ArenaNet talk:Developer updates/Archive Jan-Mar 2009

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

double drag

IT WAS FINE. It WAS in many builds but now ya think ur cool and screwed with it so it sucks. W00t! Bar c0mpression! infern0 + glyph 04 3l3ment@1 p0\/\/3r!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!1!!!!one --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:76.252.230.34 (talk).

erm, perhaps you should look up the definition of buff? Also, if you want people to actually read what you type, try to type normal english not in allcaps. :/ WhyUser talk:Why Are We Fighting 17:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
No, it was not fine. It sucked great deal. It required too much and gave not enough. I can't say that now it's the best it could be, but it's better. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 21:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
When it comes to how good elites are, some are essentially TWO normal skills combined. You just showed it was like that, except, this stacks with glyph of elemental power(or can be used with another glyph), and it costs less than inferno and has a larger range. You should compare it to Flame Burst too, since that has the same area of effect. Anyway, this skill is fun, but like most elementalist PBAoE skills, I would be hesitant to use it on an primary ele (except frozen burst, since it snares). I'd prefer this skill to deal damage to ONE target (out of LoS, like mind blast), and keep the bonus to fire magic. StatMan 16:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Yup, it buffs itself. I use AoE skills like this combined with skills like wirlwind or frozen burst, that allows you to deal another hit. With the previous Double Dragon, the second burst usually is avoided, since they usually manage to move away fast enough even snared or knocked down. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 14:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
When it comes to PBAoE spells, a large range is often what makes one more powerful than the others. 145.94.74.23 12:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
This skill got a buff. It was NOT fine before. Previously it was useless trash, worse than a non-elite. Fail troll is fail. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.71.229.129 (talk).

The skills is farrrrrr more useful now xD, I don't even think it began to be useful back in the old timers pre-buff of a Double Dragon. Nikdanbro 05:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

[Dev Update] - 15 January 2009

I really hope that they're doing a lot more than (1) storage, (2) storage, & (3) HoM. What I'm hoping is that this is like a teaser to get people interested, otherwise they're wasting my time. If it's seriously going to take 3 1/2 months to add storage and finally make the HoM the way it should have been in the first place, then I'm going to be royally pissed off. Hey Live Team, you want to know how to improve the quality and experience of GW? ADD NEW CONTENT. Don't just make old, crappy content more efficient. I understand people's concerns with storage (I'm having them myself), but 3 1/2 months of minuscule updates for 1 LARGE turd is ridiculous. Please....please Live Team....give us a hint that it's going to be better than that. 129.62.40.101 22:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and P.S. working only retroactively with player problems and concerns shows no foresight. Do some proactive work and prove to the GW community that you still give a damn. 129.62.40.101 22:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
GuildWars doesn't really need new content, the player base is split thinly enough as it is. What would be handy is better tools to help players find each other and enjoy the existing content. 60.241.42.118 22:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


moved from User talk:Regina Buenaobra

And I quote: "We want players to feel connected to what we are developing even though it may be months away from release, so during development we will be more open about our process and what we are working on.". This is something we as a community have been asking for months (even years) now. How is this going to be achieved? (edit- an official name woot ^_^ ) Aba malatu 20:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It'll be about how amazing Guild Wars 2 is and how we should all buy it. 67.81.108.211 19:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
There are no solid points in that statement. No matter what they do, they are "following" that statement. Even just saying here is one detail, without an explanation that is provably in the game or flat out going to be in the game is more than what we have now, even if that detail may undergo minor changes. You're going to have to be a hell of a lot more concrete than that or completely take us off guard and actually release relative information, and support that information before you can even begin to repair the damage that has happened so far. There is no plan available for rolling this information out, and while this is a start, unless a plan shows up in a week, I suspect that this will also backfire due peoples patience being already worn thin. Kelvin Greyheart 19:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Curious as to what "improvements to character-based storage" means. But hey, this is great. Even though I don't expect anything from ANet aside from making GW2 an awesome game, they keep giving us some nice updates in GW1. Good job! And thanks for the heads up. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 19:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I would be surprised, very pleasently mind you, but surprised, if they let us access all characters inventories at once, (non pre obviously). That would be wonderful. Alternatively, there is armor storage, rune (WHY don't they stack?) storage, dye storage, and mod storage/trader. What if any of these will be added is anyone's guess, and I would like to know more. Kelvin Greyheart 20:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I would imagine character based storage would be addressing the issue that has come with the new storybooks and the likes. Hopefully armor as well. Minipet storage would be nice. Ok, I suppose the more accurate question, based on what the Update says, is "Ok, what are you developing that you want us to feel connected with?" Aba malatu 20:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I suspect they'll be including more specific storage slots, like dye storage, or storybook storage. (They did mention that they understood the pressures that storybooks were putting on inventories and were looking at that.) A mod/inscription trader would be a dream come true for me, but it's doubtful that such a thing will come about. - Zaxares 03:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
A mod/inscription trader wouldn't be too good.. It ruins the fun of id'ing to get it unlocked on PvP, and most of the current merchandising goes through the trading of mods/inscr. A mod/inscr. storage tab on Xunlai would be cool though ^^ Personally, i'm going for the extra bag!! Joetjah 22:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It means that they are allowed to talk about guild wars 2 because the fanbase is giving up

If only things were so simple :P Aba Malatu 21:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I believe Linsey has already addressed the issue of a 'master inventory' that would access all character inventories at once as being impossible without recoding the entire game, so I wouldn't expect that kind of change, I'm guessing it will be more along the lines of somehow expanding the storage capabilities of each character beyond the current 45 slots, either by creating kit or book type items that hold additional items or something similar. And no, I don't believe the statement about being 'transparent' in what they are developing has anything at all to do with GW2 or a lifting of the non-disclosure order, only the development that's happening with the GW Live team. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn/talk 22:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
What concerns me is Arena Net's trend of announcing something before they are sure they will be able to implement it. If they really add what they're claiming they will add, great; if they learn in a couple months that some of those ideas will have to be delayed by months, or learned to be impossible, well... Erasculio 22:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
It's nice feeling connected, now if I knew what I was connected to would be nice. I share your view there, Erasculio, its hard to get excited when you look back at the familiar pattern. Excuse Me Will I Ignore You In Advance 22:29, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree with both of you. After the last few years....and the promises that have been made.....I just don't trust it anymore. Either way, I'm not ready to experience lackluster updates for 3 months while they figure out that it's not worth their effort to add "more storage" (and honestly, more storage doesn't excite me). 129.62.40.101 22:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
while i can understand the negativity, i don't share the sentiment. i was quite critical of anet back when they were releasing chapters, but it's been awhile since they've had a new source of income and i've mellowed out. i don't really do much besides the minigames during holidays so maybe it's b/c i feel less attached to the game. but i will say that no game has come anywhere close in terms of money_spent/hours_played. truthfully, i'm just glad they still keep the servers running. i'm not sure if it's really a good business decision for them. --VVong|BA 22:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
You misunderstand, it's not negativity. More caution based on past actions. Excuse Me Will I Ignore You In Advance 23:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Linsey did say on her Journal that those items aren't the only things that they will be adding to Guild Wars in April. I hope new quest continuing the storyline that was touched upon by the Mox quests. 216.232.127.117

MOX? I really don't want to be playing with bots. I am dead tired of bots after I H/H'd all the campaigns. I might as well be playing a offline RPG because everyone that's competent has a partyfull of bots because 'PUGs suck.' You play a MMO because PUGs give that unexpected twist. When I play GW, I don't feel there's one thing that encourages me to make new friends like WoW does, unless you count hanging out with standers out in Piken or something [but those people just stand there and talk]. Anet needs to encourage more player interaction which will help improve PUGs and the Average Joe players instead of passively falling back on bots. 67.234.6.254 01:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You've identified the core problem right there. Most competant players do not play with PUGs because PUGs are usually awful, and are likely to result in failure. Nobody likes failure; it's a waste of everybody's time and ends up in blame-games and name-calling. Therefore, the only way to ensure that most people would rather play with PUGs than H/H is to make the game easier, or change it so that there's no penalties for failure. (And clearly, this would totally alter the GW experience. Imagine if you could respawn infinitely in missions, with no DP, or if you could 'save the game' at specific points in missions. This would no doubt encourage people to just 'group up and go', but I bet this would alienate the 'elite players' crowd who then decry the game as being too easy.)
Hmmm... Maybe there should be an Easy mode for GW... Where you COULD respawn infinitely, or save the game... *musing* - Zaxares 03:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
That would be nice, it would help to weed out the trash players from PvE. Mori no Kinoko ni go Youjin QQ 03:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Most good players do not want to play with PUGs for several reasons. PUGs have serious organizational problems, which can be overlooked with decent, or even mildly decent players. That brings us to problem number two. Most PUGs are terrible. You see spirit spam monks who "can heal also", /me with conjure phantasm nightmare lolling their amazing pink damage, and a host of other combos that make you want to eat your keyboard in frustration. That sort of brings us to issue number 3, and that is that PUGs have serious attitude problems, and essentially never take suggestions. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing with people, but having someone maintain mending on 6 people and then complain we aren't killing people fast enough to trigger his soul reaping to maintain enchantments gets irritating. As far as making the game easier, goes, that only makes the problem worse. There is no reason to get better at all if that happens. It is sad wen you get called a noob by someone who has mending, frenzy, with all points in strength, and healing prayers, and attack skills from all 3 war weapons. This "expert" has a set of 15k platemail because he can farm UW with his perma which can of course "pwn your shitye nub SSS necoro" cause with "his perma you'll never be able to do anything to him in a 1 on 1". Apparently dealing over 200 damage a second is totally shitty when he can use dismember, switch to a hammer for mighty blow, then switch to a sword to cover that deepwound with sever artery, but then what do I know. I'm a "total fuktard hoo socks cuck". On second thought, that guy is actually pretty good. He knows that covered deepwound is better, though maybe thats just coincidence. <Sarcasm> But hey, he has elite armor so I have to give him the benefit of the doubt. </Sarcasm> And yes, I did run into the above, and yes the spelling is all his with the exception of the perma is untouchable. That sentence had in total, 7 swear words, all of which were misspelled, and was written in a way that would make a furious Yoda force choke himself to death. I wish I could make this stuff up, but my creativity is simply too feeble to even attempt such abuse of reality. I will gladly assist someone who listens and is polite. However the above, while admittedly somewhat uncommon in that it is SO far over the top, is a sad reality that you are always gambling when pugging. At least he wasn't leeching, but for total contribution to the team he may as well have been. Kelvin Greyheart 04:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
It used to be online games had a nice /whois function so you could get someone's IP to hunt them down and kill them with a rifle grenade if they acted like that. Now, though, you can't find anybody no matter what you try -- I blame 9/11. In any case, I agree wholeheartedly that the quality of PUGs is dismal. However, easy mode would do little to benefit the game -- it would only require more programming, more rebalancing, and allow more farmbots to get easy gold. While I will certainly agree that most people who actually play the game could be safely converted to fuel with little to no disadvantages to society at large, easy mode would not filter them out, it would only attract more, like proverbial flies to GW's festering, cancer-ridden corpse. --Jette User Jette awesome.png 05:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hell, I'd settle for a painful electric shock through their keyboard. Easy mode would serve no purpose, and to prevent farming would need to have no loot whatsoever. That and no titles, even cart, could be gained. Kelvin Greyheart 05:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
That reminds me of when I wanted to turn into my minipets and rip through everything in 5 minutes. It could be called mini mode! No loot, no maps, no missions, no drunkenness, or anything else -- just me as Mallyx tearing everything in a five mile radius a new asshole. I'd like to do it in PvP, too: pop up on the altar in HA and mess your ass up with banish enchantments, just for the lolz. Take amphetamines and keep people from playing for 72 hours. Wasn't that supposed to be what happened to Tombs? Fifty grasps of insanity popped up at the altar and started wreaking all sorts of havoc? I was sleeping at the time; did that actually happen or did business continue as usual, until people were all "wtf" when they returned to HA instead of the Tombs when they lost? --Jette User Jette awesome.png 06:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
...*sniff* ... That was beautifully EPIC fail right there, truly inspiring --ilr 20:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Some of you sound an awful lot like the people you're complaining about. 145.94.74.23 09:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Try playing with that guy in thunderhead keep, only to realize he isn't infused... at all. When asked if he is infused, he asks whats infused? At this point he has died 8 times. That is just a minute after him flipping out at you for not healing him when you area a SS necro, and less than 5 minutes after the above comments about how everyone but him is noobs, and how his triple weapon build is the best in the group. If you can not be the slightest bit ticked off, and not resort to some sarcastic satyr when discussing someone like that, then you are a far better person than I am. You do get some wonder pugs that are very good, but they are a rarity. Kelvin Greyheart 16:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I have to admit, it's true. When I first got the game, I spent ages trying to do the last Prophecies mission, Hell's Precipice. I tried it with different henchmen, I tried it with different builds and I tried it with various PuGs... all to no avail (remember this was back when PvE was hard and I wasn't that great and more importantly we had no Boss-killer or anything). We didn't even get to the Portal Wraiths, and in fact I seemed to get further with just henchmen, and even when I finally did that bit I got wasted by the "Dead Spoiler Dude" (lol). Of course, after a while I gave up and did other things et.c. et.c. until I got Factions and Nightfall, played NF for a bit and got heroes. I went back, and finished the mission myself. Now, the fact that I had gained more experience in the meantime probably helped, of course, but having heroes was the major factor. Nowadays is the same. I actually tend to play with henchmen and heroes in PvE more than random players, except when helping someone or something - after all, they may be stupid, but people can be stupid too, and heroes don't go to the toilet or to get a drink (in fact they never go afk, sad losers), do what they're told, play what they're told and don't mind being kicked (plus you can kick them without feeling guilty, since I'm cursed with one of these Conscience thingymajiggies). When you look at it like that, there's a lot in favour of Heroes over PuGs, which is kind of a shame, really.
In that case, I suppose the flaw lies with the game's party system. You have eight slots to fill, and each one needs to be utilized as optimally as possible. So when you're helping out a new player or gambling on a PUG, you're sacrificing party spots that could be spent on reliable ol' henchmen. Makes sense for PvP, less so for PvE.
Unfortunately, since the entire game is balanced for squads of X size, I don't really see any feasible way of changing it so grouping with other players doesn't feel like a penalty. The game certainly doesn't have the feel of other MMOs where you can either go it alone or group up with people you meet along the way, and NPC allies don't exist at all. Maybe in GW2... what little info they've released makes it sound like they might be going in that direction, what with only one henchman per player. 96.39.1.7 18:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The only thing about storage that could make me happy right now would be some sort of unlocking and better trade systems(the less you have to store the more room you have), like adding more traders or setting better places and systems to trade (the sooner you get rid of stuff, the more room you have). More storage will always get filled, so the only solution is keeping inventories as empty as possible, by making storing things unnecessary. That way the only things we would need to carry would be things like consumables and the current equipment are using. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 02:10, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

