Curse

Nadia Roark · Sep 25, 2007, 08:55 AM // 08:55

Man, some people sure love to whine.

Whether or not a "set" of armor can be displayed in the HoM or not is irrelevant. You can't display non-elite armors there either--it doesn't mean they're not armor sets. Dwarven Armor may have the requisite pricetag for an "elite armor set;" but despite the complaints I've seen here I have to say that all this "false advertising" crap is just a bunch of whining. Bottom line: You can clothe your character entirely in dwarven armor,* so if they want to put "40 new armor sets" on the box, that's their perogative. If anything I'd be more disappointed in the frequency of reskinned armor than armor that can't be displayed in HoM for whatever reason.

Honestly now, this sounds like a question you knew the answer to before even asking. I find it hard to believe that you'd actually think there'd be some kind of phantom cache of nine additional armor sets.

* And before you get too excited with the Quote Post key, yes, I do in fact know that not all professions get a full "set" of dwarven armor. I'm just making a bit of a simplification here.

fenix · Sep 25, 2007, 08:58 AM // 08:58

GAILE SAID IT WASN'T AN ARMOR SET. That's the whole point. Gaile said it wasn't an armor set. Ergo, 31 sets.

Nadia Roark · Sep 25, 2007, 09:08 AM // 09:08

Read my post again carefully.

What the game mechanics define as an armor set and what marketing defines as an armor set are obviously quite different. Since dwarven armor can (for the most part) be assembled on all characters, marketing decided to classify it as a "set." Would it have been more accurate to say "thirty new armor sets and assorted elite armor pieces?" Probably. But it's really not worth throwing a fit over.

fenix · Sep 25, 2007, 09:24 AM // 09:24

But the Deldrimmor set doesn't even have all the parts to it. Most classes CAN'T make up a full set using it, which is another reason why it's not an armor set.

unienaule · Sep 25, 2007, 09:32 AM // 09:32

I think the flaw lies in the term "set" being used for two different things. When Gaile says it's not a "set," that means it was not designed as a set of 4 coherent pieces of armor. However, although some classes were shorted one piece, there is a "set" of Dwarven armor, whereby I mean a few pieces of armor that you get from the dwarves.

trielementz · Sep 25, 2007, 10:30 AM // 10:30

there there.. we should all um.. set (

) aside our differences in opinion and not flame this thread to death.

from gaile's talk page, it sounds pretty definite that there won't be anymore armors coming out, no matter what the packaging/ mkting fellow printed/said/alluded to.

Jamison0071 · Sep 25, 2007, 10:57 AM // 10:57

Game companies, like most companies manipulate the truth once in a while.
Example: The Sims 2 promised to have rain and things that would 'shock' our sims (lightening). And what happens? They take it out and repackage it as an expansion, The Sims 2 Seasons .

What sounds better, 31 new armor sets or 40 new armor sets? Obviously a no-brainer. Unless there are actually 9 new armor sets waiting to be given out with the Online Store Promotion missions, I'm fine with it.

Meat Axe · Sep 25, 2007, 11:54 AM // 11:54

Aww dwarven armour will never be made a complete set (according to that quote from Gaile). But the ranger dwarven armour looks so good...

Ahh well, I'm over it. It's certainly not something I'm going to get upset over. I'm not gonna rage quit the game. Or accuse Anet of "false advertising". It's a matter of a few colourful clothing-shaped blobs on a computer screen. Just a few specks of data. If you think it looks cool, get it. If you just want it to put in your HoM, don't get it (unless, of course, you do it just so you can make a thread on GW forums to whine about how you wasted your virtual money. If that is the case, go ahead). Simple as that. Sure, you may be disappointed. I was for a few seconds when I read that quote from Gaile. But is it really worth getting all worked up and slandering a more or less great company? Well, I guess that's just a matter of opinion.

Retribution X · Sep 25, 2007, 12:21 PM // 12:21

And If I bought GW:EN for 40 armor sets, and they gave me 31, that means they're all fat-ass liars right?

I really don't see how people can NOT camplian. If you bought Factions for the AB and they didn't have AB, would you be happy? I think not. If they didn't have all the skills they mentioned, people would be crying their asses off, for a skill that has no use, and isn't maxable.

False advertising FTL. I should call my lawyer.

Tijger · Sep 25, 2007, 01:16 PM // 13:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onarik Amrak

You're a douche fanboi.

Most of the Dwarven armors don't have all the pieces to make a complete set, and they obviously don't go together. They're just individual pieces like Chaos Gloves or the Spectacles.

They promised us 40 and gave us 31. That's all there is to it.

Silver Eagle won't even go into the HoM. Oh and you obviously have no idea how programming works.

Pssst? "40 armor sets including unique individual pieces", ergo the number 40 includes none set pieces.

You obviously have no idea how reading comprehension works.

Spazzer · Sep 25, 2007, 01:32 PM // 13:32

Calm down; we don't need namecalling. Don't troll this thread with insults.

Also, I keep seeing this "40 armor sets including unique individual pieces" quote being thrown around, but I remember nothing about it before the release of eotn. It was always listed simply as "40 new armor sets". Since release, the official website conveniently has it a little more detailed but not very specific. It states "sets", though, and Gaile has stated that there is no deldrimor "set".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

And before you get too excited with the Quote Post key, yes, I do in fact know that not all professions get a full "set" of dwarven armor. I'm just making a bit of a simplification here.

Something can't be a set and not a set at the same time. That is not simplification. There are not enough pieces of "dwarven" armor to be a set, plain and simple.

Quote:

What the game mechanics define as an armor set and what marketing defines as an armor set are obviously quite different.

