Curse

Fitz Rinley · May 29, 2006, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zui

All competitive PvPers are forced to PvE for multiple sets of armor, and for items. It is also much faster to unlock skills in PvE, than to unlock them in PvP. Every competitive PvPer that I know(including myself), does infact play PvE, and many even enjoy it(myself included). This is why you never see PvErs say that PvPers need to PvE. They already do.

HOw fast one unlocks skills seems to be a matter of debate. I know of some who GvG and unlock a new build in a hour or two. PvE may allow you to unlock skills faster by farming (Cantha) or Questing (Tyria) in the numerical sense of skills, but not necessarily useful builds. Further it is not even assured that questing will unlock them faster. E-bay gold purchases would do a much more efficient job given the skills trainers, and the gold is now the primary way to obtain skills. I do feel purchase of armor and weapon skins should be available for the appropriate faction. This might even inspire sme PvE players to work at PvP as they could then get the appearance they want on the weapon they enjoy.

Quote:

PvE can't keep you entertained with the game forever, PvP, in my oppinion, can.

I am not convinced that the repetitive beating upon fellow players of unequal talents, unequal opportunities of play caused by real life, and unequal equipment is in someway going to entertain me forever. Especially given that I will not live forever.

Quote:

PvE is static, PvP is dynamic.

PvE is static of content in between ANet nerfs and additions. PvP is static of content between changes also. Both are sytemically static, between ANet changes to performance, access, and options. More effectively, PvE is casual and PvP is intense.

Quote:

and PvP has a higher replayability in my oppinion, as every match is different.

''I've looked at love from both sides now, From give and take and still somehow, It's love's illusions I recall, I really don't know love at all.'' ~ Both Sides Now, per Judy Collins. In details the tiny things of battle may seem different, but the structure, analysis, and outcome are inevitable once you have a given. It is only the illusion which impresses stress through opposition to achieve catharsis.

Quote:

I'd reccomend doing a few Guild vs Guild battles with your guild,

Because of the way ANet chose to implement Alliances and GvG I cannot and keep personal integritty and identity.

Quote:

IMO rule #1 of guildwars is try and avoid pickup groups.

This is the big crux for GW. The basic experience for the mature audience (both in age and character) is negative in dealing with the behavior of the less mature audience. If we do not join PUGs we will not be able to separate out the difference and find others to play with.

Quote:

A lot of good PvPers don't want to spend their time playing with players of a much lower skill level, but you can surely find some, and you'll always find people who are around your level.

Perhaps there should be a title of Mentor. One who achieves points based on successfully leading a party thru a PvP match where all party members average 1-3 ranks lower than yours and no class can be repeated in the group.

Quote:

I'll also say that PvP players expect people to improve, and want to improve. They also want people to understand the game mechanics, and then use those to try and play as best they can. Alot of people mistake this for being "elitest" or "snobbish."

Skill falls on a bell-curve of both talent and opportunity to develop that tallent. Some players will never have the reaction speed or recognition speed to play as well as others, they are no less valuable as persons. It is the behavior of ''I own you, you f***ing noob,'' which specifially details the elitest and snobby persons. I will not participate with such players. I will not allow children to treat others that way in my presence personally nor virtually. The majority, not quite all, PvE misbehavior is in sexual connotation because of their insecurities while ruled by their hormones. At least with age the chemical poisoning should subside some, and a better awareness of the intricate dance of mature interaction develop. The kind of disrespect fostsered in PvP is aimed at real persons using terms of enslavement and denigration. Sexual misconduct is more likely to be punished both socially and by administration. Disrespect for fellow players is encouraged thru the oppositional play.

Quote:

PvP is more of a team game than PvE is. It requires much more elaborate teamwork, and this is where alot of people get the impression you can't be a casual PvPer.

I do not judge casual or lack thereof based upon whether one is in a team. Casual is dependent upon whether or not something is stress releasing or stress increasing. I went to the Urban Dictionary and MSN Encarta for the following:
1) The general use of casual in game by opponents of casual players is that of someone who lacks dedication, is ignorant of the game mechanics, superficial or disloyal to the game, indifferent, or is lazy.
2) The general use of the term casual by casual players is someone who is comfortable, layed back/nonchalant, informal/relaxed, performing events without specific prior planning, or who refuses to conform to the (so-called) masses and usually gets hated for it. (Parens mine).

If this game is also for the casual player, then the elite attitudes that misdefine the person fresh out of the shower after working all day who wants to relax with some gaming must correct themselves. In many cases, not all, I supsect a lack of obligation to the outside world is the major factor in causing this disrespect, and in some cases a resentment of that obligation.

Casual players will never be fully comfortable with the idea that what they paid to play is controlled by others who are either malicious, condescending (we got it and you don't, but here lets us take care of you), or completely indifferent of their venues (Favor and Faction both).

Fitz

Raiin Maker · May 29, 2006, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

I do not mean any disrespect for any of you out there, although i will be flamed for saying this anyway...
Giuld Wars is a PvP game, whether you want it to be or not. They balance skills based on PvP abuse (and 1% of the time on farming abuse). PvE is just an introduction, and should not be kept that seperate.

I started this game as a PvE'er, and a few months into it, started hardcore PvPing, and now I do both, and enjoy both almost equally (most pve players have no clue at all about how combat works). Without combining the 2, I would probably still be rank 0 (not like it's any different from rank 12).

I would say thats wrong. Take away PVE and most of their players leave, but take away PVP and maybe a few will leave, but most will convert to PVE.

Nevin · May 29, 2006, 04:38 PM // 16:38

/not signed

Francis Demeules · May 29, 2006, 05:12 PM // 17:12

I play PvP with my PvE Character. Remove this option will remove many players too in this game who want to PvP with their PvE Char (Feeling useless with a Green weapon without PvP).

/Not signed

Phades · May 29, 2006, 07:56 PM // 19:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raiin Maker

I would say thats wrong. Take away PVE and most of their players leave, but take away PVP and maybe a few will leave, but most will convert to PVE.

I would very much enjoy reading your detailed census that includes every person who plays the game and the actual numbers supporting this analysis.

