Curse

kostolomac · Jun 13, 2008, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cale Roughstar

I don't see why everyone keeps putting out the idea that Guru users are not indicative of the community as a whole. I like to compare guru to the government of any democratic country. Guru, like to government is a place where a small percentage of people from all facets of the game come to discuss the game. To say that there are not enough users to represent the community as a whole is bullcrap. Here in Canada, we have just over 300 representatives in the federal government, representing over 35 million people. That is a lot less than 1%. The users of guru represent the players of GW. To say that a full census is required is stupid and we would still be in the dark ages if a referendum was held for every single decision or policy.

Some people...

But did I , or the other GW players choose you , the voice of the community to actually be the voice of the community. You compared it to the federal goverment of Canada. Did you vote for them , or did they just proclaimed themselves to be our voice and know what's best for us?

Carinae · Jun 13, 2008, 08:22 PM // 20:22

FYI: Among all the GW forums, Guru is the smallest, but has a reputation for having a very high density of skilled players....and thus an excellent signal-to-noise ratio, comparatively.

Is Guru representative? It's representative of people who know how to succeed in this game. People who don't know how to succeed probably shouldn't be directly represented at all. Because they don't know what they need. They know what they want, but that's not the same thing.

Tyla · Jun 13, 2008, 08:30 PM // 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostolomac

But did I , or the other GW players choose you , the voice of the community to actually be the voice of the community. You compared it to the federal goverment of Canada. Did you vote for them , or did they just proclaimed themselves to be our voice and know what's best for us?

Well if the rest of the community voiced their opinions, the game would be in a better state.

People who post on these forums are people who care about the game whether or not they disagree or agree with anything. They make contributions to Arena Net simply by posting and voicing their opinions, and if the majority don't speak up, then you might aswell look towards the people who actually speak out and discuss with other players.

Gun Pierson · Jun 13, 2008, 08:55 PM // 20:55

One more thing: A poll in the log in screen could be an opportunity to get mass feedback on hot topics, if Anet wants to have that information.

For example:
Do you like to have the option to play with 7 heroes:
1) yes
2) no
3) I don't care

Shuuda · Jun 13, 2008, 09:01 PM // 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

One more thing: A poll in the log in screen could be an opportunity to get mass feedback on hot topics, if Anet wants to have that information.

For example:
Do you like to have the option to play with 7 heroes:
1) yes
2) no
3) I don't care

That could have some uses, but I'm a tad cynical. The GW masses (or the masses of anything, be it game, country, etc) are similar to the child that refuses to eat vegetables or go to school, and wants chocolate instead. He doesn't know what's good for him.

Inde · Jun 13, 2008, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Everyone is right now speaking in general and vague terms. It's ridiculous to say that Guru does or does not represent the community. It doesn't matter. You don't know if it does. The developers don't know if it does. The majority opinion on this forum could very well represent what 90% of the playerbase thinks. But you'll never know and neither will Anet. Which is why Regina made her post, to tell you that Anet is looking for better ways for players to voice that opinion and for Anet to listen to that voice.

You can't bash the only method they have right now of gathering feedback by proclaiming "it doesn't represent the community." It's the only thing they've got. Whether it does or does not is irrelevant until Anet finds a better way to gather that feedback. So right now... the forums, the wiki comments, the emails and PM's are Anet's only means of gathering feedback. If 9 out of 10 people in a thread say they like/hate something then Anet has to accept the possibility that this IS the opinion until they actually find a method of getting a more diverse one. Otherwise every move they make is just a shot in the dark.

We all know that every move a company makes there will be people who like or dislike it. People who can list every reason for it being good, and every reason for it being bad. Then those in the middle who can't care. It's also commonly known that complainers have the ear of the company. You can't improve in the right direction if you don't know what the opinion of your customers is. If you have ineffective means of gathering that data then anything goes. You are taking a chance with every single decision you make and it will hurt your bottom line after a while.

