Curse

Bryant Again · Jul 18, 2007, 04:51 AM // 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

was the point of Auto-Targetting, i haven't seen a single person saying they liked it and Anet were forced into making it optional ASAP.

I'm not gonna be annoying, but for the record I do like it. It takes the C out of C-Space.

Muspellsheimr · Jul 18, 2007, 04:57 AM // 04:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operative 14

IF it had been implimented properly.

Key words.

I don't remember them ever implementing anything properly - especially not the first time. DoA? Hard mode? - just the recent ones.

undeadgun · Jul 18, 2007, 05:06 AM // 05:06

i think i like the idea, but ppl complaining bout it is not the actural functional, i think its just ppl not used to it, that's all. i have the same feeling, but i think i will get over it, and be used to it in couple days.

Zeek Aran · Jul 18, 2007, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operative 14

This may sound nitpicky, but, of all the literally hundreds of threads in this forum I have read, thousands of conversations in the game, I have never heard a single person complain that their Party Window was to big. If it was, they could CUSTOMIZE the size. I miss my party window the way it was, stacked under the compass perfectly fitted above my mini map... forming one singular console of geographical and team based information. I can get used to this though... I guess...

Actually, it pissed me off a lot. I would be FFFing, and we would portal back into Lut, and my party box would be tiny, shrunken from my customization, and forced into the top right of my screen. I found it really annoying and was glad they fixed that. I think it's a minor thing, but it was still a nuisance to me.

Putting the Party Search thing in REALLY messed up stuff. Stop whining people, we understood you the first seven times. They will fix it in the next update. I hope.

Evilsod · Jul 18, 2007, 05:09 AM // 05:09

Yeah the party bar randomly warping around the screen constantly changing size for no reason was annoying as hell.

Muspellsheimr · Jul 18, 2007, 05:15 AM // 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeek Aran

I hope.

As do we all, but we don't seem to get what we want to often around here...

B E A S T · Jul 18, 2007, 05:22 AM // 05:22

No, this was not the best way to make people use the party search.
Why do I say this?
Ok, earlier today I was in HA, and I typed something like this
r3 SF ele LFG...I have vent and TS + mic
What I got was something like this...
r3 SF ele LFG...I have v
So then, after my message got into party search, some moron decided to invite everyone in the party search window onto his team. He got a group of 8 in about 5 seconds, and before anyone could say anything or leave, we had already started HA with a group of 3 Warriors, 3 sins another ele and myself. I was incredibly pissed.
Things like this are going to happen to become more frequent, and unless ANet fixes this with another update, HA and other areas are going to get tons of morons who abuse the party search feature.

Gaile Gray · Jul 18, 2007, 05:35 AM // 05:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muspellsheimr

As do we all, but we don't seem to get what we want to often around here...

I think some of you need a swift kick in the... excuse me, I believe some of you need a reality check.

How could you even suggest that we don't play, don't care, don't read, don't give you anything, whatever the current beef of the day is?

Consider:

Party Search
Expanded storage
Observer Mode
Reconnects
The Festival Hat NPC
Domain of Anguish
The title system
Hard Mode
Festivals -- modified and new
A bloomin' $100,000 Tournament

The list is darn near endless!

I understand you want more characters in the PS window. Sorry, that is simply not possible with the programming in Guild Wars. It's something we can look at with the new programming and the new engine for Guild Wars 2, but from all that I know, we cannot modify it for the current game.

However, I'd like you to look at the Big Picture, and realize how small that issue is, and how comments like "We never get what we want" are utterly inaccurate, inappropriate, and unfair.

I advocate for fans every day. But I really hope that the other dev team members don't see this thread because, today, I'm totally embarrassed by a few of you and your petulant comments.

Martin Alvito · Jul 18, 2007, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I think some of you need a swift kick in the... excuse me, I believe some of you need a reality check.