Many of the balance choices and game mechanics were based around the pvp implications. This is most easily expressed through the limitations imposed on each player in terms of skills, skill selections, attribute cost, and damage caps. You remove the pvp aspect from the game, you change a very fundamental aspect of the game. It wouldnt be too hard to follow the logic that you begin to demand other changes, like unlimited level cap, changing skills on the fly, unlimited skill points, and continue to completely change the fundamental design choices that actually make this game different from the rest of the market.

You can continue by observing how this game is not a unstructured pvp venue. In other words, you will not have random people invading your instance of the game and killing you just to ruin your day. When pvp does occur, there are clear differences between sides and specific goals. The most common one being kill the enemy. Factions has opened up this a bit in variations with the fort aspenwood, jade quarry, and alliance battle maps. However, there is little reason and in some cases ability to participate within, for a pvp only character making the maps arguably a variation for a pve character to enjoy the option of a different style of pvp.

People forget that pvp and pve are options for someone to spend time in doing. There is only one instance in the entire game where the player is forced to participate within a pvp setting. That instance occurs in pre-searing ascalon and is used as part of a plot mechanic to bridge the two time sequences. While playing the game for the first time many people choose the options that will get them moving in a productive manner in the shortest amount of time. This leads towards exploiting various methods within either venue to achieve this goal. However, many other individuals have reached a point where it is completely unneccary to continue to advance their account or characters on their account, as they have everything at a functional level. Those individuals typically fall into one of two catagories. These are pve farmers and pvp focused individuals. These two camps have virutally zero interaction with each other and the only instance where one is truly related to the other is in relationship towards hereos ascent and the temple of the ages.

Removing peoples' options towards playing the game does not improve the game. Adjusting mechanics within the game to relieve some of the percieved connections between the two is a entirely different story. This can be veiwed through expressed desired for options with party control such as party organization tools, remove player options, tuning of rewards, alternate options for enterance into end game pve content, and so on.

Seperating the two gamestyles entirely will remove a portion of the playerbase. Removing one of the two gamestyles will remove a larger portion of the player base. Removing any of the playerbase is not in ANET's best interest. If you are feeling that someone, somewhere, ejnoying pvp with a pve character is somehow infringing on your enjoyment of the game, then suggest a game mechanic that adjusts the situation to a more parrallel level. Of course if you are truly that paranoid about the situation, id suggest trying a different game like oblivion or any of the other elder scrolls saga, any game from the kotr series, fable, jade empire, NWN, any title from the final fantasy series, any title from the phantasy star series, and so on. I could keep going, but i am sure you have the idea by now.

Fitz Rinley · May 29, 2006, 11:05 PM // 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Many of the balance choices and game mechanics were based around the pvp implications.

Accepted.

Quote:

When pvp does occur, there are clear differences between sides and specific goals. The most common one being kill the enemy.

And unfortunately without respect to the humanity of their fellow players. A culture of respect could be fostered, at least in appearence. Alas, it is not.

Quote:

There is only one instance in the entire game where the player is forced to participate within a pvp setting. That instance occurs in pre-searing ascalon and ...

This seems to forget the inherent feeling by ANet that all persons who might enjoy the full game content must mystically becapable of besting all other players in the world thru PvP match at any given moment should they seek to enter that content. A single man guild must either best 1,000 man alliance faction farming zergs, denigrate themselves thru charity, or abolish their personal integritty and creativity to submit to someone else's guild concept in order to gain entrance. Favor is no better than Faction.

Quote:

However, many other individuals have reached a point where it is completely unneccary to continue to advance their account or characters on their account, as they have everything at a functional level. Those individuals typically fall into one of two catagories. These are pve farmers and pvp focused individuals. These two camps have virutally zero interaction with each other and the only instance where one is truly related to the other is in relationship towards hereos ascent and the temple of the ages.

I have no interaction with either of these groups. I rarely do either. I have over 1500 hours of play in two merged accounts, 11 active characters and one mule, and I do not have the kind of money where I would ever consider buying keys or entering UW/FoW affordable. I believe with 6 of my characters at 20th level (one of each class) and three of them in Abaddon's Mouth, they might be considered functional. They do not have all maxed weapons/items, with all maxed mods, or even the armor and appearence I would like. All of that also is unaffordable. I find PvP to be a way to waste time among the disrespectful while waiting for friends to come on line. I rarely play PUGs.

Quote:

Removing peoples' options towards playing the game does not improve the game. Adjusting mechanics within the game to relieve some of the percieved connections between the two is a entirely different story. This can be veiwed through expressed desired for options with party control such as party organization tools, remove player options, tuning of rewards, alternate options for enterance into end game pve content, and so on.

I agree. I do not see ANet providing more than placebos over the majority of important issues in the game. Improving drops was a good way to decrease desire for practices we as a community find distateful. (No one is going to prove to me they made millions and multiple hundreds of thousands thru legitimate play.) I have adressed many of these issues: storage, party structure, access to game areas, even hair stylists, etc. Given the amount of time ANet has had to work on these, community interest, and in somecases what is simply the right thing for the right reason, I can only conclude that ANet does not care.

Quote:

Removing any of the playerbase is not in ANET's best interest.

I have supported this argument.

Quote:

Of course if you are truly that paranoid about the situation, I'd suggest trying a different game like...

It is not a matter of paranoia. It is a matter of fact. PvP controls access to UW/FoW. Prohibited access is a part of what feuls the underground economy. The nature of Favor assumes all persons living in a time zone must be on the same schedule. The concept of peak hours of control means there are those that will virtually never see an opportunity to play those areas. A similar thing is true for Faction.

I was arguing against Favor when Factions became available. My arguments stand irrevocably. Because Favor was something we were supposed to be seeing a change in for the better, I made the mistake of investing in GW: Factions. I have spent over $225.00 for a game I write off segments of as non-accessible due to prejudice against individuals, creativity, and moral treatment of others. I will not ever bow on this issue. They have had a year to fix the storage problem, and done nothing. They have had months to do something as simple as add a stylist for chaning hair styles, they have not. They have produced nice looking artwork. That is important as we are very much beyond Frogger at this point. They already knew the community was at schism level with Favor, and they decided to douse the flames with gasoline. If I do not see it fixed correctly I will eventually leave GW, probably for NwN II coming out in September (I think). Should that happen, I will suggest against any GW product from thence forward.