@Kelvin: yes, some people can be annoying at times, but complaining about them here won't make that any better. Just like it isn't something that Anet can fix. 145.94.74.23 10:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't care what the people whining about above is saying, any improvement for storage will be appreciated. Thank you.
- Kherec 12:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
That's 'if' it happens. The way Linsey makes it sound it doesn't appear that points mentioned are actually at the final approval stage. Its concerning that they say they'll do something and then give off the vibe it's not a certainty. That's how I read it at least. If they had said "will be coming for April" and supporting it by "the programming is all there, it just updating server side etc and so on" would have been good, would have shown that they can do it and it just needs to be put into their servers etc and so on, but they put "Here are a few features we are currently developing for April" which leaves the question of if any of it will come. Certainty would be nice. But, of course, I am a "seeing is believing" kind of guy. Show proof or it didn't happen. Aba Malatu means Forbidden Truth 05:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

you all need some cheese with your wine? -Bilbo Jan 19 2009

I think most of you forget that April=Birthday in the world of GW... which means, big things happen in April, and more storage being added is a big thing. Remeber the crazyness when storage opened up a place just for materials? Same with this I hope. And the fact that my farmer wont have to poop out whites due to lack of space is a good thing as well. Going back to the n00b PUGs, Grayheart hit it on the head... I do better with 1 brand new person to the game (35 days) under my wing with 3 heros and 3 henchies then adding other PUGs... maybe because I am one of the better PvEr in the game and I have a wealth of knowledge I guess... but when you have that PUG that Grayheart mentioned... the one where they are pawnage and have the best skills and a pet named Bart Simpson, lvl 16 and vampiric weapon of defense and non-max shield... or that Necro that think he is a tank and runs into the frount line, aggros everything and says WTF??? when he dies because it only took 2 hits to do it and he says "WASN'T ME NOOB!"... ya... its hard not to talk crap back to them... which is why when it happens I flash the www.guildwars.com news article about me, and that ends the crap right there (so thank you for that one ANET! :-D). PUGs will be PUGs forever unless they are willing ot stop and listen. Much less we forget that this game is "FREE TO PLAY!". Which means that unlike games like WoW, your younger kids will play this game since its a one shot pay. What kid (unless they have really nice parents) can afford $15 a month upkeep to play a game? Not many that I know of... so this adds to the immaturity to the PUGs and thats the slight side effect to Guild Wars no-pay-to-play system. If this was not no-pay-to-play, then Pre-searing convos wouldn't be a chat room... So n00b PUGs are here to stay until they can find Yoda or Obi-Wan that they are willing to listen to for guidence. SabreWolf 15:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
As I think Jette would say: "April's fools is also in April", XDDDD. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 16:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

skill updates

are they still gonna take place or are we gonna get the shaft and be stuck with 10 or so good elites and about 100 shitty ones? 98.199.243.39 05:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! You can trade your current game for whatever's behind door number three, or try to stick it out in hopes they find someone who knows what they're doing. (Door! Door! Door!) --Jette User Jette awesome.png 05:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Read what they wrote please, and then rethink wheter you have to ask that question or if they already answered it. Hint: they already answered it. 145.94.74.23 09:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Notes on next update-
      • The only Elementalist elites will be Searing Flames and Icy Shackles.
      • The only Monk elites will be Word of Healing, Peace and Harmony, Life Sheath, and Mending.
      • The only Warrior elites will be Eviscerate, Devastating Hammer, and Crippling Slash.
      • The only Ranger elites will be Burning Arrow, Prepared Shot, Escape, and Rampage as One. Escape will no longer be elite while wielding a scythe so that you can have even more broken skills to use.
      • The only Mesmer elites will be Visions of Regret, Visions of Regret, Arcane Echo, and Wastrel's Worry.
      • The only Necromancer elites will be Weaken Knees, Wail of Doom, Rend Enchantments, Parasitic Bond, and another Wail of Doom.
      • The only Dervish elites will be Autoattack(with scythes), Wounding Strike, Wounding Strike, and... let's see.. more Wounding Strike.
      • All other skills will be 25/90'd to make life easier for our mentally challenged balancing team. Sit back and watch while we break our stupid piece of ---- game.
      • In case anyone took this too seriously FAILS BADLY, this is a parody/joke.

Why?

'...However, we are discontinuing the monthly ATS skill usage charts on the website as the feature isn't popular enough to warrant the time investment required to compile, sort, and publish the data...' How do you know it isn't popular enough? This was a valuable tool for you (or it should be) and one of many people's favourite readings. You are kindly asked to reconsider. Dionyssios 11:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It was a very nice feature and always interesting to see. Also I wonder why it isnt automated in some way? A script getting these Data out of the Database (or whereever they're stored) and compile them to a readable Format. --SilentStorm Talk to me 13:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
There are various common tools for a webmaster to view the number of times certain webpages are viewd by unique persons. I suppose that not enough people viewd them (for example: would you continue them for 200 people if you had 200.000 players? Thats 0,1% of your total playerbase. Wouldn't you rather use that time for something that would benefit 10% of the players?) 145.94.74.23 14:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
They're going to keep trimming down options and conveniences for GW1 until we've got pretty much nothing left. Then they're going to shut it down entirely. That's what happens when you pick a bad market scheme. -Auron 14:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
They only need to take out things that require too much work. Why this is more work to automate than to do by hand, I don't know... but the point is, it takes time away from employees that could be doing something more useful to the community. No need to throw in the generic "too little too late" and "bad market scheme" arguments. If their business was failing, they'd be going under like Fury or Hellgate. Instead they're making a sequel... with the same market scheme. It can't be that bad! -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I've been part of the PvP community in this game for 2 years now. I can use the "too little too late" and "bad market scheme" arguments because they're both boning PvP in the ass and have been since factions release. Please don't talk about something unless you know what you're saying - they sacrifice more and more PvP content to spend their time and energy catering to the PvErs.
It's not like we lose something and get something back in return - we just lose more and more shit. What do you think is going to spring from this change? Are PvPers going to get some other benefit now that we can't see what skills are in each month's meta? No. ANet's hosing us, just like they have for 2 years. They canceled world-wide tournaments with huge prizes in favor of a cheaper all-online tournament scheme, which was then replaced by a buggy as hell automated tournament system which was a complete failure for the first five or six months it was in practice. By the time they got the automated tournaments right, they stopped offering real-life prizes, instead replacing the winnings of each "monthly tournament" with 4500 RP instead of graphics cards and other things that made competing worthwhile. Less reason to compete + competition leaving because of terrible balance = dead game.
Anyone defending ANet's bullshit arguments with "oh, if they're not spending time on the AT skill charts, they must be using it to benefit you guys in some other way!" is fooling themselves quite bad. As evidenced by, y'know, the past two years of great things replaced by shitty things, you'd think "well, if they aren't spending a lot of money flying people out to tournaments, couldn't they at least balance their game?" Well... no, that isn't happening either.
So I have to ask - how low are your standards, honestly? How long will you sit there like sheep taking in this line of bullshit? How much stuff do you have to lose before you realize you've been losing for years? ANet removes more and more content and support for GW1 except they aren't adding anything in return. If you think this means GW2 will be great, you'll be sorely mistaken - GW2 will come out, buggy as shit, and the only line you'll ever hear from them is "sorry, we can't fix our multitude of game bugs, 95% of our staff are busy on GW2:factions." -Auron 16:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

"95% of our staff are busy on GW:WoW"
Fix'd that for you. Sometimes I must wonder, "was the awesome game ANet released in spring 2005 ever a result of their own brilliant gaming design techniques and knowledge about balance and competitive gameplay, or was it merely the result of sheer dumb luck?" Much as I hate to consider the ludicrously unlikely possibility, I must confess I lean toward the second option. I could go into detail about why the game is in crappy condition, or where you've gone wrong and what you must do to fix the problem, but everyone's told you before. I'm glad you made Guild Wars -- it's my very first MMO (because I think standard MMOs suck dicks, where this plays more like a normal RPG game, and the PvP is was good) and I've met all sorts of cool people. I won a few games, I trolled some fags, I enjoyed my experience. But you've screwed up and broken my toy! Your incompetence has destroyed everything good about GW. The bottom line here is this: You should have stuck with Blizzard, guys. I'm sure the staff for WoW has plenty of openings. --Jette User Jette awesome.png 17:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

@Auron: How high are your standards? You honestly expect to keep getting cash prizes for a almost 4yo game? You honestly think there are plenty of alternative games that have much better balance, prizes, and content? You honestly think that GW is buggy as hell? Well, look around. Look at the competition. I've seen games rise and fall in the time of GW. I've played some of the competition, only to run back to GW. I don't believe in perfection. But from what I have seen, GW is currently the closest to perfection in the MMORPG genre. There's still lots of place to improve, yes. But the competition is far behind.
@Jette: broken? Overall, my evaluation is that the game has improved since I joined. But then again, to even think of whether the game improved or not, we need to agree on what constitutes improvement. We're very far from achieving consensus on that. See the debates on skill balance, professions, Ursan & cons, HoM, heroes, and PvP in general. For all of those, some ppl want more of it, and some ppl want less. They say the game is broken, often for opposite and incompatible reasons.
If I've lost confidence, it's in the vocal few complainers to come up with good ideas to improve GW. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 17:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
@auron, i've said this elsewhere, but my currect expectations for gw1 are pretty low. i'm impressed they still keep the servers running. hard to undercut those expectations. --VVong|BA 18:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
The complaints about PvP are getting old. Just adopt to the way PvP is now. If you don't like the way it is now, then don't play it. But please, stop with the complaining, we've heard it too many times already. 145.94.74.23 10:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Second option for me. GW sucks these days, dunno why you guys still bother. Dark Morphon(contribs) 17:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm fine as soon as I get new game content. EotN is baed for not having a low-end part. They could easily have given it one while still making it good for oldies. ---Chaos- 18:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Heh, GWEN is now for level 10s and Low-end parts is for stand alone games not expansions where you are expected to have at least one character of reasonable level.
If any of you have played as many MMO as I have, you will see the brilliance of what ANet has done, they Truly removed almost everything that made other MMOs annoying and/or frustrating, but it turns out Players want to grind for higher levels as if being level 20 is Worse then 50 in some other game or 350 in a third. Worst part still is when people who don't know dicks from dildoes start yapping about how bad the Game become... So there is far less people playing now, that is because you dont need to grind a better part of the year to be max level same way as you don't need to spend same amount of time grinding for levels as you do grinding for qualitatively better gear, as 1k weapon may have same stats as the most expensive one. Wouldn't you flame it even more if entire game was based on consumable items, had 4 times more levels to grind, no instant travel, 5 Melee classes and Ursan as its own profession and every time you have to change your build you must pay a considerable amount of ingame currency AND buy ALL your skills all over again. Think about that one. Biz 09:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

"derp derp derp derrr other games are baed which maeks this one good right guise?lol! ^_^"
(Reset indent) Yes, other MMOs suck. That's why I don't play them. Guild Wars used to not suck, which is why I still play it on rare occasion in the hopes that it will not suck again one day. But that seems unlikely at this point. My point, though, is that just because other games are worse doesn't make GW good. --Jette User Jette awesome.png 10:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

