Curse

crimsonfilms · Feb 27, 2007, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Bad choice of words describing PvErs? Check.

Accurate description of PvE -> PvP noobs? Check.

Get over it.

Drazaar · Feb 27, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Well i mostly PVE but have touched PvP as well.

Ive taken the time to learn a few tricks, watched a few of the observer things to see how people play there classes and gain an idea of skills. I know too how theres skills that absolutly rule in PvP but suck in PVE and vice versa.

But that article I did find myself grinding my teeth thinking the arrogant jerk kind of thing.

I didnt like it cause the way he worded things and chose to say the things he did made him seem aloof/above/better then a PVEr, and did basically make it sound like all PVErs in general dont know what to do with there skills.

I mean sure theres people that suck in PvP at first well they learn the transition from PVE to PvP but the same goes both ways. I feel that if you want to talk about PVE at least know the fame of it. The whole mending thing urked me for example.

I felt that my playing style was basically under attack from reading his article. instead of further pulling me into PvP and play PvP more it was doing the opposite. I have noticed how there is an elietist attitude in PvP as is making it near impossible when your new like myself to get in a party and even if you are your generally brought in knowing you were a last pick simply cause they were bored of waiting thing.

I didnt like the elitism attitude because everyone of us can look at the time we thought Mending was wicked at first glance as an example. We were all noobs at one stage but we got better when nice people took time to teach us and through practice. But the elietism is counter productive, instead of bringing more people in and giving you more options and diversity it continous to close you in, bring less options and drives people away from the game.

Back on the main topic though the article did upset me and I hope A-net and this guy will be considerate enough to not do such a thing again. Mistakes happen this is just a pretty bad slap your players in the face feeling kind. Im tough though and shrug it off in hopes they dont do similar again.

The guys message may have been intended for good but it was lost in poor choice of words and lack of knowledge in PVE(at least with how he was speakign it definitly gave that impression). Like get a trusted friend to read it or advice from highly experienced/hardcore PVErs on what they play.

Like instead of giving an example of saying how mending tanks suck(basically what he said in a nutshell no sugar coating) say somethign along the lines of how say the warrior elite "Hundred Blades" can find itself some use in PVE and dependign on the build could be rather usefull. An eliete worth considering when your trying to plan some warrior AOE dmg build but in PVP Hundred Blades wont work when your facing non AI intellegence cause they spread out and casters flee warriors so there "paper" armor isnt exploited"
Really its NOT WHAT he said, its HOW HE said it.

In an area so impersonal like the internet one has to be more careful with there words. If he was this outcry and upsetting your player base situation could of been avoided and we wouldnt have these PVPs ruin everything, PVErs ruin everything argument wars.

Str0b0 · Feb 27, 2007, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

If he replaced all references of "PvE players" with "novice/new pvp players" there would be no issue. He could still talk about things that tend to be PvE mistakes without being as blatant.

That is the thrust of my argument right there. If he had not made the inclusion of PvE players as a whole in his opening statement then there would be no issue. Whether it was just poor writing or a deliberate jab the results are the same. It sets a condescending tone for the rest of the article that, in my opinion, diminishes any value it might have had.

The fact that he included beginning players in there in the first place seems like more of an afterthought to me anyway. Why would a beginning player make a transition to PvP? If you're going to go PvP from PvE then it stands to reason that you will have gotten a character to level 20 and by that time you will have figured out these common sense things he covers. Either you will be told that they are ineffective by frustrated party members or you will have figured it out on your own through experience.

It can be defended till everyone is blue in the face but the bottom line is that Adam made a gaffe through questionable writing and that sort of thing draws fire no matter what. If you are going to be published, even if only in an electronic format which doesn't hold quite the same prestige as a paper, then you should know these things. I think even highschool English these days teaches students to guard against generalizations when writing on topics like this. I know I learned it when I was in school.

At the end of the day the article was poorly written and as a consequence of that he has insulted a lot of PvE players through the implication that we are all ignorant of the ways of PvP. I would urge the author to more carefully consider his words before writing another article like this and to perhaps look into some writing classes if he intends to continue being published.