Fitz Rinley

Sanji · May 30, 2006, 12:36 AM // 00:36

Online Video Games are not obligated to be a suitable platform to assert one's individuality or creativity. Guild Wars is a team based game that tends to rely on rigid builds that work. Sure, there are innovative builds and styles of play, but should they be popular enough they soon become staple.

Anet has made it no secret that Guild Wars' platform will be a large series of expansions.

Guild Wars definately isn't an MMORPG, you're not going to get the same patches and content you would expect from one. Anet doesn't need you to keeping playing as there are no monthly fees. They just need people to keep buying the expansions.

And to accomplish that, they're going to do their best to hold on to those who are easy to please and write those who are not as an acceptable loss.

Phades · May 30, 2006, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

And unfortunately without respect to the humanity of their fellow players. A culture of respect could be fostered, at least in appearence. Alas, it is not.

Feeling sorry for virtual injuries is taking the concept of humanity to a extreme. It is also hypocrytical, considering the mass genocide that occurs as a result of the player's actions throughout the game to the various npc factions. This has been occuring since the game's original release. Philisophically speaking, its really no different, but when referenced towards other people the common terminology is being competitive opposed to psychotic.

Currently there is no "kinder/more gentle" way to play GW without standing around acting like some kind of bot to sell gold over the internet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

This seems to forget the inherent feeling by ANet that all persons who might enjoy the full game content must mystically becapable of besting all other players in the world thru PvP match at any given moment should they seek to enter that content.

This reads as a complaint about the game developers giving you more than what you wanted. Simply stated, its just more content that does not have to be used.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

A single man guild must either best 1,000 man alliance faction farming zergs, denigrate themselves thru charity, or abolish their personal integritty and creativity to submit to someone else's guild concept in order to gain entrance. Favor is no better than Faction.

I believe a democracy dictacted by a single person is not called a democracy. Its plainly obvious that 1 person can not faction farm (hold more influence) more than 1,000 people. This is not a design fallacy. The point of alliances, was so that you could merge small and large guilds together without losing their individual identities.

If a single player game was what you desired, then there is a large selection of them to choose from as i alluded to towards the end of my previous post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I have no interaction with either of these groups. I rarely do either. I have over 1500 hours of play in two merged accounts, 11 active characters and one mule, and I do not have the kind of money where I would ever consider buying keys or entering UW/FoW affordable.

I am not entirely sure what to suggest to you as far as your playing habits are concerned. Completing 1 quest in factions netting a 1,000 faction reward, exp, and gold will pay for 2 trips to the underworld without splitting the cost of it with anyone or trading with anyone other than npcs. You are making it sound like you go afk for large portions of time. Personally, i have more time invested than that in a single account and i have currency problems at times, but nothing as debilitiating as you are alluding towards. It also does not affect my ability to play within any aspect of the game that i choose.

Social engineering is more of an issue within the game than any percieved economical one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I believe with 6 of my characters at 20th level (one of each class) and three of them in Abaddon's Mouth, they might be considered functional. They do not have all maxed weapons/items, with all maxed mods, or even the armor and appearence I would like.

Most all of the "max weapon" options can be obtained through collectors, or crafted through a npc. Many of the mods are more vanity based opposed to actual effect. Though what tends to be optimal and what people choose to use are two different things. Harder to come by mods end up being max bonus to defense and 20% duration to enchantments from my experience anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I find PvP to be a way to waste time among the disrespectful while waiting for friends to come on line. I rarely play PUGs.

So, do not play with them or in pvp. No one is forcing you to. Seperating or removing it does not add anything to everyone else who does. There are plenty of repeatable quests in both prophecies and factions to help achieve whatever your goal is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

It is not a matter of paranoia. It is a matter of fact.

The failure of the argument lies within the fact that a pvp only character could also just as easily go into hereos ascent and achieve the same thing. The fact that at one point in time you could use a pve character to get to the tomb of the primeval kings location doesnt have much to do with anything currently. Even then, you could just make a pvp character located there. The way control is derived from this is the only point that can be argued. Even then, introducing an alternate method of entery is better than removing the pvp play aspect. Then again, they did introduce a entire new end game pve area in the old tombs rendering the only real reason to goto UW or FOW based entirely upon the vanity of obtaining unneccary armor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

PvP controls access to UW/FoW. Prohibited access is a part of what feuls the underground economy. The nature of Favor assumes all persons living in a time zone must be on the same schedule. The concept of peak hours of control means there are those that will virtually never see an opportunity to play those areas. A similar thing is true for Faction.

The two are entirely unrelated as the outcome of pvp within factions has zero impact on the availability of pve content. In essence, map changes are just as cosmetic as FOW armor design. As far as any underground economy is concerend, i would find that strange since you werent interested in competing with other people in a different format. Why would you choose this format where there are zero tools or controls in an environment with virtually unlimited resources.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

... for a game I write off segments of as non-accessible due to prejudice against individuals, creativity, and moral treatment of others. I will not ever bow on this issue.

You clearly have bought the wrong game. I believe the sims has no violence in it and interacts with other human beings virtually, where the option for personal vanity is the only real venue involved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

They have had a year to fix the storage problem, and done nothing.

The xunlai agents work as far as i know and beyond stackable materials for future weapon/item upgrades crafted from a npc. There is not much need to hoard anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

They have had months to do something as simple as add a stylist for chaning hair styles, they have not. They have produced nice looking artwork. That is important as we are very much beyond Frogger at this point.

There are priorities within the coder's time, such as bug fixing and content additions. Personally im more interested in how the game works than what it looks like. Too many games look good, but are exceptionally shallow. If the looks of the game are the high point of this game, i wouldnt be playing it. There are others that look far better in terms of just graphics and physics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

If I do not see it fixed correctly I will eventually leave GW, probably for NwN II coming out in September (I think). Should that happen, I will suggest against any GW product from thence forward.