Gaile, you're probably right, but the fact is that people aren't wired that way. Let me refer you to a very influential book by John Zaller whose title is The Origins and Nature of Mass Opinion. When things are going well, people remember the positive; when you screw up, they tend to remember the negative. The immediate reaction of ANY community to your dev team's screwups will be to recount the errors of the past. It's just how human beings work. Relax.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

How could you even suggest that we don't play, don't care, don't read, don't give you anything, whatever the current beef of the day is?

Please see preceding paragraph. Human nature, nothing more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I understand you want more characters in the PS window. Sorry, that is simply not possible with the programming in Guild Wars.

We've heard this one before, and you've been proven wrong (ie: either you were incorrect about the coding or the programmers found ways around the technical challenges of the day). Gaile, let's be honest here. If you (the dev team) provide us a tool with which to solve a problem, but it doesn't work, we're going to get upset at you. No amount of spin can change the fact that the party search window as a trade mechanism is an INCREDIBLY cumbersome tool.

I discussed some potential solutions earlier today, but in case you missed those threads, let me recap:

1) Global search function with something akin to the Party Search window as a mechanism to broadcast; remove trade chat.
2) Create a "trade isles" with districts divided by item category (swords, axes, wands, etc.); eliminate trade spam.

How hard can these things really be to program? I've read how you store characters and accounts; programming an account broadcast would be easy although the search function might be tricky. By contrast, a "trade isles" as defined here would be a piece of cake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

However, I'd like you to look at the Big Picture, and realize how small that issue is, and how comments like "We never get what we want" are utterly inaccurate, inappropriate, and unfair.

Probably true, but again research suggests that it's human nature. Deal with it and don't blame people for being human. Make the dev team solve the problem; it's your job to make the dev team see why they need to do work they don't want to do as the community relations manager. END OF STORY.

Not to get off on a rant here, but your company has rammed a Diablo-style, spam-based trade system down our throats whose design is NO LESS THAN ELEVEN YEARS OLD. If you tried releasing a game today with the graphical engine of Might and Magic VI, would it sell very many copies? I thought not. (MMVI is a fantastic game, btw; I highly recommend its gameplay.)

Your trade system inefficiencies are analagous and far less code-intensive to fix. So fix it already. Other companies (read: the designers of said antiquated trade engine) have a comparative advantage on you in this area. It would be wise not to permit such an advantage to persist.

Firebaall · Jul 18, 2007, 05:57 AM // 05:57

I think most players really do understand that Anet does actually listen. I've seen it first hand. That's why I'm hoping they (the developers) are reading this.

Honestly, why on earth would you make it even harder for players to trade with each other? Auto-truncating the item description was bad enough. Inserting "Party Search - ",which I might add, takes up a full 1/3 of the allowed item description. I'm sorry, that was bone headed.

I guess we'll have to come up with a new laguage if we want to function with this abomination.

Party Search - WTB: LFCTKWTFTAD

Know what that means? Yeah....neither does anybody else.

Bithor the Dog · Jul 18, 2007, 06:07 AM // 06:07

Well said gaile, and well, i don't care if i get flamed here.
I've been playing games on computers and consoles since the computer was commercially available.
Of all the games I have ever played, GW has the one that captured my attention most. One of the reasons is mainly, that you CAN interact with the developers.
I've played many many games where ive left it because of the skill or team imbalance and the developers basically throw you a middle finger as if to say, "STFU...we got our money you got a game....live with it" and its never updated or changed apart from a few bug fixes. Some people on here are acting like 5 year olds and demanding this that and some sweets to boot.
What?, you want them to fully disclose everything about the game and engines etc. so you can be happy, and they can go out of business because someone took their game codes .....grow up for pity's sake

They do listen and do react. Maybe not favourably to what YOU want but they have a better grasp of the bigger picture than you, and to be honest, I'd rather they spend a lot of time developing new things than trolling the boards answering every one of our whims when they know its impossible to do.
Its been said before that they cant do this and that because the way GW is built. agreed that the party search feature is too small to work to how you want sometimes, but at least try, be creative, improvise adapt and overcome....if it ain't working in game, go auction it..(ive sold 100K this week and haven't tried standing in a town shouting it at all)