They removed most of the grind from an MMO when prophecies came out. They have systematically destroyed that with every campaign. Many of us were attracted to GW because it had a decent story, looked nice, and had fun gameplay. Grind was absent on the list as well, which further appealed to some of us. It let us actively enjoy content from multiple angles and professions. Those of us who got GW because of that do not like where GW2 seems to be going. If the game is turned into WoW, costs aside, why not play WoW? OH right, a lot of us don't like WoW. Those of us that do like WoW, often have GW because it is different, so if GW 2 becomes WoWlite, why spend money on it? Kelvin Greyheart 16:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I have to agree with what some of the people are saying about GW being miles away in terms of balance, no grind (unless you want it) and general feel of the game compared to the competition. The only reason I stopped playing GW on a more regular basis was because I pretty much enjoyed every aspect of it to the fullest during my 3+ years spent here and there wasn't anything new left for me.
That being said I still pop in from time to time for some RA/TA/AB/FA and enjoy PvP that is balanced on a scale many other MMO's don't even comprehend - that of actual team balance. Sure Factions introduced shadow stepping and Nightfall brought in powerful elites in term making the old elites be in need of buffs, then consequent nerfs, etc. but all of that just made the game more dynamic and fun to watch as it develops.
And about Aurons only somewhat valid comment - that of no RL rewards for tournaments, well it is sad but it also isn't surprising, without monthly subscribtions and with plans of another game they don't have the funds for real life prizes. In fact it was good enough that they were giving away those RL prizes for so long, most games you pay to play give you a crappy "grind some more" event every now and then and expect it covers their end of the bargain. Face it people if there ever was an electronic sport MMO, then GW was/is it.
Currently I'm playing Warhammer Online and can safely say that game is lolerific compared to GW. Imagine a game where victory is decided by what side has more players, even if those players are doing nothing more but following the zerg of their allies, where healers have no chance in hell of saving someone from a spike so obvious that it wouldn't be more obvious if they took a huge red marker and circled the player under attack (well calling it a spike is stupid, more like prolonged focus fire), where ranged damage is just as powerful as melee and there's no real midline (well there is but it's nowhere near the midline you get in GW), where gear although not as important as in some other MMO's still is a big factor in deciding who wins the fight, etc., etc. Oh and the not so long but utterly boring grind and unimaginative quests needed to get to max level (missions FTW btw). Hell if it wasn't for some small scale fighting I sometimes run into on my server I would've ended my sub a month ago and as things stand I'll probably not renew it again.
So ye GW might not be perfect game and saying other games suck compared to it might not be much of an argument, but GW definetely brought out some of the best ideas and made them work. Do I imagine myself playing Warhammer the next 3 years? Hell no! Yet it wasn't much of a problem playing GW that long. Any game that can hold my interest for that long is as good as it gets. Here's hoping GW2 is out sooner than later, and if in the end it doesn't go out well then at least I can say I played the best PvP team based MMO out there and the market was dumb and didn't recognize its value. 78.2.35.30 05:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but if I hadn't read "I'm playing Warhammer Online", I would have sworn you were talking about Guild Wars. Vili User talk:Vili 05:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
"where healers have no chance in hell of saving someone from a spike so obvious that it wouldn't be more obvious if they took a huge red marker and circled the player under attack (well calling it a spike is stupid, more like prolonged focus fire), where ranged damage is just as powerful as melee and there's no real midline" Oh, paragons? Yeah, they're like that too. No midline, a spike that never ends, and basically they just tspace on whatever their leader's target is and get kills.
My point isn't about the lack of real life prizes - it's about ANet taking stuff away without any compensation. PvErs haven't had loss on the same scale, ever - after ANet supposedly nerfed runners (put more monsters on the droks run, etc), they made shadow form completely maintainable. After they nerfed ursan (8 months too late), shadow form and cry of pain remained strong to pick up the slack. When people were still having trouble beating "elite" areas with no effort whatsoever, ANet put in consumables for them. PvErs have always had the entire game handed to them, and have never lost something entirely without ample compensation.
Imagine what would happen if you bought a game like WoW, took a character up to level 80, and found a dungeon you absolutely loved. Maybe it was the pretty area, maybe it was the themed monsters, maybe it was the drops - regardless, you liked it alot. For no reason whatsoever, Blizzard simply removes this area from the game and doesn't put anything back in to take its place. That is my point with the real life prizes. If I wanted a damn video card that badly I'd go out and buy one, but being able to get one for being on the best PvP team in the world was a rather nice reward.
And please, do your homework a little more thoroughly. Alaris said "No need to throw in the generic "too little too late" and "bad market scheme" arguments," in an effort to dismiss my argument, and because that's complete bullshit, I had to defend my posts. They weren't "only somewhat valid" unless you had no idea what I was talking about to begin with. -Auron 05:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Depends how you look at it, I always thought of the real life prizes as a little added extra, as a bonus but not something that would make you play or not play GW. It was the gameplay itself, the tactics involved, the fun of winning (or losing) a great match that was the main point of it. And you can still do that but won't get a reward for it. No big deal IMO, but if it's important for you as something PvP'ers are now deprived of, well I can't make you think otherwise. I just don't consider it an integral part of the game, so ye it's not a valid point. And your example would be the equivalent of Anet removing GvG or HA as a competition arena.
EDIT: Paragon pressure is nowhere near the stupididly overloaded damage you get in WAR
EDIT 2: First sorry for these edits, I'm used to posting on forums, don't know how you show on a wiki that you remembered something new after your original message. Anyways I don't agree with them removing the skill tables, but I just don't think it's the same as when they removed RL prizes. For that I could see obvious reasons, for this I can't. 78.2.35.30 05:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
HA has been removed as a competition area. No; let me rephrase: HA has been removed as a skill-based area of competition. It's all about who can run the most broken builds now. It's to the point that if you get a Lingering Curse or MoI on you, you're probably going to die (You know how most HB monks only take Patient as a self-heal? Well, yeah, it doesn't even trigger through MoI. And you know how prot monks prot things to keep them from dying? Well, yeah, those don't work, either. You know how hex removal recharges in 12 seconds? Well, yeah, Suffering, Lingering Curse, VoR, and Parasitic bond. And that's just a few skils.), and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
A friend of mine said "HA used to be, you go in and you kill the shit out of everything and you win. Now, it's, you go in and run back and forth through AoE and hexes and other stupid crap and whoever's the best at running around wins." Competition is fun.
If you want to go with Auron's example, I'd say it'd roughly be the equivalent of removing all the mobs from said dungeon. Yeah, it's still there... But nothing's there. You can still compete, but where's the competition? User Raine R.gif Raine - talk 07:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Well that's sad to hear (though I never much cared for HA, it always suffered from the fact the maps are too small) but I saw on observe the builds people were running in the last months finals so yeah I can see it affecting GvG as well. Either way my point was that this game had its ups and downs, but even at its worst it still blows the MMO competition out the window. On a side note I cut back on my PvP a few months after Nightfalls release for the same reasons that are still going on now, but still remained active enough to continue following the meta (something like instead of GvG every night, it was twice a week :D). Like I was saying it's not a perfectly balanced game that we want it to be and Anet doesn't listen to the players like some would want them to, but it's still heck of a lot more balanced than the regular crap out there. As always, instead of worrying about it and getting frustrated you can play something else (only to realise GW is better than that something else, or better yet lucking out and finding a game more balanced - gl with that). 78.2.35.30 08:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
In my opinion, HA has pretty much always been about gimmicks (lol iway), but in the beginning, if you were good at your gimmick, you stood a good chance of winning. Now it doesn't matter about whether you're good or not, it's entirely your build and how well you can follow targets, which really isn't difficult to do. --Jette User Jette awesome.png 08:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
To the guy a few posts higher that said that Prophecies has no grind...look how much time it takes you to get from level 1 to level 20 there. If you play the story, there are almost no quests and even the mission are just hack & slash most of the time. If you take a run to Droknar's...well youhad to grind to level 20 there, so again: grind. Factions is the game with the least amount of grind. You get to level 20 and max armor quickly, the PvE titles at that time were non-grindy and the only grind was the 10k faction, which you could also get relatively easy by just doing the quests of that city. Complain about grinding all you want, but the only grindless game is Factions, not Prophecies. 145.94.74.23 08:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
you get to lvl 20 just by doing missions if you don't jump to Droks. and those are all grind titles. ---Chaos- 08:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
And those Prophecies missions consist of...? Right, mindless monster hacking for 30 minutes before you reach anything resembling a mission. The titles I mentioned however, are for doing missions (not a grind), gathering skills (if you think that is a grind, then why do you even play games?), not dying (used to be just playing the game instead of Dwarven Boxing) and visiting every area (ok, this might be a bit grindy, but not getting it maxed didn't make you miss out on anything). The real grind titles were introduced in Nightfall, not Factions. The PvP titles only became grind titles because of gimmicks. In their essence, they're not grindy. Too bad they can be farmed these days. 145.94.74.23 12:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
@Kevin: Well put and exactly. I don't plan to touch GW2 at all. I didn't want "an MMO" and I still don't. GW wasn't, though they've pretty much destroyed that. I predicted perfectly way back when titles first came around (on the GW Guru Forums, before they became rabid fanboy haven stating "stop QQing!" to any criticism) that they would be the first and biggest deathstroke to the game, and it's been 100% true. --Emkyooess 12:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
It's Kelvin. Not the first to drop the L and you wont be the last. At 145. I would contest that prophecies required grind. You can get to 20 in well under 20 hours of gameplay in just prophecies, without going to other campaigns and without scrolls or farming. You are also going through the story then, which I cannot see as grind. If playing the story is grind, I have to ask what on Earth you want from pve?. I simply have to call you out on Survivor not being a grind. It simply is. You either farm it for 10-20 hours, or you play carefully for up to around 100. That is grind. Going through the story is not since you don't have to do it unless you are going for prot titles, which is grind. Factions actually has the most grind of anything with the Kurz and Luxon titles because they have pve benefits, and the fastest way to get them has never been through pvp gains. Whether it is HFFF, or now speed vanquishing, the speed at which you can acquire points has never been as high in pvp. Kelvin Greyheart 19:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I find it funny how you can claim playing the game is and isn't a grind at the same time. Getting the protector title is just playing the storyline so by your logic it cannot be a grind. Becoming a Legendary Survivor used to be playing carefully, but it is PLAYING carefully, not FARMING carefully (I was talking about the way it USED TO BE, not the way it is now). However, Prophecies in itself is a grind game. In Factions, when you do a mission, you start at the beginning of the mission. In Prophecies, you first have to clear huge amounts of enemies just to get to the mission part. The best example of that is Hell's Precipice. You have to spend at least 30 minutes fighting huge mobs of (the same) creatures (over and over again) JUST TO GET WHERE YOU STARTED THE MISSION! How is that NOT grinding? Tell me that? As for the biggest grind that you mentioned, the allegiance titles, they weren't linked to PvE-only skills when they were introduced. There was no HFFF or even FFF back then. It was just a title to show that you liked playing AB a lot. How is that a grind? Most of the titles are grinds now, I agree with you on that. However, when Factions came out, they weren't. That is a simple fact. Nightfall is to blame for grind titles, not Factions. 145.94.74.23 22:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Aren't you twisting facts just for your benefit? You claim that the "traveling to the real mission area" in Prophecies missions is grind... Yet you don't feel the defending/fighting against the same mob just so you can get to the mission end boss in Factions is grind.... This is the first time I've heard someone claim that Prophecies is grind. Factions was just designed to be speedy, not less-grind. -- ab.er.rant User Ab.er.rant Sig.png 03:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Prophecies is slow... but not particularly grindy. You can easily stick to the main story, do everything once along that path, and keep moving forward. You don't have to stop and kill stuff just to level. It's slow, yes... but not grindy. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 04:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I leave Pre-Searing halfway or more to L20 already. What's your point, 145? I'd also like you to tell me how the cartographical layout of a mission has ANY bearing whatsoever to how "grindy" it is. The issue of what foes you fight is also completely irrelevant, because guess what? You fight "the same kinds of enemies" in every single mission in the game (give or take the unique ones like Augury Rock). Vili User talk:Vili 05:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
My point comes from a difference of perspective. If you are playing the game for the story the protector stuff is optional. You are playing for fun. If you are playing for a prot title, you are treating it as a task. That is the fundamental difference in philosophy that seperates the grind. So yes, the same content can be grind and not grind at once. Now I personally play through the storyline and happen to get a prot title for it. <humor> Before anyone tells me to get off my fence and pick a side, I must say that I like it here. It's comfortable and offers a nice view of the surounding countryside. </humor>
As far as survivor goes, I still have to point out that it required you to do certain things. It has always been a grind. Even with all 3 campaigns you typically don't get the 1.3 million xp required for it. I say this with 2 leg survivors under my belt, one of which had prot x3 well before the 1 mil mark. You have to grind, capping elites, farming or something. You cannot aquire that title without doing something that would be considered grind.
As far as the kurz luxon titles go. Your statement about the skills being added later is irrellivant to my point. FFF has always been available in one form or another. It was simply a question of when players started using or abusing the ways to get those titles. They have always been faster to achieve in pve. The addition of pve skills based off of these titles is completely and utterly irrelivant to my statements as such. Q.E.D.
I have no wish to be offensive with the following, but I simply cannot word this any more politely. Do you understand my arguments? You have repeated your points here and elsewhere, and in multiple cases I have refuted your claims, and in your counterargument to what I have said you simply restate what I just pointed out as invalid. I am more than willing to provide a clarification on essentially anything I have written if you simply ask. Kelvin Greyheart 05:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, to be honest, do understand your point. You just don't like them. I won't blame you for that, but I do like to reply to the question Alaris just asked. The defenition of grinding states that something is a grind when it is either repetitive, non-entertaining or both. In my personal opinion, having to walk and fight the same non-challenging monsters for 30 minutes or longer because the map doesn't include a more direct route is both repetitive and non-entertaining. It happens a lot in Prophecies, direct routes or even partly direct routes are uncommon, meaning you have to go back and fight even more of the same monsters...I think you understand how I feel about that.
As for the other titles, Protector has always been the same as completing the game for me. I just got bonusses and master rewards as I played, and since I enjoy the missions (well, those in factions anyway) it never felt repetitive or non-entertaining to me to do a mission again. Completing it in under X minutes actually was a nice challenge. That you get a title for it, was a nice bonus.
Cartographer could have been made in such a way that you shouldn't have to hug the edges all the time. On the other hand, it did gave me an incentive to go out and view the world they made. I have seen nice scenery I wouldn't have seen otherwise. That being said, it does fit the defenition of grinding indeed.
Skill hunter is the least grindy of all titles. Why? Because most people want all elite skills anyway. Getting them isn't repetitive (you need to fight against different bosses all the time) and the thrill of getting new skills is quite entertaining. And hey, when your character is all powerful, you get a title as well! What's not to like?
As for the Allegiance titles, back then, PvP and PvE weren't as seperated as they are now, so it is only natural that they included a PvE way of getting a PvX title. That people preferred to grind their way to the top was their choice, but PvE farming wasn't faster than AB. Just more reliable.
Survivor is nothing but a huge grind. Unless you simply play the game. It will take a lot longer to achieve (well over a year in my case) but the amount of repetitive experience farming has been minimal and making sure you don't die can be entertaining in itself. It gave me an adrenaline rush at times to say the least.
So yes, I agree with you. It is all a matter of perspective. However, what I wanted to point out is that these titles don't have to be grinds. You can make them as entertaining as you'd like, or you can just ignore them and still enjoy guild wars to its fullest without missing out on anything. When Nightfall came out however, titles started requiring you to kill monsters. Lots of monsters. And you needed the titles because they gave you gameplay benefits. So while it may be a common trend to blame Factions for everything, I strongly have to disagree with you. The real title grinding started with Nightfall, where titles became mandatory instead of optional. 145.94.74.23 09:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that playing a game should in itself be the reward for playing it, an experience commonly known as "having fun." As opposed to grinding, which is "working so that you can have fun." If I wanted to do that, I'd get a job so I can afford more ammunition and sit outside your house in the morning, waiting to jump you while you're having your eggs and toast. --Jette User Jette awesome.png
I have fun achieving some of the titles (mostly the Protector and Guardian titles). I don't find them a grind at all, mostly because I gain them while doing my favorite thing in the game: missions. 145.94.74.23 19:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I would like to repeat that I enjoyed many titles, and I would have had less fun in GW if not for them. These titles are: (1) Survivor, played normally, (2) Skill Hunter, (3) Cartographer, using texmod, (4) Protector, (5) Guardian, and (6) MotN. Vanquisher was fun too at first, but became too grindy. Also, most rep titles were either completed or nearly-completed once related titles were completed. For example, MotN filled most EotN rep titles, and Vanquishing Elona filled SS. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 20:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

How about skill usage for HA/RA/TA

For new players who want to know what bars to use in Build Wars. I can give you an estimate on what it will be Skill Usage:

  1. 1 Palm Strike
  2. 2 Wounding Strike
  3. 3 Visions of Regret
  4. 4 Res Sig

Seems like 3/4 of them are why ppl dont play PvP like they did 3 years ago. --adrin User Adrin ecto sig.png 08:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Making up your own statistics, and then drawing conclusions from them. I'll have to try that at the university some time, maybe solar pannels really can generate 10 times as much power if you put a banana on them. 145.94.74.23 16:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
An orange actually. :P 89.172.128.211 18:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I heard it was tanning lotion that did it.--DNA 00:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Translated January 15, 2009 update for people who don't epic fail...

2 and a half years later then we should have, we assembled the Live Team with 2 goals-pretending to add great stuff to Build Wars, and hoping that no one would notice the bad balance problems. We started with smaller changes to skills and AI that still broke the metagame which shattered into more shards than the crafting material storage can handle. After these successes(at Anet, failure equals success), we worked on title balancing, encouraging even more grind, and adding M.O.X. the golem so that players could run more copies of Wounding Strike. We finished the year with the same holiday event that we have been using since Build Wars launched, despite the fact that even Runescape has new events for even free players every year. In this Devastating Update, we do our best to justify destroying the metagame and hint at what skills are getting broken next.


Monthly Maintenance

Throughout the year, our regular builds will include Xunlai Tournament rewards, so you can clutter your inventory with more firewater and creme brulees, changing the monthly tonic that does nothing anyway, and breaking Automated Tournaments even more with maps that reward bad play. These builds may include small balance changes, tweaks to AI, or bug fixes that have yet to be implemented. However, we are discontinuing the monthly Automated Tournament skill usage charts because we're too lazy to continue with them and we're running out of money anyway.

Content Updates

Content updates will be done separately from monthly maintenance and will occur every 3...4...5 months (Attribute:Anet falls asleep at their desks instead of doing their jobs). By delaying our content releases, we gain the time to tackle larger and more difficult projects that previously would be impossible. However, balance fixes have previously been impossible, but will always remain that way. We decided to just work on graphics and forget about the skill balancing since we always fail badly whenever we try to change anything.

Coming Attractions

At the moment, the only way to attract people to Build Wars is with large amounts of gravity. We finally, at least, decided to listen to the PvErs and improve storage, which is the first intelligent update we are planning in a long time. Also, we are improving the Hall of Monuments so that people who grind mindlessly can enjoy even more of Build Wars 2. We have stopped working on skill balance to spend more time perfecting our gravity generator. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:96.233.8.165 (talk).

didn't shard write this on his page? --adrin User Adrin ecto sig.png 22:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
That was for a different update. Actually bother to check his page before claiming that someone copied and pasted stuff.
Would it not be wise that instead of the bickering you stop debating a post which is an obvious trolling attempt and lends absolutely nothing to the wiki other than a wee rant? -- Salome User salome sig2.png 23:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
OP was undoubtedly inspired by Shard, though the OP's material sucks. --TalkRiddle 23:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Seriously, if you can't contribute anything positive, you fail. Saying "this sucks" without any constructive comments makes you look like at worst, a troll, and at best, a 12 year old.
Riddle = fail troll.
I only did it on the other developer update because 100% of the content in it was either bullshit spewing from anet's jaws of epic lying or it was so contradictory to the changes that it was worth ridiculing. I thought about doing a similar one for this update (I actually drafted it on pvx) but there wasn't enough to make fun of. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 01:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean there was nothing to make fun of? there was PLENTY of stuff to make fun of. They claim that they want to do bug fixes- Dancing Daggers glitch says O HAI. Larger and more difficult tasks that were previously impossible = Guild Wars 2
I suppose I'll drop what I drafted just for giggles.

[Dev Update] - 15 January 2009

Six months ago, we assembled the Live Team for a Dead Game with one goal: Make stupid people think we haven't abandoned Guild Wars yet. We started with smaller changes, getting our feet wet by balancing skills breaking pvp even more and tweaking AI not banning heroes from pvp. After these initial failures, we moved on to title balancing changing and the golem Hero M.O.X. before finishing off the year with new three-year-old festival content. As the Live Team looks to the new year, we are streamlining our processes, where we can create even more exciting new features and content than ever before, excluding whole expansions or updates that address problems. In this Dev Update, we explain the reasons for some of these changes and reveal tidbits of what we've got planned for the future. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Shard (talk).