Give oblivion a try.

demon dantes · May 30, 2006, 01:43 AM // 01:43

they should have it to were in order to play pvp you can only do it with a pvp char. this way you don t have these spammers in pve going im a rank 9 wammo and you all suck. if you want to pve make a pve character and play the game. if you want a pvp char create pvp only and only play pvp.

Fitz Rinley · May 30, 2006, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanji

Online Video Games are not obligated to be a suitable platform to assert one's individuality or creativity.

Until they have already done so.

Quote:

Guild Wars is a team based game that tends to rely on rigid builds that work. Sure, there are innovative builds and styles of play, but should they be popular enough they soon become staple.

This tells me you have no concept of what I'm talking about. Individuality, personal integritty, and personal expression are not religated as subsets of nor exclusive to teams. They are completely separate venues which may work well with one another or not exist. Nor is it relative to builds. While building concepts aside from single attribute line themes is inherently risky or prevented by game mechanics in most cases, weak conceptual builds can be used in weak game areas. (Such as a Necro-Ranger Beastmaster in Pre-Beacons Perch areas.)

Quote:

Anet has made it no secret that Guild Wars' platform will be a large series of expansions.

Irrelevant.

Quote:

Guild Wars definately isn't an MMORPG, ...

Correct, it has no Role-playing capacity at all.

Quote:

They just need people to keep buying the expansions.

And misrepresenting the product, product availability, intended changes to meet community interests appears to be one way of ensuring that happens. I insist that appearence change.

Quote:

And to accomplish that, they're going to do their best to hold on to those who are easy to please and write those who are not as an acceptable loss.

There was a good small college not far from where I went to school. Based upon a riumor that they were closing due to financial difficulties student flight caused them to do so. This was a rumor about what was not true. How much more effect can truth had from one who is written off?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

Feeling sorry for virtual injuries is taking the concept of humanity to a extreme.

You miss the concept of respect for humanity completely. Krishna folded his hand in prayer to his cousin/foe in recognition of the divine in his enemy. Gladiator's saluted one another before combat. Once also did knights.
1) Match cannot start till all members salute in a pre-meeting.
2) Anyone making derogatory, insulting, or non-constructive remarks to or about friend or foe be banned til they figure it out.
3) Match cannot end until all members again meet and salute.
4) AI takes control until match is over of any account that tries to map, becomes disconnected. or is identified by the party leader as a sabateur.
5) Characters skills are changed to a set the AI is prepared to use during take-over.
6) Player may not do anything in their account except view their character while AI has control.
Any use of the word noob or any variant automatical logs the player out. Any cussing automatically logs the player out. Any use of the terms Own/Pwn or the equivalent automatically logs the player out. While I have used choice words when dropping a knife near my foot or smashing a hammer into my thumb, this is not the case in PvP where players regularly denigrate and disrespect fellow players. Use of colorful metaphors between friends is different than the oppositional style of PvP which has fostered a lack of character develoment and respect for others. Especially given most appear to feel they are the elite of humanity and superior in all ways to all others.

Quote:

This reads as a complaint about the game developers giving you more than what you wanted. Simply stated, its just more content that does not have to be used.

No it does not. It states that the game developers gave control over my PvE play to the whimsical outcome of professional players, without regard to my life circumstance or whether or not peak hours fit within my life-schedule as a customer. Giving control over other peoples lives to their fellow players is wrong.

Quote:

I believe a democracy dictacted by a single person is not called a democracy. Its plainly obvious that 1 person can not faction farm (hold more influence) more than 1,000 people. This is not a design fallacy. The point of alliances, was so that you could merge small and large guilds together without losing their individual identities.
If a single player game was what you desired, then there is a large selection of them to choose from as i alluded to towards the end of my previous post.

In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison discusses the nature and venues of faction. (From the Congressional Records:
''There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.'' ... ''The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.'' ... ''From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. '' Yes, when I discussed Alliances for the purposes of allowing increased play options for friends across guild lines, it was to allow small and one man guilds greater opportunities to play with one another. Instead it has been implemented as a means by which a majority or large faction/collective of persons may control the gaming opportunity or real lives of their fellow players. It is anathema to the principles of the Constitution that neither a small faction nor a large faction shall take away the right to property and opportunity of the other.

Quote:

You are making it sound like you go afk for large portions of time.

I will admit to going AFK to go to the bathroom. I am hardly ever AFK more than a few feet during party assembly during which I get a drink of water or food. My computer is located on the kitchen table.

Quote:

Social engineering is more of an issue within the game than any percieved economical one.

No economic decision can be made without ethical impact. ~ Jesuit saying.

Quote:

Most all of the "max weapon" options can be obtained through collectors, or crafted through a npc. Many of the mods are more vanity based opposed to actual effect. Though what tends to be optimal and what people choose to use are two different things. Harder to come by mods end up being max bonus to defense and 20% duration to enchantments from my experience anyway.

I agree the max enchant mod is hard to comeby, a reason I have a less than perfect sword with a +20% enchant, as I know from experience it will not come off. (The best mod on a weapon is always destroyed if salvaging it is attempted.) Further, I have not seen a collector offering a Max Chaos Axe +15^50, 20/20 Sundering, Health +30. Where is this collector?

Quote:

So, do not play with them or in pvp. No one is forcing you to. Seperating or removing it does not add anything to everyone else who does. There are plenty of repeatable quests in both prophecies and factions to help achieve whatever your goal is.

If you have noted I have not promoted eliminating sections of play, but in correcting the play sections. The Op's posit is quite understandable given the behavior that is supported thru license. This behavior will drive good people from playing the game and leave it bareft of maturity.

Quote:

The failure of the argument lies within the fact that a pvp only character could also just as easily go into hereos ascent and achieve the same thing.

Control of PvE content is derived from Favor which can only be gained by elite players in PvP. That is a fact you refuse to admit. In the same manner, control of so-called elite mission access, and access to towns and outposts is done thru Faction to the exclusion of all individualists, small guilds, and small alliances made of real people, with real incomes, who paid real money to play those areas. This also is a fact which you refuse to admit. Again, If we both buy homes, and I win the Betty Crocker Cook-off, you feel I should be permitted to deny you the use of your bathrooms. It is the same behavior as if we both buy a game, and based on whether or not I win Favor/Faction, I can deny you access to part of something you purchased.

