Curse

Tempy · Nov 02, 2007, 12:40 AM // 00:40

I would love to see a poll on the sign in window on the game about this. One Vote only...would be interesting to see and would be a way to shut up both sides of the line!

lyra_song · Nov 02, 2007, 12:45 AM // 00:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by wu is me

Hence a lot of us are "CHOOSING" not to make a new character.
This proposal is aimed at reducing the barriers to creation of more than one character. This is so that a player would be more inclined to make the "choice" of making an additional character.

Why not remove the barrier altogether for the first time.
Buy the game, instant access to everything! That would rock!

Quote:

Given that a design aim of this game is skill>time, but skill is dependent versatility, it would be in the best interests of maintaining this design goal, to implement the proposal.

It already applies, since after you reach your peak (lvl 20, max attributes, max armor, max weapons, etc maxed PVE skills), having more time will not grant you any advantage. Even then, a good player can do without any of those.

Quote:

And you say"This entire debate is based around what people "want", not what they "need."" like its a bad thing, and borders on stating the obvious...

Yes. It is a bad thing because if you allow such a proposal to go through, ANYTHING that is based on WANT is acceptable.

I want free ectos! Hey! That would rock.

Quote:

Its a game. Nothing is Need. Everything is Want."NEED" is subjective. WANT is objective. You cannot say what we "need", but we damn sure know wat we want.
IMO the only way to define "NEED" in a game is that you have fun, hence "NEED" is logically equivalent to "WANT" and if this entire debate is based around "NEED" then its very well justified isn't it?

If the titles were causing an imbalance, or it wasnt functioning as it was originally intended, or players are unable to play for some reason, then a change is NEEDED.

If you played through it the first time and had no problems with it, then its NOT BROKEN.

Quote:

Lots of people want this, some people are dead set against it. the problem is the reasoning behind it is flawed, selfish and RP oriented.

Lots of people? What? Guru? This messageboard represents a tiny percentile of the game community.

Flawed reasoning? Lets reason this out.

You play game content -> You get game reward
You play game content again -> You get game reward again
You dont play game content -> You dont get game reward again

"You don't play game content -> You get game reward"

Now...how could you possibly tell me that makes any logically sense?

Selfish? Your argument is based on WANT. You're tell me, I'm selfish?

The "grindy" elements are part of the storyline. The role playing game part. The elements that affect your character only. And not YOU as a player.

zamial · Nov 02, 2007, 12:58 AM // 00:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

oh hurray look you win your +1 post count and get to say your worthless little "in before close" yelp. feel better now?

Lots of people want this, some people are dead set against it. the problem is the reasoning behind it is flawed, selfish and RP oriented.

ROFL you and 3 others want this, anyone with a functional brain can clearly see this is a BAD, DUMB, UNNEEDED IDEA. Why try and suck all the remaining life out of a great game because: WHHAAAA
I don't want to grind, WWHHAAA I'm a casual player, WWHHAAA skill>time. This ENTIRE THREAD is mind numbingly idiotic to the point of nausea.

BTW if "lots of people want this" where are the 5 stars in the rating? why isn't this a sticky? I do not want/need an answer to these questions, as it is obvious.

THIS = /FAIL

now I feel better.....

Sleeper Service · Nov 02, 2007, 03:35 AM // 03:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

(...)

Lots of people? What? Guru? This messageboard represents a tiny percentile of the game community.

Flawed reasoning? Lets reason this out.

You play game content -> You get game reward
You play game content again -> You get game reward again
You dont play game content -> You dont get game reward again

"You don't play game content -> You get game reward"

Now...how could you possibly tell me that makes any logically sense?

Selfish? Your argument is based on WANT. You're tell me, I'm selfish?

The "grindy" elements are part of the storyline. The role playing game part. The elements that affect your character only. And not YOU as a player.

true and theres been more than 5 supporting it. how many against? how many have a valid argument?

lets take fish, one of your more virulent (albeit confused) supporters. On this thread he states :

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

As others have said, if you can do it HM then why not NM. It would also incourage people to do hard mode, which is a major issue.

/signed

regarding the choice of unlocking/auto-completing NM in missions if the HM version of it has been done.
its the same logic as been proposed here and yet it seems to be generally approved of maybe because its a little easier to see?

derailing this conversation into philosophical hazy waters concerning "needs" and "wants" will not make your arguments any better, how about we stick with stuff we can reason with. Not your forte but thats the way the world works.

so far the defence has been :

1. toon A has done it not toon B. - completely ignores that PLAYER has controlled both. YOU play game content. the player. now, not understanding that one simple premise is just a joke or an illness. Either way that argument has clearly run its course.

