Does the community know what they want?

[Ate of DK]

Originally Posted by Red Sonya

You'll never know the real truthful answer to that question unless Anet/NCsoft polls the entire GW population. Polls on forums just aren't valid and are irrelevent as they can only represent a very very very small portion of the entire community as a whole even with 20000 if you got all 20000 to vote it would only be an inkling of the entire population of the game.

Is that so?

When elections are comming up, the TV always shows pre-results on what a small amount of the country would vote. In the end it's never that far off.

Which is why we actualy poll...

It represents what probably most people think. And that is something where you start working with.

And the best thing is to ignore most people with 5000+ posts. Cause they are probably not the average player in the game.

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by Clone

I think you've unintentionally hit my nail on the head. Why must Anet direct the way I'm playing the game?

For the good of the game, obviously. When ANet wants more feedback on how to improve the game, who better to turn to? People who play and know the game extensively. If you don't talk to the community you make many hit-or-miss decisions, as seen in the current game of GW.

Just because a lot of people are "enjoying" something doesn't mean it's good for the game. You could probably get a lot of people to actively play in a certain area if it was guaranteed that you'd get a million gold every kill. Will people enjoy it? Yes. Will it make the area popular? Yes. Is it a good idea? Not in any way, shape, or form.

Originally Posted by Ate of DK

And the best thing is to ignore most people with 5000+ posts. Cause they are probably not the average player in the game.

So ignoring (usually) knowledged feedback is a good thing?

[Stockholm]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Just because a lot of people are "enjoying" something doesn't mean it's good for the game.

What people enjoy is whats good for the game, after all most people bought the game for recreation and enjoyment, those who bought the game for any other reason is whats bad for the game. After all it is a GAME, not an occupation.

[la_cabra_de_vida]

People know what they want, its always a matter of self interest. With the SF issue its mearly a debate between the people with stacks of ectos woh saw their value go down vs. the people who were getting rich off the farming run.

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by Stockholm

What people enjoy is whats good for the game, after all most people bought the game for recreation and enjoyment, those who bought the game for any other reason is whats bad for the game. After all it is a GAME, not an occupation.

Either you missed my "1mil gold each gold" example or you agree with that it would be a "good idea". There is an integrity and quality that needs to be maintained in order to say that you have a good game.

[Xx_Sorin_xX]

I think it's a given that no company will ever please the community. There will always be people who are unhappy about a change that others will praise. It's the nature of a free opinionated group.

So does the community know what they want? The community can't even agree on what they want. But does the individual know what they want? Probably.

It's a dilemma every company will face, and probably something that will never be perfect.

[Clarissa F]

Originally Posted by Ate of DK

Is that so?

When elections are comming up, the TV always shows pre-results on what a small amount of the country would vote. In the end it's never that far off.

Which is why we actualy poll...

It represents what probably most people think. And that is something where you start working with.

And the best thing is to ignore most people with 5000+ posts. Cause they are probably not the average player in the game.

Florida, 2000: NBC, based on polls, give the state to Gore, when it was too close to call and polls weren't closed. A factor in Bush lawyers arguing in front of the supreme court.

Ohio, 2004: called in favor of Kerry, Bush ends up with the most delegates.

1980: Polls a few days before the election show Reagan with a slim lead. Results: one of the most lopsided elections in history.

GG.

[byteme!]

I'm not gonna point fingers because I don't need to. The proof is in the pudding. There are certain aspects of the game that are dying or dead. That part of the game has been catered to for the last 3 years. Countless people who "thought" they knew the game destroyed that portion of the game for themselves by repeated asking to refine it, to balance it, to nerf it etc... You people are shooting yourselves in your own foot. I don't need to explain myself. For anyone who has a clue, you already know what I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Just because a lot of people are "enjoying" something doesn't mean it's good for the game.

GW is doing well. People are playing and enjoying the game. GW is thriving unlike many many other online games that have failed upon release. When a lot of people are enjoying something in GW it is a good thing. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S MAKING SALES. Would it make more sense if people didn't like what they were doing but it was better for the game? Who's gonna buy what they don't enjoy? *face palm* If you don't like the direction things are going you can leave anytime. If GW2 turns out to be a success in terms of sales are we still gonna sit here and argue about what's good/bad for the game? If things are "bad" people will leave. This is fact! GW's population in-game seems to be healthy so I rest my case.

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So ignoring (usually) knowledged feedback is a good thing?

For the most part yes. Not a lot of these feedbacks have ever been good. In 1 way or another it's had a domino effect. You buff, nerf 1 thing and suddenly you create a problem somewhere else. Certain aspects of the game are dying. I won't say which portion but you should know anyways. I hate to point fingers but I think I'm becoming very obvious by now.

For the record. Even the best and most knowledgable individuals have made mistakes. It's happened alot. They say 1 thing only to realize later on they were not so correct. Yes this is spotted from time to time in these forums. My faith is in the devs to decipher the good from the bad and even then it's a lil sketchy.