Quote:

Then again, they did introduce a entire new end game pve area in the old tombs rendering the only real reason to goto UW or FOW based entirely upon the vanity of obtaining unneccary armor.

Sometimes it has nothing to do with vanity, meaning I wish to feel superior to you by displaying my wealth. I hated mixed armor sets (Stonefist gloves) causing a lack of uniformity in my warriors armor, and the knights armor is useless. For that reason I wanted Obsidian Armor for him. I now have him in Shing Jea. I still find most of the Necromancer armor repulsive. The Obsidian Necromancer armor is the only one I find aestheticly pleasing. I tolerate the new Tyrian Exotic because it is at least uniform with the Blood Stained Boots. Things that were nice in some Tyrian armor, like the Female Ele gause skirt, are not available in Canthan armor. In a conceptual game, appearence is half or more of the concept. Otherwise we should only play in coference call and go back to PnP.

Quote:

The two are entirely unrelated as the outcome of pvp within factions has zero impact on the availability of pve content.

The two are entirely related because it is the same exact system made worse. Further, the system incites hatred and animosity between players, as witnessed by the OP.

Quote:

Why would you choose this format where there are zero tools or controls in an environment with virtually unlimited resources.

This question makes no sense. It refers to an insufficient amount of data to be answerable.

Quote:

You clearly have bought the wrong game. I believe the sims has no violence in it and interacts with other human beings virtually, where the option for personal vanity is the only real venue involved.

You clearly have not paid attention to what I have stated. Individuality and integrity exists in choices one makes for symbolism/expression and action. It is conceptual and intuitive, not sensory limited. Nor does the communication of it have to be to others, like religion such forms need only communicate to the one who celebrates them. The ANet support of Faction Farmin Alliance Zergs ensures no individual can compete and must either sacrifice the play of content they purchased or submit to control by the mob-state.

Quote:

The xunlai agents work as far as i know and beyond stackable materials for future weapon/item upgrades crafted from a npc. There is not much need to hoard anything.

The current storage system is so far short of what a player needs (over 200 slots last I calculated it) that it is not even beginning to be funny. This includes allowing for bags, runes, belt pouches, and Xunlai.

Quote:

There are priorities within the coder's time, such as bug fixing and content additions. Personally im more interested in how the game works than what it looks like. Too many games look good, but are exceptionally shallow. If the looks of the game are the high point of this game, i wouldn't be playing it. There are others that look far better in terms of just graphics and physics.

From where I stand the looks of the game are the high-point of it. No one who is (using Mott's Typology) a feeler or intuitor will find something acceptable that does not fit appearence and/or concept. The hair stylist is not a difficult addition to the game, but was my example of things I consider more at the lower end of priority versus the obliteration of Favor and Faction control of other players real life playing options, which I hold to be at the hgihest priority.

Fitz

Ggraphix · May 30, 2006, 05:23 PM // 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by quickmonty

It seems there is an animosity between PvP and PvE players that is increasing since the release of Factions. I know there are many of you who enjoy both aspects of the game, but there are those that lean more towards one style and have a disregard for the other.

There was always a conflict between the two sides (factions?) in Prophecies. That conflict has greatly increased in Factions now that Anet has tried to push us all closer together. I am hoping that Anet sees the error of their ways and, in future chapters, will seperate PvP and PvE so we can all enjoy the aspects of the game we prefer without further increasing the conflicts, flaming and name calling.

Please. No flames or attacks. Let's just discuss this suggestion in a peaceful manner, so we can all enjoy this game in our own way.

Peace.

What conflict?

I see nothing wrong with the way PvE and PvP is handled.

I like both PvP and PvE, and I'd just assume use my PvE chars for PvP.
I do have one free slot for PvP, incase I don't have the type of PvEcharacter for the job.

But separating the 2 would just be rediculous.

I'm stopping here, cause this isn't really worth discussing.

Helll is for Heroes · May 30, 2006, 05:33 PM // 17:33

The worst thing ive seen with the slight merge betweeb PvE and PvP is people calling luxons noobs in Cavalon and Kurzicks noobs in Houze zu Heltzer.

Just ignore it!

/not signed

Dougal Kronik · May 30, 2006, 05:38 PM // 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ggraphix

What conflict?

I see nothing wrong with the way PvE and PvP is handled.

I like both PvP and PvE, and I'd just assume use my PvE chars for PvP.
I do have one free slot for PvP, incase I don't have the type of PvEcharacter for the job.

But separating the 2 would just be rediculous.

I'm stopping here, cause this isn't really worth discussing.

The OP wants the interdependency - more so of PvE depending on PvP accomplishments to reap the rewards for PvE.

PvP is fine in how it is handled. PvE is fine in how it is handled and the way skill and item unlocks for PvP from PvE play may be fine as well. For me it is, anyway.

The access to UW/FoW for PvE characters based on the performance of PvP teams that are from somewhere in my regions server (or at least their team leader is) is not handled correctly.

My playing time, and level of expertise (in PvE) should be the determining factor in my gaining access to the included (or extra) content in the game.

The separation of the two styles of play if only for the dependency of one style upon the other style's performance.

Phades · May 31, 2006, 12:08 AM // 00:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

You miss the concept of respect for humanity completely.

You do not know the meaning of humanity.
hu·man·i·ty ( P )
n. pl. hu·man·i·ties
1. Humans considered as a group; the human race.
2. The condition or quality of being human.
3. The quality of being humane; benevolence.
4. A humane characteristic, attribute, or act.
5. humanities
A) The languages and literatures of ancient Greece and Rome; the classics.
B) Those branches of knowledge, such as philosophy, literature, and art, that are concerned with human thought and culture; the liberal arts.

See reference http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=humanity

The closest thing you are reaching for is the 3rd and 4th entery which can be elaborated with the following:

hu·mane ( P )
adj.
1. Characterized by kindness, mercy, or compassion: a humane judge.
2. Marked by an emphasis on humanistic values and concerns: a humane education.

