Curse

Alex Dimitri · Oct 31, 2007, 11:26 AM // 11:26

True this is the dead-end street, so i think a thread with VOTE system should actually show how many people wanting the change and how many does not !!!
And hopefully someone from Anet will see it and give us official "word" on the matter !!!

leprekan · Oct 31, 2007, 04:39 PM // 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Dimitri

True this is the dead-end street, so i think a thread with VOTE system should actually show how many people wanting the change and how many does not !!!
And hopefully someone from Anet will see it and give us official "word" on the matter !!!

A vote from less than 1 percent of the game population never gives an accurate sampling.

Most of the blunders in this game have been from Anet listening to that tiny percentage.

Alex Dimitri · Oct 31, 2007, 05:33 PM // 17:33

OMG mate u are true LEGEND.....i give up !!!

smrandom · Oct 31, 2007, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by leprekan

My having the title has nothing to do with my argument against further dumbing down of this game.

This is a flawed argument because it falsely creates some artificial standard that relates to the current state of the game incorporating the current Treasure Hunter title. For a standard to be lowered, it must be set in a place that allows it to be lowered. Whatever you have assumed the Treasure Hunter title adds to the game in terms of "intelligence" is likely arbitrary and baseless. In addition, to say that any such standard is correlated to the effort or accessibility of the Treasure Hunter title is far fetched.

Quote:

Combining chars after more than a year is short cutting a title no more no less. When the totals were set to be character based and not account based it is a huge jump start when they become combined.

Your first argument was better. Having a title be more accessible isn't a reason for not making this change; it's simply the result of the change. You haven't said why the result would be bad for the game or it's players. I'll give you a hint: it's not.

Quote:

If this were done where does it stop? Sweet tooth? I have points on other chars would be nice to combine those too. Drunkard? Hmm sure would be nice to move those minutes over.

I love the slippery slope argument because it signals the end of intelligent discussion. This is what people say when they can no longer argue the subject at hand. An argument is not refuted by changing the subject. No one was talking about Sweet Tooth or Drunkard.

Jongo River · Oct 31, 2007, 10:39 PM // 22:39

He's half-right, though. If we actually got treasure hunter "fixed", of course we'd move onto the other aspects of the game that make no sense.

Drunkard and Sweet Tooth are both gimmick titles attached to activites involving swirling your screen and grabbing presents quicker - why the hell was the benchmark set so high? Didn't it ever occur to ANet that having another *never ever* going to be completed title track popping up is only thrilling to the extreme minority that will ever find the time to obtain them? That maybe the rest of us just think it sucks to have another bar that will never be completed?

Oh, yes I know, "they're optional" - so where's my off button? Where's the gadget to delete the frelling things and let me play the game with all features and no stupid title tracks?

leprekan · Nov 01, 2007, 06:01 AM // 06:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by smrandom

This is a flawed argument because it falsely creates some artificial standard that relates to the current state of the game incorporating the current Treasure Hunter title. For a standard to be lowered, it must be set in a place that allows it to be lowered. Whatever you have assumed the Treasure Hunter title adds to the game in terms of "intelligence" is likely arbitrary and baseless. In addition, to say that any such standard is correlated to the effort or accessibility of the Treasure Hunter title is far fetched.

Your first argument was better. Having a title be more accessible isn't a reason for not making this change; it's simply the result of the change. You haven't said why the result would be bad for the game or it's players. I'll give you a hint: it's not.

I love the slippery slope argument because it signals the end of intelligent discussion. This is what people say when they can no longer argue the subject at hand. An argument is not refuted by changing the subject. No one was talking about Sweet Tooth or Drunkard.

No offense but your first paragraph is pure fluff .. do consider getting to the point without trying to flex your IQ. Your second paragraph contradicts the drivel from the first. "Having a title be more accessible" is lowering the standard that the title had to begin with. To make more accessible is to make easier.

After 30 months of watching Anet lower the bar to make it "easier" pardon me if do not agree. If there isn't a challenge or a goal to be achieved in a game ... there is little reason for people to play it. No idea if you have played long enough to have entire friends lists grow bored and leave the game or not but I have.

Slippery slope? LOL. Fact. The same type of QQ please change this so I can enjoy it more .. is attached to everything in the game that the lazy do not want to put the effort into getting. So it is MORE than relevant to use those other titles in the example. The same mentality that wants to combine their chest totals to jump start the title would also want to combine minutes of drunkard and sweet tooth. Argue it all you want but at the end of the day there are two types .. those that will work for what they want and those that won't.

pumpkin pie · Nov 01, 2007, 07:28 AM // 07:28

I don't understand, after reading many post here (across the forums), that says they have to "buy" and spend lots of gold on achieving a title.

number 1, why do you have to buy "alchohol" to get the drunken title? why can't you do what I do, collect drops to exchange for abstinent, rice wine et cetera, during holiday festival.... no gold required

number 2, treasure hunter, if I remember to bring a key, or if i have enought gold to buy a key, or if a key drops, or lock pick drop, I'll open a chest next time I see it. why do you need to buy the keys and then complain that you have to buy them and because you have to buy said amount of keys to achieve this title, you are entitled to make the title account wide because you choose to buy the keys...

fyi, i don't care when i get the treasure hunter title max out, lol if i get it i get it, if i get a key i open the next chest i see. if i have extra gold, i buy a key If i remember...

if you choose to grind, don't whine.

best advise it play the game. don't grind

Happy Days.

bobrath · Nov 01, 2007, 02:28 PM // 14:28

Cause folks aren't patient enough to wait for festivals to get the collector supported drink on.

And they don't know you can exchange mandragor roots for rice cakes all the time

Its all because we want instant gratification and praise NOW. sigh

Jongo River · Nov 01, 2007, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Whooooosh!

