ArenaNet talk:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/A2

Eye candy

I'd like to suggest something that might be more of an consern. It's a kind of question but will get an suggestion too. ANet, as I have read says GW EoTN is to prepeare us for GW2, I hope strongly you people making this game consider more than just a bunch of eye candy. I, and many more would love to see Norn females actually looking STRONG. Jora looks like an oversized bimbo with big boobs, and if thats what I'm gonna have to be when I play GW2 then I wont buy the game, honestly. There are many people expecting this to be great, and I seriously expect more than warrior females looking like skinny bikini girls. This is more of an consern, also cause I am looking forward to this game alot. Try to not focus ONLY on your male players, I see alot of games who where great have become just only, yeah, soft porn? (For example Red Alert which was a game I used to play alot.) Us who are females would like to be able to play something that lookings strong and reasonable.

So here is my suggestion, I hope you'll be making it very easy to change anything of the apperance of your character. (This does not consist boobs or ass size please.) I also suggest more covering armor, but ALSO showing armor BOTH for female and male. Thought I have not seen armor from GW2, so I can't really say much about it. I just hope it'll be great and not dissapointing. I really would not like this great game you people are making to turn out to something which sells for the naked girls. There are many ways of doing this on. I'm looking forward to see what GW2 will turn out to be!

(I'm sorry I don't speak so well english, I'm sure there is 100 of words or more who are wrong. But please take me serious, as I take this very serious. I'd also not like to have alot of men/boys/girls too for that matter telling me all: whats wrong about eye candy huhhhh bitch. And so on. I'd like a serious answer, from anybody who'd wanna answer.)--Naoko20 15:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Signatures

I just went through the history to sig some unsigned comments, and it was annoying due to the noeditsection tag. IMO we should either allow section edits or add a rule for removing all unsigned posts. -- Gordon Ecker 02:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it feasible to make it so that users have to log in to make edits? Wait... when was section editing removed? Now we have to load up the entire page if we want to move a small section? (Terra Xin 04:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC))

Yes, the page could be protected from unregistered edits. -- Gordon Ecker 05:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Some one needs to remove the _NOEDITSECTION_ part that removes the edit seciton buttons... Those make it a whole lot easier on everyone to edit.The Cabal 01:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Which is exactly what we don't want, Calor. Backsword 01:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Think you mean Cabal Backsword as Calor hasn't commented on this article :P --Kakarot 01:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, C'mon. With a name like "cabal" it must be a part of a conspiracy. Backsword 01:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Shhhh! They'll figure it out! =) The Cabal 21:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

But seriously, unless you can come up with a solid explanation why the noeditsection is needed, (because it's obviously not working) then I vote that it gets removed. (Terra Xin 20:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC))

Sugestion pages are not for lols!

I'm sorry to offend all of you using these suggestion pages as a place to post as many dumb ideas that even you don't think are good as rapidly as possible. That said, most of these suggestions are so blatantly horrible that even the original creator states within the suggestion itself that it sucks... why the hell even suggest it? Suggestions such as the one about adding a vampire race come to mind where the pros list consists of "vampires are totally kwel and can like turn into bats lololol!" and the cons list is about 10 long concluding in "it would be a dumb clone of a blood magic necromancer, turning into a bat would either be completely useless and stupid or completely overpowered, and vampires cant go out in the sun so gg". Also, please PLEASE stop posting suggestions involving making everything in the game free. I don't care if you think its a good idea, because no one else does. To sum it up, if your suggestion isn't worth suggesting, DON'T PUT IT UP AND CLUTTER UP THE PAGE WITH USELESS GARBAGE so that someone's brilliant idea might actually be seen among the ocean of crap it is currently submerged under. Zero4549 12:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Main/Character Select Screen Appearance

The Character Select screen and Main screen(logon page+events)Background if it can toggle to the appearance and music that fits you.Like the Prophecies theme,Nightfall theme,Eye of the North themeHow the current theme is Eye of the North.If it can switch the background,music,etc.When it toggles between the appearances,The reason is some people may favor other campaigns over others.It sounds like a lot of work,but It will be an amazing benefit.I'm pretty sure this was a post before,but I was unable to find it. Good Idea? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.64.131.7 (talk).