[Ate of DK]

Originally Posted by Clarissa F

Florida, 2000: NBC, based on polls, give the state to Gore, when it was too close to call and polls weren't closed. A factor in Bush lawyers arguing in front of the supreme court.

Ohio, 2004: called in favor of Kerry, Bush ends up with the most delegates.

1980: Polls a few days before the election show Reagan with a slim lead. Results: one of the most lopsided elections in history.

GG.

I don't know of America, but here polls reflect much better on who wins.

[Kashrlyyk]

Originally Posted by Stockholm

What people enjoy is whats good for the game, after all most people bought the game for recreation and enjoyment, those who bought the game for any other reason is whats bad for the game. After all it is a GAME, not an occupation.

Let´s hope ANet realizes that.

[Stockholm]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Either you missed my "1mil gold each gold" example or you agree with that it would be a "good idea". There is an integrity and quality that needs to be maintained in order to say that you have a good game.

Yes I must have missed your 1 Mil gold post.

Quality of the game? Are you referring to the game it self (graphics, sound, movement etc etc) or to the game play (witch would be very different for those that have finished all 3 campaigns and Gwen compared to those that recently bought the game).

The thing is that once you have finished the game, You should no longer be catered to. A-Net have then fulfilled it's obligations to you as a customer.
If you prefer to hang around and grind that your choice, and we all do, but that does not obligate A-Net to change the game so it suits the "veterans" at the expense of the "new players", and that my friend is business integrity and etiquette. Always look at what current customers prefer, not what the freeloaders want.

We all had our time and played the game, now the game has evolved and some "veterans" don't like it, well evolve or move on.

[byteme!]

Originally Posted by Stockholm

Yes I must have missed your 1 Mil gold post.

Quality of the game? Are you referring to the game it self (graphics, sound, movement etc etc) or to the game play (witch would be very different for those that have finished all 3 campaigns and Gwen compared to those that recently bought the game).

The thing is that once you have finished the game, You should no longer be catered to. A-Net have then fulfilled it's obligations to you as a customer.
If you prefer to hang around and grind that your choice, and we all do, but that does not obligate A-Net to change the game so it suits the "veterans" at the expense of the "new players", and that my friend is business integrity and etiquette. Always look at what current customers prefer, not what the freeloaders want.

We all had our time and played the game, now the game has evolved and some "veterans" don't like it, well evolve or move on.

Bingo! You win a prize!

[Riceboi]

Everyone is different.
It's impossible to please everyone.
Therefore someone will always be complaining.

You can't win when dealing with a large amount of people.

/thread

[Kanyatta]

Originally Posted by Riceboi

Everyone is different.
It's impossible to please everyone.
Therefore someone will always be complaining.

You can't win when dealing with a large amount of people.

/thread

Obviously you didn't read the OP correctly, although this thread has taken a turn in a direction I really wasn't expecting. This isn't a whine thread "THE COMMUNITIES ARE ALWAYS COMPLAINING" or whatever. I was just discussing instances where I really don't know what I want when it pertains to Guild Wars.

Your /thread is invalid because of you inability to read.

[Shadowspawn X]

Originally Posted by Ate of DK

I don't know of America, but here polls reflect much better on who wins.

I know much of America and the sad thing is our elections are rigged. When exit polls don't match the result it means someone is cheating. It all stared in our 2000 election of Gee-dub-ya Bush. Whose brother Jeb was the governor of a state that miraculously swung in Bushes favor when all exit polls indicated Al Gore won by a landslide. They will do the same to Obama you are better off in Demark because at least your government is not corrupt to the bone.

On topic I'd like to add that the activists of guild wars who call themselves "casual players" are just special interest nerds who want to dumb the game down and get rewards for nothing. These same "casual players" if they do a /age have thousands of hours both in game and on the forums.

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by byteme!

I'm not gonna point fingers because I don't need to. The proof is in the pudding. There are certain aspects of the game that are dying or dead. That part of the game has been catered to for the last 3 years. Countless people who "thought" they knew the game destroyed that portion of the game for themselves by repeated asking to refine it, to balance it, to nerf it etc... You people are shooting yourselves in your own foot. I don't need to explain myself. For anyone who has a clue, you already know what I'm talking about.

So you're blaming us for introducing mechanics like Shadow Form? You're blaming the players and not the devs for implementing skills like "Save Yourselves" and Ursan Blessing? It's totally the players' fault for abandoning care in a game that we can only voice opinion and not act upon?

Obviously Ensign was a terrible person.

Originally Posted by byteme!

GW's population in-game seems to be healthy so I rest my case.