(Sound of poster completely missing the point that this debate is about account based rewards, rather than character based - not asking for less work, just not biased in favour of those who prefer to play one toon. Oh, and "Treasure Hunter" isn't aided by drinking).

Antheus · Nov 01, 2007, 02:59 PM // 14:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by leprekan

Argue it all you want but at the end of the day there are two types .. those that will work for what they want and those that won't.

Yes, people do work, are motivated and dedicated (hint: GW is not life).

Why does the treasure hunter in a game mean so much to you? It's a virtual number. Why do you so passionately defend it as achievement?

Is this really the only thing you can take pride of? You have no idea how silly this "work for what they want" sounds.

Apparently, you are an incredible achiever. Why do you then defend this in a game which was designed as "skill over time"?

Why not go prove yourself in true grind-fests (Lineage, everquest or similar). Arguing grind-based achievements in GW as something to be proud of is just pointless.

When talk about grind titles arises, I cannot help but seeing the prize ceremony of a certain alternate type of olympics.

smrandom · Nov 01, 2007, 03:46 PM // 15:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by leprekan

No offense but your first paragraph is pure fluff

That you would make this assertation in the absence of a related explanation makes this statement ironic.

Quote:

Your second paragraph contradicts the drivel from the first.

Care to explain what makes you think this? Or are you satisfied with believing that empty statements are true just because you say them. I'll assume there was some thought involved in making this assertation and I'd be interested in knowing what it was.

Quote:

"Having a title be more accessible" is lowering the standard that the title had to begin with. To make more accessible is to make easier.

To what standard are you referring? You've created a notion that this title carries with it some measure, which you haven't explained, yet continue to argue that making the title more accessible would dilute the integrity of whatever the measure represents. I'll save you the trouble: there is no standard that came with the title. The title was a flawed design and implementation from the beginning. It has little to no relation to a person's devotion or commitment to playing one character. In fact, the effect is the opposite: many of us limit ourselves to opening chests on one character because of the nature of the title's mechanics. You'll notice I didn't word that statement to say that people are limited to opening chests on one character. It's obvious we are not. However, Treasure Hunter is the only title that has the effect of hindering your gameplay on other characters, even if the limits are self-imposed (I'd throw in Wisdom, but that is more of a nuisance than a hindrance). IMO, the fact that people refuse to participate in a certain aspect of the game is worse for the game than any perceived deterioration to some articifical prestige imbued to the title.

Quote:

Slippery slope? LOL. Fact. The same type of QQ please change this so I can enjoy it more .. is attached to everything in the game that the lazy do not want to put the effort into getting. So it is MORE than relevant to use those other titles in the example. The same mentality that wants to combine their chest totals to jump start the title would also want to combine minutes of drunkard and sweet tooth. Argue it all you want but at the end of the day there are two types .. those that will work for what they want and those that won't.

Again, it is ironic that you would use the word "fact" in this paragraph that is rife with generalizations, speculation and baseless accusations. This is not a counterargument to anything on this subject. Taking a position out of context while trying to shame people for taking up that position is disingenuous. This type of argument only serves to derail the topic and frustrate the possibility of intelligent discussion, as scarce as may it be.

leprekan · Nov 01, 2007, 04:23 PM // 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by smrandom

That you would make this assertation in the absence of a related explanation makes this statement ironic.

Care to explain what makes you think this? Or are you satisfied with believing that empty statements are true just because you say them. I'll assume there was some thought involved in making this assertation and I'd be interested in knowing what it was.

To what standard are you referring? You've created a notion that this title carries with it some measure, which you haven't explained, yet continue to argue that making the title more accessible would dilute the integrity of whatever the measure represents. I'll save you the trouble: there is no standard that came with the title. The title was a flawed design and implementation from the beginning. It has little to no relation to a person's devotion or commitment to playing one character. In fact, the effect is the opposite: many of us limit ourselves to opening chests on one character because of the nature of the title's mechanics. You'll notice I didn't word that statement to say that people are limited to opening chests on one character. It's obvious we are not. However, Treasure Hunter is the only title that has the effect of hindering your gameplay on other characters, even if the limits are self-imposed (I'd throw in Wisdom, but that is more of a nuisance than a hindrance). IMO, the fact that people refuse to participate in a certain aspect of the game is worse for the game than any perceived deterioration to some articifical prestige imbued to the title.

Again, it is ironic that you would use the word "fact" in this paragraph that is rife with generalizations, speculation and baseless accusations. This is not a counterargument to anything on this subject. Taking a position out of context while trying to shame people for taking up that position is disingenuous. This type of argument only serves to derail the topic and frustrate the possibility of intelligent discussion, as scarce as may it be.

Partial quotes to pick apart my point .. put it all together and it already answers your reply.

I made my original point long ago. The standard for that title was chests opened on each char.

To combine those totals after more than a year gives a rather nice boost to the overall total. Which in turn makes said title easier to finish since it has been around more than a year. This is the ultimate goal of those QQing for the change. You need to wander over to sardelac to see another thread on this topic where they are asking for like 8 titles to have their totals combined. I will stick with my original statement being FACT.

At this point either I break out crayons to draw pictures or give up. You win .. I give up.

Alex Dimitri · Nov 02, 2007, 12:33 AM // 00:33

I have 5 PvE chars and only on one i have opened chests, others haven`t opened a single chest !!! So how`s your theory (FACT) applies on me ???

Jongo River · Nov 02, 2007, 09:56 AM // 09:56

Or me - finished re-rolling yesterday, no chests opened yet.

Why does the notion that some players with many toons want their work respected with titles and associated benefits (the same as a single toon player) have to be treated as such a conspiracy, anyway?

If player A adds 100 points to a title across several toons and player B adds 100 on one toon, why is player A inferior to player B?