See reference http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=humane

There was nothing humane about the gladiator arenas....

In reality you are arguing for sportsmanship, which is entirely different. You are arguing here to force other people to act in a sportsmanlike manner, yet you go on later to complain about other people forcing you how to play.

Quote:

No it does not. It states that the game developers gave control over my PvE play to the whimsical outcome of professional players, without regard to my life circumstance or whether or not peak hours fit within my life-schedule as a customer. Giving control over other peoples lives to their fellow players is wrong.

Lets look up another word.

hy·poc·ri·sy ( P )
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

See reference http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=hypocrisy

Quote:

''[I]There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

Rethink your position and pay attention towards your stance since you are bringing this up. You are following the first element in bold print to achieve your goal, yet fail to realize that the latter bold print does not apply.

Quote:

...From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual.

This does not refute my point, nor are the players the representatives of the "democracy" at work within a online game. A political faction is simulated through those common interests is represented through the alliance system. Ergo, the change from the controlling alliances charging fees into "eliete" content to new alliances ferrying people into them for free.

The fact you were unable to do this solo seems to be your only point of contention, to which anyone would reply simply with, "duh".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Yes, when I discussed Alliances for the purposes of allowing increased play options for friends across guild lines, it was to allow small and one man guilds greater opportunities to play with one another. Instead it has been implemented as a means by which a majority or large faction/collective of persons may control the gaming opportunity or real lives of their fellow players. It is anathema to the principles of the Constitution that neither a small faction nor a large faction shall take away the right to property and opportunity of the other.

You might want to bring up that point with the republican and democratic parties first, since you seem to be rather clueless with the current state of the game in this instance.

Quote:

No economic decision can be made without ethical impact. ~ Jesuit saying.

That has nothing to do with my statement. Aquiring friends and collecting a large and or effective guild is by far more difficult than aquiring virtual wealth within this game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

I agree the max enchant mod is hard to comeby, a reason I have a less than perfect sword with a +20% enchant, as I know from experience it will not come off. (The best mod on a weapon is always destroyed if salvaging it is attempted.) Further, I have not seen a collector offering a Max Chaos Axe +15^50, 20/20 Sundering, Health +30.

First off, as a warrior you do not need a bonus to enchanting or health. +5 defense is better as a whole and a vampiric mod deals more damage over time than the sundering mod. You are also confusing the difference between a "perfect" weapon and mods, in addition to confusing a vanity item with a stock item.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

If you have noted I have not promoted eliminating sections of play, but in correcting the play sections. The Op's posit is quite understandable given the behavior that is supported thru license. This behavior will drive good people from playing the game and leave it bareft of maturity.

Welcome to the internet. I realize that sounds extreemly belittling and i am asking alot for you to not be offended at this point, but that is just the simple truth of the matter. The most you can do is ask someone to choose to operate in a more socially acceptable manner, just like in life outside the computer screen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Control of PvE content is derived from Favor which can only be gained by elite players in PvP. That is a fact you refuse to admit.

I have never dismissed reasoning for allowing alternate acess to the UW and FOW. This is a dead horse argument as far as im concerned. Those players dictacting this situation are not neccacarially "eliete", due to the nature of other the higher tier of pvp which is GvG battles.

You however blame others for your own playtime habits that feel restrictive towards you in roughly less than 2% of the game's total content, for which its sole purpose is the eventual vanity of crafted npc items. There are many other end game pve venues that have no such restriction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

In the same manner, control of so-called elite mission access, and access to towns and outposts is done thru Faction to the exclusion of all individualists, small guilds, and small alliances made of real people, with real incomes, who paid real money to play those areas. This also is a fact which you refuse to admit.

Perhaps you should spend less time complaining and more time in those actual areas where people are ferrying others into those zones for free. You could also read the dev blogs where they are working on methods for alternate acess into those areas. You are grossly misinformed in this instance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Sometimes it has nothing to do with vanity, meaning I wish to feel superior to you by displaying my wealth. I hated mixed armor sets (Stonefist gloves) causing a lack of uniformity in my warriors armor, and the knights armor is useless. For that reason I wanted Obsidian Armor for him. I now have him in Shing Jea. I still find most of the Necromancer armor repulsive. The Obsidian Necromancer armor is the only one I find aestheticly pleasing. I tolerate the new Tyrian Exotic because it is at least uniform with the Blood Stained Boots.

Fashion translates in to a socially acceptable form of vanity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

The two are entirely related because it is the same exact system made worse. Further, the system incites hatred and animosity between players, as witnessed by the OP.

I suppose there are aliens out there too, just because someone who is paranoid thinks they are out to get them. They have yet to prove much of anything beyond that the dead horse, is in fact, still dead. It is still up to the developers to finish methods of alternate acess and implement them or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

This question makes no sense. It refers to an insufficient amount of data to be answerable.

Play a greater variety of games and you will come to this conclusion on your own. For a decent reference into a system with relativly good economic controls, i would suggest EVE online.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

You clearly have not paid attention to what I have stated. Individuality and integrity exists in choices one makes for symbolism/expression and action. It is conceptual and intuitive, not sensory limited. Nor does the communication of it have to be to others, like religion such forms need only communicate to the one who celebrates them. The ANet support of Faction Farmin Alliance Zergs ensures no individual can compete and must either sacrifice the play of content they purchased or submit to control by the mob-state.

Likewise i could state the same. The difference being related to the quantity of people invovled in the evolution within the living game environment, opposed to the dictatorship you propose. Even so, you still haven't noticed that the alliances are ferrying people into those areas for free.

Philosiphy is up to the individual, but every individual is not forced to use the same philosiphy. I believe tyranny comes into play in the latter aspect of this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

The current storage system is so far short of what a player needs (over 200 slots last I calculated it) that it is not even beginning to be funny. This includes allowing for bags, runes, belt pouches, and Xunlai.

At what point in the game do you need 200 runes, complete weapons, mods, armor sets, 50,000 units of crafting materials/collectors items, or any combination there of? I would really like to know.