Needs to be moved. Can't do it at the moment because of slow internet... The Cabal 01:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, to the anonymous editor, please don't remove others' comments. -- Gordon Ecker 01:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

This has been suggested before, on Gaile's talk page if I remember correctly. My understanding was that Gaile responded that it was not really feasible with the current game, though I can not remember the details of why, they seemed a little technical. Anyway, that's not to say it's not a good idea, I would love it, I miss the Factions background a lot, and it could be cool to bring back the old campfire of Prophecies... (Satanael 02:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)) P.S., this is also more of a GW1 suggestion anyway.

The future of easy page creation

With the experience we now have, I think it is clear to all that Aspectacle's implementation was too userfriendly. While AGF is good, this does not mean that every good faith addition is helpful. Moreover, perhaps to increase utility for those familiar with webforums but new to wikis, they made things resemble such a webforum. That have had the side effect of people thinking it is.

As it stands, the vast majority of new pages are bad pages. That would be bearable if there was a steady stream of good pages. However, as times pass and more of common and popular ideas already have pages, the amount of duplicate topics have exploded. It seem that people either can't be bothered to find existing topics, or are convinced that their idea (for, say, mounts) are so unique that it couldn't possibly already exist.

So what we have to do is to remove the createbox functionality, as well as the scratchpads. This would set things to the same level as the rest of the wiki. The upside is that we would get but a fraction of the bad pages, while an obvious downside in fewer good pages. As compensation, we should set up a page where people could request help in starting new pages, a service which, while it takes work, is not prone to creating bad pages. And I believe that we are rapidly approching the point where the workload in dealing with all the bad pages are higher than what such a page would mean. If not already well past. And that is still a service beyond what this wiki provides otherwise, so it would still help serve as an entrance for new wikieditors.

I'm not saying this must be done immediately, but I don't see this current situation as sustainable, so we should prepare for it. Backsword 05:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that making it more difficult to create a new suggestion will definitely help. Most anon users probably don't even know what that createbox is doing and are just filling in what appears to be asking them to fill in. An upside to this would likely be that only the more well thought out ideas will get added, since only those with a stronger desire to have their idea heard will take the trouble of figuring out how to add new ideas. Cutting down on the volume of input is certainly worth exploring as a means to keeping the suggestions more under control. -- ab.er.rant 06:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

What about removing the createbox and using it the way we have for the guild pages? When you go to an inexistent guild page, you get the createbox - same way for suggestions: when you go to an inexistent suggestion page, you get the createbox. That would at least require the editors, to set up the correct name. poke | talk 06:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I like this last idea, one of the things I like about the createbox is that it gives a semblence of uniformity to the format of the ideas. This uniformity makes the ideas easier to read and and easier to identify the ideas that have not been given much thought (if both the pros and cons sections are blank, it's obvious the person didn't really think it through when making the idea). (Satanael 08:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC))

I think that is a really good idea poke. --Lemming 21:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that'll help, but I believe it's effects to be minimal, given the horrendous "naming" that gets typed out. -- ab.er.rant 15:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

<reset indent>I recently submitted an idea using the current method - which I like a lot. I see the point about garbage ideas but my fear about making it more difficult to post a suggestion by having to type in the correct name is simply it might be too difficult. We would just end up with people posting ideas and feedback in the wrong places, like we have with skill pages vs skill feedback pages. Sure you could then remove any suggestion which wasn't done properly but who's to say they will be the worst suggestions? I can agree with making it a requirement to fill out all criteria in the create a page list and deleting pages which don't do that, but you would still have garbage proposals.

