Curse

cataphract · Nov 18, 2008, 02:26 PM // 14:26

Logic and game economy is srs business.

Takeko Nakano · Nov 18, 2008, 02:50 PM // 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

You seem to be contradicting yourself

How is it contradictory? A "bribe" is interesting to people who have not yet finished a campaign, but less interesting to people who have done it several times.

Quote:

IMHO this update is just an application of EotN principles (e.g., books) to other campaigns

One of the most significant EoTN principles is that if you do something you can buy the page back in your book - that was not followed through with this update.

Quote:

As you rightfully said, it's just a game, so stop treating this so seriously.

I paid money for this game, so I can complain if I wish. I'm not going to uninstall GW because of it. I may choose to delay purchase of GW2 though.

Quote:

don't ask me to help explain yourself to others, it's not my job

Did I say you had to?

Quote:

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

Sure, if the criticisms are valid and not childish comments such as "you're just like people on benefit".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

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

My point was that you and others had not read my and others' comments in full. If you failed to pick up on the biggest point, that of money, then I was right in that you failed to read the comments properly. I didn't say your other arguments were invalidated.

Quote:

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

Sorry, you don't want "veterans" to play anymore? So we've paid up our money to ANet, now we can go away until they want us to give them more money again?

Quote:

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.

Then why didn't they just come out and say that? It sounds to me like you're fishing for reasons because you don't like the idea that ANet blundered into this without thinking it through.

Quote:

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.

Except that this is a game so they can do whatever they like that the game allows.

Quote:

Those who played should have an incentive to play again.

Oh please, this isn't an incentive to play the missions for the nth time!

Rocky Raccoon · Nov 18, 2008, 03:05 PM // 15:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

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 agree with most of what you say, but I do take offense with the term lazy just because having the game and not finishing it. I have had the game for over 3 years and have completed just Prophecies and Factions. When I bought the games I had no set time to finish each chapter. My time in game has been divided among missions and quests, farming special drops, AB and helping others with the game. I am in no rush to complete anything and have no real desire for titles unless they come about playing through the game. I play for fun, not for any virtual stature.

Riot Narita · Nov 18, 2008, 03:13 PM // 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

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

No. It's proof that you don't practice what you preach. Worse, you try to dismiss all opposing opinions with "you didn't read what I said". We do indeed read, we simply disagree and don't value your opinions as highly as you do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

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

Such a short memory. You got a load of free faction and an increased faction cap just for logging in. Or are you going to tell me you never did the Factions missions? I also suggest you visit the update notes page, to see all the other nice stuff that came in the update.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

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

The comment wasn't aimed specifically at you, but regardless: You don't have to say it explicitly, in quotable text. You didn't lose anything, quite the opposite... yet here you are, complaining. Therefore, you are one of the people who I categorise as greedy and ungrateful.

Free stuff is cool - but if I don't get any, I don't come on here to complain bitterly about it, or try to dream up arguments to justify why I should have moar free stuffs plox.

Shasgaliel · Nov 18, 2008, 03:39 PM // 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

My point was that you and others had not read my and others' comments in full. If you failed to pick up on the biggest point, that of money, then I was right in that you failed to read the comments properly. I didn't say your other arguments were invalidated.

Because my original topic from which this discussion started was not aimed at your suggestion, which did not include money reward, but about the concept of retroactivity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Sorry, you don't want "veterans" to play anymore? So we've paid up our money to ANet, now we can go away until they want us to give them more money again?

This part was referring to your solution. I was not clear enough there. I meant that giving those rewards will remove the incentive for veterans to play the game. Anyway it should be obvious from the latter part of my post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Then why didn't they just come out and say that? It sounds to me like you're fishing for reasons because you don't like the idea that ANet blundered into this without thinking it through.

I do not know why they did not. In my opinion they put some grind in the game with this books which is against the community wishes so they kept low profile. But it is just a guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Oh please, this isn't an incentive to play the missions for the nth time!

Some mission outposts are cluttered with people. I guess for some it is a sufficient incentive. Might be that the rewards are still too low. Anyway giving stuff for free will not make people play the missions while increasing rewards for them will. Not all of them of course. Anyway I see it working and I am happy. I just hope it will last long enough.

