Curse

I Angra I · Nov 17, 2007, 02:09 AM // 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by RSGashapon

I rest my case, you can't explain the pet exploitation change in a reasonable manner.

Maybe because there is no good reason? Someone bitched loudly enough in PvP about pet corpses, that's all there is to it.

It was a game mechanic that promoted gimmicky builds over player skill.

PvP requires balancing.

PvE not so much so in most cases.

I'm sorry that it ruined your experience of "realism" for the game, but high-end PvP has and always will shape the way the game is balanced for the most part. If you don't like that, I suggest you either try to convince ANet to change their entire outlook on how they view Guild Wars as a competitive game, or move to another game that is more "realistic".

Antheus · Nov 17, 2007, 02:19 AM // 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by RSGashapon

Please, tell me that this makes perfect sense to you. Go ahead.

Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed forum, RSGashapon would certainly want you to believe that his pets should leave exploitable corpses.

And he makes a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself!

But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed forum, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Zahr Dalsk · Nov 17, 2007, 02:19 AM // 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Angra I

If you don't like that, I suggest you either try to convince ANet to change their entire outlook on how they view Guild Wars as a competitive game, or move to another game that is more "realistic".

I'm going to offer ArenaNet this opinion of mine: If you screw over the majority of your player base, PvE, then they will be less likely to buy GW2.

RSGashapon · Nov 17, 2007, 02:21 AM // 02:21

Maybe you should to take a step off the Battle Isles once and a while.

Everytime Anet changes something, after incessant whining from the PvP'ers, the PvE side has to adapt and compensate. Ever try doing the same? Rather than bitch about "GET RID OF <insert insurmountable problem here> NOW!!1", you could, I don't know, find a way around it? Necro wells, necrotic transversal, interrupts... hundreds of skills here people, remember?

Strange concept isn't it? PvE'ers adapt and change, it's time for PvP'ers to do the same.

I Angra I · Nov 17, 2007, 02:23 AM // 02:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

I'm going to offer ArenaNet this opinion of mine: If you screw over the majority of your player base, PvE, then they will be less likely to buy GW2.

I still honestly have no clue how changing an extremely small game mechanic is "screwing over the majority of the player base". Because you can't run Barrage/Pet to farm anymore and have to think of a new build? Is that honestly why people won't buy GW2?

Faer · Nov 17, 2007, 02:23 AM // 02:23

Can we please not turn yet another update thread into a "NO U!" PvP vs. PvE argument?

Divinus Stella · Nov 17, 2007, 02:27 AM // 02:27

How does repeatedly killing an animal then bringing it back to life, even though its corpse has been shaped into a minion make any more sense?

If you wanted everything to be realistic then you would have to do away with spells altogether, also you would have to remember to eat, drink and sleep otherwise your character would die.

Perhaps you should just buy the SIMS, theres no "elitism" to cry about and you can have all the realism you want.

RSGashapon · Nov 17, 2007, 02:27 AM // 02:27

People aren't going to buy GW2 when the team designing it respond more frequently to whining, bitching and complaining instead of rational, reasonable, "Hey wait, this isn't right!" discussions.

They changed something that has been around for two years. All of a sudden there's a problem with it. Rather than work around it, it just gets removed. Funny, I think PvP'ers just go do a list of "Things to Screw With" so the game stays "interesting" for them. Either that, or e-peens... it's all about the e-peens to you guys, isn't it?

Vinraith · Nov 17, 2007, 02:28 AM // 02:28

RSG is doing an awesome job of convincing me that PvE players suck. That's really quite impressive, since I'm an exclusively PvE player myself...

Oh, and game balance trumps "logic" in a fantasy RPG any day of the week. Nothing about the mechanics of GW make sense, why should this?

Sleeper Service · Nov 17, 2007, 02:29 AM // 02:29

for your pvp vs pve discussion needs.

will there ever be a chance for a split?

take it there. a lot has been covered already.

oh so you're a grammar gestapo now faer. ah here i was thinking you were just a regular nazi.

RSGashapon · Nov 17, 2007, 02:33 AM // 02:33

The basic problem is there's no reason behind the change, other than PvP whining. If pets can suddenly go from exploitable to non-exploitable by being charmed, then undead should be, and spirits, and rocks...

I demand exploitable trees in compensation!

Racthoh · Nov 17, 2007, 02:34 AM // 02:34

It was a bug from something that was supposed to be implemented from yesterday's update, you can discuss matters there.

And we also don't need another pve vs. pvp thread.