2. GW is a RPG therefore grind must be incorporated at all levels. - what stops you from grinding it anyways. Just because you have labeled it as a RPG (which Anet does not btw) does that mean EVERYONE has to RP it? not only that but RP it like you do?

FYI if i do not want to pretend i'm a toon. Just play as ME i sure hope you allow me to (which seems to be contrary to your "vision")

And zamial. I'm not a casual player, you on the other hand manage to masterfully express yourself with "whaaaas". That clearly does great credit your intelligence and capability of even attempting to understand simple logic.

oh i see you replaced your typical "in before close" with the oh so original /fail.

high five. now run along.

lyra_song · Nov 02, 2007, 03:40 AM // 03:40

Quote:

You play game content -> You get game reward
You play game content again -> You get game reward again
You dont play game content -> You dont get game reward again

"You don't play game content -> You get game reward"

Now...how could you possibly tell me that makes any logically sense?

Please address my question. Explain to me.

Ill toss the whole "character" thing out the window, since you dont regard your character as different from each one (apparently you only have 1 character that lives in multiple slots)

But explain to me....how can this make any sense?

Your #2) No. Grind is not incorporated in all levels. Regardless of game time, REPETITION OF ANYTHING is a grind. It doesnt matter.

Look at real life. I work weekdays. I do the dishes. I cook. I do my laundry. Thats a grind. Its repetitive. Why should I ; get paid, have clean dishes, have food, have clean laundry, if i didnt do the work for it?

arcanemacabre · Nov 02, 2007, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

You play game content -> You get game reward
You play game content again -> You get game reward again
You dont play game content -> You dont get game reward again

"You don't play game content -> You get game reward"

Now...how could you possibly tell me that makes any logically sense?

The problem is the task itself vs. the reward. If the task is a unique experience, appropriate difficulty (harder for higher reward), and of course, fun (since this is a game, after all), then a reward of more effective skills is perfect. Repetitive, grinding, boring tasks do not fit this description. However, when titles were introduced, the reward for repetitive, grinding, boring tasks was simply words under your name that said: "Hey, I do repetitive, grinding, boring tasks better than everyone! Look at me!" And whatever, that's fine.

So the problem now is that the title alone is no longer the reward for that. Now, the reward is more effective skills (and effects). I think that everyone who disagrees with that style of play has every right to complain about it. It is clearly something that was not in the game when many of us fell in love with GW, and now it is. It is a change for the worse, and a change we do not like.

So, are you telling everyone they're wrong for thinking this way?

My personal mantra is, "don't fix what ain't broken." It was fine before, with titles that had no effects or skills. It isn't fine now. There's clearly a divide, people who love it, and people who hate it.

lyra_song · Nov 02, 2007, 05:44 AM // 05:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

The problem is the task itself vs. the reward. If the task is a unique experience, appropriate difficulty (harder for higher reward), and of course, fun (since this is a game, after all), then a reward of more effective skills is perfect. Repetitive, grinding, boring tasks do not fit this description. However, when titles were introduced, the reward for repetitive, grinding, boring tasks was simply words under your name that said: "Hey, I do repetitive, grinding, boring tasks better than everyone! Look at me!" And whatever, that's fine.

So the problem now is that the title alone is no longer the reward for that. Now, the reward is more effective skills (and effects). I think that everyone who disagrees with that style of play has every right to complain about it. It is clearly something that was not in the game when many of us fell in love with GW, and now it is. It is a change for the worse, and a change we do not like.

Grinding tasks are content, like it or not, and it fits the description fine, and the reward is fine (with me). Now you might argue that its not worth the grind...but thats not the argument at hand.

I do not even consider the PvE only skills, whos attribute is bound to certain titles, to be of too deeply relevant in the discussion.

I think people are putting too much emphasis on PvE skills/effects as their platform to change the way titles are affected, because for some reason to them, the PvE skills/effects seem to be very important. Yes, they are powerful and useful and fun, but you can beat the game without them.

I don't see why the game needs to be changed to make it convenient over something like the PvE skills/effects, considering those title tracks can be built naturally with normal gameplay.

I personally havent maxed out any PvE skill related title tracks. I dont feel any want or need to. I dont feel compelled to mindlessly do something that doesn't really do that much, imo. Maybe when i get bored, ill do it.

Theres people who love it, theres people who hate it, then theres people who dont see its a big deal, to require any fixing.

Sleeper Service · Nov 02, 2007, 05:45 AM // 05:45

you know what lyra. I can see your point, you want to play the game the way you play it and thats cool. If anything you have been extra crispy polite in your argumentation and i fully respect that.