Apollo Smile · Nov 18, 2008, 03:42 PM // 15:42

With all the arguing in this thread, can we at least agree on the fact that its a step in the right direction and ArenaNet is trying? Every update this game has ever had has been complained about, but I am thankful to the small group of people who still work on GW1.

Jongo River · Nov 18, 2008, 04:05 PM // 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

One of the most significant EoTN principles is that if you do something you can buy the page back in your book - that was not followed through with this update.

Fudging a feature into EotN, after it went live, because people complained they'd made progress before acquiring a book, was a "significant EoTN principle"?

You're really talking out of your

, now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollo Smile

I am thankful to the small group of people who still work on GW1.

Amen.

DreamWind · Nov 18, 2008, 04:15 PM // 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

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.

You think?? The only official statements out of Anet have been shaky at best. I will tell you right now the economy argument is a joke on so many levels, and the reason they won't bring it up again it because they know it is too. The argument that they can't technically do it is also a joke because we know it has been done in EOTN. It has even got to the point where Linsey admitted it is unfair, and yet people are still sitting here trying to claim it is fair.

Also I am tired of people saying "well it brought a lot of players back to play the missions therefore it is good". How do you define what is good? The update is still unfair regardless of what else it did. The ENTIRE POINT of the update was to reduce grind, yet it INCREASES grind for players who have already done the missions. Seriously how the hell can people not see this clear point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

I too fail to understand how new players need "less work" for their protector and guardian titles.

New players need less work to get the new rewards, not the titles. Think of it this way: if I have done all the missions twice previously, it means I have to do the missions 3 times to get the same reward as somebody who has done it once.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

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?

People who are driven by goals should be rewarded, not punished, when they reach those goals. In this update the people who were driven to do the missions previously are punished by having to do them again for the same rewards. I don't think anybody is asking for more than being able to turn in 1-2 books depending on title, because that is what we know Anet is capable of doing.

As for removing books from the game, please do. Remove titles while they are at it...of course that would never fly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

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.

Completely 100% disagree, but this isn't the place for a logic debate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

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.

Are you kidding me? This update is the epitome of unfairness. Whatever you may think about the update as a whole and how it did or didn't make the game better is irrelevent to the point that the update is completely unfair. Calling people who realize this fact "greedy" is ridiculous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frozy

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.

Finally someone with reason!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

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.

I thought the entire point was to reduce their grind based game...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

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.

You simply aren't going to motivate many players to go through the entire game all over again. As I said before, if they gave me a million gold I wouldn't do them over...because to me it is GRIND based. I enjoy NO grind, not MORE grind.

Also using your logic, what if we turn in these new books only for Anet to release a new update in the future saying we get MORE gold for doing the missions ALL OVER AGAIN (and those who did them previously for these books don't count)?? Is that considered incentive too? I seriously think thats a joke...its just incentive to keep recycling the same content over and over. In the eyes of many that is called grind, something that should be minimized.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeno Nakano

Then why didn't they just come out and say that? It sounds to me like you're fishing for reasons because you don't like the idea that ANet blundered into this without thinking it through.

Somebody else with reason! People are just fishing for reasons for this update to be considered fair...and yet even Anet reps are acknowledging it isn't fair and giving no good reasons why it should be considered so. Lets drive this point home one more time....whatever you think about this update being good for the game is irrelevent to the point that it is blatantly unfair and increases grind where it was meant to reduce it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

The comment wasn't aimed specifically at you, but regardless: You don't have to say it explicitly, in quotable text. You didn't lose anything, quite the opposite... yet here you are, complaining. Therefore, you are one of the people who I categorise as greedy and ungrateful.

Yet another person calling people who dislike the update "greedy". LoL.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

Some mission outposts are cluttered with people. I guess for some it is a sufficient incentive. Might be that the rewards are still too low. Anyway giving stuff for free will not make people play the missions while increasing rewards for them will. Not all of them of course. Anyway I see it working and I am happy. I just hope it will last long enough.