What do you do when a number of people are all voicing the same complaint in a company then? You address it. You'll never win back everyone though. Really good companies, that continue to thrive, do actually concentrate on their customer service. That customer service can only address the needs and wants of those that choose to have a voice though. If you remain on the sideline then you leave yourself little choice but to accept what is thrown at you. If you do take the time to write your complaints, your concerns, your questions down then it is good business practice for a company to listen and, in the best way they can, acknowledge that they heard. No they can't solve or bow to your whim but what most people are looking for when they have a complaint is acknowledgement that it's being looked at.

This is a lot of rambling for a point that I made in my first paragraph. Anet would be wise to listen to the voice of the player by the only means that they have provided and encouraged us to use... the forums. They don't have to agree with the user, but if a number of users pop up saying "hey I feel the same way" you've got a red flag that you can go off of and use. Isn't a common repsonse from NCSoft support to post that suggestion on one of the GW forums? If support is directing you to use a resource then of course one is going to believe that Anet is actually themselves using that as a resource for suggestions, complaints, concerns and questions the players have.

Not one of us speaks for anyone else. But I do believe that Anet can follow a discussion and draw their conclusions on whether a good number of people support or don't support a thread. Why we are fighting over whether this forum or a particular user represents that voice is silly... Anet has told us to use this as a resource for delivering constructive feedback.

Crom The Pale · Jun 13, 2008, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Excelent post Inde, the only question it raises for my part is do we know exactly how much info they can gleen from the game itself?

Can Anet tell just how many players are making use of a specific skill or farming a certain map?

We do know they can tell how much cash we have in storage. I would also assume they know how many of any one type of items have been generated in the game, ie they know how many Torment weapons exist and how many accounts but not the ratio of how many are on one account.

We do know they read the forums and gather some general feed back from them and emails, but they must also have other resources that we never know about that influences the changes they make.

Inde · Jun 13, 2008, 09:37 PM // 21:37

I don't really feel that looking at a db of info can really tell them what suggestions, feedback, changes, etc. the game needs. Raw data can be interpreted any way you'd like... majority of players can be using one weapon because it's:
a) good
b) overpowered
c) easy to get
d) cool looking
e) you get the point....

Raw data has uses but really the only way to know what needs to be changed is either experiencing it or listening to others. If they have other means of gathering that data they've never let the players know. So I am going to go with the assumption that no, they don't.

DreamWind · Jun 13, 2008, 09:44 PM // 21:44

I find it interesting that people are going back and forth about "the minority" and "the majority" and talking about communications with Anet. To me I think the bigger point is that Anet destroyed the depth of their game, and don't seem to have any intentions of going back.

Tyla · Jun 13, 2008, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Agreed, Dreamwind.

I believe that can be sorted out by something noticable by everyone who logs in.

Anyway, back to the topic and off these strawmen...

Lopezus · Jun 13, 2008, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Quote:

The GW masses (or the masses of anything, be it game, country, etc) are similar to the child that refuses to eat vegetables or go to school, and wants chocolate instead. He doesn't know what's good for him.

totally disagree,
only because people can be count in large numbers doesn't mean thay are masses, they are individual human beings and they know fairly well what's good for them and definietly know it better then self-proclaimed represnetatives.
Thinking that people who don't use guru to voice their opinions just don't care about the game or are childs that need to be guided is nothing more then just being conceited.

Red Sonya · Jun 13, 2008, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cale Roughstar

I don't see why everyone keeps putting out the idea that Guru users are not indicative of the community as a whole. I like to compare guru to the government of any democratic country. Guru, like to government is a place where a small percentage of people from all facets of the game come to discuss the game. To say that there are not enough users to represent the community as a whole is bullcrap. Here in Canada, we have just over 300 representatives in the federal government, representing over 35 million people. That is a lot less than 1%. The users of guru represent the players of GW. To say that a full census is required is stupid and we would still be in the dark ages if a referendum was held for every single decision or policy.

Some people...

