Feedback talk:Game updates/20101124

Wow, I'm surprised nobody said anything about "love my new derv skills" or "epic update <3" :) Thepoisonx 20:04, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * They are probably all on vacation 70.44.204.18 Z
 * Give it time J new [[Image:Tormented Scythe.png|25px|link=User_talk:Jnew]] 21:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Omg, love my new derv skillz. Epic update <3. I'm a douchebag. FleshAndFaith 22:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * My derv appreciates the lack of a derv update, which would probably turn out to be a nerf to everything I actually enjoy about the profession. 203.173.150.48 23:17, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ^Nuff said.--122.111.229.52 01:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You never know, they can do something like they did with the big mesmer update. "Mysticism only affects dervish enchantments that end prematurely due to you activating a skill. You also gain 1 armor for each rank of mysticism while wielding a scythe. Derv armour gets nerfed to 60 to balance this", "Scythes now can attack up to 5 enemies" "Vow of Strength: Functionality changed to 'You attack +30% faster and deal 30% more damage while wielding a scythe. No effect if you are under a hex AND a condition' ". Wounding strike moves to mysticism and they buff Strength because of that... nerf random stuff, fix what isn't broken, introduce faceroll to appease under 10s and punish players for trying to make dual-class builds. You'd still be dealing more damage, so it'd be an awesome buff, amirite? - VileLasagna 13:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Wait.
So they're adding PVE-only-use items to GvG(pvp)? ..kinda ironic, no? -- Neil •  00:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to PvE after you've done with GvG - problem solved.--122.111.229.52 01:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it is ironic, but whatever, at least they add additional language support. - Lucian Shadowborn  [[Image:User_Lucian Shadowborn.jpg|19px]] 03:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If these are the improvements to make PvP more "rewarding", this is kinda sad attempt... - J.P.[[Image:User J.P. sigicon.png| ]] Talk  17:00, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's probably just to get PvE Players to play PvP or something 184.56.243.170 21:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Nub ass pvpers need to learn how to PvE. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 21:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

?
What, you're going to force us to PvE now? Keep consumables out of PvP pls. ~_~ Rolain1 20:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Edit: Or do it properly and give the zaishen elite battle Cider and Pie too. Rolain1 20:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Where are they forcing them? You must see a different update from the one I do. If anything they can just sell them or not pick them up.--The Emmisary 20:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * PvPer's are just stupid and try to attack drops for no apparent reason, then complain. FleshAndFaith 00:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ^ Good Joke 68.193.46.141 00:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just waiting until the complains start coming about people that lost important matches because the monk accidentally clicked a pumpkin while kiting and died horribly while collecting it. It'll be epicsauce - VileLasagna 13:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