Its not incentive for me or anybody I know personally. Its great that some people are playing the game again, but it completely goes against what the update was meant to do, and it just feeds in to the fact that Anet possibly WANTS their games to have more grind.

odly · Nov 18, 2008, 04:17 PM // 16:17

I want a bookcase in my HoM. The books in themselves don't do much for me. I don't see any reason to fill them except as a vanity item. Putting them on display in the HoM makes a lot of sense to me.

Riot Narita · Nov 18, 2008, 04:52 PM // 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

People are just fishing for reasons for this update to be considered fair

People are just fishing for reasons for this update to be considered unfair. A-Net could have done more, but they didn't. That's their prerogative. I don't see it as unfair, I don't see any sky-is-falling injustice, or people being indiscriminately punished. I see an update with a ton of good stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Yet another person calling people who dislike the update "greedy". LoL.

Yes, because that's exactly what I think of them. So what?

Did you have a point to make, or did you just quote me to pad out your post?

HawkofStorms · Nov 18, 2008, 05:02 PM // 17:02

The thing is... people are so convinced they are "right" that they will ignore any arguement, no matter how logical, that flies against them. You are all stubborn... and well, lets just say nobody here is going to be given a judgeship any time soon.

Learn to listen to and acknowledge other people's points. If you aren't going to, then why bother posting? If you aren't going to be convinced, and they aren't going to be convinced, why waste time arguing about it? Neither side is even listening to the other anyway.

Takeko Nakano · Nov 18, 2008, 05:26 PM // 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

No. It's proof that you don't practice what you preach. Worse, you try to dismiss all opposing opinions with "you didn't read what I said".

No, I say people don't read what we write when they trot out the economy concern after we've said several times we'd be happy to give up the cash.

Quote:

We do indeed read, we simply disagree and don't value your opinions as highly as you do.

Sorry, you disagree that removing the financial reward for handing in a back-dated book would resolve the concern on the economy?

Quote:

You got a load of free faction and an increased faction cap just for logging in.

Couldn't care less about the faction cap. As for the faction itself, I lost all the Kurzick faction I got because I spent it on my Luxon title track (where I'm much more ahead). I had also EARNT that faction by doing those very things you would receive it for completing/taking part in.

Quote:

You didn't lose anything, quite the opposite... yet here you are, complaining. Therefore, you are one of the people who I categorise as greedy and ungrateful.

Ah, so if I don't lose something I can't complain. Well that's a load of rubbish.

Ungrateful. I'm ungrateful because I can get something by repeating what I have done more than half a dozen times and took me hours each time? What are you smoking - I want some!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shasgaliel

Because my original topic from which this discussion started was not aimed at your suggestion, which did not include money reward, but about the concept of retroactivity.

Err, no, you said (I'm not quoting you, but it's essentially what you said) "I am reading your comments" and then you said "retroactivity is not possible because it would affect the economy". Either you failed to read my comments or you failed to take them on board. There is no point going on about the economy if a solution has already been proposed.

Quote:

I do not know why they did not. In my opinion they put some grind in the game with this books which is against the community wishes so they kept low profile. But it is just a guess.

Why are you guessing? Regina passed one comment which was "economy problem". That has been refuted. So officially ANet has no reason not to bring in our changes. If they want myself and others to accept the changes as they stand, I think that we would like to see an official announcement that addresses the points we've made. With all due respect I'm not going to be convinced because of comments you or other players make. ANet can do their own work.

Quote:

I guess for some it is a sufficient incentive.

Yes. But just because some are happy does not mean the rest/the minority should be satisfied.

Quote:

Anyway giving stuff for free will not make people play the missions while increasing rewards for them will.

Again, it wouldn't be free because we already earnt the rewards by playing these campaigns. Also, whilst it might not induce us to play these campaigns again at least with our existing characters that have already done those missions, it certainly would make us feel valued and convince us that ANet seeks to RETAIN players and not just cast them aside once they've handed over heap-big-money for all their products. Because at the moment my view of this company is that once you've paid up, that's it.