Thus we have this thread. I think what you're trying to say is that you're not very bothered that you've been lied to. Yay for you. On the other hand, I'm becoming very cynical of their business practices. Every single time they create a new gimmick to grab money or try to sleight customers on promised content, I become more and more dissatisfied.

Mordakai · Sep 25, 2007, 02:08 PM // 14:08

You can argue if they are "new" or not. Is a reskin really "new"?

You can't argue if it's a set. Even Gaile admits they are stand-alone pieces. Luckily for Anet, they put in a loophole: "including unique individual pieces."

Not "false", but it is misleading. And why? Why spend all this time on voice acting, new graphics, Hero armor, etc and put out crappy reskins?

I just want to know why... did they run out of time, money, patience, ideas...

what?

NeHoMaR · Sep 25, 2007, 02:17 PM // 14:17

This is my final opinion: I "undertand" the "fact" the dwarven armor is NOT a set, BUT it IS a new armor and can be used as advertisement.

Bryant Again · Sep 25, 2007, 03:21 PM // 15:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeHoMaR

This is my final opinion: I "undertand" the "fact" the dwarven armor is NOT a set, BUT it IS a new armor and can be used as advertisement.

It's not best to say "Dwarven armor is *a* new armor", but simply "Dwarven Armor is new armor", since there's no sets save for Warrior Silver Eagle.

So yes, they can say "new armors!", but not "40 new sets!".

Terra Xin · Sep 25, 2007, 03:40 PM // 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

Read my post again carefully.

What the game mechanics define as an armor set and what marketing defines as an armor set are obviously quite different. Since dwarven armor can (for the most part) be assembled on all characters, marketing decided to classify it as a "set." Would it have been more accurate to say "thirty new armor sets and assorted elite armor pieces?" Probably. But it's really not worth throwing a fit over.

This is what 'marketing' said:

40 new armor sets, including rare, stand-alone pieces

The Deldrimor armor would have been initially classed as a set, but later scrubbed down to being parts of stand-alone pieces, I see where you're coming from. It was... good of them (I guess) to tell us that Deldrimor armor isn't a set... but only after people started questioning them, but then they could have decided that before marketing the game... It just prevents the need for any hassle to come about. It's what good businesses do...

Darksun · Sep 25, 2007, 04:32 PM // 16:32

I don't care what they call armor "sets". "New" is hardly an honest word for reskins.

Nadia Roark · Sep 25, 2007, 05:24 PM // 17:24

Look guys, all I can say is... Welcome to Planet Earth. Expecting one thing and getting something entirely (or slightly) different is part of life. Marketing often takes minor liberties with its product's content; this is a phenomenon common to business and is in no way limited to Anet, Guild Wars, or even MMO's altogether.

And to the definately-not-a-moron that said he was going to "get his lawyer," I have a question: would you sue Axe Body Spray if you didn't have a throng of women hanging off you seconds after applying the stuff? You know, that's false advertising too.

If you really want to bitch and complain here about something as exasperatingly trivial as a handful of incomplete armor pieces, fine. The relevant points have been made and the issue has been explained as fully as it ever will be. Anyone who still wants to whine like a child will continue to do so, and those of us mature enough to deal with it will likewise continue. I think there's a contingent of players in this game that are determined to deride just about everything anet does, and I can see them coming out of the woodwork here.

Oh and Fenix? Read the first five words of post #23 again and then do what it says. You basically came back and said the exact same thing again. Being aware that some professions do not have a full set of Deldrimor, and the fact that Deldrimor can't be displayed in the HoM is something of a requisite for participating in this discussion. Once again: I'm fully aware of both circumstances and there is absolutely no need to keep pointing it out.

Darksun · Sep 25, 2007, 05:58 PM // 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

If you really want to bitch and complain here about something as exasperatingly trivial as a handful of incomplete armor pieces, fine. The relevant points have been made and the issue has been explained as fully as it ever will be. Anyone who still wants to whine like a child will continue to do so, and those of us mature enough to deal with it will likewise continue.

Yeah, it's almost as mature as acting like your one these "children's" parents to stroke your ego. Or you could be "mature enough" to deal with it and move on. Make no mistake, you're no better than the people you are berating.

I think pointing out the drop in quality of the armor is a perfectly valid point. MANY people have getting new armor as a goal. This is obviously supported by the fact that in EotN you have to AQUIRE A FACTION LEVEL just to get it. They know that people like to work toward this end, just like people like beating the game. Hell, they even put it on the box! Having the "new" sets be a (for the most part) a bunch of reskins is laughable. It may not end the game, there are other things to do, but people should definitely bring to Anets attention that many people find this cheesy..

Skyy High · Sep 25, 2007, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Oh please, most of the dwarven sets fit just fine together; it's a set, regardless of how it's "intended" to be used. Regardless, we got just as much armor as they said we were going to, the only complaint you should have is that we can't add dwarven to the HoM, because that's the only situation where the definition of a "set" matters at all.

Ruby Lightheart · Sep 25, 2007, 06:41 PM // 18:41

ya know what ticks me off is they could have told us BEFORE EoTN release that the dwarven armor was not considered a set. I still dont see how they can reason it is not a set.

If I had known I would not be able to display the dwarven armor I would NEVER have gotten it

And yes..technically it is false advertising..cause there isnt 40 sets or 41 sets..since the dwarven set dont exsist.

Anet...come one...we know you read these forums. There realy is no excuse not to allow the Dwarven armor to be displayed. Those of us who got the armor then found out the hard way before it was officially announced...feel that you cheated and tricked us and dont care that you did. Its not that hard or big a coding job to allow it to be displayed..why do you torture us?