I've learnt in life and work, that if you want something done, then you ask nicely, and creatively. don't go asking for your wants without being constructive about it. If the answer is NO, because of reasons A,B or C then you're gonna have to live with it.
And im surprised, nay, astounded that the community team is prepared to take the amount of crap the community throws at them...they are messengers not developers in this instance. They ask, get told NO and we slate them....shameful

Its not up to the CR team to demand, They inform and update the devs. Thats like someone going into thier boss and demanding a pay rise..now...cos i want one...the answer will probably be GO AWAY(or words to that effect) The CR team cant tell the devs what to do, its the other way round!
At least someone has been constructive (martin Alvito), I dont agree with all his points, but its constructive and not defamatory

SUMO............Shut Up..Move On

Zeek Aran · Jul 18, 2007, 06:15 AM // 06:15

=O I made a positive comment in a thread Gaile was angry at! I win at life for once! ^^; Offtopic?

Gaile: Shortening each thing said in trade chat and forcing the 'Party Search -' on us was not a good idea in any way. The rest seems to work.

Gaile Gray · Jul 18, 2007, 06:16 AM // 06:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

1) Global search function with something akin to the Party Search window as a mechanism to broadcast; remove trade chat.
2) Create a "trade isles" with districts divided by item category (swords, axes, wands, etc.); eliminate trade spam.

How hard can these things really be to program? I've read how you store characters and accounts; programming an account broadcast would be easy although the search function might be tricky. By contrast, a "trade isles" as defined here would be a piece of cake.

What do you know of game development? How much do you understand the process of design, art creation, programming, and so forth? "Piece of cake," is a term that has zero relevance here. We are developing a new game -- it will be out in six weeks. What would it take? At least a dozen people, to design the concept and functionality, to create the art, to design the level, to add the props, to program the triggers, to write the text, to localize the content, to QA test the additions, to update the servers. Taking time for this "piece of cake" would make it impossible for us to release GW:EN in time.

I'm sorry, but the truth is that you really don't know what you're asking, and your assessment of what we can and cannot do has no basis in possibility or truth.

I'm not going to "make the dev team do it." What I'm going to try to do is try to make you understand that what you ask is impossible. Maybe changes will come in the future, but "why don't you add new zones" or "just make global broadcasts" would pose a major setback to our release date, and would no doubt create as many problems as it solved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeek Aran

Gaile: Shortening each thing said in trade chat and forcing the 'Party Search -' on us was not a good idea in any way. The rest seems to work.

Understood. Taking out those characters would give more options. I will pass that along, you can be sure of it. Thank you for the feedback.

GodofAcid · Jul 18, 2007, 06:30 AM // 06:30

I agree that this party search feature has been forced upon us today. I fully supported, and still do, the decision to prevent trade spammers from using the local channel. In that case, you had a handful of people who had taken over that channel and in the process were interfering with the rest of us to be able to use that channel for any purpose. There was a good reason to do something in that case. In this case, you have a party search function that is largely ineffective for trade. I will not go into why because I feel many people in this thread have expressed that better than I could. However, you must understand, when you force people to use a system that is ineffective, they're going to get mad. There are people on this board, and frankly the internet as a whole, who push things too far with statements like "They never listen to us". I believe you 100% about that not being true, and that the devs DO read these threads and consider what the community thinks. I've seen threads that discuss how things could be improved, only to see those very ideas instituted in the near future. However, I see alot of people expressing why this party search decision has upset them in an intelligent way; listing the reasons. Not namecalling, not being overly dramatic, merely saying "This is how I feel and this is why I feel this way". I hope you consider the opinions of those people.