At least the pay-per-month games have to keep things interesting because otherwise they'll lose their cashflow. ANet just want you to trust them that they won't forget you. Why should we trust them after this debacle?

Fril Estelin · Nov 18, 2008, 05:31 PM // 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

The argument that they can't technically do it is also a joke because we know it has been done in EOTN.

It may not be, as it's not because it was done in the context of an expansion that you can "retroactively" apply the new methods to previous content. There's been new source code with EotN and this update is probably not just a matter of applying a straightforward "getRetroactivePoints" procedure from EotN to a "propheciesDB" database from Prophecies. I'm sure this update required quite a lot of fiddling in the source code from the 3 campaigns to work (yep, if they had more resources working on GW1 they could do better, yet they don't, but they still produced this update).

Quote:

It has even got to the point where Linsey admitted it is unfair, and yet people are still sitting here trying to claim it is fair.

More exactly, she said (strangely I can't find her quote on the wiki discussion page but it's still in my post #387 in this thread), like someone did here, that it'd be unfair to give reward equivalent to doing missions one time to those that did all missions several times, or in other words you open the doors to more QQing. I'll put again here her post:

The problem is that we have not tracked how many turn ins people have done or what they turned in for, so we can't even remotely guess how much you should be credited. Without that information I just don't think it's a good idea to randomly give out points.

This kind of thing is the nature of all online games and it's not an easy thing to compensate for. Keep in mind that it's a two way street, though. Players that have been playing a game for a long time get advantages as well as disadvantages by playing content that has been changed. For instance, after this update the HFFF won't be the easy thing that it has been for a long time. Many players have taken advantage of it for ez-mode farming but newer players won't have that benefit and will have to actually play through content to farm points. Does that mean that we should be making guesses at how much faction they could have earned along with the rest of the people trying to advance the title and give it to them? I think not.

I know that it can be a bummer to have changes made to the game that make activities that you had previously done more rewarding for people that do them after you. You are left sitting, thinking "man I already did that like a 100 times and NOW you decide to give me a cookie for it?" which is why we are making an effort to have as many of the changes we are making be retroactive. However some things just can't be reliably done so rather than potentially create more problems, a call has to be made. At this point, well over a year after that change was made, I don't think that it is a good idea to try to guess at who turned in faction, what they turned in for and how much. So we are not going to be crediting players for possible turn ins they made over a year ago. I'm sorry this isn't the answer you are looking for, but I do think that it is the right one. =/ - Image:User Linsey Murdock sig.jpgLinsey talk 17:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Quote:

Also I am tired of people saying "well it brought a lot of players back to play the missions therefore it is good". How do you define what is good?

It's fairly simple: each person that speaks expresses his own point of view (plus sometimes those of friends, guildies), but most of the time it's one's own good that we're talking about. But not always.

Quote:

The ENTIRE POINT of the update was to reduce grind, yet it INCREASES grind for players who have already done the missions.

On the first point, a better presentation of the update is "propose less boring ways to grind" (but it doesn't change the fact that grinding is a player's choice, no one and surely not Anet forces you to do so). On the second, I don't see how it increases grind at all, because we have the same situation plus more rewards.

Quote:

New players need less work to get the new rewards, not the titles. Think of it this way: if I have done all the missions twice previously, it means I have to do the missions 3 times to get the same reward as somebody who has done it once.

Like I said above, what are you talking about? PvE skills? How can it be easier for anyone since we all have access to the same game features (missions and rewards)? I don't understand at all your example, please rephrase.

Quote:

People who are driven by goals should be rewarded, not punished, when they reach those goals.

Title-grinders are driven by goals...

Quote:

In this update the people who were driven to do the missions previously are punished by having to do them again for the same rewards.

You seem to consider it "punishment" by the simple fact of "not having a retroactive reward", but this is a (logical) fallacy. Punishing would imply doing something directly to those that did the missions, like removing their title, or indirectly by forcing them to redo the mission, which is not the case (no one forces you to redo missions).

Quote:

I don't think anybody is asking for more than being able to turn in 1-2 books depending on title, because that is what we know Anet is capable of doing.