DreamWind · Feb 27, 2007, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

But, in the case of the article, I think the fall out surrounding it speaks more of the posters on this forum than it does about the "most common mistakes PvE players make when trying PvP, as well as basic concepts a lot of beginner players don't immediately grasp".

I completely agree that it speaks more about the posters of the forum more than the article itself. If you think this is bad, go over to the gwonline forums and look at the ruckus it caused there.

The fact of the matter is this...while he may have used a bad sentence or two that "IMPLIED" that all pve players dont know how to play pvp, the rest of the article was essentially speaking complete truths about the majority of the population in Guild Wars. The people posting in insult here and on other forums fall into this category: We don't want to play pvp and we don't use those skills. The fact of the matter is though, this article speaks to the MAJORITY of the GW population, and anybody who plays pve or RA or AB with any regularity will discover that.

DIH49 · Feb 27, 2007, 11:09 PM // 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by frojack

I believe the title of the article was 'From PvE to PvP'...

Exactly my point. In the class of people moving "From PvE to PvP," Adam listed common mistakes that many make. This is not the same thing as mistakes that everyone makes. Adam is speaking to a large group of people, but in absolutely no sense can it be fairly held to be all inclusive. Adam simply didn't say that, and to accuse him of it is at best unfair and at worst a gross mischaracterization of his article. It is intellectually dishonest to attack positions he doesn't espouse as if he did, and everyone who is doing so should know better.

Str0b0 · Feb 27, 2007, 11:40 PM // 23:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by DIH49

Exactly my point. In the class of people moving "From PvE to PvP," Adam listed common mistakes that many make. This is not the same thing as mistakes that everyone makes. Adam is speaking to a large group of people, but in absolutely no sense can it be fairly held to be all inclusive. Adam simply didn't say that, and to accuse him of it is at best unfair and at worst a gross mischaracterization of his article. It is intellectually dishonest to attack positions he doesn't espouse as if he did, and everyone who is doing so should know better.

Regardless of the semantics of many or all in the article the the information presented is so dumbed down that it is insulting to any PvE player of experience and let's face it if you're considering PvP you've been around the block in PvE a couple of times. It's like talking to a brain surgeon and trying to explain to him that the brain is located in the head and it is what makes people think and breathe and talk and act and move. He'd be insulted by your condescension and by you presuming to tell him what he already knows. I think that is the most insulting aspect of the article. He wrote poorly and apparently managed to alienate and insult a significant portion of his target audience by painting them in broad strokes.

From what I've gathered he did attempt to do a little research on the subject matter though by way of interviewing PvPers to see what PvE skills they see used. That was a good idea, the problem is we as people and as players tend to notice the glaring mistakes of others more often than the good stuff done. I seriously doubt as large a population of players actually uses the mentioned skills in PvP and I would instead put it to you that those are simply the most memorable mistakes people have seen, not necessarily the most frequent or common.

The bottom line? This article is poorly suited for its supposed target audience and would have been better suited to someone who just then rolled up a PvP only character. If that was his target audience then the article would be perfect. If they are new to the game and want to do the PvP section then they should definately read this, but to target it towards PvE players, who really do know more than they are given credit for, is just poor judgement and poor writing.

GloryFox · Feb 27, 2007, 11:56 PM // 23:56

Quote:

posted by DreamWind
The people posting in insult here and on other forums fall into this category: We don't want to play pvp and we don't use those skills.

I think your observation is incorrect; so in contrast here are my observations.