I understand that you can't add characters to the party search feature. That should be a reason why it should not be forced upon people. I don't like feeling that I could get in trouble for avoiding the "WTB/WTS" filter, merely because I can't fit my trade message in the party search window and don't wish to have 30 people asking me for details on the item I'm trying to sell. I support many of the decisions you guys make (for one, I think the item name being displayed as it is now in the trade window is very nice), however I don't feel this party search decision is one that the majority of the community is embracing, at least from what I've heard tonight. I hope you guys will consider that.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfeather1975

Complaining about something is good. They'll change it eventually.
But calling Anet devs stupid, lazy, f-ing idiots is not going to help.
If they are anything like most of the people complaining, they'd actually put it on the shelf just to piss you all off out of spite.

By the way, I agree 100% with that. Some people need to think about what they wish to achieve and then decide how to go about it. Namecalling the people who you're asking to address the issue is self defeating.

Alderin · Jul 18, 2007, 07:10 AM // 07:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Taking time for this "piece of cake" would make it impossible for us to release GW:EN in time.

Yet the time is taken for things such as "Auto Targeting" get time wasted on them and then more time has to be spent on them so players can turn it off.

Yet time was taken yet again for "Auto Targeting" to add toggling options for if it is a Foe or NPC/Item.

Yet time is taken for changing the way 'Hexes', 'Conditions' look and the 'Skills and Attribute Panel' get messed with and which only serves to make the majority of players ticked off but they have to deal with those though.

There are many more beyond those yet time is taken for them when players aren't asking for them and they usually just make the player-base mad. So why is it time is taken for those but not for what the players are asking for or needing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Consider:

Party Search
Expanded storage
Observer Mode
Reconnects
The Festival Hat NPC
Domain of Anguish
The title system
Hard Mode
Festivals -- modified and new
A bloomin' $100,000 Tournament

- I'd love to see where people keep asking for more and more "$100,000 Tournament" but I have seen many people prefer more of that money go to improving the game.
- Festivals... please. Thats more for you guys than anything so more players come on to help show to investors that your game is keeping a large player base interested and playing. Doing so keeps investors and helps to get new ones. You guys are currently releasing GW:EN and then working mainly on GW 2 so you need all you can get. As you said before, nothing you do is a charity.
- Hard Mode was/is a joke with little though put into it. Simply buff the creatures Level, Attack Speed, Casting and Recharge Speeds and add a new skill to the bars of a few. I bet the hardest and most thought provoking thing was adding the Normal/Hard Mode buttons. By goign the way Anet went with the way Hard Mode creatures were handled it went against what the players wanted rather than giving them what they wanted in smart AI with varying skills bars.
- Title System, gives players a reason to keep playing once they've done everything which leads to the same as the Festivals.
- Reconnects where needed, not merely a want. You need to improve your game to keep players and attract new ones.
- Expanded Storage should have came with merging accounts since merging accounts became possible. If players can't collect items they need or want then have no reason to get them.
- Party Search has turned into another feature that has flopped as many has pointed out because of the very restrictive limit on the characters.

Oh, and snapping at the customer, the ones that keep Anet up and running, is poor CR. Didn't you learn that from the post Mr. Patrick made?

Enix · Jul 18, 2007, 07:15 AM // 07:15

Charecter limit in party search should be higher, and when you add someone with a message up - THEY should be the group leader and YOU should go to their dist.

Other than that, the resizing is slightly annoying for adding heros, but I will get used to it.

Sli Ander · Jul 18, 2007, 07:39 AM // 07:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alderin

Yet the time is taken for things such as "Auto Targeting" get time wasted on them and then more time has to be spent on them so players can turn it off.

Yet time was taken yet again for "Auto Targeting" to add toggling options for if it is a Foe or NPC/Item.

Yet time is taken for changing the way 'Hexes', 'Conditions' look and the 'Skills and Attribute Panel' get messed with and which only serves to make the majority of players ticked off but they have to deal with those though.

There are many more beyond those yet time is taken for them when players aren't asking for them and they usually just make the player-base mad. So why is it time is taken for those but not for what the players are asking for or needing?