Again, /agreed on this one, but with adjusted rewards for everything (while the "it'll impact heavily the economy" excuse seems wrong, no one in its mind can reasonably say that it won't have an effect on the economy). Unless Anet produces clear evidence that it'd impact heavily the economy.

Quote:

Are you kidding me? This update is the epitome of unfairness.

And this answer is the epitome of "blowing things up beyond reasonable proportions". I mean, no disrespect to all those disappointed by this update, but it seems that posts from this side of the argument get an excessive and very emotional reaction. I know that some of you keep on repeating that you give logical explanations, but most of the time you don't (see my request for a better example above, it may well be that you have a point but you haven't phrased it clearly, or I'm very bad at understanding it!).

Quote:

Whatever you may think about the update as a whole and how it did or didn't make the game better is irrelevent to the point that the update is completely unfair.

Similarly to your "who defines what is good" argument above, you can't claim to define what is fair because it affects you or others, or you agree to the points of other people here. What if we realised that people who've done LG before and want retroactive rewards were only a very small minority? Would it be fair to force this issue onto the whole population? (I mean, we've seen posts from people who said they don't mind)

Quote:

I thought the entire point was to reduce their grind based game...

And you think it may happen in one go, after one update?

Quote:

People are just fishing for reasons for this update to be considered fair...and yet even Anet reps are acknowledging it isn't fair and giving no good reasons why it should be considered so.

Fairness is an evolving and multi-faceted concept anyway. There's not a universal definition that will stand against time and the diversity of the GW population. As Linsey said, a line has to be drawn and while it's never, ever perfect, it's probably as fair as Anet can ever do. (and I guess fairness is also a matter of perspective, this argument we're having would be completely ridiculed if Anet were to provide evidence that it'd have a major impact on the economy)

Quote:

Its great that some people are playing the game again, but it completely goes against what the update was meant to do, and it just feeds in to the fact that Anet possibly WANTS their games to have more grind.

Without being from Anet, you have no way to know what the update was meant to do exactly, you just try to infer that from bits and pieces we grab here and there, including comments from people here. I'm for example convinced that it was to drive people back to playing, which it did, but I don't really care because it seems that overall people are reacting in a positive way to the update.

DreamWind · Nov 18, 2008, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

People are just fishing for reasons for this update to be considered unfair. A-Net could have done more, but they didn't. That's their prerogative. I don't see it as unfair, I don't see any sky-is-falling injustice, or people being indiscriminately punished. I see an update with a ton of good stuff.

I see it as an update with some good stuff as well, but that completely ignores the points I made. The unfairness doesn't need to be fished out, its right in front of your face.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

Did you have a point to make, or did you just quote me to pad out your post?

I made several points and you ignored every one of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Learn to listen to and acknowledge other people's points. If you aren't going to, then why bother posting? If you aren't going to be convinced, and they aren't going to be convinced, why waste time arguing about it? Neither side is even listening to the other anyway.

Its called a forum. Whether or not people want to listen to the facts is not my problem.

Riot Narita · Nov 18, 2008, 05:52 PM // 17:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Sorry, you disagree that removing the financial reward for handing in a back-dated book would resolve the concern on the economy?

Sorry, no. I've made myself perfectly clear. So now you are reduced to putting words into my mouth and trying to infer extra meaning that isn't there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeko Nakano

Ah, so if I don't lose something I can't complain. Well that's a load of rubbish.

Again, putting words into my mouth.

You didn't lose anything AND you gained stuff.
Arguing for even more free stuff is simply greedy.
Arguing for more free stuff minus the money is just a little less greedy.

DreamWind · Nov 18, 2008, 06:02 PM // 18:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

It may not be, as it's not because it was done in the context of an expansion that you can "retroactively" apply the new methods to previous content.

Maybe...but if it is completely impossible they should just come out and say it is completely impossible. Instead we get "it would be bad for the economy" which tells me it is possible but they didn't want to do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linsey

Players that have been playing a game for a long time get advantages as well as disadvantages by playing content that has been changed.