1) Most PvE players would enjoy the opportunity for PvP play.
2) I believe PvP players ruin new player PvP experience because of rank emote elite status in HA and new PvP players and veteran PvE players see this far to often.
3) Both new PvPr's and new PvE'rs use those skills until they wake up and discover those skills just won't work for high end PvP or PvE. So stateing things such “Hailed by many PvErs as the most useful skill in the game” is offensive by many PvE people because its not exclusive to PvE play.
4) PvE players are sick and tired of skill balances that kills the PvE experience because of PvP player inability to improvise adapt and overcome creative team builds. Thus PvE concerns are summarily ignored as in the case of the last open beta observations.
5) PvP team builds become so polarized that once something "new" enters the arena it must suddenly be nerfed out of existence because the counter does not fit the polarized PvP view of team skill builds “a.k.a. the original Ritual Lord build for example”. PvP cannot change its paradigm thus PvE suffers a bit more and ruins the PvE experience yet again.
6) Most PvE protest PvP by simply not participating.

Just admit it there are PvP noobs just like there are PvE noobs. The difference is there is no starting area for PvP so most elite PvP assumes noob PvPr's are PvE primary. The average PvE player has thus become synonymous with “noob” because of PvP exclusionary practices and articles such as the one we are now discussing.

I want (strongly request) an apology from ANET.

Quote:

Special note: Each State of the Game article presents the opinions and insights of one game observer. These observations are personal in nature and do not reflect the opinions of ArenaNet. While ArenaNet does review each State of the Game article to assure that it offers content that is respectful of all players, we intend to allow our reporters the freedom to inject some personal opinion into descriptions of the current atmosphere of competitive play in Guild Wars, and to express views based on their experience and observation.

That is the first time Ive ever seen this in a "State of the Game" article.
Question: was this added later this afternoon? I don't remember seeing this earlier this morning.

B Ephekt · Feb 28, 2007, 12:00 AM // 00:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

Are you kidding?

The 13 year olds are all running around tombs/ra. Look at how many r9+ 13 year olds there are. By contrast PvEers tend to be older and more carebearish. Part of the reason many pvers dont play pvp is they dont have dozens of hours a week to devote to practice, grind, or team play. Unlike most kids, especially 18-21 year old college kids.

This is garbage.

Most of the pvp players I would consider good are anywhere from 18-30, only a handful are younger. A large number of these player are college kids, but there are also a lot of older 'professionals' who play seriously. A good majority of top gvgers are adults with normal lives and jobs.

Personality has a lot do to with which side the player chooses, not age. People choose competitive pvp over pve for the same reason some choose league sports play over friendly backyard games.

Quote:

As for understanding the game, lets be real. If you can count down from 3 and run the builds you are told to run, you can play pvp as well as tons of pvpers. It doesn't take much to PvP and even to win at PvP some of the time. PvEers are generally much less gimmick/spike oriented and rarely run the builds others give them. They usually pick their own based on their experiences/preferecnes (for better or for worse).

The reason certain builds prevail in pvp is because they're effective. There is certainly room for creativity, but certain builds will always be more effective at a given task. You'd have to be a scrub to take issue with this...

The reason people expect players to adopt a cetain build is because pvp is a team initiative; builds are created with 4, 6 or 8 specific character builds in mind. For the team build to be sucessful, each individual build has to add to the overall goal of the team build. In pve this isn't really an issue. As long as you have enough damage to kill, and a couple monks, you can get through most areas without much thought.

Spiking is generally only effective at the lower levels of play. At levels where players actually understand mechanics and strategy, spiking become a desperation move that pressure builds pull out when their pressure isn't taxing the opponent's monks, or as an added tactic for scoring kills quickly.

When i do pve, I always see the same builds... WoH monks, SS necros, MMs, shitty stance tanks, Barrage rangers. Yeah, there sure is a wealth of creativity in pve builds.

Str0b0 · Feb 28, 2007, 12:16 AM // 00:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryFox

That is the first time Ive ever seen this in a "State of the Game" article.
Question: was this added later this afternoon? I don't remember seeing this earlier this morning.

It wasn't there earlier. Apparently someone at A Net has been reading the forum backlash on this one. This is basically just a cop out though. It's corporate speak for, " Don't blame us. He isn't on the pay roll and we won't censor anyone because we don't want to deal with that backlash either."