I guess you forget that every one of those 300 representatives had to be VOTED into that position by those 35 million people. Even more in the US and I didn't see any voting polls that said the people who spat on Guru or the other websites were VOTED in by their peers. lol You are each little representations of YOURSELF and that is all, nobody voted you into ANY position to tell Anet what they should do with the game.

Quote:

Thinking that people who don't use guru to voice their opinions just don't care about the game or are childs that need to be guided is nothing more then just being conceited.

Exactly QFT again.

Quote:

And I was saying it to bat against the 1% that Sonya threw out. I don't hold my statement as fact but it's a hell of a lot more than 1%

Prove it which you can't so your statement is just as biased as the next person and the next person who throws out any STATISTIC related to the game. All anyone can do is speak INDIVIDUALLY for themselves unless you can prove your statements with documents or official statements from NCsoft or Anet which you can't. I can't either and I've proven MY POINT saying EVERYONE and EVERYBODY and ALL THESE and MAJORITY is baseless and cannot be proven. So, everytime someone else does it I'm going to do it on the opposite side of the fence just to show there is no base for statistics and numerical values for the community that wants this or that except that there IS a silent majority that cannot be denied and that's the pudding that Anet is catering and mixing stuff up for.

One last point I will make is that there's been people (lots of them have no figures) that have whinned and cried and boo hooed for 7 playable heroes, stopping the running past content to Droks, an auction trading house system and even more storage or guild storage and you haven't seen Anet cater to those whinners, so, why do you keep saying Anet caters to the whinning crowd with this? This is no different than the others. Anet picks what is important to change for their reasons and their income not because a bunch of people whinned.

Alia Stormkiller · Jun 13, 2008, 10:23 PM // 22:23

I wil get back to the OP...great post

/signed

I would like to question why Regina took the time to post? She really didnt say anything. From what I read she gave a typical non-answer that a lot of Customer Relations give.

Also Why even mention GW2 and providing more in the future, why not now? A year ago we knew almost as much about GW2 as we do now. So how about some updates on that. Throw the community a bone, answer some of our question and not by tap dancing around them.

sixofone · Jun 13, 2008, 10:35 PM // 22:35

Just curious: has anyone done a poll on here about this? Is there, in fact, a measure of how many love Ursan, hate it, could care less? Short of having to read thru entire posts, which often devolve into something other than the OP's point/issue - wouldn't simply pointing to a poll end the matter?

"See? 60% of those polled love GW in its current state!"
or
"80% feel ANet went in entirely the wrong direction with PvE skills and EotN class-less system!"

If not, how do you start one?

Greedy Gus · Jun 13, 2008, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lopezus

Players didn't ask to be reperesented by guru users

Guru users more or less do represent the players with the useful feedback and important knowledge about all specific issues. Not because these players "asked" or "voted" for representation, but because they are the forum posters. When people actually care about their opinions on important matters, they find a medium to convey them.

The so-called 'silent masses' will find a voice if a need arises, but before then no one should speak for them or try to use them to push policy in any direction. Automatically lumping them in strong favor with the status quo is just as bad.

Cale Roughstar · Jun 13, 2008, 11:56 PM // 23:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Sonya

I guess you forget that every one of those 300 representatives had to be VOTED into that position by those 35 million people. Even more in the US and I didn't see any voting polls that said the people who spat on Guru or the other websites were VOTED in by their peers. lol You are each little representations of YOURSELF and that is all, nobody voted you into ANY position to tell Anet what they should do with the game.

Fine, I will go historical to get my point across.

The Athenians of ancient Greece were some of the pioneers of the political system we use, called democracy. In Athens, every male citizen was allowed to participate and vote in the assembly. It was these assemblies that passed laws and made the decisions.

In case you don't believe me

Quote:

Wikipedia

Assembly

The central events of the Athenian democracy were the meetings of the assembly (ἐκκλεσία ekklesia). Unlike a parliament, the assembly's 'members' were not elected, but attended by right when and if they chose. Greek democracy created at Athens was a direct, not a representative democracy: any adult male citizen over the age of 18 years could take part, and it was a duty to do so. The officials of the democracy were in part chosen by the Assembly and in large part elected by lot.