We have COMPLETELY different approaches to the game no amount of discussion is going to change that, whats more I dont think it really matters whos "right" or "wrong" here as in the end its out of our hands anyways.

I tip my hat to you sir, this subject is 100% over for me now.

wu is me · Nov 02, 2007, 06:13 AM // 06:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Ill toss the whole "character" thing out the window, since you dont regard your character as different from each one (apparently you only have 1 character that lives in multiple slots)

But explain to me....how can this make any sense?

Lyra, its a game =.=
It only makes as much sense as you read into it....*pulls hair out*
How much sense does a carbon based life form, conjuring massive amounts of fire from the sky make(elementalist casting firestorm)? Hence your argument that it is essential that titles represent an effective proxy for character development is fundamentally flawed.

Video games suspend imagination, and I think I can safely say without imperical evidence, that they are designed with the intention of simulating abstract environments in which the player may do things s/he desires, otherwise impossible in RL.(you may have a different opinion, this is mine)

Does magic make sense? absolutely not, but is it cool? Yes!

Do account based titles make sense? absolutely not but would it be cool? That’s the matter of discussion, but IMO, Yes!

So do you understand now that whether or not something makes “sense” is no basis for argument for or against the proposal. (unless your playing a game designed specifically for OCD patients)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Look at real life. I work weekdays. I do the dishes. I cook. I do my laundry. Thats a grind. Its repetitive. Why should I ; get paid, have clean dishes, have food, have clean laundry, if i didnt do the work for it?

you can’t possibly comparing guildwars to rl?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

You play game content -> You get game reward
You play game content again -> You get game reward again
You dont play game content -> You dont get game reward again

"You don't play game content -> You get game reward"

Now...how could you possibly tell me that makes any logically sense?

LOL if ur gonna argue with predicates, AT LEAST google predicate calculus first, instead of giving us that tripe =P.
I think the point your making is more to do with “fairness” than “logic”, because what u just effectively stated was a whole bunch of assumptions rather than a logical contradiction, which would’ve essentially PROVED that account based titles cannot exist without being unfair =P,

Now on fairness… I really can’t see how this proposal wouldn’t be fair. Under the current proposal, points attained from all the “grind based titles” across characters will be tallied and merged into single account based titles. The player would have had to play the game to achieve each of these in game rewards. Considering that character based titles only allow you access to the in game rewards achieved with that character alone, we could say that:

player plays game content ->player does not get game reward,

whenever that p layer chooses to play a different character. Wouldn’t you say that Account based titles are even more fair than character based?

Hence you cannot progress in the discussion by arguing on fairness, or as you put it “logic”

You responded to my post by saying:

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Why not remove the barrier altogether for the first time.
Buy the game, instant access to everything! That would rock!

Im glad you considered this, because THIS should be the topic of the discussion. YES part of the game does revolve around roleplaying. The reason that some titles were chosen over others, was to preserve as much of the roleplaying aspect as possible, whilst removing significant barriers to extra character creation- almost a win win!.

Grind based titles were seen by the op to contribute significantly less to the story line than any other of the titles, and this is one of the reasons they were chosen over the others.

Most of the impacts that Account Based titles will have on the game have already been stated, esp in the opening. Whether or not you like the suggestion, should not be influenced, by any of the above mentalities/notions of fairness/ attitues of if it aint broke don’t fix it. This tread is asking for an opinion alone, and as such the only thing that should influence your decision is your preference for either: ROLEPLAY over GAMEPLAY.

I've said it before, this is really an opinions thread, if you don't like it, say so, nobody should object to your well entitled opinion.
Just make sure that your reasoning is sound and every1 is happy

Cebe · Nov 02, 2007, 11:10 AM // 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempy

I would love to see a poll on the sign in window on the game about this. One Vote only...would be interesting to see and would be a way to shut up both sides of the line!

I'm going to go right ahead and give that the Rofflecopter Prize for the Most Naive Comment.

Someone will always complain.

freekedoutfish · Nov 02, 2007, 12:14 PM // 12:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by wu is me

Hence a lot of us are "CHOOSING" not to make a new character.
This proposal is aimed at reducing the barriers to creation of more than one character. This is so that a player would be more inclined to make the "choice" of making an additional character.

What restrictions are making you not choose to make a new character?

Just because you might choose to re-earn a few (sorry I know you dont like this term) unimportant titles, is no reason to argue that barriers are being put in place to creating a new character.

You can create a new character and not bother earning half these titles or maxing them out, because they dont have any real important.

Ok so it may be important to you as an individual in a "I want it" sense. But there is a difference between being important because you "want" it and being important because you "need" it.