I know the wiki is run by the users but this is a topic which directly involves dealing with arena net. Perhaps it is best to ask someone, probably Emily, how the best way for us to present ideas to them is? She could also comment on how some ideas we might consider as bad are seen by ArenaNet. If they don't see them as a problem then there's no point in us deleting them. On a side note, I think regardless of what is done we are likely going to end up wanting some kind of suggestion vetting process, has that been discussed? 122.104.161.96 20:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Questions have already been asked on Emily's talk page. Vetting processes (as well as other ideas) have been/are being discussed on the community portal talk page. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow! That's a lot of discussion on the community portal. Um, anyway, contributors are becoming more focused on the rush to get their idea through than providing qualitative input into their suggestion. The whole point of these pages is to provide suggestions by contributors that are quick and easy for developers to read. I think that the developer's response will be very helpful, but they should at best provide a recommendation that we'd have to implement ourselves. Backsword's idea is good as long as people actually follow it, and I'm keen to help wherever it is appropriate. Even if it's just getting the idea into people's heads that this isn't a web-forum - that would be a positive step forward. But we must do something about this issue as soon as possible because it's only going to get worse as the release date nears and ideas become less likely to be considered. (Terra Xin 01:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC))

here's a very typical example of a suggestion that would warrant AGF (check the history section because I've already gone and edited it). It's ideas like this that should be outright deleted, but unfortunately it hasn't been suggested before. (Terra Xin 01:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC))

Reasons why suggestions won't work...

I'm very tired of seeing "GW is not WoW or Runescape" as reasons why a suggestion will not work out. Thank you for stating the obvious; we know that GW is not World of Warcraft or Runescape. Myself (and I don't even make many suggestions!), along with others - particularly the suggestion creator - would like to see criticism depending on if the suggestion is good, not if it's like any other game you might know of. azalea^chat 15:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I Completely Agree, but people will talk about and relate things to what they enjoy most, so as unfortunately, people who play GW and/or also play/ed Wow/Runescape/Any other MMo out there, there is going to be comparisons.

As it once happened on South Park "The Simpsons did it" I'll admit people have to expect slight similarities between GW and other MMO's but that doesn't mean we have to follow other MMO's footprints. Or That ( Have to quote because i saw it earlier today ) This is a logical suggestion.(Admittedly, upon proof-reading i realized I'm doing the -exact same thing- but replacing "not if it's like any other game you might know of." with any other suggestion)

Although, i must point you towards this quote, which i think justifies the suggestion entirely, and wholly for this reason i agree with him:

"GW players may be tempted to Meteor Shower some poor elve's face in." --Chaiyo Kaldor

Cetrius 15:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware that there are comparisons between different games. I prefer Dynasty Warriors 6 to Diablo II, and they are both Hack-Slash, but that's besides the point... People say some Guild Wars 2 suggestions - such as this, which I came across this morning - are bad suggestions because they are too much like World of Warcraft. Maybe it's true that this suggestion may be derived from WoW, Diablo, or Runescape, or, in some cases, The Sims, but that isn't enough of a reason to say that a suggestion will not work. We'll let ArenaNet decide if they want to add in new features of combined games. azalea^chat 18:19, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion of a complete unchanged feature taken out of a Very different game system will make GW, if implemented, a bad copy of the game where the feature is most prominent. A Good example would be suggestion where some one was keen to remove all map travel and instead implement Flying Mounts, most prominently Gryphons, can't bother to look for it now, that's a no brainier imagine having to run your way trough southern shiverpeaks every time you want to go to Forge, or having to wait 10-20 minutes to get from one part of the map to the other by flight. I have nothing against say semi manual fishing as seen in 2Moons where you actually have to reel in the unfortunate main dish, but having same fishing done automatically and you just stand there as seen in RS, DragonRaja and as good as any other top down MMO out there will most definitely not fit GW, while those games can't be with out it. Biz 08:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

