Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chthon
1. I agree with Jetdoc. This thread is going to quickly descend into a pointless high-school popularity contest... if it isn't one already.
|
It's possible, and even so it may be what we need (look at it as a "let's talk about ourselves" thread

)
Quote:
2. Except for "balance updates," testing has definitely been a-net's weakest point with GW. Anyone remember the Factions release with at least 3 different bugs/"features" that made one's team auto-fail in Vizunah Sq.? How about the first iteration of the SR timer which was utterly unplayable, even though Gaile assured us it had been tested? (Aside: REMOVE THE DAMN SR TIMER ALREADY!) The list could go on.
Anywho, my point is, whatever a-net has been doing by way of testing thus far is not working. It needs to be changed. That means that the old testing system should be completely overhauled, and none of the old testers should be invited back. (Sorry Ensign.)
|
I can't comment on this, but I disagree that the testers should be changed. It's rather the way Anet deals with test results that shall be changed, not testers. I don't have the knowledge to judge
Ensign but I read that he's highly praised by PvPers, so I'd tend to nominate him. The goal is not to get "the perfect list", it'll never be, you want a good list and most importantly Anet needs to: 1) be organised (rounds of beta with clear objectives"); 2) listen with a quality control at each step; 3) select a mix of people, with PvE/PvP/PvE+PvP players, young and old (both in-game and RL), opinionated and openminded.
Quote:
|
3. I see people talking about having a good mix of PvP and PvE testers. Why? Hasn't GW1 proved beyond a doubt that the two cannot coexist as equals? One play mode is going to be the favorite son and the other is going to end up the red-headed stepchild. Pretending things aren't going to be that way is just going to lead to repeating the worst design mistakes of GW1. I think it would be more productive for the devs to make up their minds about which play mode they are supporting first and foremost, pick testers who are going to test that mode well, and advertise GW2 specifically as that sort of game so that customers know what they're getting into this time around.
|
I agree and disagree: both communities NEED to be represented, because the current state of GW and its community are like this, it's a simple matter of representativity. Not doing that would lead to test results shifting too much into one direction, with the risk of alienating legit and interesting players.
Secondly, GW2 wil lbe very different from GW1 if I'm not mistaken. So PvE or PvP should be irrelevant (my guess is that it'll a matter of playstyle, with shades of gray between PvE and PvP), and so to be FAIR you need to pick a bit everywhere. Because if you don't, you'll have PvErs looking at this new game without the experience of PvPers and so they may orientate their feedback against interesting aspects (if you think of yourself as a GW2 player, i.e. neither PvE nor PvP).