I find this comment to be sad and funny at the same time, since the game does have effectivly unlimited resources and there is a finite point for upgrades. Excluding head pieces and the occasional hand piece, there is really 1 and sometimes 2 optimal armor set combinations for each profession. You didnt seem to include each item slot on the character.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

From where I stand the looks of the game are the high-point of it. No one who is (using Mott's Typology) a feeler or intuitor will find something acceptable that does not fit appearence and/or concept. The hair stylist is not a difficult addition to the game, but was my example of things I consider more at the lower end of priority versus the obliteration of Favor and Faction control of other players real life playing options, which I hold to be at the hgihest priority.

Stylist requires different mappings and character model options, in addition to programmer time to insert into the game. Hell, they havent even added the option for a profession changer into the pvp only areas of the game, which forces people to use a minimum of 2 map changes (usually 3), or recreating a character from scratch. Yet, they have had the game mechanics for one in place since before the release of factions.

Now i pose another question to you, which takes more time, adding in content that smoothes out gameplay using existing elements already coded into the game, or introducing something entirely foreign into the game that only suits an asthetic nature? Neither have occured yet btw and both have been asked for numerous times.

Tarun · May 31, 2006, 12:43 AM // 00:43

I wonder how PvPers would feel if they could only PvP when the PvE players had the favor of say.. Glint/Kuunavang. Imagine the Battles Isles being like Atlantis. It sinks unless your region has favor. Or even certain islands. Food for thought.

If you can see what that is like, PvPers; it gives you a taste of how PvE players feel about trying to go into UW and FoW.

pipedream · May 31, 2006, 01:11 AM // 01:11

/NOT SIGNED

Play what you want, its fine the way it is.

Replicant · May 31, 2006, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tarun

I wonder how PvPers would feel if they could only PvP when the PvE players had the favor of say.. Glint/Kuunavang. Imagine the Battles Isles being like Atlantis. It sinks unless your region has favor. Or even certain islands. Food for thought.

If you can see what that is like, PvPers; it gives you a taste of how PvE players feel about trying to go into UW and FoW.

HAH that would be awesome, then all the PvP'ers can come here and get a taste of their own medicine. I could just hear them all complaining on the forums now.. lol.

/signed on seperating the 2 systems. Ascention should be all that is needed to go to FoW/UW.

Fitz Rinley · May 31, 2006, 06:13 AM // 06:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phades

You do not know the meaning of humanity.
hu·man·i·ty ( P )
n. pl. hu·man·i·ties
1. Humans considered as a group; the human race.
2. The condition or quality of being human.
3. The quality of being humane; benevolence.
4. A humane characteristic, attribute, or act.

The closest thing you are reaching for is the 3rd and 4th entery which can be elaborated with the following:

I know full well what I mean and it falls under definition 1, not the bastardized concept currently represented in the word humane.

Quote:

There was nothing humane about the gladiator arenas....

In the bastardized concept no, but they were human and therefor of humanity.

Quote:

In reality you are arguing for sportsmanship, which is entirely different. You are arguing here to force other people to act in a sportsmanlike manner, yet you go on later to complain about other people forcing you how to play.

Instructing people in the nature of what you call sportsmanlike behavior is different from a manufacturer granting a few so-called elite purchasers of their product the right to deny fellow purchasers use of their purchase in part or in whole. The first is merely a social venue the second is social, legal, and economic.

Quote:

Lets look up another word. hy·poc·ri·sy ( P )

Because you used the pseudological argument X is 'X' above confusing apples with potatoes, it may falsely appear hypocrittical. It does not when the pseudorefution is recognized.

Quote:

Rethink your position ...

Both circumstances may be applied. The factions are those who favor the liberty of access to the content for which they have paid real money and those who favor tyranny by maintaining a system in which it can be denied. The ending of these factons over Faction may occur in one of two ways: 1) removing all players who support one or the other from the community, or 2) find a way of ensuring all players have the same corporate sponsored oppinion of Faction.

Quote:

A political faction is simulated through those common interests is represented through the alliance system.

You are confusing the factions of real life players with the Faction of virtual play. I am not. My character has died, I have not.

Quote:

The fact you were unable to do this solo seems to be your only point of contention, to which anyone would reply simply with, "duh".

I have not attempted to do this solo, nor would I debased my integritty to beg for or allow others to take me for free. Nor will I pay fellow players for access to content in a game I purchased with real funds. I oppose it on moral principles without restraint.

Quote:

You might want to bring up that point with the republican and democratic parties first, ...

My good senators and representatives are long past attempting to send me form letters, and provide excellent documentation when requested.

Quote:

Aquiring friends and collecting a large and or effective guild is by far more difficult than aquiring virtual wealth within this game.

To more friends and less need of them. ~ Scots' Toast. Whether it is difficult or not does not indicate it is desirable. Half the world is introverted and has no use for it.

Quote:

First off, as a warrior you do not need a bonus to enchanting...

Eleven active characters and one mule in two accounts. Not everyone who wields a sword is a warrior. Some are Mesmers.

Quote:

Welcome to the internet. I realize that sounds extreemly belittling and i am asking alot for you to not be offended at this point, but that is just the simple truth of the matter. The most you can do is ask someone to choose to operate in a more socially acceptable manner, just like in life outside the computer screen.

Imagine what would have happened if MADD were told, ''Welcomoe to the interstate. You are just going to ahve to accept drunk drivers on the road. That is just the way it is.'' There are laws against drinking and driving while intoxicated. There are laws against the use of unnacceptable language in public. There are laws against lewd and lacivious conduct. Promoting a ritual to represent honor and respect as a means of recognizing the common worth of persons in your fellow contestants is defined by you as Tyranny. Respect for the dead is in the beginning of civilization. With that respect is understood respect for the dying and living. Yet, by promoting a game mechanic for a ceremony of respect, and has the added feature of ensuring all players are loaded and ready to perform on the battlefield, I am a tyrant.

Quote:

You however blame others for your own playtime habits that feel restrictive towards you in roughly less than 2% of the game's total content, for which its sole purpose is the eventual vanity of crafted npc items. There are many other end game pve venues that have no such restriction.