I'll give you 2 to 1 that those changes were A)already in development or B)as someone else suggested, simply being tested for GWEN.
As Gaile said, some changes being requested can't be put in until GW2's new engine arrives on the scene, so these are most likely GWEN level adjustments.

Quote:

- Festivals... please. Thats more for you guys than anything so more players come on to help show to investors that your game is keeping a large player base interested and playing. Doing so keeps investors and helps to get new ones. You guys are currently releasing GW:EN and then working mainly on GW 2 so you need all you can get. As you said before, nothing you do is a charity.

But they still didn't have to originally implement them, or continue them. It may be less work to simply repeat a festival with old props than to create a new one, but its still work hours they could have spent somewhere else.

Quote:

- Hard Mode was/is a joke with little though put into it. Simply buff the creatures Level, Attack Speed, Casting and Recharge Speeds and add a new skill to the bars of a few. I bet the hardest and most thought provoking thing was adding the Normal/Hard Mode buttons. By goign the way Anet went with the way Hard Mode creatures were handled it went against what the players wanted rather than giving them what they wanted in smart AI with varying skills bars.

But it did provide options to players with differing desires for challenge. Smart AI isn't an easy thing to do, or training them to use skill bars in an intelligent fashion(ask people that use heroes about their limitations) People asked for Anet to provide a challenge, and DoA and Hardmode will provide a form of challenge until GW2 gets here with a different system.

Quote:

- Expanded Storage should have came with merging accounts since merging accounts became possible. If players can't collect items they need or want then have no reason to get them.
- Party Search has turned into another feature that has flopped as many has pointed out because of the very restrictive limit on the characters.

Expanded storage arrived late, perhaps, but it arrived. And GW wasn't designed to be an item oriented game such as Wow(sorry to bring that as a reference) or other games out there which make you more powerful with more scarce weapons.
As for Party search update. IT JUST GOT UPDATED. Now they know the limitations, the likes and dislikes. So it would be greatly appreciated if people could think about this calmly. You're more apt to get a response out of Anet if you're polite than if you start calling names.

But that's just my two cents

Martin Alvito · Jul 18, 2007, 07:50 AM // 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

What do you know of game development? How much do you understand the process of design, art creation, programming, and so forth?

Technical aspects? Comparatively little; my comp programming repertoire is all of a few courses. Theoretical aspects? Gaile, I am a game theorist by training and trade. I know quite a bit about incentive structures and the fundamentals of getting human beings to do what you want them to do.

That said, I'm totally unconvinced by your arguments regarding the technical aspects. If it would be so burdensomely difficult to code new districts, why did the dev team make the technical changes made today? Honestly, I don't care if the districts are greyspace as long as they accomplish the appropriate functionality, which is cutting down on existing transaction costs in the game.

If the dev team wasted a bunch of employee time and effort by coding an ineffective solution to a problem which cannot be improved due to technical problems, then the dev team screwed up at the design phase. Back up one step from the implementation phase and try again. I provide you the proper design solution to your problem, and you give me technical reasons why this cannot be implemented. Fix it after GW:EN comes out; I don't care. Just fix it, for the love of God! It's been two and a half years since release, your primary competiton has had auction houses for most of that time, and you wish to tell me that your dev team still can't even begin to erode the competition's advantage in player-to-player item transfer due to technical problems?

I'm not buying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I'm not going to "make the dev team do it." What I'm going to try to do is try to make you understand that what you ask is impossible. Maybe changes will come in the future, but "why don't you add new zones" or "just make global broadcasts" would pose a major setback to our release date, and would no doubt create as many problems as it solved.

Again, Gaile, I'm not saying fix it tomorrow. I'm saying fix it. There's a difference between the two statements. Further, and speaking as a game theorist with some credentials:

a) It is the role of the dev team here to tell you that there is no practicable solution to the problem (because their preference structure is such that not work > work)
b) It is the role of you, as the liason between us and them, to tell the dev team the following:
1) The existing trade system is antiquated and lagging behind the solutions of the competition.
2) That what they learn by implementing the solution now will help them properly implement solutions in GW2.
3) That they need to solve the problem, and the sooner the better.