Monthly Maintenance

Throughout the year, our regular monthly builds will include Xunlai Tournament rewards, changing out the Buyable Pvp Title monthly tonic, and map rotations for Automated Coin Flips. These builds may also include small skill balance changes buffing fire magic, tweaks to AI not fixing AI, or bug fixes not fixing bugs. However, we are discontinuing the monthly ATS skill usage charts on the website as the feature isn't useful, considering only 1 build is capable of winning and everyone already knows what skills are in it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Shard (talk).

Content Updates

Content updates will be done separately from the monthly maintenance and occur every three to four months. By spacing out our content releases, we gain the time to tackle larger and more difficult projects that, previously, would've been impossible. Some features that once seemed unattainable are now being explored as upcoming projects. We are even expanding the Live Team to offer more of the shitty quality support and content that we can for Guild Wars. With this new system, we release our new content in fewer yet more substantial updates. We want players to feel connected to what we are developing (we're trying something new) even though it may be months away from release, so during development we will be more open about our process and what we are working on. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Shard (talk).

Coming Attractions

The Live Team is now designing the first big content update of 2009, which we expect to release in April, but will probably be delayed via tradition. We had many discussions and no reading of feedback towards the end of last year and ended up with a major wish list of useless changes and a plan for what it would take to make that list a reality. At this point, we have a clear idea of what is ahead of us and we hope everyone will be as excited about these prospects as we are pretending to be.

Here are a few features we are currently developing for April:

  • Increases to account-based storage
  • Fixing the stupid "carry 10 books around at all times" idea
  • Something related to GW2 that very few people care about.
  • Not fixing bugs that have been in the game for 34 months.
  • Not fixing HA
  • Not fixing GvG
  • Not fixing Hero AI
  • Not fixing Shadow Form

--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Shard (talk).

<Sarcasm>(and with a pitiful whiny tone in voice) But Shard!! Shadow Form is balanced!</Sarcasm> Kelvin Greyheart 02:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Shadow form is balanced, just like Wail of Doom, VoR, Searing Flames, Palm Strike, and Life Sheath are balanced. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.229.129 (talk).

i lol'd, well played Sir. ...Also, am I the only one who reads: "We want players to feel connected to what we are developing" and gets the feeling we're watching Indiana Jones in that one episode of South Park? ...I don't think "connected" is the right word given the pattern we're continuing to see. --ilr 02:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you sound like me. I completely agree 100% that Anet is turning this into MapleStory/Last Chaos/crappy WoW clones where the more you pay, the more you win. The newest/most expensive chapter always has the best stuff and gimmick events for it. The best skill combos are across multiple chapters so if you don't pay up you are booted out of every high-end PvP group in existence for not having the skill to being able to run their build because you couldn't afford an additional $80 to waste on a fail game. Let's see... Back in the good old days where everything was actually balanced and there was only one chapter, everything was balanced. Mesmers were a bit overpowered but whatever. It was nowhere near as bad as the current VoR metagame. Then they made Build Wars Fractions and that's when everything started to go down the toilet. Overpowered "Ninjas" became the new overpowered meta, and a lot of the good skill combos were in Factions. Anerf made the title system to keep people grinding. Almost ALL weekend events were exclusively for people with Factions. After that, I figured out that Build Wars was a a gimmick and promised myself that I would never purchase another product with Anet on it until they improved and stopped turning Build Wars into a gimmicky sellout. Turns out, the problems introduced with Build Wars Fractions were nothing compared to the nightmare caused by Nightfall and EotN. Nightfall was chock full of blatantly overpowered skills and still is. They haven't been nerfed, and they are never going to be nerfed because it's a money factory for Anet. Scythes are broken and have deliberately been allowed to remain that way. Energy based non-elite deep wound on demand, spammable deep wound covered by bleeding, overpowered cheap spammable attack skills that heal you, and on top of that the most broken critical damage in-game. The slow attack rate doesn't mean a thing when half of your attack skills have a 1 second activation on them either and you can spam them with broken stuff like this and enough Expertise, Critical Strikes, or Strength and Warrior's Endurance. Spears completely outclass bows in every way except interrupts, and paraway is still problematic. In PvE, events were focused on Nightfall, and Nightfall got heroes. Guess what? Everyone without it gets stuck with crappy henchman builds that are deliberately crippled so that people have to get Nightfall or fall behind. Then Grind of the North came out which was (thankfully) the last big addition to Build Wars. Grind of the North got about half a year of exclusive PvE events and even more broken skills, plus PvE skills that make PvE for anyone with EotN easy even while blindfolded, and if you don't have EotN or NF in PvE, good luck. You'll need it. EotN also got broken crap like consumables to turn the game into Potion Wars, keeping stupid people grinding. And after that, Anerf decides that their game engine is to limiting, and they are making Build Wars 2. All the time and money you poured into Build Wars grinding to your GWAMM title and accumulating 1 million gold while using deliberately overpowered farming builds is about to go to waste as Anet puts all their time and effort into Build Wars 2. I most certainly will NOT be getting Build Wars 2, as I'm not keen on giving Anet even more money to waste so they can take another nap at their desks and fiddle while Build Wars goes down the toilet with an extra helping of toilet bowl cleaner, considering they will probably find another way to screw the fanbase over again. I would QUIT Build Wars before getting any more chapters. And let me give you all a little incentive NOT to get Build Wars 2. Quoting from the wiki-"There will be no monthly fee associated with Guild Wars 2 to keep up the tradition of Guild Wars. Mike O'Brien has stated that expansions or mini-expansions are more likely than standalone campaigns, but a final decision hasn't been made yet." I can almost guess that the expansions or mini-expansions will add overpowered new options, equipment, skills, companions, enhancements, or whatever, and if you don't keep paying, you will get left behind. It's like a subscription fee, only not. DON'T LET ANET HAVE ANY MORE OF YOUR MONEY. BTW, there's some formatting issues in the post above this one that's hiding someone's post, someone fix them. 72.71.229.129 17:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Just to correct some minor errors: GW2 was not announced after they EotN was released/had failed, as you make it sound, but they were announced parallel. Neither was VoR overpowered - as it may be now (I still think it's pretty much on par with Spiteful Spirit now, which, granted, may not be the best example of a balanced skill to begin with) - right from the start (as you make it sound), but very limited in its use. While many claim that all was better during Prophecies, I remember everyone cursing about IWAY back then. Apart from that, thanks for your advice, but I'll rather testplay GW2 when it's available for testing and decide myself if I like it or not. If I like it, I'll buy it. I'll worry about the expansions when they become an issue. After all, I'm playing a game to pass time and enjoy playing it, not to achieve or prove anything. Don't get me wrong - I agree with some points some people make. Some of the critics can be very insightful and enlightening, and many of the defenders of GW are critical and wary themselves. I surely would have done some things differently (Hard Mode, for example, could have been done in a different way) and I surely have my own quarrels with the state of the game. But you... I don't know what you're even doing here. I'd have some more things to say, but this is neither the time, nor the place. Oh, one last thing for the record: As a member of the fanbase (since World Preview Event 2004) I don't feel screwed over. And yes, I do feel better now. 84.178.100.238 23:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Saying that Spiteful is on par with VoR is like saying that Star Burst is on par with Searing Flames. No offense meant but you don't seem to have a clue about game balance. Oh, and I plan to at least test the Build Wars 2 beta, but I'm waiting at least 2 years AFTER it Build Wars 2 launches so that I can see if Anet ruins the game like I predicted.96.233.9.222 13:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Suum cuique - to each his own. My take on it is that VoR is like Clumsiness while SS is like Wandering Eye from the surrounding conditions (who is hexed and who gets damage when triggered) making VoR, like Clumsiness, stronger at preventing the punishable action and SS, like Wandering Eye, more effective at dealing damage when the action is punished. Otherwise we're dealing with some simple stats here: Energy Cost is slightly higher on SS, which is offset by being Necro, Cast Time is equal, slightly in favor for VoR due to Mesmer. Recharge is 10 verus 20, Duration is 8 to 20 versus 10, means: 50% versus 200% uptime in favor of SS. Damage is somewhere between 2.5x and 3x in favor of VoR, effect range is equal, trigger conditions are in favor of SS (skill usage, as VoR, plus attacks). The rest is all very situational. Except for the fact that you can't remove a hex from all party members (like for Enchantments with "Mirror of Disentchantment") which has to be seen against the fact that SS is Curses, which also has some good cover hexes; which also has to be seen against the fact that the enemies have to ball up for VoR to be applied on more than one of them (a situation that, if it is abundant, is favorable to SS as well) and finally, it has to be weighed against the fact that VoR will only trigger on actions, while SS triggers on attacks as well, and lasts twice as long. Regarding base stats, SS is like a weakened, longer-lasting Empathy that triggers on skills as well and damages everyone around, while VoR is like a weakened Backfire that hexes multiple foes and works on non-spell skills, too. There may be differences in power, and they may be one-sided on average. But even if they are, they are not nearly as large or overwhelming - on average - as some people make them out to be. 84.178.87.243 16:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

[Dev Update] - 15 January 2009 translated for people who actually like the game

and think making fun of them is a bad way of inspiring them to do the fixes we care about. Six months ago, we assembled the Live Team with one goal: sustaining high quality support for Guild Wars. We started with smaller changes, getting our feet wet by balancing skills and tweaking AI. After these initial successes, we moved on to title balancing and the golem Hero M.O.X. before finishing off the year with new festival content. As the Live Team looks to the new year, we are streamlining our processes, where we can create even more exciting new features and content than ever before. In this Dev Update, we explain the reasons for some of these changes and reveal tidbits of what we've got planned for the future.

Monthly Maintenance

Throughout the year, our regular monthly builds will include Xunlai Tournament rewards, changing out the Zaishen chest monthly tonic, and map rotations for Automated Tournaments. These builds may also include small skill balance changes, tweaks to AI, or bug fixes on an as needed basis. However, we are discontinuing the monthly ATS skill usage charts on the website as the feature isn't popular enough to warrant the time investment required to compile, sort, and publish the data.

Content Updates

Content updates will be done separately from the monthly maintenance and occur every three to four months. By spacing out our content releases, we gain the time to tackle larger and more difficult projects that, previously, would've been impossible. Some features that once seemed unattainable are now being explored as upcoming projects. We are even expanding the Live Team to offer more of the best quality support and content that we can for Guild Wars. With this new system, we release our new content in fewer yet more substantial updates. We want players to feel connected to what we are developing even though it may be months away from release, so during development we will be more open about our process and what we are working on.

Coming Attractions

The Live Team is now designing the first big content update of 2009, which we expect to release in April. We had many discussions towards the end of last year and ended up with a major wish list and a plan for what it would take to make that list a reality. At this point, we have a clear idea of what is ahead of us and we hope everyone will be as excited about these prospects as we are.

Here are a few features we are currently developing for April:

  • Increases to account-based storage
  • Improvements to character-based storage
  • Account-based changes to the Hall of Monuments


Protips: Don't compete with the master. I give this translation 0 XD out of 5. Vili User talk:Vili 07:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Could be me, but isn't that just the exact text of the Dev Update? >.> -- User Elveh sig.png Elv 11:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I think it's just copy pasted. Agreed, this is lame. unsigned
I suppose I shouldn't have expected you guys to get my point, so I'll summarize it: would you please keep these 'funny' things confined to your user pages? The constant complaining is getting old and it is not improving the game or the wiki. 145.94.74.23 21:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I too find it quite funny how many ppl are still complaining about a game they continue playing, or at least care about enough to invest time - a valuable resource mind you to joke about it, make sarcastic comments, etc. 78.2.25.63 23:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
keep these 'funny' things confined to your user pages IP's don't have userpages, due to policy; Shard didn't originally intend to post his version, due to his not finding enough to parody. Can't really get mad at the IP, this was perhaps the most logical place he could rant. Shard could have linked us to the PvX one, but whatever.
To the OP (above this): Seriously, if you can't contribute anything positive, you fail. Saying "this sucks" without any constructive comments makes you look like at worst, a troll, and at best, a 12 year old. Riddle = fail troll. Way to be a hypocrite. If you want my critique: Your puns aren't really funny, and your punch-lines are lacking. I got a minor chuckle from the gravity part, though. --TalkRiddle 00:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the constructive feedback.
I'm not complaining about a game I continue playing. Add me to f list and see how often I'm on. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 02:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
So it's a waste of time to spread humour and mirth? News to me! Vili User talk:Vili 04:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
@theunsignedpost: I don't blame Shard as long as he keeps it to his user page. As for IP's not being allowed a userpage: that's not a loss to me. The game or the site won't suffer if you don't post it at all. I am getting really tired of people posting their frustration on every single page they can find. We've heard it all before. It's getting old. They can't make any change that will please you. Please, get a (chat)room or something.
@Vili: Is there a secret defenition of mirth that I am not aware of? Constantly mentioning to everyone that you don't like something doesn't sound like mirth to me. 145.94.74.23 08:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
145. People post their frustrations on every page in hopes that if an anet employee accidentally finds the wiki through google, they might actually see one suggestion. They don't read wiki like the rest of us, many anet employees are clueless as to what the players don't like. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 08:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I always have that suspicion that Izzy is sitting in front of his Mac (thats his excuse for not playing the game) and laughing at all the ppl on wiki while he eats his third box on oatmeal creme pies. ok ok that was harsh, lets make it twinkies. --adrin User Adrin ecto sig.png 09:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
@Shard: and you all still believe that it will happen after 2 years of it not happening? you know the popular saying: Only idiots do the same thing twice and expect different results. Then again, I suppose I am that idiot, since I keep trying to make you guys to stop a lot more often than 2 times. :p 145.94.74.23 13:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
@Shard: Not all suggestions are good (in fact, I've seen quite a few of debatable quality). Not all suggestions are agreed-on by the community (see all-hero vs. no-hero suggestions, or buff vs nerf Ursan for examples). I've seen plenty of updates adding things that were suggested by players (hat maker, storage, HoM modifications). But it's unreasonable to expect ANet to cater to all or most of players' wishes (see above). They should stick to modifications that are reasonably implemented, won't cause too much problems to other players, and will be useful to a large enough portion of the population... or at leat, they should prioritize those. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 15:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
But at the same time, I don't think it's unreasonable to look at 2008 (or rather two-thousand-hate) as the WORST YEAR IN DECADES by not just chance, but FATE ITSELF and go "Oh hey, Anet fucked up just as much as everything else that year" and now we've all experienced huge set-backs just like the rest of the World, and they probably could have avoided it if they tried harder. And yes, unfortunately Trying Harder does include "listening" to your Critics. =P --ilr 22:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
@Alaris, it's not they they don't implement 100% of suggestions - I'm not expecting them to. I am, however, expecting them to fix the game. They don't fix anything ever. There are bugs in the game from 3 years ago. Zero people like HA the way it is. I don't want them to add more stuff to the game - I want to fix the things they already broke. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 23:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I think Alaris' point is that such things are on a back burner, as more people want new content etc., so M.O.X. and the Fire Imp > Dancing Daggers no longer giving a lead mark if it misses (cause let's be honest, it doesn't miss). Other than a very select few, who would notice or care if ANet fixed the "Golden Arches"?
@145: Shard's posts often make me laugh, and I know I am not the only one. I consider that to be spreading mirth. Perhaps you have a different definition? Vili User talk:Vili 04:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
When something in one of my projects doesn't work, I fix it quickly so I'll never have to worry about it again. It's common sense, not rocket science. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 05:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I am glad he makes you happy. When I read his stuff, and I take him seriously, he makes me feel very depressed about Guild Wars. Then I return to the game and find that it is not so bad as most people make it out to be. But if you read this website, you'd think it's the worst game in history. 145.94.74.23 07:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I looked at the bugs you posted, Shard. You know ANet is doing a good job if that's the worst you can find to complain about. Seriously, nothing is perfect, but Guild Wars is a very high-quality product. I agree bugs should be fixed. But you can't go around being upset about details like that... or you'll doom yourself to being miserable. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Then you obviously haven't encountered the dancing daggers/entangling asp/toxic shock gimmick.
That's right, I didn't encounter it, or if I did, I didn't notice it. Minor bug. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 21:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
That's it. You said it is minor, so why isn't it fixed?Pika Fan 10:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
When the effect on the game is minor, but fixing it is not, the effort of fixing it isn't worth the time it takes to fix it. 145.94.74.23 15:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