It's times like these that I wish there was a fee structure for this game because I'd cancel my subscription so fast it would make their accounts department's heads spin. That response generally disgusts me too. A Net had the final call on publishing the article and they did. Gaile is in here all the time and she should know about the PvP\PvE tension. Someone should have been better informed about their community and to publish this shows a woeful lack of insight by the Arena Net staff into their player base. They put up the disclaimer as a cop out but they are just as at fault as the author because as the publisher they have the right to make the call as to whether something is appropriately written and fit to be published on their site. Before anyone goes on about freedom of the press and speech that's not applicable here. Those freedoms are only guarantees against government interdiction not private interdiction. It reflects poorly on Arena Net that they would feature something like this on their domain. I mean if it was in a fan forum it would be different but when it's right there on the corporate website for the game then that just looks bad.

Omega X · Feb 28, 2007, 12:31 AM // 00:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Str0b0

It wasn't there earlier. Apparently someone at A Net has been reading the forum backlash on this one. This is basically just a cop out though. It's corporate speak for, " Don't blame us. He isn't on the pay roll and we won't censor anyone because we don't want to deal with that backlash either."

It's times like these that I wish there was a fee structure for this game because I'd cancel my subscription so fast it would make their accounts department's heads spin.

HA!

The game wouldn't have been successful at all with a "visible" fee structure.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 28, 2007, 12:36 AM // 00:36

Well, for all those hurt and sorely abused people out there, I hope we can collectively get our underwear untwisted without further incident or injury.

Being affronted by the harshness of a basic introduction to PvP must be a true shock to the system. I can only hope we survive, as a game playing community and as human beings.

Obviously, ANet has decided to purposefully exploit our sensitivities by allowing a writer to even insinuate that there are beginners or novices playing Guild Wars. This is an insult to every gamer out there and it must be protested.

The outrage is palpable and the disrespect to every freedom loving gamer can not be condoned.

Str0b0 · Feb 28, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

Sarcasm gets you nowhere. The perceived slights are valid on all points and it is a poorly written article that simply would not hack it in any major publication. If this individual was a reporter for a paper and he wrote something that inflamed the readers to the degree that this has that reporter wouldn't be able to find work locally ever again.

It's not the insinuation that there are novice players it's the insinuation that PvE players don't know what skills are useful or even how to organize themselves for a PvP match which is simply untrue. It's the tone of the article and the way that it presents such basic information to an identified target audience,i.e. PvE players who want to try PvP. Said target audience can be safely assumed to be experienced enough to know that those skills that he chose to highlight are bollux in PvP. It is common knowledge.

It was a bad call on Arena Net's part to publish it and it was bad writing on the part of the author. That's it. End of story. The outrage is justified and some action has been taken in the form of that ridiculous cop out disclaimer but I hardly think that's enough. I personally emailed the community relations staff and urged them to print a retraction and apology without delay. I think that anyone else that is offended by the article should do the same.

[email protected] is their community relations email. If you don't speak up then they can't make amends. Numbers speak but even if only a handful of us write then representational statistics will do the rest for us.

Randomway Ftw · Feb 28, 2007, 12:57 AM // 00:57

I realy don't understand why some many people are up in arms about this, is it because this article challenges the fact that some skills that are used in PVE are absolute trash in pvp?

This article was meant to help PVE players get into PVP, it does a good a job providing some helpfull hints despite a few innacuracies (its certainly better than the lst one lol.

I see a lot of trash in this thread mainly jealousy, bitching about elitism, completly denying that the article has any truth in it.

Calm down you're getting worked up over something very stupid.

Str0b0 · Feb 28, 2007, 01:09 AM // 01:09

One of the big sticking points is the way in which the information is presented. I'm not denying that the article is true, those are trash PvP skills but the thing is everyone ,outside of someone that just fresh bought the game, knows they are trash PvP skills and to present that article in such a manner is insulting to the intelligence of the PvE community. I've used this example before but I'll use it again. It would be like you, who I'm assuming for the purposes of this analogy are not a brain surgeon, walking up to a brain and saying." You know the brain is located in the head and it is responsible for all the nervous functions of the body." And saying it as if he wasn't aware of these facts. He would be insulted by your condescension and your implication that he didn't know these basic facts.