Because on the get-go, it's fun. That's what's going to keep people more than anything: The fun factor. And yes, on the surface it's *very* fun. The graphics are great, animations are fun, killing is satisfying. On top of all that,

But the thing is that GW has always been doing well. So why was there a need for all of these changes? Why did ANet "need" to revert their policy of "skill>time"? Why did we "need" numerous additional professions that put way too much pressure on the PvP game?

I'm not saying "GW was doing good and now it's doing bad". I'm saying "GW is doing the same as it's been for the three years it's been in existence". We haven't seen a difference. The sales have been declining slightly, but not because it's "bad", just because it's aging - and that's always expected.

Neither am I saying "we should listen to everything the 'elite' players know and base the game entirely off of them", but that we should listen to their advice while keeping the original appeal of Guild Wars in mind. Besides that, most of the arguments you see circulating these forums don't even concern the majority in the first place: Ursan Blessing, PvE skills, Shadow Form, and high-end PvP aren't too well known about from the casual point of view. The silent majority isn't going to care about the depth of the game as long as the surface is still appealing. And I'm not saying their dumb, I'm saying they haven't heard of it and don't concern themselves with it.

Originally Posted by byteme!

For the record. Even the best and most knowledgeable individuals have made mistakes. It's happened alot. They say 1 thing only to realize later on they were not so correct. Yes this is spotted from time to time in these forums. My faith is in the devs to decipher the good from the bad and even then it's a lil sketchy.

This is going to be a slap to ANet, but look at WoW and it's test realm: When Blizzard wants to introduce something new or make a change to something already existing, they go to the TR forums to gather the feedback of who the changes are concerning. Good examples have been the changes of Tier 6 raiding gear and the Lifetap "nerf": If there wasn't a *huge* influx of players showing the reasoning of why such changes would hurt more than help, many players would've been pissed.

All in all, the dev doesn't know best, and Blizzard realizes this. They listen to the feedback and knowledge provided to them by some of the most longterm players. And you can't really argue that WoW is doing bad.

Originally Posted by Stockholm

Quality of the game? Are you referring to the game it self (graphics, sound, movement etc etc) or to the game play (witch would be very different for those that have finished all 3 campaigns and Gwen compared to those that recently bought the game).

To the integrity of it, which is part of the overall quality of it. And yes, you lose *A LOT* of it when you just hand things to the players. How meaningful would Oblvion be if at the start you were given Daedric armor and weapons? How would Diablo look if you were given every item, weapon, and spell at the start of the game?

You are right, though, the game is indeed very different than it was way back when. But not in the good sense.

Originally Posted by Stockholm

The thing is that once you have finished the game, You should no longer be catered to. A-Net have then fulfilled it's obligations to you as a customer.
If you prefer to hang around and grind that your choice, and we all do, but that does not obligate A-Net to change the game so it suits the "veterans" at the expense of the "new players", and that my friend is business integrity and etiquette.

Show me when Guild Wars was doing so bad that ANet had to implement these changes and revert the "skill>time" ideology that made their game unique in the first place. Also, so me how the changes that many here have labeled "bad" (PvE skills, UB, PvE/P seperation) help the casual majority. If you can then I fully and entirely agree with you. But until then...

Originally Posted by Stockholm

Always look at what current customers prefer, not what the freeloaders want.

And that right there is the problem: You never know what most people prefer. The majority is labeled "silent" for a very good reason.

[byteme!]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So you're blaming us for introducing mechanics like Shadow Form? You're blaming the players and not the devs for implementing skills like "Save Yourselves" and Ursan Blessing? It's totally the players' fault for abandoning care in a game that we can only voice opinion and not act upon?

Obviously Ensign was a terrible person.

Since you put it so bluntly. YES I do blame the players. Do I blame Ensign specifically? Probably not. There you go. You got my opinion since you asked.

[Bryant Again]

Originally Posted by byteme!

Since you put it so bluntly. YES I do blame the players.

So you blame the players for implementing things that they didn't implement?

That's all I need.

[Ate of DK]

Originally Posted by Shadowspawn X

I know much of America and the sad thing is our elections are rigged. When exit polls don't match the result it means someone is cheating. It all stared in our 2000 election of Gee-dub-ya Bush. Whose brother Jeb was the governor of a state that miraculously swung in Bushes favor when all exit polls indicated Al Gore won by a landslide. They will do the same to Obama you are better off in Denmark because at least your government is not corrupt to the bone.

On topic I'd like to add that the activists of guild wars who call themselves "casual players" are just special interest nerds who want to dumb the game down and get rewards for nothing. These same "casual players" if they do a /age have thousands of hours both in game and on the forums.

I can agree with everything but Denmark.
<<< The Netherlands, far more beautiful than Denmark.
Ate of [ DK] stands for my first Guild.

[byteme!]

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So you blame the players for implementing things that they didn't implement?

That's all I need.

Yes yes and yes. I'm not gonna bother elaborating. Seems futile. Feel free to put words in my mouth. I could care less. Hopefully as you say this is all you need. We can end this discussion now.