We want players to feel connected to what we are developing even though it may be months away from release.

i lol'd 72.183.202.229 00:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Isn't there anyone on this website anymore who think they might actually be telling the truth? That they are really trying to improve the game as best as they can? What happened to the Assume Good Faith policy on this website? 145.94.74.23 07:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Trying to improve this game? At the point when they decided they won't do any more GW1 chapters but GW2 instead, they made GW1 the public GW2 testcenter. Almost everything they do in GW1 nowadays isn't even remotely intended to improve anything about GW1 ('cept for some minor stuff they release to keep players with them and interested in GW2), it's just a public test run of some brainstormed features that might find their way into GW2. For those of you buying GW2, I can only hope ANet realises that alot of things they came up with (seperate PvE & PvP versions of certain skills and all that crap) is shit and won't implement that in GW2.--Makku 08:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Separating PvE and PvP skills was a change long overdue...for PvP. (Since no one cares if skills are balanced in PvE.) If that makes it into GW2 from the get-go, ANet will have done something right.
Anyway, GWW:AGF doesn't apply to Guild Wars the game, only to the wiki and its users. Vili User talk:Vili 08:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Balancing skills in PvP is a change long overdue (no one cares if that makes these skills weaker in PvE since we have enough horribly overpowered PvE-only skills anyways). Splitting skills into seperate PvP & PvE versions is what kills PvP in the long run, because the gap between PvP players and PvE players increases even more. Certain skills are a lot weaker in PvP than PvE, some behave different, some even got deleted from PvP (Smiter's Boon..); How do expect to get fresh talent from the PvE scene into PvP in an environment like that? And how do expect to keep the PvP scene alive with veteran players leaving and no newcomers joining PvP?--Makku 09:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
What fresh talent? PvEs and PvPs can and should be seen as two completely different kinds of people, enjoying different things... how ever "Imbalanced" you think PvP is in GW, name any other MMO with a pvp system and its even worse, you will either complete domination of one or two classes or just one build that wasn't changed since the game was in beta etc. Biz 09:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
So....your point being that just because other people suck so much we can do the same? Learn how to give a proper argument, not a reply full of fallacies.Pika Fan 10:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm mainly a PvE'er who PvPs on occasion, I don't PvP that much because of the attutides of the people I came across than the skills. The trash-talk, stupid /emote bullshit ruins it for me and the retarded "no one cares about PvE" lines. Learning that skills may have variation in PvP isn't very challenging, you should be checking your bar anyway, it's dealing with all the other bullshit that stops people making the jump from PvE to serious PvP. User Aba Malatu sig.png Aba Malatu means Forbidden Truth 10:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Only a few people who buy GW already know for sure whether they're going for PvE or PvP mainly. A typical "career" is more like Buy the game → Get started in PvE, do some quests, get some armor etc. → Decide to join RA just for the fun of it and try some PvP. At that point some players will decide that PvP is a lot more fun and challenging than PvE, and stick with it. A few of these players will have good talent for PvP, further increase their skills and experience and eventually win a gold cape some day. Now if one of these guys joins RA and does PvP for the first time ever and suddenly his skills suck royally due to PvP versions, chances for getting him into decent PvP are severely lowered. That's meant by "fresh talent from the PvE scene". Regarding that "All other games suck, so Guild Wars has a right to suck as well": BS like that is not even worth responding.--Makku 10:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
So, your idea is to put cryway, ursan and all other broken PvE skills into PvP? Thanks, I am starting to feel that it is a lucky thing Anet didn't listen to you. Or anyone for that matter.Pika Fan 10:56, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I never talked about PvE-only skills, I was talking about skills with seperate PvP/PvE versions. Learn to read and comprehend, plz.--Makku 11:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
The whole point of skills with separate versions is to maintain a semblance of balance, like smiter's boon. This is also true for PvE-only skills. Balance in PvE and PvP were never supposed to be equal; expecting skills to do the same thing in each mode is ridiculous. It's really sad that people with no adequate knowledge are attempting to flaunt their lack of it. Pika Fan 11:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
And I never claimed balance should be equal in PvP and PvE. My point was (I feel like I'm repeating myself, but anyways..) that introducing PvP-only versions of certain skills wasn't a good idea, because for new players it makes the step from PvE to PvP even harder than it already is (considering how much of a difference PvE and PvP in GW is). Instead, non-PvE-only skills should be balanced according to PvP (after all, Guild Wars claims to be a competitive PvP MMOG). Even though that might produce some rumble it wouldn't hurt the game too much, since PvE players would still have PvE-only skills to farm hard mode. That's my point, in three short sentences for your pleasure, but I think this discussion is going kinda off-topic..--Makku 11:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
That is exactly what ANet tried to do for ~three years, but so many players bawwwwed about it (mostly PvE players) that ANet gave up; balance for PvE and PvP simply was based on different things and so the skills had to be split. (Sometimes, ANet would definitely buff a thing in favor of PvE, and then it would be the PvP players complaining; but this was rarer.) The thing is, that most players are primarily one game mode or the other, and they really could care less about what they don't play, because it doesn't matter to them or affect them in any way. But when ANet starts messing with their skills to fix someone else's problems, they get mad. Vili User talk:Vili 11:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Judging by the amount of low-end PvPers, it certainly doesn't seem like anyone(except you, of course) is crying about PvE/PvP splits. If every non-PvE-only got balanced according to PvP, you can be VERY sure people will complain about how hard this elite area is, oh my xyz skill was so good now it's so bad bla bla bla.Pika Fan 12:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure the majority of players play PvP or PvE instead of playing both; and if that's true, it's one more reason for both modes to have some similarities, so it would be easier to jump from PvE to PvP. I agree with Makku about this; but I think he's wrong (and everyone else in this discussion is wrong, IMO) by assuming that the game is going to have some flaw. For example, Makku said, "since PvE players would still have PvE-only skills to farm hard mode"; Pika Fan said "you can be VERY sure people will complain about how hard this elite area is", and etc.
The balance in PvE and PvP should be more or less the same. PvP has many interesting traits that PvE lack, like huge replayability, many different strategies being viable, and etc. If PvE were more similar to PvP, the PvE part of Guild Wars would only be improved. This would be possible not by making all PvE matches to be against teams of 8 enemies in the same 4 maps over and over, but by changing mob design so there is some degree of randomization (something possible in GW thanks to the use of instances, and something that is already seen in the game in Dajkah Inlet) and so strategies that are important and useful in PvP (kitting, energy denial, other kinds of shutdown) are also important and useful in PvE. It's too late to do that in GW1, but it's something that maybe could be used in GW2, making a split between PvP skills and PvE skills unnecessary. Erasculio 12:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Many HM builds do not only center around PvE-only skills, maybe you should actually play sometime before pointing out non-existent flaws.Pika Fan 12:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
"If PvE were more similar to PvP, the PvE part of Guild Wars would only be improved." This is true, but...have you played the game recently, Erasculio? And if so, where? I'm all for getting rid of unnecessary changes, but the simple fact is that the AI is dumb, predictable, and haxxed while (good) humans are not. Few examples: You don't tank in PvP. You don't use energy denial in PvE (other than few specialty builds) because mobs have much higher base energy and/or energy regeneration. Kiting is largely unnecessary in PvE because few monsters carry Bull's Strike or any other sort of suitably dangerous melee. Spreading degen with Apply Poison is lame in PvE as everything either has ridiculous health or dies in <5 seconds anyway. Splits don't happen in most PvE. Etc etc...
I just fail to see how randomization would help to address these issues, especially if skill balance isn't touched upon at all either. Of course, this is where we insert the blanket argument "No one knows how things will work in GW2, so for all we know it will be just fine". >.> Vili User talk:Vili 12:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
That's the thing: it would require randomization and to make PvP strategies viable in PvE, not only one or the other. Monsters not staying at tanks, monsters using different AIs depending of the kind of enemy, enemies with Bull's Strike and similar skills, enemies balanced by having a good skill bar instead of being balanced by coming in groups with dozens of low level foes, and etc. That's how mob design should have been. Of course now no one is going to change that in GW1, but if they applied that in GW2, I think splitting PvE and PvP skills would not be necessary.
And Pika: lol, what? Did you read what I wrote, or are you just replying to non-existent arguments? Erasculio 12:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
After reading most of Linsey's posts, I got the impression she's really trying to make things right (better late than never). Anyone who says different just has certain grudges he/she can't get past. It's that simple, really. 145.94.74.23 12:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Not just Linsey, but frankly, I get that impression from everyone at ANet. They are about making good fun games, and make a little profit while doing it (to be expected). But their dedication to quality comes out as a good game that focuses on fun. We've been spoiled, let's face it. And now that GW is getting old, and we're done everything in it, and the population is declining... I see a lot of people being upset because the other games out there don't compare. Linsey now has a very small team to keep making changes and updates, and there's only so much she can do. Every change made, even simple skill adjustments, is a risk for bugs to creep in. So every change takes time. PvE and PvP are different games, and should be kept separate, except for some games that are midway (AB for example). It should be easier for players to find a blend of PvE/PvP that they enjoy, and to get rewards for it. Skill split is a great idea, because the alternative is to have some skills being good in PvE but horrible in PvP, or vice-versa. Remember, skill split was introduced in large part because it was difficult to balance skills so that they worked equally well in both contexts while not being OP'ed in either. Also, there are some rare PvE missions that are PvP-like. They were fun, but I wouldn't want the entire PvE game feel like PvP-lite. It's a different style, with different challenges. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Make PvE monsters smarter, reduce their levels to 20(22 or 24 for bosses), improve their skill sets, fixed. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.229.129 (talk).
Let's see. To the unsigned comment above me: Making monsters smarter is AI development which is pretty complex and won't resolve the problem of predictability and therefor abuse (given time) - plus, that's one thing you'd do while you make a new game or prepare some kind of reset. Plus, PvE is about facing overwhelming odds, too, so foes should have some numerical/power advantage over the players in return for them not being as intelligent.
Hard Mode would have been a good possibility to make some changes: Change group loadout for monsters (more support for groups without, etc.) and instead of permanent, unremovable attack speed, damage and cast time modifiers they could have kept the changes to a level that's within the games system: Give them skills, monster only skills maybe, that cost energy, have a recharge and are interruptible, divertable and/or removable, that have these effects or, even better, only make them have more skills on higher attributes and give them appropriate health and energy (appropriate health would only make a foe have only some 700 health and some 30 (non-caster) to 60 (caster, except ele) energy on level 30, so that's not too bad, especially if they only have the same regeneration rates as players) and give them a useful secondary class.
In short: Make them tougher to beat, but beatable with a balanced loadout of debuffs, buffs, damage and support (including skill and energy denial as well as punishment as viable options), instead of making them best defeatable with DPS-optimized brainless spamming builds or overpowered PvE skills and consumables. Rule of thumb: If you can play a mesmer (highly powerful in PvP, with few exceptions almost useless in PvE) in PvE (this means Hard Mode, too) effectively without using VoR, and with Empathy not your best friend - that would be rather good already. So... while Alaris makes some good points, when it comes to PvE and PvP being closer to each other, I'm pretty much on Erasculinos side. PvE is PvE, it's different than PvP. Still, some of the core principles should apply to both.
As for some of the comments above that: PvE is not about farming HM with PvE-only skills for many players. Even most players, probably. It's a common mistake of PvPers to regard PvE as repeatedly wiping out the highest number of foes with the least effort possible, to get to "the reward" (whatever it is) in the quickest fashion possible to be able to repeat it more often in the same amount of time, thus earning more rewards. Of course, this means that PvE is perfectly or sufficiently balanced if any area can be beaten with a group of SF Eles and two monks, or, like UW2 some time ago, with five B/P rangers, an order necro, a minionmaster and a monk. Or Cryway. Or Ursan, back then. If likewise a team uses a similar tactic that will effortlessly have them win against most foes they may encounter in PvP most of the time, that's ganking gimmickry, a sign of imbalance, and should be forbidden or altered.
Honestly? I have been a PvE player in Guild Wars for quite a long time, release of prophecies, and prior to that. I have been told, it seems ages ago, in Beacons Perch (Droks runners where a big topic back then), that if I wanted to play PvE, I should go play WoW because GW is a PvP game. It was the sincere and honest opinion of that person. I have found GWs PvP-based game system much more fun in PvE than any PvE-based game systems like in WoW and all its free2play clones. It's about interacting with your foe and your allies, not stacking up stat buffs and debuffs that only affect yourself or your own attacks on your foe and timing potions to maximize your DPS by improving some vaguely described base stats. It's about fighting foes that are as strong as you are or stronger, not auto-attacking a foe 5 or 50 levels below you to farm them while actually watching a movie. Don't tell me what PvE is or should be like, don't assume that PvE players will like a game in which PvE is just spamming PvE-only skills, don't propose that PvE players should play effectively and that PvE doesn't have to be balanced. Because at this level, it's a matter of principles. Either everybody plays for some superficial reward, or everybody plays for the challenge and the fun. Either it's okay to gank and use gimmicks to win quickly with least effort in PvE AND PvP or it's not okay in both. Some people will always find a way to get the "reward" they seem to need, but don't make it a rule that everybody has to, wants to or doesn't know anything else than that. This just as some words to think about from a longtime but unknown, wiki-lurking GW PvE player to the highly esteemed PvP crowd and wiki prominence. (And yes, this is one large block of text, but it is, in steps, a reply to pretty much the whole discussion above. Sorry for the length.) 84.178.84.160 17:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
tl;dr. could you make less points? It makes my wiki activity more fun. ---Chaos- 12:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Heh, kinda interesting how the guy making the most sense is the hardest to argue with huh chaos? Personally the only change I want from anet is to take something like the top 10 elites and top 20 normal skills and pvp only change them to crap so we have to rework our builds, which will allow for different strategies. That alone could keep the game alive for a good while. 68.47.192.6 17:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

^I like that suggestion and have myself been thinking of pretty much the same thing. ---Chaos- 19:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
They ain't gotta make 'em "Crap" like they keep on doing to all my Fav 'Goon skills, they could simply change their stats around a bit like they used to back in the day, or figure out why they're synergizing "too well" with other FotM B.S. and just make those synergies less "Spammable". --ilr 21:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
"And now that GW is getting old, and we're done everything in it, and the population is declining... I see a lot of people being upset because the other games out there don't compare." - Yep that's the biggest truth I read on this page. Even if you start from a backward position of all/most games being bad and GW being less bad than others, it still says a lot. In fact this game is quite good and the rest is just so so, especially compared to it. 78.2.9.216 15:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Most games that the entire fail industry makes these days all suck. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.68.52.189 (talk).