Rene Saliere · Feb 28, 2007, 01:11 AM // 01:11

Quote:

Gee, Rene Saliere, you kinda full of yourself. I find you "patronizingly simplistic".

But wait! Didn't you say...

Quote:

Insipid little snipes don't make a debate, but since when has that stopped anyone?

and...

Quote:

So, keep up the ad hominem attacks; it's great way for you to be consistent if you can't manage to be correct.

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

Quote:

You seem to have an issue of trying to force non-absolute statements into becoming absolute statements. Well, that is called being intellectually dishonest and lazy.

But you are the King of Absolute Statements! What else have you given me to work on? If you supply no proof for your meandering spoutings, it's not my responsibility to supply them for you. I agree I am being intellectually lazy in arguing with you, however, as you do not put up much of a fight. For example, you make assertions like "you can't manage to be correct", but you never seem capable of giving any reason.

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

Quote:

You seem to have some comprehension problems yourself, irregardless of my typos and spelling errors. You realize that reading comprehension isn't in the same category as perfect typing or immaculate spelling?

Good comprehension is difficult, if the writing you are reading is full of poor spelling and clumsy grammar. Demonstrating you can use language accurately would help convince us that your own reading comprehension is of a high enough standard for you to say:

Quote:

What I find more demeaning to PVE'ers is the amazing number of them who can't interpret an article because they apparently lack reading comprehension skills.

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

But you know, maybe you should avoid getting into more argument with me because to use your own words:

Quote:

All this reminds me of having to train new hires and have them cop an attitude during training

Blame the Monks · Feb 28, 2007, 01:36 AM // 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by B Ephekt

Spiking is generally only effective at the lower levels of play. At levels where players actually understand mechanics and strategy, spiking become a desperation move...

Tell that to the reigning champs. Or to the euros who won gold before that. Or to any of the other dozens of spike guilds that have held top 20, earned silver capes, and held their own in the playoffs. Or to any tombs player, where spiking is clearly the dominant strategy atm. Its only in guru forum wars that spiking doesn't work -- on guru every spike is infusable, disruptable, or splittable. But in the real world, it is alive and well and works in just about every game mode, every meta, and against just about every opponent.

PvPers like to pretend it takes much more skill to PvP; this is a joke. If you can follow basic instructions from a caller and run a bar you are given, you are as good of a player as at least half of the PvP players. It takes less skill to spike in HA than it does to correctly hold aggro in PvE. It takes the same amount of skill to mindlessly spam AOE in tombs as it does to spam aoe in PvE. If you are merely average in PvE, you can expect a lot of frustrating attempts to beat hard missions -- because they are always the same difficulty. In PvP, even if you are merely average you will win a lot of the time just because so many people are so bad -- and sometimes you will get lucky and win just for showing up. And you can always bust of the FoTM gimmick -- there have been a surplus of imba gimmicks ever since Factions was released.

One of the things that cracks me up is watching PvPers try to PvE. I recently was GvGing as a guest for a guild with a gold cape. One of them wanted to beat a relatively easy NF mission and the gvg team all got on their pve toons to help him beat it. It was a disaster. It felt worse than a pve pug. They failed miserably three times in a row before I offered to help the guy beat the mission with just him, me, and my heros. What happened to their skill (and make no mistake, they are great pvpers, despite being noobs at pve)? Easy -- they needed to unlearn the mistakes they learned from PvP (frenzy, heal sig, overextension, too much utility, too little damage, poor damage avoidance, etc). All their "skill" in pvp in knowing what to run and how to run it turned out to be time spent practicing and copying others, not skill in terms of being able to know what to do without being told. Kiting, preprotting, interrupting, knowing the skills, having good tactics or strategy.... none of these things are exclusive to PvP (and indeed most PvPers, inclungding those who post on guru, can't do these things well). Just look around tombs or RA for proof. The PvP crowd has at least as many wammo idiots, button pushers, or mindless copycats as PvE. Perhaps more.