I know that it can be a bummer to have changes made to the game that make activities that you had previously done more rewarding for people that do them after you. You are left sitting, thinking "man I already did that like a 100 times and NOW you decide to give me a cookie for it?" which is why we are making an effort to have as many of the changes we are making be retroactive. However some things just can't be reliably done so rather than potentially create more problems, a call has to be made. At this point, well over a year after that change was made, I don't think that it is a good idea to try to guessat who turned in faction, what they turned in for and how much.

I cut out the important parts and bolded them.

1st bold- I see no advantages for long time players doing missions since the missions have not changed.

2nd bold- Here she admit that it is unfair.

3rd bold- If they are making an effort to make changes retroactive why not this one? Its either it is impossible to do or they really believe it affects the economy. Which one is it?

4th bold- They don't have to guess...they simply use the titles for 1-2 turn ins (as almost everybody agrees would be fair).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

On the first point, a better presentation of the update is "propose less boring ways to grind" (but it doesn't change the fact that grinding is a player's choice, no one and surely not Anet forces you to do so). On the second, I don't see how it increases grind at all, because we have the same situation plus more rewards.

Grinding is not a choice for players who have already done the missions and want the reward! Meaning if they have already done the missions they now have to grind to get the reward as opposed to others who only have to go through once. See what I mean?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Title-grinders are driven by goals...

I don't agree with titles...BUT if you are going to have them in the game at all for goal driven players, then why piss off those goal driven players by saying their previous accomplishments mean less than what others are doing now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

You seem to consider it "punishment" by the simple fact of "not having a retroactive reward", but this is a (logical) fallacy. Punishing would imply doing something directly to those that did the missions, like removing their title, or indirectly by forcing them to redo the mission, which is not the case (no one forces you to redo missions).

They didn't punish them directly, they punished them indirectly if they want the reward. See my previous paragraph.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

And this answer is the epitome of "blowing things up beyond reasonable proportions". I mean, no disrespect to all those disappointed by this update, but it seems that posts from this side of the argument get an excessive and very emotional reaction. I know that some of you keep on repeating that you give logical explanations, but most of the time you don't (see my request for a better example above, it may well be that you have a point but you haven't phrased it clearly, or I'm very bad at understanding it!).

I'm not emotional. As I said I don't really care one way or the other. I'm just pointing out some obvious facts that people are ignoring. Yes the update in general seems to be good, but there are bad parts to it and this is one of them. (And what example do you want?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Similarly to your "who defines what is good" argument above, you can't claim to define what is fair because it affects you or others, or you agree to the points of other people here. What if we realised that people who've done LG before and want retroactive rewards were only a very small minority? Would it be fair to force this issue onto the whole population? (I mean, we've seen posts from people who said they don't mind)

If it was a very small minority then that would be an even more reason to implement it as the economy argument would go even farther out the window (although it is bad even if the majority is huge) and the whole population would not be affected whatsoever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

And you think it may happen in one go, after one update?

No I don't think they can reduce all grind in one update...but that was the major point of this update as has been stated by them. So why do something that takes away from the major point of the update? Doesn't it seem counterproductive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

This argument we're having would be completely ridiculed if Anet were to provide evidence that it'd have a major impact on the economy/

Which I can guarantee they will never do so it is irrelevent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Without being from Anet, you have no way to know what the update was meant to do exactly, you just try to infer that from bits and pieces we grab here and there, including comments from people here. I'm for example convinced that it was to drive people back to playing, which it did, but I don't really care because it seems that overall people are reacting in a positive way to the update.

Actually I was pretty darn sure they said this would be a grind reducing update, as hfff and titles was obviously the main focus of the update and talking points of the update before it was ever released.

Frozy · Nov 18, 2008, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

You didn't lose anything AND you gained stuff.
Arguing for even more free stuff is simply greedy.
Arguing for more free stuff minus the money is just a little less greedy.

Excuse me? Greedy?
We played the game naturally just like the new players, and yet they get more rewards than us, we have to grind for the rewards they get by playing naturally.
We don't want more than what we earned, we want the same reward they get, since we did the exact same thing.
This isn't being greedy, we want to be equal.