I recognize that they have an imminent deadline to meet. I don't expect to log in tomorrow and see that the problem has been solved. However, any economic theorist worth having a conversation with could tell you that the trade system you currently possess is flawed and need of rework. The present system imposes overly burdensome transaction costs (time/informational costs) on both would-be buyers and sellers and consequently leads to market failures.

While today's efforts represent a small step towards reducing those costs, the system implemented today remains overly cumbersome for a large variety of reasons (overly limited advertisement space, particularly in comparison with existing trade chat; lack of global reach).

You argue that "global broadcasts" or "new zones" would create just as many problems as they solve. I admitted the technical problems associated with a search function for global broadcasts, but I refuse to admit the problems that would be created by new zones, categorized by item type, to which trade spam would be confined. Care to elaborate on the theoretical new problems that would be created? I don't perceive them.

Your best counterargument would be that it would continue to make sense for sellers to spam all available trade isle districts. While this may be true, there are three factors working against such an argument:
1) buyers will naturally gravitate to the zones for the item type that they seek to buy, thus compelling sellers to do so (I refer you to Thomas Schelling's Nobel Prize winning work in The Strategy of Conflict; if you want other sources, I can provide them)
2) regardless of such defiance, creation of such zones STILL gets trade spam out of conventional zones.
3) the creation of such zones eliminates the duplication of functions that go on in numerous districts in Kamadan, Lion's Arch, Ascalon (ID1 in particular), Kaineng and even occasionally Shing Jea. Kindly note that such duplication favors those to whom time costs are comparatively cheap (ie: BOTS).

Hell, combine today's update with the above notion, create one "trade isles" zone that exists in International districts only and name the districts by item type. Voila! Global posting AND you create locii at which buyers and sellers can gather.

I understand why you're upset with other posters in this thread as well as myself; you feel as though your hard work is being repudiated. Again, let me reiterate that this is not the case! See my previous post for why you will always get dogpiled when the implementation crew screws up, and further why the dogpiling will get nastier and more strident the longer the game has been in existence.

What I'm trying to tell you is to take the design team's word less seriously, as they've burned you before, and use your powers of persuasion to get them to put their brains to work on solving the problem. As it stands it sounds like they've been using their brains to avoid work (and successfully so). I understand why they are doing so; it is their nature. All I'm asking you to do is to take their claims of "impossible" a bit less seriously and get them to think like designers (that present the proper long-term solution) rather than politicians (who show off a system that appears to work and call it progress).

Arcane_Penguin · Jul 18, 2007, 07:51 AM // 07:51

It only cuts your trade message off if you use words that the filter uses (WTB, WTS, WTT, etc)

Just use the trade channel the way you would spam the all channel.

W T S: or W T B: won't get your message cut or posted in the search.

Kook~NBK~ · Jul 18, 2007, 07:53 AM // 07:53

What I don't understand is Why the change? What's the rationale for redirecting trade chat posts to the party search window?

In other discussions, I've advocated the use of Party Search for trading - especially things that don't need a lengthy description. In cases where someone is selling a "Vampiric Recurve Bow of Fortitude, health +29, 5/-1, req 10, 15^50" or something, I can see using (and do use) trade chat. Selling multiple items can most effectively be doe in Trade chat. Party Search does not afford that ability. Now, even in trade chat, you lose the ability to describe your wares and instead are bombarded with PMs asking for details.

I appreciate all the work being done to make this game better; weekend events, festivals, expanded storage, hard Mode (at leastI'm having fun with it), cracking down on trade spam in Local chat, and a host of other things that players have asked for. This is one of those things that no one asked for (since it is definitely NOT an improvement to the trade system.), and it's apparent that no one wants it.

Don't worry, people will figure a way around the redirect thingie and life will be good again - or you guys could be kind enough to remove this particular update,