"After reading most of Linsey's posts, I got the impression she's really trying to make things right (better late than never). Anyone who says different just has certain grudges he/she can't get past. It's that simple, really. 145.94.74.23 12:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)"
It doesn't matter how hard she's trying, she's failing. This power creep is fucking absurd. --76.25.197.215 18:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Success != effort.
Too bad results are the only thing that matter in this situation. But I'm sure glad she's trying really really hard. --76.25.197.215 22:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm happy they told us some things. Not much, to be sure... but it helps to prepare... -- Alaris_sig Alaris 02:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I think since Linsey has been lead of the Guild Wars Live team, we have gotten more than we had since EotN came out. Not only that, but she TALKS to us, which is something many of the rest of the staff have ceased to do (mostly because all they ever get in return is hate). Take your cynicism elsewhere. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 03:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, we've really gotten a lot. We've gotten train this person to death because their monks can't do a goddamn thing, ignore any requirements a dual attack might happen to have, and Improved Deep Wound + poison on everyone. I can't tell you how glad I am that she's in charge instead of someone who knows what the fuck they're doing. And maybe, just maybe, the reason the staff gets nothing but hate is because people are frustrated at the terrible direction this game has gone in since Nightfall came out and nobody's doing anything to fix it. --76.25.197.215 03:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I don't want to sound like a wet blanket all the time, Wyn.... but until "discussions" and "Feeling connected" are upheld with ACTUAL DETAILS about the nitty gritty of what Balance changes are planned; all of this was basically just Us standing next to them while they're pissing in the Wind. They can tell us about "features" all they want... infact they should have an entire Marketing Department who sets aside time just for that. But until they include all of you in the process, there's no reason whatsoever to feel "connected" to that process. IF they don't plan on following through, then they never should have made this big long schpeal about involving the community in the first place. Blindsiding with Nerfs ~!= Connecting. --ilr 03:40, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, once again, I think people are failing to really read what has been said. The rants here are all about skill balances, which really has nothing whatsoever to do with the comment this section is based on which was clearly released under the Content Updates section of the update. They never said they are going to make you feel connected to skill balancing, so continuing to cry about it is rather pointless. They hope to keep the community connected to the features and content they are developing, not to making all the whiners happy about skill balance. While features and content mean virtually nothing to the pvp community who are the primary whiners about skill balance, they do mean a lot to the pve community, and as far as new content and features go, I stand by my opinion that Linsey and the Guild Wars Live team have given us more in their 7 months, than we had gotten since EotN was released. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 03:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I am not a PvP'er. I am a PvE'er, and I'll tell you with complete certainty that their Brash and rushed decisions on Skill balance changes have negatively impacted my PvE experience much more than they've improved whatever "content" was added. I'm losing interest in PvE because it's becoming so goddamned inconsistent lately. I'm also having more and more trouble finding teams. Areas that often had multiple instances, are gradually emptying out. If the last 7 months is the standard you wish to go by, then I'd say it's patently obvious that Anet is doing something wrong because this "half-a-year ago" is almost exactly when this downward Trend started. --ilr 05:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I have to say the skill changes have done very little to change my overall game experience. Ok, this game is 3, almost 4 years old. Of course you aren't going to find as many people playing, that's just common sense, since more and more people have completed stuff, and moved on to other games while they wait for GW2 to come out. I guess I don't blame that on ArenaNet or on skill balance changes, just time attrition that I would think would be expected. I still play daily, and thoroughly enjoy it most of the time. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 05:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
The only thing I would have liked to see, skill wise, avoiding vbalance, is that pve skills that got nerfed for pvp reasons be split and reverted. Likewise for pvp skills that were buffed for pve reasons (Aura of the Lich). Anet has the skill split and they're really not taking full advantage of it. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 05:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Agreed 100% with Shard. I would like to see Feast of corruption at least be viable in PvE(it should be left in the garbage bin in PvP because hexway is already overpowered enough as it is). User:71.174.30.10
^I agree with that too, especially in cases of skills that were nerfed when they already had a PvP-Split or only needed very minor modifications --ilr 18:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Paragon's ain't gonna get any reasonable tweaks for a while, but suddenly you notice they change the whole concept of "paragon" because it was too powerful. Atleast I wish. ---Chaos- 19:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
That is exactly my point Shard... why make global changes that hurt one formate of play when there is already a system in place to spilt the "two relams" in the first place? As for Paras... the biggest change I would like to see with them... PANTS! - SabreWolf 06:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Dev Updates?

We were told that the dev team would be providing more frequent updates and attempt to engage us a bit more to keep us connected to the proposed quarterly content update schedule slated for GW1. It's nearly been a month since the January 15th update. Given that it's been a month, what can we expect in terms of frequency and what in what forum (fan site, gw.com, this wiki, etc) can we expect such updates? 24.188.207.20 02:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The monthly update is tomorrow, so I guess we'll get a dev opdate tomorrow. 145.94.74.23 08:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for reminding me <3 needs more skills. ---Chaos- 21:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Great! I can translate the Developer Update so it doesn't fail badly, and I can translate the update as well. LOL. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.30.10 (talk).
How noble of you. I made sure your IP was added so everyone can congratulate you. Anyway, for those interested in Developer updates, check this out. 145.94.74.23 15:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
WTH wuz that? All I heard was:
"WE CAN'T EVER GIVE YOU GUYS INFO YOU NEED EARLY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW IT YET BUT AS SOON WE KNOW ITS ALREADY CODED BECAUSE JOE-THE-PROGRAMMER IS THE FASTEST NINJA EVAR AND WE WILL LABEL EVERY SINGLE CHANGE AS A "FEATURE" BECAUSE THEN YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE WE DID NOT TELL YOU WHAT IT WAS"...OOOOOOOHH!
--ilr 20:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Give it a rest. Your capitalization only makes it that much more obnoxious, but not any less meaningless. Take your angst to the fansite forums. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 21:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
The devs sure are doing a good job of keeping us connected. I really feel like they care. 208.44.247.101 17:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Wow. Tough crowd. You know you're a GW addict when you allcap-harass the devs for scraps of info. Detox seriously needed here. GW withdrawal symptoms may include: agitation, depression, intense craving, extreme fatigue, anxiety, angry outbursts, lack of motivation, irritability, muscle pain, and disturbed sleep. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 18:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Ya totally left out nervous twitch and Nocturnal Discharge --ilr 19:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Feb Update

Looks like the February update is up http://www.guildwars.com/gameplay/developer_updates/february_2009_skill_balances.php. Can we update the wiki page or does Anet need to do it? Looks like it the page uses includes, and I'm afraid my lack of wiki skills might break something if I try to put in the new update... :) me55enger 09:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Seems redundant to me, but here's what they did, 'Proof it and add only it's title ( {{ArenaNet:Developer updates/20090205}} ) in the only-include (unless I'm missing some important step here...) --ilr 09:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, my questions is...

"While Guild Wars PvP focuses a lot on character combinations and build-making decisions, some skills that are balanced and designed with their primary profession in mind become used more frequently by secondaries"

Ok if that is the case... then why did you mess with PvE with these skills? now new Necros who get these kinda skills at the begining of the game cant even use them... Not even the Charr can use these skills... so now you have to be atleast lvl 4 to even use either of the skills... so to say that "skills that are balanced and designed with their primary profession" is not true... because not even the primary profession can use this skill. If you want skills to be used by the primary profession, then put it into Soul Reaping or Divine Favor or Critical Strikes... that way, it locks it so that the player MUST use the Primary profession that skill is a part of, without messing with the integrity and the meat of the skill. The skill will still be effective without jepordizing the skill for use... - SabreWolf 15:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Doing that makes alot of skills get in 1 attribute line which can be very powerfull because of that. But i agree on the point that the new players actually should be able to use there skills D: Fox007 User:Fox007 16:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
TBH, the only skill that would have 0 degen for newbies is Faintheartedness. However, that skill isn't used just for the degen (read:50% attack rate debuff for a long time). The other skills you get at a point later in the game where speccing to get the degen shouldn't be too much of a hassle. --TalkRiddle 17:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

IF they do not use tombs... heck I had Glimmer of Light on my Monk at lvl 2 - SabreWolf 17:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Uhh... how were any of those changes related to PvE play.. They friggin split PvE and PvP skills for a reason, have they forgotten?

pwk is used in pve. no need to split. ---Chaos- 18:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh I see, touche.
Sabre, if they're using tombs, chances are they aren't newbies, since, sans trading, you have to get them from HM. Low level'd does not necessarily mean newbie. --TalkRiddle 19:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
my eyes bleed when someone writes "tomb". ---Chaos- 19:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bit more concerned about the implications this Sig of Humility change has on Diversion. What's left to counter PimpSlap if they eff with Diverting next? It's looking more and more like they're actually trying to set off a chain reaction of FAIL. --ilr 22:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Not sucking at the game? :p Vili User talk:Vili 01:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Believe it or not, there's actually some places in PvE that 'the rest of us' normal human beings need stuff like Humility and Diverting to pass/clear. Infact I couldn't have even gotten ahold of "You're all weaklings" on a "standard difficulty" quest without Diversion due to recent Power-Creepage. And I use to rely on Humility sig for a number of HM encounters as well until this change. If that's considered "sucking at the Game" then I don't wanna be good at it like you, I don't have that kind of ego. --ilr 02:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Unlike sig hum, Diversion actually requires thought to get the desired results, otherwise you're essentially just doing spray and pray. Granted, Sig Hum should be PvE/P split, since outside of cryway, mesmers are shit. --TalkRiddle 07:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Really shouldn't even try to make an argument out of "low levels can't use it thus its bad for PvE" as being low level in this game is about a day or two, so the worst thing that can happen is that someone fresh out of presearing won't get a skill or two because at 0 curses it does no damage at all, not a life long debilitating injury if you ask me. I for one like the idea that skills arn't static and can actually change throughout the game. Firstly it pisses off a lot of Mesmers, Necromancers, Elementals, Rangers, Assassins, Ritualists, Paragons, Dervishes and Monks while Warriors are standing in the corner laughing at them all. Secondly who ever thought that skills that remain unchanged throughout entire history of mankind is a Perfect skills system must make sure to remove themselves from the gene pool immediately trough any method they choose. Biz 09:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Tangential argument is tangential; if you needed Diversion to finish Prenuptial Disagreement, then yes, I'd consider you bad at the game. Which has nothing to do with ego, as much as you'd care to make it be; merely skill. Humsig is useful in a very few places of PvE ("certain caster bosses"), but dshot etc usually takes care of that too, so I believe the list of viable counters is still well off. Vili User talk:Vili 13:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
FYI, "Prenup" is part of a longer but tricky Quest Chain. I've already done all I could to improve the 'snag point' in it with lots of suggestions for Compromise. Whether the Devs actually consider it, is a whole nother matter however. --ilr 21:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
...For my information? Well see, I've completed all of the Norn quests on at least three characters (Ranger, Assassin, and Elementalist iirc), and the Prenup chain on several more. The first is The Great Norn Alemoot. Very buggy quest, tricky the first time around because you don't get any instructions, but after you read up on it and practice a bit it's very easy, regardless of profession. Next is Bear Club for X. Every profession in the game has reliable means to defeat the Rabid Bear; the hardest by far is Paragon, but it is still totally doable. The one problem here is that it usually requires unconventional skills to be used, so at worst I'd accuse the quest of forcing one to go buy otherwise-useless skills. But then again, if you wanna do The Norn Fighting Tournament or even the Doppelganger in Prophecies, you sometimes have to do that too, so meh. Finally, there is Prenuptial Disagreement. Getting to Ssissth the Leviathan isn't hard at all. Once you actually meet him, if you came prepared to deal with a Shockwave wurm boss, you'll be fine. Heroes have godly reflexes and can interrupt it sometimes; you can also use Protective Spirit, or even bonding, to render him harmless. I'd admit to Humsig or Diversion also being viable options, but they are by no means necessary. I will further admit that on my first time doing this quest, I ran the entire party straight onto the quest marker; Ssissth popped up and wiped us all in one shot with Shockwave. That was memorable. :) But that was also my fault for not coming prepared; and you can bet that every time after that I knew what to expect. Vili User talk:Vili 00:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Good deal, that was a much better answer than "you Suck at PvE". Though I still think that Bear's way too "Tanky" without Diversion/Humility --ilr 08:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Anet doesn't balance stuff around low level/n00b areas, and I'm glad they don't.

Protip: PvE is a joke. SniperFoxUser SniperFox IconSmall.gif 14:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Protip: PvE is way more popular than PvP, for a reason. Unfortunately, PvE is a joke with stuff like consumables and PvE only skills, not to mention imbagons. I agree that PvE is a joke, but that's easily fixed. Leave it to Anet to leave stuff broken when it's easily fixed and to keep breaking stuff that actually worked in the first place.
Ugh! What's this Imbagon crap I keep hearing? Incoming & Angelic got Nerfed, remember? And S-Y! for Goons got replaced with a spear skill so You're locked into the Warrior secondary for that only skill that actually puts the imba in imbagoon. Plus; you have to buy all Three chapters! (and probably EotN too if you really wanna get the most out of it) At that point it's not Imba, it's "I payed too damn much at this point to continue to SUCK at PvE goddamnit!" like Paragons always do regardless in smaller teams or solo. I wish people would lay off the Goons, it's not their fault PvP'ers find PvE tedious. --ilr 06:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
If you think PvPers are the ones who need to abuse broken PvE skills, you'd be sadly mistaken. Also, who used "Incoming!" unless you had like six copies? Vili User talk:Vili 06:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
On the contrary, PvPers are more likely to ask for dying as much as they do in PvP, since PvE is designed to allow the entire party to kill hundreds of enemies without casualties on their side, and PvP is designed to have quite some casualties in both sides along the game. PvP usually have a harder time understanding that PvE enemies are just mere sacrifices to our fun that have no right to live. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 12:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
In other words, PvE monsters = PvP pugs. Anyway, back to topic... there are people in PvP and PvE who love to abuse skills. Let's be honest about it, this isn't a PvE / PvP thing. The difference is that if someone abuses a skill in PvP (and has fun doing it), another person is on the receiving end of that abuse. So, whenever there's a skill that gets OPed in PvP, there are people for and against that skill. In contrast, those poor monsters don't complain when PvE players abuse skills, so they can keep doing it at nobody's harm. It's still abuse, but of pixels. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
No... I would never give PvP'ers so little credit. Quite the contrary, I'm very aware that all the best PvE accomplishments in the game were without a doubt pulled off predominately by PvP'ers. It's pretty much a given in every MMO. All I wish to point out is how PvP'ers love to point out the tediousness of PvE a little too much b/c they always take Non-A.I. controlled opponents for granted. Meanwhile I challenge them to build an H/H "Imbagon Team" WITHOUT "Save Yourselves". Failing that, I'd challenge them to find even ONE mention of any Dungeon/Raiding teams forming in PvE outposts even looking for Imbagons b/c all you ever see in local broadcast is demands for 600's, LOD'ers, BiP'ers, Trappers/Nukers/SS, and whatever else hasn't really changed in 4 effing years of so-called Metagame Evolution :p. But yeah, No real PvP'ers even Need those gimmick builds, sorry if it sounded like that was the context --ilr 02:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

How to organize future Dev Updates?