If something is important because you want it, then its not Anet's responsibilty to make it easier to get because you choose to attain it.

If something is important because you need it (to progress), then it IS Anet's responsibilty to ensure its easy to get for all characters. If these titles were important because you needed them, then I would /sign this thread.

But these are all just "wants" and a "choice" to attain.

There is nothing wrong with "wanting something". I spent the last 3 weeks buying destroyer cores for destroyer gloves because I wanted them. But should that mean all my characters can wear them because I dont want to grind for them everytime I make a new character? Ofcourse not!

If you could prove to me there is a need to have all these titles account based, because you cant progress without them being so then I will sign this thread.

But (sorry) you cant prove that (for example) GWEN titles or Luxon/Kurzack titles or LB/SS titles are not important. There is nothing connected to those titles titles which is needed to progress, not even LB gaze.

This all comes down to choice and your choosing to attain these things on each character. Your not forced to attain these everytime you make a new char. So there is no barriers in place, preventing you from creating new chars.

Do you have to get a\every elite armor set when you create a new char?
Do you have to get protector or guardian when you create a new char?
Do you have to max LB/SS, GWEN or faction titles when you create a new char?
Do you need all normal and elite skills when you create a new char?
Do you need 100% exploration when you create a new char?

In a "need" sense, no you dont! In a "want" sense you may do! But its a "want" and not a "need", so its not Anet's job to make those wants account based just because you choose to attain them on every character you create.

I know your going to use the arguement of "its Anet's job to keep the customer happy", and it is. But its more important to fix bugs, errors, connection issues, create weekend events, festival events and focus on GW2 then think about...

"hang on, are our customers happy because they are choosing to max titles EVERY time they create a new char?"

...if this was an issue that was preventing people from progressing then (as I say) I would sign it. But you are not being prevented from doing anything, including creating new chars just because you want max titles everytime you create a new char.

This whole entire thread and debate comes down to choice! I keep saying this! You are choosing to max these titles and to re-play these aspects when you create a new char. No one is twisting your arm and you dont need these things to play the game.

You are perfectly capable of creating a new char and not maxing GWEN, LB/SS etc etc, titles! If you choose to then its your own fault! Anet cant make all titles account based just because of that.

dont feel no pain · Nov 02, 2007, 12:31 PM // 12:31

Rank 5 requirment for gwen armor = no problem after handbook + HM

Sunspear and lightbringer = well thier optional you dont have to have them maxed unless you want 1337 sunspear skills.

/notsigned, its too easy now anyways.

~ Dan ~ · Nov 02, 2007, 12:44 PM // 12:44

A level 1 stood in Shing Jea with I'm Very Important, having done no work for it? No thanks.

/notsigned

T1Cybernetic · Nov 02, 2007, 02:02 PM // 14:02

Because you just posted in it

and so i have to post in it now that i have seen it becasue it was bumped to the top.

Anyway.
The original post has ideas that i think are better than what we have right now so yeah.

/Signed

fir · Nov 02, 2007, 02:20 PM // 14:20

No I dont think its a good idea when you make those titles account based you will see in a week or two evryone with people know me title

/suxx

pumpkin pie · Nov 02, 2007, 02:38 PM // 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan-the-noob

A level 1 stood in Shing Jea with I'm Very Important, having done no work for it? No thanks.

/notsigned

hahaha, level 1 synching in Shing Jea... in their underwear with I'm Very Important....

BlackSephir · Nov 02, 2007, 02:40 PM // 14:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan-the-noob

A level 1 stood in Shing Jea with I'm Very Important, having done no work for it? No thanks.

/notsigned

A level 1 stood in Shing Jea with Savior of the Kurzicks having done no work for it? No thanks.
/notsigned

Owait, it's already in :OO

Quote:

No I dont think its a good idea when you make those titles account based you will see in a week or two evryone with people know me title

Yeah, because now when people see someone with PNM title they think "wow, he's good at GW"
Owait, they don't

lyra_song · Nov 02, 2007, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by wu is me

Lyra, its a game =.=
It only makes as much sense as you read into it....*pulls hair out*
How much sense does a carbon based life form, conjuring massive amounts of fire from the sky make(elementalist casting firestorm)? Hence your argument that it is essential that titles represent an effective proxy for character development is fundamentally flawed.

I see each playthrough through the game as a seperate playthrough through the game. Simple as that. Wether i consider that playthrough a development of the character is actually irrelevant.

When i play the storyline as a monk, it has no bearing to my gameplay as a ranger.

You can bring up shared money or transferring of items to counter this point, saying that one character can already affect the other, but i can say that that this is invalidated by the fact that other people playing the game can as easily give me money or items (i can go to my guildies), making storage a mute point.