The ekklesia had at least four functions; it made executive pronouncements (decrees, such as deciding to go to war or granting citizenship to a foreigner); it elected some officials; it legislated; and it tried political crimes. As the system evolved these last two functions were shifted to the law courts. The standard format was that of speakers making speeches for and against a position followed by a general vote (usually by show of hands) of yes or no. Though there might be blocs of opinion, sometimes enduring, on crucial issues, there were no political parties and likewise no government or opposition (as in the Westminster system). In effect, the 'government' was whatever speaker(s) the assembly agreed with on a particular day. Voting was by simple majority. In the 5th century at least there were scarcely any limits on the power exercised by the assembly. If the assembly broke the law, the only thing that might happen is that they would punish those who had made the proposal that they had agreed to. If a mistake had been made, from their viewpoint it could only be because they had been 'misled'.

As usual in ancient democracies, one had to physically attend a gathering in order to vote. Military service or simple distance prevented the exercise of citizenship. Voting was usually by show of hands (cheirŏtonĭa, "arm stretching") with officials 'judging' the outcome by sight. With thousands of people attending, counting was impossible. For a small category of votes a quorum of 6000 was required, principally grants of citizenship, and here coloured balls were used, white for yes and black for no. Probably at the end of the session, each voter tossed one of these into a large clay jar which was afterwards cracked open for the counting of the ballots (Ostracism required the voters to scratch names onto pieces of broken pottery, though this did not occur within the assembly as such).

In the 5th century BC, there were 10 fixed assembly meetings per year, one in each of the ten state months, with other meetings called as needed. In the following century the meetings were set to forty a year, with four in each state month. (One of these was now called the main meeting, kyria ekklesia.) Additional meetings might still be called, especially as up until 355 BC there were still political trials that were conducted in the assembly rather than in court. The assembly meetings did not occur at fixed intervals, as they had to dodge the annual festivals that were differently placed in each of the twelve lunar months. There was also a tendency for the four meetings to bunch up toward the end of each state month.

Attendance at the assembly was not always voluntary. In the 5th century public slaves forming a cordon with a red-stained rope herded citizens from the agora into the assembly meeting place (pnyx), with a fine for those who got the red on their clothes. This, however, cannot compare with the compulsory voting schemes of some modern democracies. It was rather an immediate measure to get enough people rapidly in place, like an aggressive form of ushering. After the restoration of the democracy in 403 BC, pay for assembly attendance was introduced for the first time. At this there was a new enthusiasm for assembly meetings. Only the first 6000 to arrive were admitted and paid, with the red rope now used to keep latecomers at bay. These two uses of the red rope are known from Aristophanes's comedy Acharnians 17–22, the forcing in, and his Ekklesiazousai 378-9 for the keeping out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy

It was here, with no restrictions on who could participate that the decisions were made. I will concede that not every GW player posts on Guru, it would be ludicrous to think so. I believe that the users of Guru are like the men of this assembly. They show up, they argue on behalf of themselves and others, and then go home. Those who do not use guru, I think of as the other people of Athens, though in this case, those non-guru users can choose to join if they like

The men (users) are not chosen, they simply show up, and it is their input that is taken as the view of Athens as a whole.

Guru (and other fansites) are the best form of representation available at this point. Why does it kill you to think otherwise?

dread slayer · Jun 14, 2008, 02:27 AM // 02:27

/signed

Great post and I agree wit the OP in GW.

I miss the good old days...

Many recent events have pretty much screwed the game.....