If Anet would give a good reason for not giving us retroactive rewards, then the situation could be different.
And yet, we know they could reward us retroactively, we know they didn't, and we still didn't get a good reason for this.

We keep stating the facts that show why this update is unfair, and how it could be fair, nobody managed to prove us wrong or even get close to it.
We ask if Anet got a good reason for screwing us, we didn't get a good reason.
Economy? simply don't give us the gold reward, give us the faction.
Cannot track our achievements? proven wrong, we can see it on our map, on our titles and on our Hall of Monuments, they might not be able to track how many times we completed these missions, but they CAN track we did them at least once on each mode, we should get retroactive rewards at least for that.

Our point stands - this update is unfair, Anet could make it fair but chose not to for no good reason, we have the right to complain.

MStarfire · Nov 18, 2008, 06:19 PM // 18:19

FLAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously what happened to this thread? It's worse than a political debate in here. You've got idiots on both sides trying to convince each other that either the update is amazing or it sucks and should be removed or whatever, but at the end of the day you're all just idiots arguing on the internet.

Log off the forums, and maybe go play the game. Just go play the game. While you do this, keep in mind that it is a GAME and it's supposed to be fun.

The odd thing, though, is that even if you hate the new update and you rail against it day and night on the forums, you're still playing the game, which I suppose makes you a hypocrite. If you disagree with the game so much that you feel the need to get into a flame war on GWG, then maybe you need to retire and find a new game.

The other side of the coin is just as retarded. If you love the new update, why do you care if someone else doesn't? Anet isn't going to take the books away from us just because some jackoff decided he doesn't like it and felt the need to bitch about it. You're wasting valuable time arguing with children, time you could spend actually enjoying the new update. So you, too, should shut the hell up.

Regardless of how "unfair" (OMG a VIDEO GAME is being UNFAIR THIS IS CLEARLY THE END OF TEH WORLDZ) you think the update is, it is what it is and there's no going back. So deal with it. Adapt, change with the times. If you find yourself unable to reconcile yourself with the game as it exists today, then quit.

As for me, I'm going to go steamroll my 4th copy of Shiro's Return HM with my guild. I, for one, enjoy the revitalization, especially the incentive to get back to Cantha. I've Vanquished, Protected, Cartographered and Guardianed there, and I was beginning to miss it. Helping guildmates through with missions they need to do to nail their titles as well as see all the scenery again (yes I agree the story falls apart, but the art is impressive) is a very welcome update. I'm going to go enjoy it.

Shemsu Anpw · Nov 18, 2008, 06:28 PM // 18:28

I'm Amazed that people are still arguing about this it has been almost a week. Please let it die. We will have to agree to disagree. This is soooooo not worth carrying it on for a week past the update? Is it? It seems right now it is more along the lines of difference of opinions now, and THAT will never change. Save Yourselves and pixels. :-D

Carpe Diem

Abedeus · Nov 18, 2008, 06:57 PM // 18:57

Quote:

should be removed, but at the end of the day you're all just idiots arguing on the internet.

I only see one idiot, that sees some things that nobody EVER said. Nobody said that books should be removed, because they help new players.

Quote:

So deal with it. Adapt, change with the times. If you find yourself unable to reconcile yourself with the game as it exists today, then quit.

Quitter boy, quitter boy. If life is too hard, and if you don't adapt, quit it. Don't try to change it.

Quote:

I'm Amazed that people are still arguing about this it has been almost a week. Please let it die. We will have to agree to disagree. This is soooooo not worth carrying it on for a week past the update? Is it? It seems right now it is more along the lines of difference of opinions now, and THAT will never change. Save Yourselves and pixels. :-D

People said same thing about Ursan. And what happened to Ursan carebears? Well, you don't see anyone using UB nowadays.

Quote:

We played the game naturally just like the new players, and yet they get more rewards than us, we have to grind for the rewards they get by playing naturally.
We don't want more than what we earned, we want the same reward they get, since we did the exact same thing.

That. And we don't want gold, maybe except for Tyria. We do want, however, FACTION. Because 8k Sunspear faction is still a lot, my Ranger would be r5 or r6 already.