DLC
Hey is there any new DLC in this update? I think DLC is great and I don't understand how people could have ever enjoyed video games before DLC. I think anet should be more like capcom and move assassins and monks to the DLC shop. Also move hard mode to DLC. Thanks buye Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә    ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 22:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see how you can get upset about purely cosmetic stuff being sold for money in a game. If anything, you should be mad about game expansions like Eye of the North, as those are much closer to the behavior you've described in your sarcastic post above. You won't get any sort of tangible in-game advantage by buying a costume, but you get a bunch of new skills for use both in PvE and PvP just for buying EotN. Campaigns are even worse, you get whole new professions for money. You clearly see how that translates to in-game advantage, don't you? --Adul 23:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Although each one of those, even eye of the north, is indeed a full fledged expansion. And totally worth the 12 quid I paid for them - VileLasagna 23:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * EotN is 50% off right now. They did this since HoM Calculator was release to allow everyone to get a HoM for half price only. Dont say they are inconsiderate and only want money, they halved their prices for the players. Just tell yourself GW2 cost you $12 more for cosmetic stuff(need EotN for HoM rewards, which are cosmetic stuff in GW2)173.32.190.24 04:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Pay for content < Get free content and OPTION of paying for costumes. If Anet were to release a new costume pack every content update I would ALWAYS choose to get the content for free and let people who want the costumes buy them.  As long as they keep adding more, they can add as many cosmetic, completely optional, pay to use options as they want.  It's complete nonsense that people would rather pay for something that they're getting for free right now than pay for a costume occasionally (or not get any costumes at all).  24.118.99.65 20:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the general belief is that by charging for microtransactions it encourages them to offer less for in purchase of the game (or for standard value expansions) and move the things they took out to the online store. That's how they are implementing the store in GW2 (removing the ability to move insignias between armours and making you pay to do that in GW2 - they aren't offering anything new, just taking more money for things you already had). 122.104.165.248 06:09, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * @Previous: where exactly did you hear that? Considering that the GW2 wiki has no mention of armor upgrades requiring any sort of purchase and the fact that the only thing they actually have mentioned about those, as far as I'm aware, is that they exist and give bonuses when applied to an armor set, I have to question that statement. 128.113.201.222 13:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I read the same thing at the gw2 site. He might not of explained it very well. It basically goes like this. You have this really cool armor set, but you find something a lot better. Instead of sacrificing your awesome look, you can "merge" the two items by buying a store item (Forget what they called it). You can then use that item to take the stats from the better new item, and put them onto your less good item that you like better. The idea is that they want you to keep the items you like and be able to keep it growing with you if you want. Of course its at the price of real money. Overall, I think it's a good idea, but something I would only ever use if I really needed it.146.186.210.82 13:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC)New poster? (thought i'd contribute for the first time)
 * Close. Saying that the items "grow" with you is a bit of an overstatement, since all you're doing is applying the stats of item X to the skin of item Y. Purely something cosmetic if you want to keep the axe skin that you found back in Kryta or something. You'd buy transmutation stones and get an NPC to merge the two items. But, for items obtained in the HoM, this process is free. So you can keep upgrading that Stygian Reaver until level 80. As for the actual bonuses you can apply to armor, those are different. You buy crests (the actual names differ for each armor class, but the light armor ones are crests, so we'll go with that) from a Tailor NPC in-game, and you apply them to your armor. These basically let you make your own custom sets, since you get more and more bonuses the more of a certain crest you have on you. What GW2 is doing is about as "bad" as buying a costume in GW, from the information available at this point in time. Zetta 14:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally think it's brilliant that they are implementing cosmetic stuff into the cash store from the get go in GW2. How many times have we heard that this or that isn't possible in GW because of the lack of resources? Obviously, after almost 6 years, the number of new players has tapered off dramatically, and so their overall income has gone down, thus restricting the amount of resources that can be applied to GW while maintaining the team to make GW2 as good as it can be. Their no subscription fee model is what has kept most of us here year after year, even though from a purely business standpoint, it makes it difficult for them. If they are building in a way to have continual income from players who wish to utilize these cosmetic options while continuing to provide all game play content for only the initial investment for the game itself, YAY! I personally have no problem dropping $10 here and there on costumes if it means that John and the rest of the Live Team can continue to give us new content occasionally, rather than have to pay $15 or $20/mo just to play the game that I've already bought. As for A&S's original post, you need to calculate just how much per hour of game play you have actually spent on GW, and then compare it to pretty much any other form of entertainment around. You pay $20 to go see a 90 minute movie (if you get popcorn and soda)... The fact that everything that truly affects game play is available to you for your initial purchase price is totally amazing to me. -- Wyn [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon2.png|19px ]] talk  14:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The way it sounds to me though is this: "You know how when you finally save enough kashes to get that new elite armour you can then just take a perfect salvage kit, which is easily acquirable in-game, and transfer all the mods to the new set? Well, in GW2 now you have to buy perfect salvage kits with irl monies, how cool is that?". I'll confess though that I have resigned myself to researching as little as possible about GW2. Me buying it on pre-release is an inevitability however, the more I think of it, the greater the danger of ragequit. Never mind that they absolutely murdered guild wars, background wise. Also some of this stuff sounds strange since one of the greatest standpoints in guild wars, and one that to my belief was one of their most brilliant moves is that a obsidian sword worth several dozen ectos is no better than a sword you can get dropped by a normal enemy or trade a collector for, say, 5 margonite masks or putrid cysts. The early ceiling and the assumption that everything IS at the ceiling and the distinction is skill and planning sounds intrinsic to guild wars and I, for one, will rage quite fearsomely if GW2 changes in that aspect. Also: I agree that the way GW stands right now on this is brilliant. You get everything with the game and then, for a few extra kashes, you can unlock a few extra shinies (heck, BMP is just awesome, and you can buy it for what? 10 quid?). Also also forgot to sign, oopsie - VileLasagna 17:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Guys: If you can't agree that DLC is bad like any decent person should, then just don't post.  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ  аІiсә  [[File:User Aliceandsven 3.png]]  ѕνәи  Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm terribly sorry, but I can't see how "Downloadable Content" is bad and I still will post. You're expanding your raeg into something that is actually quite nice. I certainly can see how DLC can be MADE bad but, using that as a word for "extras" (since it's a bit pointless to classify DLC literally given that ALL of guild wars is downloadable), I believe that so far for the GW optionals and extra add-on bits aNet has done an outstandingly good job - VileLasagna 23:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply to OP, Dear Sir/Madam, you are brainwashed. DLC games are incomplete games. They don't release full games now just to get more money out of downloadable content. Markus Clouser  [[Image:User_Markus_Clouser_signature_img.jpg|19px]] 17:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * DLC has been made bad. It was another one of humanity's "cool ideas" that in reality is just an excuse to be un-cool.  68.193.122.145 22:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The concept of game expansions being sold for money has been around for about as long as video games themselves. That they are called DLC nowadays does not change a thing about them. The microtransactions payment method in online games however is not the same thing, as it extorts money out of players in exchange for virtual goods. I like to view it as an exploitative mutation of game expansions. Now of course I'm not too fond of that myself, but in the case of GW1 I can't really see it doing any significant damage to the game as long as it's only cosmetic stuff that's being sold. --Adul 01:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That's why I think the "extra shiny bits you can buy for monies" are brilliant in GW. Being a MMO with no subscription surely is a challenge, as the game gets older it's harder to bring new players in and the veterans aren't necessarily paying for maintenance of all those servers they use so much. And the costumes and stuff in GW have been a nice trick in that way. They're cheap and have no influence at all in the game. And when they're released, aNet gets a bit of income from people that decide to buy it. People that don't give a shit, can continue not giving a shit because they're not really losing anything (except, arguably, general quality of the free holiday hats), in fact they're probably gaining some security in terms of how long the game is gonna run (can't really remember until when the servers are sure to run, though). As long as aNet continues with this sort of mentality I think they'll be quite fine in this area - VileLasagna 06:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)