Curse

Theus · Oct 16, 2007, 12:46 AM // 00:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kakumei

You're content, so no one should get the option to change? What the hell kind of logic is that?

It seems the be the general consensus of all issues with GuildWars.

It's perfectly fine for me,so it doesn't need to be changed.

It'd be a nifty addition though.

Bryant Again · Oct 16, 2007, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theus

It seems the be the general consensus of all issues with GuildWars.

It's perfectly fine for me,so it doesn't need to be changed.

It'd be a nifty addition though.

Agreed. "I wouldn't use it, so I vote no!"

Such a pain in the ass mentality...

Gaile Gray · Oct 16, 2007, 04:26 AM // 04:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esan

The next time anyone chooses to quote or paraphrase Gaile Gray, can they also provide a link to the source?

Yes, please. I'd really like to see that happen, too.

Adding an "appearance changer" is far more complex than toggling a male/female swap for a character, as we did on April 1st. Some suggest hair dressers, instead of a complete new-look option. I have never denied, nor would I, that we can do a gender switch with programming. It's possible that the programmers could do additional changes, with hugely more complex programming, but that work would most likely be made even more complicated by the fact that few players would be content with a gender swap, they'd want the full deal: all hair choices, all face choices, a height selector, etc.

I do agree with you guys that having such options -- any or all of them -- would be great. But the designers tell me we will not be adding these features to Guild Wars for very logical reasons, such as time, the long path involved in moving towards other projects, etc. We honestly cannot stop some staff members' involvement in the development on Guild Wars 2 to spend months on this feature, and I believe I understand that it would take months. (Consider how long Hard Mode took each time, and Reconnects, for a point of reference.)

We will, of course, consider the possibilities of appearance change options, even as an in-game store option (which some players have suggested), for Guild Wars 2. In the meantime, we have been talking about other fun options that are not completely out of the realm of possibility and which may find their way into Guild Wars. It's too early to talk about them yet, but we'll see.

Thom Bangalter · Oct 16, 2007, 04:29 AM // 04:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

In the meantime, we have been talking about other fun options that are not completely out of the realm of possibility and which may find their way into Guild Wars. It's too early to talk about them yet, but we'll see.

ambiguity is ambiguous!

Shmanka · Oct 16, 2007, 04:40 PM // 16:40

I wanted colored dyes to affect hair color >.>

CHunterX · Oct 16, 2007, 05:31 PM // 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

We will, of course, consider the possibilities of appearance change options, even as an in-game store option (which some players have suggested), for Guild Wars 2.

If this ends up being the case when GW2 is launched, I will not buy it.

Feminist Terrorist · Oct 16, 2007, 07:08 PM // 19:08

Anet's response, and, in some cases, lack of response to player issues is critical in player retention. They've probably lost me. So, yeah, have the ability to change character appearance in the next game, great. I'm still playing THIS game, and wish that Anet was still in it with me.

Anet-milk mustache-1 year old-nuff said.

Jecht Scye · Oct 16, 2007, 07:24 PM // 19:24

I'd rather not have to purchase extra options for a game I already own. If things start turning out that way where you have to purchase updates from an in-game store with real money, i'll boycott it. Remember, happy users create successful products. Not necessarily the other way around.

Theus · Oct 16, 2007, 07:34 PM // 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

in-game store option

Ha.Ha.Hah.

No.

Aera Lure · Oct 16, 2007, 07:37 PM // 19:37

A little disappointing I agree. I fully understand Gaile's points regarding development efforts and employee resources. Its completely understandable. My hope, though, is that there is a team, albeit smaller, of developers dedicated to GW until GW2 comes out, such that we see continued updates, some prioritized new features here and there, a little new content, of course skill balances. That sort of support I'd think is needed, and I generally expect it on a given game until the new version is out. Once GW2 is out one wouldnt expect further support outside of bug fixes. I'm sort of wondering now if that's going to happen beyond the November mission pack and I'm more than a little disappointed at the implications that it may not. Have to see how that plays out.

As for character appearance, my wish would have been hair color and style changes. A stylist. Probably not to unlike the dye preview window. Seems to be just a matter of the system accessing which class you are and having a little selector for the appropriate hair styles available. It'd be some work I know, but I'm not sure about months. Doesnt seem like it, but things are always more complicated under the hood, but still. Determining where that would have fallen in a priority list for the team that would continue working on GW for the next year+ would then be left up to Anet, but like I say, it sounds like there is no such team (?).

Karyuu · Oct 16, 2007, 08:02 PM // 20:02

It sounds to me like Gaile mentioned that: they might have some plans for further additions to the current Guild Wars game, so there will developers who will spend their time on it. But, the request being made in this thread may be too complicated and time-consuming for their current availability.

Aera Lure · Oct 16, 2007, 08:13 PM // 20:13

Guess its a wait and see:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

In the meantime, we have been talking about other fun options that are not completely out of the realm of possibility and which may find their way into Guild Wars. It's too early to talk about them yet, but we'll see.

