is grind/farm (aka WoW) and the economy keeps getting minimized through recent patches. and what all the PvP players want is 'all unlock' so they can PvP right away without the hassle of PvE (aka Warcraft 3). what anet tried to do is mix warcraft 3 with world of warcraft thinking it'd be a cash cow but actually turning into a horrible mess. the simple solution here is to just seperate PvP and PvE and give each side what they want.

Siren · Jul 01, 2005, 04:42 PM // 16:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

Lol, WHAT!? I only mentioned a factual statement of my infrequent use of an activity, but was in no way commenting on its validity (it's ALL still very valid).

No, here's what you don't get: Chess is not a valid point here. You're comparing apples to oranges when you attempt to compare GW to Chess, and I've shown you why numerous times.

Quote:

Chess remains VERY much analogous.

Bull****. Keep believing that it is--but it isn't. Magic: the Gathering is analogous. Chess is not.

Quote:

As does Checkers.

Bull.

Quote:

As does Go Fish.

Bull.

Quote:

As does Dodge Ball.

Bull.

Quote:

As does playing a 2-year old in friggin' Peek-a-Boo. What, the baby has to earn her way into using both hands and at least one eye by not drooling for five hours first? Too funny!

Siran already showed you how your sarcasm was misplaced there.

Quote:

No serious competition adds laborious nonsense just to achieve what's needed to begin on an equal level with your opponent. Rarely do I literally roll on the floor when laughing, but with your claims of imaginary logic victories, I may have to start doing just that. ROFL!

You can insert annoying references to annoying netspeak catchphrases. Good for you. Nobody cares.

Quote:

And the "tennis destruction" post falls on its face completely. As I've been saying, the professional tennis league does NOT force the players to do crazy acts of endurance just to access top equipment. Nothing keeps anyone from accessing the stuff they need but their OWN choice for not getting it in a professional, serious environment.

Please. Their "OWN choice"? So an entry level tennis player chooses to not use the very best equipment that may very well be outside their price range--or at least unavailable to them at that point in time? Do all tennis players (regardless of whether they're Serena Williams or Average Joe) have the funds available to get the same caliber personal trainers?

Yeah, we'd like things to be equal...but things aren't equal.

And what kinds of crazy acts of endurance in GW could you possibly be indirectly referring to? Is it the addition of PvPers being able to spend time PvPing to unlock things for PvP builds? What a crime. Regaining full refund points after 6k xp? Like I said before, who gives a ****? I find it hard to believe that with all the high-level/end-game content available, gaining 6k xp is such a hard thing to do.

Plus, we now have xp multiplier scrolls for sale in various places, so with a Level 20, you can access pretty much anywhere, you can buy a few of those Triple XP scrolls, so don't complain to us that it's so impossible for you to gain 6k xp. If anything, it's easier than it ever was, especially for Level 20s.

Quote:

Even your choice to bring up high schoolers is nonsense because the system deoesn't use its rules to prevent THEM from getting some $300 pair of shoes either.

School budgets. Sports budgets. It doesn't outright require students to win X amount of games or achieve X amount of acclaim, but more successful teams get more funding. Don't tell me it's nonsense...because there are definite rules in-place there. Any high schooler will tell you that. Go and talk to them before making such outrageous, blanket statements like "Everything is accessible. Nobody is forcing them to go on a rewards treadmill!" Because they'll tell you that more often than not, they feel like they're on a treadmill--and a lot of this is due to the school administration being bureaucrats.

Quote:

If YOU choose not to use a Superior Vigor Rune and any Elite in UAS/UAR system, you have no one to blame but yourself if your win ratio isn't very high. But in the current system, feel free to complain that before you can fully exhibit pure skill in defeating your opponent on an equalized basis, you must first play the equivalent of 500 full tennis matches, 1,000 games of chess, or 1,000,000 games of peek-a-boo. Only then does the SYSTEM allow you to fully gear up with what you need for competition.

Again, Chess is irrelevant. Tennis is irrelevant because you're trying to make it seem like Tennis is entirely bereft of any "imbalance," which is wholly false. Bringing in Peek-A-Boo is a complete stretch and a waste of our time. You're pulling analogies out of your ass, but you don't see that.

You're operating under some misconception that "life [outside of GW] is fair." It's not. In 99% of all that we do in our lives, it won't be fair, professional, semi-professional, high school sports included. That's not my opinion. That's a fact. Athletes are not created equal. All tennis shoes are not created equal. All school/sports budgets are not created equal.

And you're right. If I don't choose to use a Superior Vigor in an UAS/UAR system, that's my fault.

But I don't see what that has to do with what you've been saying here, because you've been trying to justify your argument by bringing in boardgames and other sports, pointing to how "balanced" they are because of an (supposed) "instant" accessibility to skills, abilities, equipment, etc, but the critical flaw in your argument is that your analogies are pointless. Chess has absolutely no bearing on this argument, because Chess has absolutely no bearing on the fundamental game design of GW. Tennis (in how you're using it) has absolutely no bearing here, because everyone does not immediately have access to the best of everything, even though you keep thinking they do.

Keep "laughing" at me. Go ahead. I don't care. But you need to realize that nothing of what you've been saying about "real life" is accurate on any substantial and meaningful level. You jab at me, claiming I've wrongly declared any logical victory here...but when you're not using any real, substantial logic in the first place, who's actually being illogical? You're trying to tell us that all tennis players from all walks of life have access to the same equipment from the get-go, but we know that's false.

Siran Dunmorgan · Jul 01, 2005, 04:48 PM // 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by nohooiam

i don't understand why anet is INTEGRATING PvE with PvP when there needs to be more SEPERATION. what all the PvE players want to do is grind/farm (aka WoW) and the economy keeps getting minimized through recent patches. and what all the PvP players want is 'all unlock' so they can PvP right away without the hassle of PvE (aka Warcraft 3). what anet tried to do is mix warcraft 3 with world of warcraft thinking it'd be a cash cow but actually turning into a horrible mess. the simple solution here is to just seperate PvP and PvE and give each side what they want.

And I don't understand why it has to be about 'sides'.

What I see ArenaNet having done with Guild Wars is—building from your comparison—having integrated Warcraft III with World of Warcraft by making resource collection and research—which normally occur within the context of a single match in Warcraft III something that occurs over a persistent, ongoing 'match' with variable, multiple opponents from the single-character perspective of World of Warcraft.

What they've effectively done is integrated RTS and FPS gaming: if you look at the entire span of Guild Wars as a single session of an RTS game, the guiding philosophy behind 'unlocking' is obvious: it's exactly like 'research' in the RTS context.

I applaud the designers for taking this larger view, and I hope that we can all come to a more complete understanding of this new incarnation of computer gaming. It doesn't have to be about 'sides'.

—Siran Dunmorgan