<--3 year old veteran

Liberations · Jun 14, 2008, 03:22 AM // 03:22

I don't play GW anymore, but I quit for pretty much what Avarre pointed out. It was (or rather became) too shallow. I was never a hardcore player, but I always wanted to try out competitive PvP. Unfortunately that never happened, as by the time I was ready for it after about 2 years of playing, it was already dried up. (I started May 2005, a month after release)

I had done PvP before, enough to know that Competition Arenas (old RA for those who don't know) used to have around 70 full districts on an average weekday. RA gets 4 or 5 half-full districts at the most on a weekend nowadays? I knew the Rift Wardens and Hellfire Mages in the first round of Tombs, and I knew the 6 team battle royales that came early on in maps like Scarred Earth and Burial Grounds. I also knew Guild Wars before Faction even existed (the Balthzar PvP kind), and before Celestial Sigils were less than 70k.

Maybe the most memorable thing about Guild Wars was getting the game (Prophecies, to defile it) and reading over the manual at least 4 times, starting a game in pre-searing Ascalon wondering what its post-apocalyptic version would look like and also looking at the signposts in PvP arenas wondering what the hell "Lion's Arch" and "Droknar's Forge" were and why I couldn't get past a portal without a error dialogue telling me PvP characters could not do just that.

A plea, Anet. Make a game that makes me feel like that again. I'll buy the collector's edition the day it comes out. RETURN-TO-THE-ROOTS!!!

I really don't think Anet doesn't know at ALL what its doing but more I think that they don't want to bother with Guild Wars 1 when they can resurrect it with Guild Wars 2.

Mac Sidewinder · Jun 14, 2008, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cale Roughstar

Fine, I will go historical to get my point across.

The Athenians of ancient Greece were some of the pioneers of the political system we use, called democracy. In Athens, every male citizen was allowed to participate and vote in the assembly. It was these assemblies that passed laws and made the decisions.

In case you don't believe me

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy

It was here, with no restrictions on who could participate that the decisions were made. I will concede that not every GW player posts on Guru, it would be ludicrous to think so. I believe that the users of Guru are like the men of this assembly. They show up, they argue on behalf of themselves and others, and then go home. Those who do not use guru, I think of as the other people of Athens, though in this case, those non-guru users can choose to join if they like

The men (users) are not chosen, they simply show up, and it is their input that is taken as the view of Athens as a whole.

Guru (and other fansites) are the best form of representation available at this point. Why does it kill you to think otherwise?

This is a very silly argument: The Athenian's culture was taught and raised upon this idea. Every man was taught that this was how things were done. You would have a valid point if there was a message that either popped up in the game for every player or was posted on the log in page that stated "Go to Guildwarsguru.com/forum to vote and decide on game changes". If you stood in a couple of the major city districts (foreign as well as US) and asked what Guildwarsguru was probably alot wouldn't even know. So you can't say that forum members on this site represent the majority of players in GW.

As to the OP - I have read every post in this thread and I can see WHERE you are coming from. I can see why you are disappointed in where the game has gone. I can also understand why you would like some answers to some very basic issues. I also believe that Anet should state in which direction they are heading and why. Also why they decided to change their initial vision to what GW has now become. I played DAOC for a long time until they did some of the same things that GW has done lately (imo dumbed down the game and made it far easier for the average player).

But I can also see that Anet is a business and in saying that they HAVE to cater to the will of their customers or they go out of business. In my opinion, they decided that drawing in new people was more important than striving to maintain their original vision.

GW is now 3 years old and was bound to change. Now it is in its final stages (imo) and Anet is trying to maintain the interest until GW2 comes out. Maybe they think the only way to do this is to provide all these overpowerful pve skills, titles and such. Maybe they thought that if they kept on doing what they were originally doing that most people would get bored and leave, and the only players left would be the hardcore players that the game values ment so much too.

I don't know and neither does anyone else on this forum UNTIL Anet comes forward and explains themselves. So yes I do see a reason for the original post and I see a reason that Anet should respond.

That is the whole reason behind this massive issue, not whether you or I agree on if the changes were good or bad but on why their vision changed.

Dante the Warlord · Jun 14, 2008, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Wow this thread grew so quickly from two days...my god... Also i would like to commend the OP, i truly believe that you are correct in almost everything you said.