Sounds to me like there might be a couple options of some sort, at some point. Maybe. Less a dedicated team to develop a new things, or anything as expansive as Sorrow's Furnace etc, but at least yes, it does imply a few side projects.

Mordakai · Oct 16, 2007, 09:58 PM // 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHunterX

If this ends up being the case when GW2 is launched, I will not buy it.

(about selling cosmetic changes online)

Eh? Let me get this straight: you'd rather not have the option to change your character at all then have to pay for it?

It's not a game-breaking issue. Frankly, I'd rather have a game with free content upgrades (new areas, etc) that paid for itself with micro-transactions, than pay for a new Chapter every 6 months.

But, maybe that's just me...

Nomen Mendax · Oct 16, 2007, 11:04 PM // 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Yes, please. I'd really like to see that happen, too.

Adding an "appearance changer" is far more complex than toggling a male/female swap for a character, as we did on April 1st. Some suggest hair dressers, instead of a complete new-look option. I have never denied, nor would I, that we can do a gender switch with programming. It's possible that the programmers could do additional changes, with hugely more complex programming, but that work would most likely be made even more complicated by the fact that few players would be content with a gender swap, they'd want the full deal: all hair choices, all face choices, a height selector, etc.

...

my bold

I'd rather see something than nothing (and personally I'd be very happy with just changing hairstyles). I fully accept that resources and money is always an issue, and if it is prohibitively expensive to add this sort of content it's quite reasonable not to do it.

I'd love to know something about the way that character information is structured (and no, I'm not expecting to find out), as it seems unfortunate that it is so difficult to, for example, change a hairstyle to another style of the same profession. It suggests that this part of the system isn't as well designed as it could be, hopefully this kind of thing is being taken note of for GW2.

Kryth · Oct 16, 2007, 11:05 PM // 23:05

Oh poo-leeeeez! Even I can dye my character's hair via text mod, how hard could it be to implement, dye preview is there already

zamial · Oct 17, 2007, 12:08 AM // 00:08

Hey instead of changing the way we look, why don't they fix all the horrible graphic glitches we already have? like armor not holding dye right or stuff clipping, and I am talking about characters, weapons, armor, not the terrain oddities......

Gaile Gray · Oct 17, 2007, 12:30 AM // 00:30

It is disappointing when players demand things that other companies charge for, even companies that also charge to play their game. Sometimes we can give a service or a feature without cost. For example, we allow you to move freely between European and American districts, where one company charges $50 to move your account a single time. (And charges you monthly to play.)

But consider name changing: Some players want that for free. Yet another game charges $25+ for that service along with their $10 or $15 a month. Some games also charge for appearance changes, plus nick their players with a monthly fee.

So, predictably, someone chimes into the discussion with "I won't buy Guild Wars 2 if they do this." If you won't buy Guild Wars 2 because of this, that's ok, you should make the choice that's right for you. But why are you suggesting that other players should not be able to make their own choices, too? Why are you saying, "Because I don't want to pay for this, no one else should have the choice to do so, either?" Because that's what some are saying.

I don't know what the future will hold, but let's speculate for a moment: Somewhere in the future, there may be a feature that is too costly, in terms of development time and resources, to add to the game at no cost. Let's say that we know it's something that some players will choose to buy, like the character slots, and we decide to offer it within the in-game store at a nominal fee. Now, do players want it for free? Yes, of course they do. It's human nature to hope that everything will be free. But are they somehow "entitled" to it for free? No, probably not, given my scenario here.

So, development of this feature is prompted by popular demand. If we offer it in the store, what's the problem with that? And why would somone boldly state he refuses to buy a game that offers its players more choices?

As a gamer, I have done some research, and I can tell you that many companies charge for extra services, like server moves, name changes, appearance/gender changes, etc. No one playing Guild Wars (playing for free on our servers, I might add) should demand that we risk our company's future health to develop new content and then simply give it all away, every speck of it, without thought to sustaining the game, expanding it, adding new things, and keeping the servers going and future development on track. Some content is optional, like character slots, like the PvP packs, and content like that rightfully should have a cost.

We're committed to the "no monthly fee" business plan. Our offering reasonable purchaseable options beyond that, when it's to the players' and the companies benefit, is a good thing.

jrk247 · Oct 17, 2007, 12:42 AM // 00:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

It is disappointing when players demand things that other companies charge for, even companies that also charge to play their game. Sometimes we can give a service or a feature without cost. For example, we allow you to move freely between European and American districts, where one company charges $50 to move your account a single time. (And charges you monthly to play.)

But consider name changing: Some players want that for free. Yet another game charges $25+ for that service along with their $10 or $15 a month. Some games also charge for appearance changes, plus nick their players with a monthly fee.