I hold ANet responsible for an unnecessary schema that restricts any customer, myself or not, from game content based upon the outcome or whim of so-called elite, privileged, or distant fellow players. I do not care if it is the trucker that finally gets a few hours to use a cafe, or the evening dispatcher who is a single parent of 3, or anyone else. The structure is ethically wrong and should enver have been installed.

Quote:

Perhaps you should spend less time complaining and more time in those actual areas where people are ferrying others into those zones for free.

By accepting there charity I condone the system that makes it necessary. I will not lend it so much credence.

Quote:

Fashion translates in to a socially acceptable form of vanity.

For the sensorily oriented fashion may seem of little value. For the conceptually oriented it is bread and water in every meal. If you are one and not the other you will not understand.

Quote:

It is still up to the developers to finish methods of alternate acess and implement them or not.

They have had a month since going on line and it is not changed. If moral value were a concern it would be done. It is not. As the Germans say, ''Sh** in one hand and wish in the other, then squeeze to see which one is real.'' It is not in hand. Promisses are empty words.

Quote:

Even so, you still haven't noticed that the alliances are ferrying people into those areas for free.

I have noticed. No one should pay another player for what is already purchased, nor accept in charity for the same.

Quote:

Philosiphy is up to the individual, but every individual is not forced to use the same philosiphy. I believe tyranny comes into play in the latter aspect of this.

Methodology is upto the individual. Stance to what is right or wrong is also upto the individual. A sufficient faction of those who choose wrong may overcome right. However, no civliized people exists in which salutory greeting is not standard. No civilized people exists in which respect for the dead, the dying, and the survivors is not a concern. Let us not mistake philosophy alone for what is the norm for civilized humanity. (Though, I recognize that philosophy also is human.)

Quote:

At what point in the game do you need 200 runes, complete weapons, mods, armor sets, 50,000 units of crafting materials/collectors items, or any combination there of? I would really like to know.

At that poiont where I need space to/for:
1. Collect among the 150+ collectable drops,
2. Gauntlets and/or headpieces for each attribute/build,
3. 3-4 weapons/off-hands for each attribute build,
4. Armor for different areas or builds accordingly,
5. Things of individual value, such as mini-pet (not purchased) or other rewards,
6. 30-40 spaces immediately available for each outing,
7. 8 spaces for dye X two accounts,
8. Odd quest items at any given time.
9. Kits.

Quote:

Now i pose another question to you, which takes more time, adding in content that smoothes out gameplay using existing elements already coded into the game, or introducing something entirely foreign into the game that only suits an asthetic nature? Neither have occured yet btw and both have been asked for numerous times.

So we are agreed. Concern for consumer interests is mild to non-existent. As I indicated this kind of thing is less important in priority than other issues such as storage, access, etc.

Fitz

Sanji · May 31, 2006, 10:00 AM // 10:00

Yes, because PvPers should be punished because it was obviously their idea to make FoW/UW the way it is and Anet had absolutely nothing to do with it.

I would say Tarun's idea is easily the most petty, self-absorbed, and moronic suggestion on this topic but unfortunately someone else regurgitated the very same spiteful nonsense before.

I am sorry you are rendered insane with grief just because you can't farm ecto's 24/7, but it's not any other player's fault that Anet designed Favor so poorly. The desire for revenge on whatever percieved injury you've endured from "the other side" will do nothing to improve the game for either side. All it does is seek to make the game worse on a whole.

The only reason this is a problem for most people is because they refuse to embrace both PvP and PvE, which is Guild Wars' focus. If you're only going to play half the game, of course you're going to run into a wall when it comes to content. This goes for both sides. As for ill will, well, people are going to be jerks even outside the PvP vs. PvE capacity. That's just people online.

Anyone who sincerely wants to seperate PvP from PvE has proven they bought the wrong game for the wrong reasons. This isn't an MMO that lacks a monthly fee nor is it a RPG styled PvP game that lacks character build up/grind. If you want a "pure" game like that, the last place you should look is in a PvE/PvP hybrid such as Guild Wars.

Fitz Rinley · May 31, 2006, 12:34 PM // 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanji

The only reason this is a problem for most people is because they refuse to embrace both PvP and PvE, which is Guild Wars' focus. If you're only going to play half the game, of course you're going to run into a wall when it comes to content. This goes for both sides. As for ill will, well, people are going to be jerks even outside the PvP vs. PvE capacity. That's just people online.

Both PvP and PvE were marketted as play options to then use some mechanism of one to coerce players from the other does not inspire cooperation or compliance. Further there has never been any good reason to place access to purchased content in the hands of fellow players, let alone such an ''elite'' few.

The ill-will occurs because certain people require their ego be boosted through the control of other peoples' recreational lives and options. (Where X reads nameable region.) ''You can't go because we are the superior X region and we are keeping it from you noob piece of **** players. We pwn you.'' Pwn and Own are for slave keepers. Using the terms is an offense against everything right. The other atten disrespect is equally deserving of ill-will. I have no reason to consider playing with these so-called elite persons.

Quote:

Anyone who sincerely wants to seperate PvP from PvE has proven they bought the wrong game for the wrong reasons.

Your statement lacks solid definition. Two forms of separation have been expressed here. One is total separation into two games. This has been less popular. The other is separation of control of player options by the two differing styles of play. (Elimination of Favor and alteration of Faction are points I have made, while still allowing for the PvP access.) Tarun's last statement questions what would happen if access to arenas was dependent upon PvE play. Perhaps all PvP players should be booted from match each time there is a change in faction, Glints' egg is touched, or Shiro defeats a team.

Quote:

This isn't an MMO that lacks a monthly fee...

Um, yes it is.

Quote:

nor is it a RPG styled PvP game that lacks character build up/grind.

RPG does not mean character build up/grind. It means playing a role with options which alter or affect story outcome. What if Eve (or Necro Player) absorbed the soul of the Lich, picked up the staff of Orr, and supplanted him? What if a party member turned on Rurik and aided the Charr at Nolani, failing and being cast into a prison or banished, or succeeding in killing the Prince and then having to flee with random spawns of red-caped avengers until saving Adelbern from the Titans? Role-play requires options, which the game does not have. But it is a Massive Multi-player On-line Game, or MMOG.

Fitz