Quote:

Video games suspend imagination, and I think I can safely say without imperical evidence, that they are designed with the intention of simulating abstract environments in which the player may do things s/he desires, otherwise impossible in RL.(you may have a different opinion, this is mine)

Does magic make sense? absolutely not, but is it cool? Yes!

Do account based titles make sense? absolutely not but would it be cool? That’s the matter of discussion, but IMO, Yes!

Account based titles make sense because it is PvP. PvP doesnt make any distinction as to what character you choose, because ultimately it is the player that is affected and the player crafts the story of each instance. (note that i am ignoring stuff like drunkard).

But not really in PvE. Ive already explained this. Being cool is irrelevant to it.

Quote:

Some might say its hypocritical to say that a player is affected by PvP, and the character is affected in PvE, since its both the player thats controlling both instances.

However, in the static and linear world of GW PvE, the players choices are irrelevant to the outcome of the story in the end. If you fail, the game doesn't end. The game doesnt remember your failure. You can start back where you began and try again.

PvP is quite different, the context and content of PvP is directly controlled and affected by the player and other players in the instance. The outcome of each match hinges severely on the PLAYER, not the character. If you fail, theres no do-overs. Thats it, YOU lost, regardless of your character, you failed.

That is why i consider PvE based titles as character based and not player/account based titles.

Quote:

So do you understand now that whether or not something makes “sense” is no basis for argument for or against the proposal. (unless your playing a game designed specifically for OCD patients)

I tend to agree with proposals that are:
1) Good
2) Applicable to the game design
3) Plausible to apply within a reasonable time frame

It doesnt fit the game's design, and in fact is an idea to change something that already works.

Quote:

you can’t possibly comparing guildwars to rl?

My analogy follows the basic function of gameplay.

Quote:

Grind based titles were seen by the op to contribute significantly less to the story line than any other of the titles, and this is one of the reasons they were chosen over the others.

The true grindbased titles are not part of the storyline at all (such as drunkard). However, SS/LB/Norn/Asura/Vanguard/Dwarven are part of the storyline.

Quote:

Most of the impacts that Account Based titles will have on the game have already been stated, esp in the opening. Whether or not you like the suggestion, should not be influenced, by any of the above mentalities/notions of fairness/ attitues of if it aint broke don’t fix it. This tread is asking for an opinion alone, and as such the only thing that should influence your decision is your preference for either: ROLEPLAY over GAMEPLAY.

I personally think this game has given up so much good design that makes it an engrossing and deeply involving world because of player convenience. Of course thats a very unpopular opinion.

Quote:

I've said it before, this is really an opinions thread, if you don't like it, say so, nobody should object to your well entitled opinion.
Just make sure that your reasoning is sound and every1 is happy

My reasoning is perfectly sound, I've thought about this issue heavily and come to my conclusions based on how the game is designed to function, that being normally playing through the game. I didn't come to it as a matter of fairness.

You bring up fairness. Ok, lets examine that.

Nowhere in the game is it unfair to player with fewer slots in the gameplay.
Nowhere is the game unfair to players with more slots in the gameplay.(imo, this is a perceived bias by players who are overwhelmed with what seems like too much to do).

Having more or less slots may give you advantage in terms of storage, or choices of characters, but it doesnt affect gameplay directly, since you can only play one slot at a time. So in gameplay instance, you can only carry what fits in your bags, whatever is in your storage is useless.

This change would be unfair to players who have less slots, since accumulated points are across multiple characters, giving a player with many slots an advantage over a player with fewer. It still rewards those who have had more time and more characters. Right off the bat.

genofreek · Nov 02, 2007, 11:22 PM // 23:22

/signed so hard it makes your face hurt.

I have 11 characters now, I think. I don't plan to max them all, not by a long shot. But I don't want to keep giving all my gold drops and keys to my dervish when I've been playing my mesmer and ele more these days. It sucks to have to switch when I get candy and booze, and damn it, I have ID'd a lot of junk. I don't want to have to keep passing items around for the best salvage rates.

cellardweller · Nov 03, 2007, 02:55 AM // 02:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

You bring up fairness. Ok, lets examine that.

Nowhere in the game is it unfair to player with fewer slots in the gameplay.
Nowhere is the game unfair to players with more slots in the gameplay.(imo, this is a perceived bias by players who are overwhelmed with what seems like too much to do).

Player 1 with 1 character grinds for 50hrs to get their max title and gets to use the effect 100% of their play time.
Player 2 with 10 characters grinds for 50hrs to get their max title and gets to use effect 10% of their play time.

Thats the very definition of inequality.