Ok... This is Guild Wars stop compairing it to other games that aren't Guild Wars. This is what pisses me off the most, Guild Wars was supposed to be it's own game and now you are basing your products off of what is already out there. I could care less if another game charges players for w/e reason. I play this game not some other one.

As for the character appearance change I could care less, I made my characters the way I wanted them and I don't need to change them. Easy way to change the appearance is to create a new character.

lacasner · Oct 17, 2007, 12:52 AM // 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

It is disappointing when players demand things that other companies charge for, even companies that also charge to play their game. Sometimes we can give a service or a feature without cost. For example, we allow you to move freely between European and American districts, where one company charges $50 to move your account a single time. (And charges you monthly to play.)

But consider name changing: Some players want that for free. Yet another game charges $25+ for that service along with their $10 or $15 a month. Some games also charge for appearance changes, plus nick their players with a monthly fee.

So, predictably, someone chimes into the discussion with "I won't buy Guild Wars 2 if they do this." If you won't buy Guild Wars 2 because of this, that's ok, you should make the choice that's right for you. But why are you suggesting that other players should not be able to make their own choices, too? Why are you saying, "Because I don't want to pay for this, no one else should have the choice to do so, either?" Because that's what some are saying.

I don't know what the future will hold, but let's speculate for a moment: Somewhere in the future, there may be a feature that is too costly, in terms of development time and resources, to add to the game at no cost. Let's say that we know it's something that some players will choose to buy, like the character slots, and we decide to offer it within the in-game store at a nominal fee. Now, do players want it for free? Yes, of course they do. It's human nature to hope that everything will be free. But are they somehow "entitled" to it for free? No, probably not, given my scenario here.

So, development of this feature is prompted by popular demand. If we offer it in the store, what's the problem with that? And why would somone boldly state he refuses to buy a game that offers its players more choices?

As a gamer, I have done some research, and I can tell you that many companies charge for extra services, like server moves, name changes, appearance/gender changes, etc. No one playing Guild Wars (playing for free on our servers, I might add) should demand that we risk our company's future health to develop new content and then simply give it all away, every speck of it, without thought to sustaining the game, expanding it, adding new things, and keeping the servers going and future development on track. Some content is optional, like character slots, like the PvP packs, and content like that rightfully should have a cost.

We're committed to the "no monthly fee" business plan. Our offering reasonable purchaseable options beyond that, when it's to the players' and the companies benefit, is a good thing.

The best way to analyze what should be done with the business model you guys have over there at Anet is what updates and bugs are truly relative to keeping the playerbase content. How I understand, PvP really only needs a few numbers changed around, and yet there still seems to be a high degree of difficulty to do that as well.

I am not sure that the "budget alloted" is that justifiable of an arguement to support not giving those updates. However, I am not a programmer (at least professionally) and neither are a lot of the ignorant ass-hates who post on this forum. However, I just suggest that updates in general are looked through a more broad spectrum.

No one should take updates for granted (at least I don't). However, it seems as though on a consistant basis, through PvE and PvP, you guys at ArenaNet have not maximized the potential of each update or skill balance to what it could have been.

What I mean is, if 20 skills need to be changed and are stressed by a lot of well-informed PvPer's, and then 20 completely different skills get changed, this gets very aggravating for a lot of people.

Back on the specific topic of OP however, yes name changing and appearance changing is something I would support greatly, much more than the time invested in double weekends or festivals etc.

Of course now Gw2 is a priority, but all that I request is just some more careful updates so that you don't have to feel that you guys are unappreciated.

Anyway, it's late.

Good night.

CHunterX · Oct 17, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

(about selling cosmetic changes online)

Eh? Let me get this straight: you'd rather not have the option to change your character at all then have to pay for it?

It's not a game-breaking issue. Frankly, I'd rather have a game with free content upgrades (new areas, etc) that paid for itself with micro-transactions, than pay for a new Chapter every 6 months.

But, maybe that's just me...

I'd rather pay in-game money to change my characters hair. I didn't say I wouldn't want the option in GW2. I'm saying that if thats the route they are going to take with GW2 (making you pay for anything and everything in the game with real money), then I'd rather just play a pay-to-play MMO. Honestly, where will paying for stuff in the in-game store end? Guild Hall upgrades? Access to armor? Access to UW? I'd rather just pay a monthly fee'd game and get access to everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

But why are you suggesting that other players should not be able to make their own choices, too?

Again, I didn't say I wanted to deny that options to players, but if the route that Areanet is going to take with GW2 (No monthly fee! Buuuut you have to buy access to hairdressers, etc. with real cash) Then I'd rather just put my money into a game with monthly fees that gets updated on a more regular basis. If the content updates of GW1 were any sign of what the updates will be like for GW2 (being slim pickens besides Sorrows Furnace), then I'd rather just play a game that will charge a monthly fee, give me access to everything in-game, and have consistent content updates. Skill balancing isn't content.