With the recent layoffs, I think it would be good to think about how we're going to organize the Dev Updates in the future. I have been posting the English versions to this page (I apologize for not getting the recent one up, I will get it up right after I finish typing this), and I have been posting the localized versions to Martin, Peter's, and Julien's pages. Now that we no longer have CM support for other languages besides English, would it make sense to move the localized Dev Updates to a new location on the ArenaNet name space? Do you all think this makes sense? If not, is there a better way to organize them? The other issue is that Developer Updates are now being posted to the website to increase their visibility. This includes localized versions on the web. Does it still make sense for one of us (meaning ArenaNet staff) to continue to post Developer Updates to the wiki, given that they are now on the web as well? Thanks a whole bunch. =) --Regina Buenaobra User Regina Buenaobra sig.png 19:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

For localized versions, we maybe could just use subpages like ArenaNet:Developer updates/20090205/de or something like that.
And as we tend to post everything that is written on the official website on the wiki, so that we would copy the DevUpdates anyway, it would be great if you continue posting them on the wiki, if you don't have a problem with that. poke | talk 19:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I personally think that posting them on the wiki is still a good and valid practice. What comes to the localized versions, creating sub-pages for this one (/deutsch, etc) is probably a good method. -- Gem (gem / talk) 19:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I could make a Dutch translation if you'd like...you know, in absence of staff members that translate stuff...145.94.74.23 20:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: localized Wiki --> I'm the one who copypasta'd the Last Update and it took me all of 15 minutes to merge the website text with the update notes and add in wiki brackets. If I could do it then so could everyone else here. So no, Anet shouldn't have to bother with it, it'll always show up eventually. --ilr 22:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
You can always simple add links for the different official sites at the end of the English ones in the Wiki, including the English one. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 18:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
If she already has the english text, why not create the page to let us know the information is out there? And if she leaves the links to the other ones, we could make/format those. --JonTheMon 18:11, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Translation of Dev Update February 16, 2009

To our laptop/desktop/server/external fans,

There has been much discussion over Build Wars 2 delays, and I'm overwriting you today to confirm that Build Wars 2 is coming out in 2013(hopefully).

You've all seen announcements about restructuring at NCSoft. Face it, we at Anet are running out of money because people think Build Wars is bad. Does it impact Build Wars 2 development? You sure bet it does. We are restructuring so we can throw all our efforts entirely out the window, then run a pseudorandom number generator to figure out how Build Wars 2 will be designed and balanced. Izzy helped us break the game a lot and we are all very appreciative of that. If you're reading this, Izzy, kudos to you. You are getting a promotion. Our team continues to appear to grow, but most of the team are holograms brought to you by the same set of geniuses who made our gravity generator for us and unfortunately cannot figure out how to balance a game in both PvE and PvP. We would like you to assure you that we have strong backing for designing Build Wars 2, mainly because we buffed it and it's never getting nerfed.

On Friday, NCSoft released a broad release window for Build Wars 2, showing the release somewhere between 1000 B.C. and 3000 A.D. (We weren't kidding when we said "broad".) The release timing is to be announced, as is everything else with Anet. Only that when we announce a feature, it gets implemented 3 years later. That's us. Get used to it. Don't like it? Tough. Go pay a subscription fee for the piece of crap called WoW if you like it so much. Anet never gave a real release date, actually. We just made it up.

I know some USB-powered external fans had hoped for a smaller gap between Grind of the North and Build Wars 2 but we already wrote a letter saying that we would be late. I know it's unprofessional to always finish products late but as I said above if you want a professional job, go pay a subscription fee for those standard cookie cutter MMOs you obviously love so much. Deal with it and stop QQing. Build Wars 2 is a bloated and overhyped failure waiting to happen, and we're going to take the time to make sure that if you don't pay for every mini-expansion or content pack you are going to be inviable and uncompetitive.

I'm immensely proud of the mess we have made with Build Wars and how we are going to shove it into a trash bin and start anew, nevermind however much you paid for all the Build Wars chapters. Until then, screw you. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.232.219 (talk).


OKAY OKAY FINE, IT'S VAPORWARE. LEAVE ME ALONE NOW. /emo "Invalid emote."

QQ. King Neoterikos 03:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone else growing bored of these "translations" now? They were vaguely amusing the first time they were done, but now every dev update seems to come equipped with its own troll translation on the talk page. Really guys get a new joke, this one is old and tired. -- Salome User salome sig2.png 03:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Every update is going to get translated until Anet fixes Build Wars. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.232.219 (talk).
Don't you think a more positive way to approach this however would be to discuss things with people rather than to post ranting posts that A) fail to address the issue, B) serve no purpose and C) are no longer amusing? I too am yearning for extra info and for balance to be fixed in the game, however I just don't feel that these posts are the most conducive way forward as they just act as flame bait. -- Salome User salome sig2.png 03:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I already tried posting on the skill suggestions pages. Anet seriously does not read them as far as I can tell. If you have a better solution, post away. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.232.219 (talk).
Better get used to it, assuming the Wiki Elite manage to tear down the suggestions sections of course. If they really had a clue, they'd make a policy against CopyPasta/Translation spam while putting some actual effort into consolidating(& VOTING) IP suggestions into community suggestions instead. A little merging effort goes a long ways when dealing with "Sry, no Tiem 4 j00" Devs. --ilr 05:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Eugh. Here's a better translation:

To the whingers who have no idea how long it takes to make an MMO,
You've been QQ'ing a little more than usual as of late, so I'm writing to you today in the vain hope you'll actually listen for once.
You've all misinterpreted announcements about restructuring at NCsoft West, and naturally began bitching about it. In fact, the reason NCsoft West is restructuring itself is in a desperate effort to save its big money-makers, ie, the Guild Wars series. Our team is getting the financial priority we need to achieve our goal of kicking WoW's ass at last.
On Friday, NCsoft released estimates that were meant for the eyes of stuffy execs, not you. For the last time, we don't want to give a release date for GW2 yet, because chances are we'll guess wrong and have to delay it, and we would much rather put up with your frustrated grumblings over being told nothing, than have to deal with your outrage at having been lied to. Lesser of two evils, you know?
I know some of the more vocal fans are pissed they couldn't play the beta in 2008, but ffs guys, the game's only been in development for 2 years, and in this day and age betas aren't actually used for beta testing anymore. So you're gonna be waiting another couple years, at least. We already told you this, but you seem to think that whining about it will make us change our minds and release a game that sucks because it's not finished yet.
Like it or not, Guild Wars was a huge success, and we genuinely believe GW2 will be even better. We'll be able to finally give you all the screenshots and previews you've been begging for when the game's actually completed enough for us to give you those things. Until then, we thank you for proving GW's success by standing by it even as you bitch about how much you hate it, and ask you to perhaps try being patient for once.

--Mme. Donelle 04:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Is it "better" because it makes makes them sound even MOAR arrogant and condescending? LoL --ilr
Yup! A little bitchiness is understandable when people are constantly insulting you and failing to understand the realities of what you're doing. --Mme. Donelle 21:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

About half of those links at the bottom of this QQ rant aren't broken. Mango 05:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

So anyway, the only one who writes funny translations is Shard. But he's banned. Vili User talk:Vili 05:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Shard's overrated. --Mme. Donelle 21:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

@OP: I guess you haven't seen the numbers yet? They actually sold over 200,000 accounts every quarter last year. Mini Me talk 12:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Why do you suppose they sold those accounts? Do you really think they were all new players or could they possibly be dupes for z-key ATS "farming" or replacements for banned/stolen accounts which is an epidemic in and of itself right now. 76.20.238.253 16:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Epidemic? Prove it, or at least support it with numbers. All I see is opinion here. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 17:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
If it wasn't a problem they wouldn't bother to put it multiple times as a login announcement. That's like saying people don't buy gold, "prove it" or do you think that's an opinion too? I used to think it wasn't a big deal either until both my alliance leader and several guildies got picked off. HoM credit stays put since it can't be deleted but these people are fast at snatch and grab for account goodies provided you even get the account back. 76.20.238.253 17:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. I'm saying "prove it" on the epidemic part... does it really happen *often*, as in to a large % of the population? Putting warnings makes sense regardless, because even if it happens to 1 or 2 ppl, it can have a profound effect on them. So it's always good to be careful. But epidemic? -- Alaris_sig Alaris 18:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
You are the champion of the negative proof and this isn't the first time. You'll notice I didn't mention a figure I couldn't or didn't support (like 200,000) just an adjective you don't seem to like which is an issue of semantics not validity. I don't think I'll be buying summon stones from your NPC anymore :P 76.20.238.253 19:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Do duplicate accounts really matter? The point is someone bought the game, and ANet got money. In terms of their financial success it doesn't make a difference if that person already owned the game or not. --Mme. Donelle 19:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
It does when you can pick up the combo pack for $30 at Sam's (I will double check with my GL to see if this is still the case) compared to the nearly $200 we all shelled out on the first set. What happened to your scythe...and account for that matter? 76.20.238.253 19:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
You realize that I make no profit from turtles sold by my evil twin NPC, right? lol... but yeah, all arguing aside, I get your point. I just don't necessarily agree with it. With regards to duplicate accounts, it's a matter of telling the difference between player base size, and income. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 20:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Translation of OP's post: "Blahblahblahblah" 58.179.110.205 12:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Good job, Mme. Donelle. Less emo, more gaming. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Well played. King Neoterikos 22:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:A Letter to Our Fans - 16 February 2009

Thank you. --Silverleaf Special:Contributions/SilverleafDon't assume, Know! 21:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Seconded. --Mme. Donelle 21:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Thirtered. Or whatever... Agreed. *blush* -- Alaris_sig Alaris 00:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
As a fan of Triple-AAA developers (such as BLIZZARD), please take all the time you need... --Falconeye 05:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Thirded*? --The preceding trolling attempt was made by Chaos (talk) . 11:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. I know you don't hear from us nearly enough, but some of your fan base do believe you're only trying to do what is best for the game.--Ryan Galen 13:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
And some of us actually think you're achieving that goal very well too. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
WhyUser talk:Why Are We Fighting 16:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks ^^ |Cyan LightUser Cyan Light SB.jpgHere!| 16:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
For good measure... thanks. :) -- User Elveh sig.png Elv 17:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, if the product lineup graphic we've all seen hadn't been leaked....would you guys have even told us this? I guess what I'm asking is: Is this letter in response to the fact that we've all realized that GW2 was pushed back? And, please, stop with all the rhetoric about there "never being a release date". We all understand how long a MMO takes, but info released in 2007 about a 2010-2011 game seems....ignorant. So, the conclusion is either you guys were (1) ignorant in releasing the info in 2007 (especially suggesting the beta might be in 2008) or (2) the game got pushed back because of exactly what you write about in the letter (restructuring, etc). Just wondering. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 19:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey KJ. Btw, what're you referring to with the "product lineup graphic"? nvm, actually found on your talk. ---Chaos- 20:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey, Chaos (like the new sig, btw. I still need to make you one). Yea, it was all over guru and a lot of other fansites. Regina had a rough time describing how it got out, whether it was valid or not, etc. I do not envy her job right now. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 20:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I think the 2008 deadline for beta was realistic under the old philosophy that they would make a really, really long beta (as they did with GW1). But it seems they changed that philosophy in favor of impact factor, which I understand, and which also explains the 2010+ deadline for release (which, tbh, was probably realistic even with the beta in 2008 under the old philosophy). -- Alaris_sig Alaris 20:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
That wasn't the question (no offense). The question was whether or not you think they would have told us if the info hadn't been leaked? Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 20:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Probably not... but who knows...? -- Alaris_sig Alaris 20:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
No offense, but why do you consider a published corporate earnings statement (easily available to anyone on the NCSoft website) to be a leak? --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 22:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Yea, I guess no one knows, but still it makes me sad that I can't even imagine them releasing this info w/o practically being forced to. I almost feel like I can't trust any of their intentions anymore. It wasn't always like that.... Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 20:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

The letter looks to me like a pretty clear response to the leaked release estimates, and he took to oppourtunity to slip in a reminder that restructuring at NCsoft doesn't effect development of GW2. He didn't need to mention that because Regina's already said it, but hearing it twice doesn't hurt, especially when (I think?) Regina's announcement wasn't posted up on the official site. --Mme. Donelle 20:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Donelle, I know you have an affinity for defending Anet and it's actions but in this case, I think it's pretty obvious that they wouldn't have even given us an estimated release date had it not been for the leaked info. And, no, Regina's comments were not on the official website. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 20:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
The wording of your comment makes it sound like the letter says "Oops, yeah, I guess GW2 will be released in 2010-2011 like the leaks say". The letter says "No, we have no release date. The estimates you saw was business shit meant for our investors' eyes." So yeah, duh, the letter wouldn't have been written if the estimates hadn't been released, because its purpose is to settle the rumours that started flying as a result of the leaks. --Mme. Donelle 20:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if my wording made my statement hard to understand. I'll put it bluntly. I believe they would not have told us an estimated release for GW2 unless this information was leaked. That's what I'm saying. They would have let us continue to believe that 2009 was possible until 2009 was gone, and then 2010 until 2010 was gone. What I'm saying is, they want us to think it is coming out sooner than 2010/2011 so we will continue to spend money on GW1. I don't think they were planning on telling us that 2009 was out of the picture and I think the very fact that this letter had to be written illustrates that there are issues with GW2 (specifically that it was pushed back). Oh, and just so you're aware. One of my best friends was in the Austin, TX office that got shut down.....and there are more reasons for that than they're saying. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 20:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Goddamn, watch the indents, ppl. And No one should feel they can't trust Anet's actual product release just b/c we've got new release windows now. Apparently the reason for it is to take their Beta process in a new direction which is something that's just way too early to judge right now. As for the investor report... who knows, maybe that one's financially motivated since ALL economists seem to be saying we're in for a 2-year recession here and investors only care about one damn thing... dividends. So they'll wanna hear that their dividends will be based on a Non-Recession period release rather than during a near-depression period like we're in now. --ilr 20:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Karate: And... what? You think that formulating conspiracy theories will make ANet announce a release date? You want me to be shocked by the notion that an American company wants to make money? Who cares? All that matters is that an awesome new MMO is coming out sometime soon. If you want to believe that NCsoft/ANet is a hair's breadth away from bankruptcy and GW2 is in trouble, then go ahead and buy 50 copies of the game to do your part of keeping them in business. --Mme. Donelle 21:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Chill, KJ made some reasonable arguments. If GW2 is stopped I'll crucify people. ---Chaos- 21:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) (@ Ilr) I think I have plenty of reasons not to trust their actions (although I completely understand why they had to do them).
Let's say I'm a foundation repairman (because I used to be) and I give you an estimate that I'll lay your slab (foundation) around Q2 2008. Then when the second quarter of 2008 arrives, you get a piece of paper from one of my business meetings saying I have no intention of laying your slab until at least 2010. Do you still trust me to do the job? Hell no, you don't. And I'll probably lose your business. So, when I find out that you've heard about my false estimate, I send you a letter that says I never promised to lay it in 2008/2009 and it'll probably be done in 2010. Even if I blame that on the economy, it's shit and I lose business.
Even though the markets are obviously different, it's the same concept. They didn't want this info to get released because it will lower their customers' trust and lower their future income from those customers. Get what I'm saying?
And chill, Donelle, it's obvious that's not what I meant. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 21:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Lol, why are people telling me to chill. I just honestly don't understand what you're getting worked up over. ANet insist that money isn't holding them back and GW2 development is still going strong. I doubt they're lying about this, because lying about a sequel in order to encourage people to continue playing a free-to-play game that isn't getting any new releases isn't exactly a huge money-maker. They would need to appeal to new players, but the only folks who care about GW2 or ANet right now are folks who already play the game. So I'm not worried about the fate of GW2, at least not until I see some better evidence that ANet's in trouble. --Mme. Donelle 21:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Donelle, you seem to be confusing my point with things you've heard other people saying. At no point during this conversation have I said that Anet is struggling financially. I'm merely saying that I don't believe they intended to release this statement and wouldn't have unless forced to do so. I honestly don't know how much more bluntly I could put it so you'll understand. Also, at no point have I claimed that GW2 wouldn't be released. Again, I was just stating that it was most likely pushed back (which they haven't admitted to, but I'm 100% sure of). Please, Donelle, read what I've said more carefully and respond accordingly. Your responses are becoming annoyingly asinine. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 21:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
OMG, Chill d00de!! Ur STILL not chilled yet! --ilr 00:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
No wai, I'm ttly chilled. I'm so chilled that when you cast deep freeze on me, my armour turns into a superconductor. </dumb joke> --Mme. Donelle 02:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