Clone · Feb 28, 2007, 01:51 AM // 01:51

How on earth did this condecending drivel make it up on their site? If you want to praise the virtues of PvP, by all means have at it. But, you can certianly do so without alienating PvEers. This thing makes it sound as if the PvE crowd doesn't like PvP because we're somehow too stupid to leave mending out or otherwise unable to put togeather coherent PvP build. Anet reps, if you seriously think thats why we don't PvP, I pity you.

Fossa · Feb 28, 2007, 01:53 AM // 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

This article was meant to help PVE players get into PVP, it does a good a job providing some helpfull hints despite a few innacuracies (its certainly better than the lst one lol.

By the reactions from the PvE players so far, do you think the article is a success as to bring PvE players to PvP?

twicky_kid · Feb 28, 2007, 02:08 AM // 02:08

Can Anet's management get any worse? I left GW for other games and check in from time to time. Too many have left this game for them to return and restore it to its once glory.

The reason pvp is so hard to get into is because you need 8-10 people that are on at the same time just about everyday. Then you have to play down egos, rage, and temper when you lose. Most players are immature and think their shit doesn't stink.

You cannot teach PvP through a tutorial. PvP is all experience. The only way to learn it is to play. The only way to play is if you have experience. GW is caught in a viscous cycle. Combine that with very bad management and you have a downward spiral the game has been in for the past year.

Oink The Pig · Feb 28, 2007, 02:26 AM // 02:26

People who want to get offended will find a way to get offended. In reading the State of the Game article, I didn't get any of this "PvP'ers are better than PvE'ers" nonsense that people are repeating here. In fact, the OP, who according to this week's GotW may be quite the accomplished PvP'er, seemed to word his post in a manner that ended up riling up the community into a PvP vs. PvE flamewar over a fairly innocuous article (including misquoting the article's author). I'm not saying that this is the OP's intention at all, but I wonder how many people actually read the article in an objective manner as a result.

First of all, I enjoy both sides of the game very much. I have beaten each chapter several times over with a variety of characters, and I have attained my fair share of PvP titles (wolf emote, champion) as well. I think people need to learn not to read more into things than is actually being said and respect that there are other people in the game that play it a little differently.

As for the article itself, actually reading through it reveals that a lot of the animosity in this thread may well be undeserved. Let's start with the beginning of the article. The tone seems innocent enough. It's true that the community is polarized--you can see that in this very thread. It's true that few dedicate the energy to learning both sides of the game, and note that he even says that few "are successful at both," which sounds like an acknowledgement that PvP'ers can have trouble with PvE, as well as vice versa. Note also that the actual line is "Someone who has learned the game while leveling up to 20 has a lot to unlearn to have a chance at playing PvP at a high level." Even the most avid PvE'er has to admit that there are those new to the game who think that maxing the character's level is the endgame, or at least really important in the general scheme of things. You can go line by line through this article, and--if you actually read the article--see that he has not written this with any of this anti-PvE attitude that many are trying to attribute to this article.

The author then proceeds to describe three key concepts that PvE'ers don't always grasp when they try to PvP. Again, I don't think there's anything to really take offense at here unless you're really trying hard to do so. And, btw, running Fire Magic on a Monk is a lot of fun in PvE, and if you haven't tried it, you should at least once, particularly if the PUG you went in with seems clueless about offense (and before you ask, no one died either...I brought my heals).

As to the skills featured, he acknowledges right off the bat that these are useful in PvE, and then goes on to explain why they don't always work out in PvP. So I'm not sure what the fuss is all about here. It's an article that's trying to encourage PvE'ers to play some PvP, and if you take the time to read it objectively, there's nothing to get all riled up about. It may not be for everyone, but it clearly wasn't meant to be either. Personally, I disagree about Remove Hex because it works fine on a Mesmer depending on the team build, but still, I didn't think the article was anything to post about until I saw this thread.