(Double-Split Reset indent) ...(@)KJ, don't even try it dude, my friend was a foundation contractor. There's ALWAYS a contract bid in any Area/Market that's actually worth contracting in, even if the only things going up are ClusterFuck cottages. ...which ironically is the EXACT state the MMO industry has been in ever since 2005. No one NEEDS a new basement this year or their house will explode underneath them, even if some of us are getting so restless with the constant stream of CRAP that's made up the previous 3 years in game design :p When the time is right, Anet will release a SUPERB game that's right for the times. All their latest Press junket really tells us is that their they're SO COMFORTABLE about their financial situation now that they're honestly going to go for the impossible.... The next fabled "Renaissance" of Online RPG's which literally hasn't existed since the UO/Baldurs/DAoC years* (*-disclaimer: YMMV depending on your views on "art"). Which in simple terms means: When it's actually time to Bid, Anet may very well be setting up to Blow the competition out of the Dirt, as it were. --ilr 00:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So they probably didn't want the info leaked .. oh noes!! And it might take them a while to make a great game ... oh noes!! And they don't know if the game will be released on Wednesday or Thursday of that week .. oh noes!! Well geez ... burn out your eyeballs right now in protest! Or maybe ... just maybe this isn't the end of the world. Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk

.. Dumb troll doesn't realize KJ's point. ---Chaos- 21:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
^ again...please read before you make stupid comments. None of what you said even remotely imitates my point, however sarcastically you meant it. So....basically, read so you wont make dumb comments. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 21:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
People spend their money on what makes them happy, or keeps them fed, etc. Whether GuildWars II comes out in 2010 or 2011 doesn't really affect my spending. If they say it will be out in 2009 and then say 2011, I'll still make the same purchases, regardless, including purchases of spare (yes spare) accounts. Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk • 21:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Whether or not it personally affects you doesn't matter (no offense). The problem is that the community's consumer loyalty goes down when consumers feel as if they can't trust a company. And my guess would be that consumer loyalty has dropped a decent amount since this incident happened. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 21:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Which is true, as far as I've seen. tbh I think everyone who said there will be no GW2 is gonna be "I told you", say their qq'ing was just joking, and won't remember how they actually thought. ---Chaos- 21:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Same for me. I've seen a pretty heavy shift towards pessimism lately with the consumers of GW. The people who think GW2 is vaporware are pretty stupid though and they'll be proved wrong (in 2012). Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 22:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
What makes me question buying GW2 is the hinted at ideas it will be WoW all over again, the Diablo II-esque henchman setup, and having no answers to those concerns. I don't expect anyone to address them yet though, as they are still early in development. I took no offense to your comment BTW, I understand your point but I don't agree with it in this case. Customer loyalty is hard to maintain when there is no new real new content, although Lindsey is working on things for us. But the longer it takes to release content, yes, the less players that will be around to see them. Whether they know when the game will be released, or if it was delayed is moot since the game isn't in front of me to play. If it comes out next week, I'll still buy add-ons for GW1. Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk • 22:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
No, you didn't take offense, you just trolled. Everyone said/says GW1 is just another WoW.. ---Chaos- 22:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
lol, WoW is GW for beginners.... Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk
Biased GW player opinion. ---Chaos- 22:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
If I was a WoW player, I'd be on their site, not this one. As far this "trolling" you're taking things out of context. The "not offended" remark came after the so-called trolling. I moved the conversation away from a personal attack (I saw your Muslim comment) and back to issues at hand. Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk
Does anyone else have issues with following his train of thoughts? ---Chaos- 22:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) KJ: Let's try going over this point by point, then. You said, "they want us to think it is coming out sooner than 2010/2011 so we will continue to spend money on GW1." I took this to mean you thought ANet were in financial trouble, because otherwise, you were simply stating the blindingly obvious: that a company wants to make money. I don't get why you felt it was necessary to point out such a no-brainer. You said you didn't believe they would have released the Feb 16th letter had the estimates not been released, and I agreed with you early on. It seems obvious to me and to most people, and has since the sequel was originally announced, that ANet want to keep quiet about release dates because chances are very good they will get an estimate wrong. Pushbacks are common in this industry. So again, I'm just wondering why you're pointing this out. Given that I felt you thought ANet were struggling financially, I thought you were implying that pushbacks meant the game was at risk of not getting completed. I guess I read into it too much? So am I correct in now thinking that all you've really been saying is that ANet want to make money, they're being careful about releasing information regarding their vapourware, and that GW2 might have been pushed back; the latter conclusion being one you've gathered from the fact that ANet released a statement which says "shit, ignore the estimates, we haven't released an official release date yet"? I apologise if my comments seemed "asinine" -- I guess I was just responding in kind. --Mme. Donelle 22:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. One of his points was saying that ANet wouldn't claim to release GW2 in 08/09, because then none would buy GW1 which is just dumb marketing. ---Chaos- 22:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Donelle, first, tone down the sarcasm. I didn't mean to offend you. Second, look up the word "asinine". You seem to think it means something that it doesn't. And thirdly, yes, I was simply pointing out that this is obvious evidence that Anet had to push GW2 back; however, I have yet to make a comment about the financial situation at Anet because I don't feel that it's pertinent to the conversation. Whether or not the reasons were financial is unclear, but I do believe the fact that it was pushed back means there's a lot more to this than they're letting us know (which is understandable). Personally, I would just prefer a more open statement about the state of Anet's company and GW1 and 2 rather than getting the run-around. Oh, and I would prefer it if they continue to actually update their own site. When was the last "State of the Game"? Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 22:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Only the last sentence was sarcastic, although I do know what asinine means, thanks. (Though now I'm dreadfully curious to know what you thought I thought it meant.) Back on topic: all I can logically derive from the letter is that ANet still want to keep us in the dark about release dates. They may be covering up a pushback, they may not; either way, I don't think it's significant, because the whole reason they have been keeping us in the dark from the start is so we aren't aware of any delays. And delays are almost inevitable. So that doesn't surprise or imply dark things to me. As for their openness: ANet have openly stated that GW2 is still being developed, that NCsoft's issues are not negatively affecting them, and that they are currently understaffed in some departments. They could probably stand to be more organised with these announcements as some are hard to find, but they've been said. --Mme. Donelle 22:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Eh, either way I think we've worn this topic out. I am curious as to when the last "State of the Game" was released though. Or a new "Guild of the Month" for that matter. I'm sure it's on their website. I'll go look. Karate User Karate Jesus sig.png Jesus 22:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
They announced a long time ago that they were discontinuing the Guild of the Week due to a lack of interest. It came shortly after the end of real rewards for PvP if I remember correctly. Ghosst I Make Dead PeopleTalk
A lot of website stuff has been discontinued; the Scribe and possibly the newsletter are dead too. I think this is partly due to understaffing issues, partly lack of interest. --Mme. Donelle 22:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
How many people are actually working on GW1/GW2? Anyone have any idea? ---Chaos- 23:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Most of ANet are working on GW2; I don't know the numbers, but I suspect they have enough people to get the job done roughly on time (whenever that time will be). GW1 is updated by the Live Team; I'm not sure how many people are in that team, at least 3 I think, and I believe they temporarily borrow folks working on GW2 when they need to. The CRM team is understaffed (currently only Regina), and I think the folks who do website stuff are understaffed, though I'm not sure on that one. --Mme. Donelle 23:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
If they're trying to get us to take over more of the Wiki updates they used to do, then yes, it's safe to say they're understaffed. Maybe they'll get smart and finally ask "us"(YOU ppl cuz I'm too lazy) to clean up the Suggestion & Feedback section next... --ilr 06:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind that most of their website services are dicontinued. The GotW was getting old, the same content with a different guildname. The articles on the game were outclassed by those on fansites, and the other articles weren't that interesting except for a (too) few. As for The Scribe, it was written by a player and not by Anet, so it's not their fault. Bottom line: I'd rather have them spend time on things that can't be done by the players, since the players have more time and love for the 'About the game' things they write. It's a win-win situation: great game and great articles on the game. 145.94.74.23 10:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
The scribe was written by a player? I was under the impression it was done by Andrew Patrick, and stopped when he left the CR team. Ashes Of Doom Talk 20:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok. :p The last time I read who the scribe was, I was still a wiki noob so I thought that he was a bigshot player or something. My mistake. :p Still, even the Scribe is optional: we still have the Developer Updates, and Regina, Gaile and Linsey do a decent job at keeping us updated. There's just nothing left to tell. All new stuff gets it's own release info (MOX&Fire Imp) and the rest has been said too many times already. 145.94.74.23 22:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Would ANET like me to do video news updates on coverage of the monthly GvG's? Like video highlights? - SabreWolf 23:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
You hardly need to ask for permission, as you will probably never be posted on the official site anyways, but if you did do it and it become immensely popular and/or professionally done, then maybe... Biz 06:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
They did post in the official site some music videos, so if you make them good enough you may have a chance to get them posted. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 17:52, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Well I do have a back ground in non-linear editing and photoshop integration... I work in Television after all... so it shouldn't be too hard... as long as I have the time for it though... - SabreWolf 03:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Incremental Progress

Thanks for the Letter. While I know that there were some quasi-official speculation regarding a beta time frame for GW2, there's never been a release date set. It's also been the case that AN has suggested that the testing for GW2 will be more along the lines of a traditional beta test instead of the innovative model used for GW1. Thus, it was natural for fans to assume that since the beta testing seemed to be delayed, that the game itself would be delayed. The NCSoft investor information seemed to confirm that impression. However, for anyone who's followed game development, a 2009 release date would be extremely optimistic, given that the game itself was announced in 2007.

The more troubling problem from the fan perspective is the lack of information about the game itself. It's understandable that AN and NCSoft wish to keep much of the game under wraps. However, it would be very nice if we could see at least some concept art. It'd not need to have any kind of character or class represented--nothing that would give away gameplay--but a landscape would be very nice. A new one every quarter would show there's something being done, and as the beta becomes closer, concept art could give way to screenshots. I will agree, though, that I'll play the game regardless, and that I very much want AN to take the time it needs to release a polished product! ceolstan 14:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I firmly second this Motion... Or atleast update the knowledge-base on the GW2-Wiki. --ilr 22:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Anything for us fans to chew on is always nice... it doesn't take much in all seriousness to keep us occupied... even releasing one of the other races that will be playable, since that was already been hinted in a past interview a while back... that would keep peeps occupied for a while... and it wont be that big of a leak, since we all know already that there will be one or 2 other races to be playable besides human, charr, asuarn, sylvari and norn... - SabreWolf 04:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

SSBB Did it, it pulled in fans by the masses, yearning for more even post-release, I second the idea on new GW2 Wiki news. Nikdanbro 08:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Even adding a seperate website with said information would be nice too, also maybe talking about some of the guild wars cities would be interesting. Dero Ahmonati

SabreWolf: We do? I never saw that information. I was under the impression they were sticking with the races they told us about. Where did you hear this? Ashes Of Doom Talk 22:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

March Skill Balances

For something that is mostly nerf... I find myself not pulling my hair too much about this one. The closest I came to being upset was the nerf to the stances, but that was mostly because I saw them nerfing something balance in one area of PvP due to unbalances in another area of PvP. As a PvEer, I just didn't use those skills. And I'm certainly hoping the buffs to self healing don't get reverted right away.

All in all, I know I'm going to be contradicted on this right away but it has to be said, good job.--Ryan Galen 18:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Not right away. The nerf to the stances hurts monks pretty bad, but the nerfs to read the wind and flail makes up for that. All in all, not a bad update, imo. Though I don't really see why they nerfed Wail now, its not used that often anymore anyway. WhyUser talk:Why Are We Fighting 18:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Stance nerf means Mo/W RA/TA monks are now bigger targets for pimp slap sins. Turret needed to be nerfed it was prolific but pimp slap is much more deadly as a spike. I think its great anet likes assassins again but honestly guys its time for a nerf. Ele buff was interesting...remind me again why eles need better e-management? For me the rest was meh. Lol for skillbar compression on Primal and Wail is poopy 40/40 = 40%hsr anet? Don't we wish. I did use rend in a solo build...with a 2 sec cast that's now in the junk pile. All in all fairly typical balance update at this point imo. 76.20.238.253 20:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Attunment is now worth bringing as a split heal (and not just a useless cover for attunements). It can even replace the common Attunement/GolE combo. And you can, if you wish, spam Flare now, for 1 energy each (energy cost to 1 was a requested change), meaning you can actually DPS fairly well now, if you want to, and get decent healing out of it too. 145.94.74.23 21:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Flare spam is bad.72.64.2.163 02:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me? I monked 20 rounds in a row having shield stance. Stance monks still work, you just to use stances correctly instead of spamming them on recharge like most do.Pika Fan 21:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Good monks are good. Seriously though anything to bust up this boring as piss meta that arenas currently have is a positive thing. The easy button has most classes down to 2-3 elites tops and virtually identical bar structure with maybe 1-2 skills on rotation with their secondary. They might as well make arenas like costume brawl with preconfigured bars and call it a day. Actually the real issue is and always has been that different formats need different skill splits...maybe GW2. 76.20.238.253 22:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Developer update, what you didn't see.

moved to User talk:96.233.11.248
Whoever did this is officially a genius. Thank you VERY much!
I fully agree with that user talk. An entertaining read, and very true! PuppetX 10:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Up and comming attractions

"Here are a few features we are currently developing for April:

   * Increases to account-based storage
   * Improvements to character-based storage
   * Account-based changes to the Hall of Monuments "
Just wondering can we get any news on this, whether its on track. Because im always superstitious to these things, and would like abit of warning to take everything out of my storage and stick it on chars. I suppose il take everything out now. Great updates anyway, been waiting for my storage space for about two years :p --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.108.178.184 (talk • contribs) at 02:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC).
The developers already stated that they want to release more information before the update. They don't have the time right now, because they're too busy working on the actual update. — Poki#3 My Talk Page :o 18:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
  • looks at Calendar* ... *looks at "Feel Connected" comments* ... *feels rofl-closure* --ilr 01:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Unless they say otherwise, assume: (1) it's on track, (2) it's set for release on last day of April, and (3) it'll fix some stuff, add some stuff, but otherwise won't totally fix everything you wished for. They're improving GW one small step at a time. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 14:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Positive attitude is one all well and good. I try to have it as often as possible concerning the game. I think, though, that the policy of not telling us everything until it's certain and keeping us more informed are contradictory goals. Particularly in a business where a lot of the grinding work needs to be done at the tail end of a project. We'll get our update, and most of us will probably love it, but I think most of us realized a month ago that the Live Team was biting off more then it could chew with the "feel connected" statement.--Ryan Galen 16:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep in mind that the release of information is not up to the Live Team, it's up to their bosses. Make sure you direct your frustrations accordingly. --Wyn's Talk page Wyn 16:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, they did announce way ahead of time that HoM will be account-wide, that TH and wisdom will also be account-wide, and that we'll get more storage in some way. Is that not information they could have kept to themselves until ready? I for one feel more connected because they released those tidbits. Sure, it's not a lot, but changes to account-wide has made a big difference in the way I accumulate titles & achievements. I'm very thankful for the info we did get. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 20:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
None of those things are actual plans or new content, they're too vague. They're not even features given the lack of specifics. And it's not their "bosses" who sludge up this process in NCsoft divisions in general, it's the "marketing" that doesn't go out and do it's real job of attracting new customers but rather justifies its existence by filtering everything we coulda gotten ourselves from the devs into TPS coversheets. --ilr 21:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Changes to account-wide were vague, but specific enough to be useful. Changes to storage also gives some hint to players who need storage space that they may be able to find ways to have more, so don't clean your storage just yet. Sure, we all want more info, but don't dismiss the info we do have. -- Alaris_sig Alaris 13:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)