That particular suggestion is a bad one in itself. A good example of how the unoriginality may be overlooked to say what's really wrong with it; it's downgrading travel. azalea^chat 11:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I am tired of users using too complicated to program as why it would not work to be honest, how do they know it would be too complicated to program? have they tested the programming? In that short spand of time that they posted the reply comments? Pumpkin pie 09:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Collaborating suggestions

The number of different collaborated-suggestions is increasing. Would it be more effective if we were to make those particular suggestions distinct from individual ones? Even if it was just a spacebar. It'll make these suggestions easier for readers to look through, so that they don't need to make a separate page... and it'll help us from having to sort through them all. I'm talking about these, 2, 3.(Terra Xin 12:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC))

All of them are supposed to be. That's the wiki thing. Backsword 18:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions related to other games

There are quite a few suggestions related to other games, such as World of Warcraft and Runescape. Should we have pages along the lines of don't repeat these mistakes and keep certain aspects from GW1 for other games? For example "copy these good ideas from <name of other MMORPG>" and "don't repeat <name of other MMORPG>'s mistakes". -- Gordon Ecker 23:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

If we place all of those suggestions into one article and give it a name like "list of suggestions based from other games", how would that work out for everyone? (Terra Xin 11:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC))

I think it would get crowded pretty quickly, but we could split it later. -- Gordon Ecker 23:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Where would I put the suggestion to add lots of rare items to hunt for that actually do something noticable to, pve only if needed. Every person I know that played this game quit after getting max armor and weapon and realizing nothing was left to get.70.100.90.27 04:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Some Ideas For GW2

I have a couple of ideas for gw2. The first is when you in town and you hold down the Ctrl and you see all the people in the game. Well i though of an idea for the people on your friends list. When you hit the Ctrl instead of blue. The people on your frinends list there names are purple or some other color. You can change the color on the compass dots as well. Instead of blue dots make them purple as well so you can freind easier.. The other thing i heard is gw2 is gonna be open to other nations where japan,usa,ect. are on the same area. What i think might be smart is have a Auto Key Translator. For Key words for quest, towns, missions, ect.. So it would be easier to talk to other countries back and forth. Well those are my ideas and i hope yea like them :)...

Later /wave elynks --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:68.98.117.177 (talk).

Noeditsection

The last time this was discussed, there was concensus in favour of removing it. If you think it should be re-added, please bring up the issue on the talk page. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Sry, i was trying to undo one of Backswords edit since he deleted plenty of suggestions w/o a proper reason. For some reason it doesnt allow me to undo that one... (Limu Tolkki - talk) 13:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You must have this page confused with some other: there was never any consensus here. Additionally, it's not hard to find voices against turning the wiki into a forum, so I highly doubt one would be easy to attain. (As such, your edits are in violation of GWW:1RR, but no matter.) Backsword 03:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

See the Signatures discussion at the top of the page. Removal of the tag was supported by The Cabal, Terra Xin and myself and only opposed by you. The other participant, Kakarot, made no statements for or against the proposal. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Removal of suggestions and comments

If we're going remove comments and discussions without archiving them, I think we should include a warning saying that we're going to remove comments and discussions without archiving them. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The last line of the 2nd paragraph? Maybe clarify it and put it into the bolded section. -- ab.er.rant 10:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"Suggestions that do not comply" clearly refers to failing to comply with the requirement that new pages use the template. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 10:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

At least, in case of duplicate suggestions, provide a link to orginal suggestion. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 18:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Moving the scratchpad

IMO we should make this page an index, archive ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Scratchpad and then move this page's scratchpad section to ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Scratchpad, using this page as an index, guide and FAQ for posting suggestions. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 10:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

It should be archived, and that was part of the plan discussed above. However, this probably means a whole new front page for GW2 suggestions. I've been thinking of making one, but those ambitions have not found the time they need. If that's done, this page could be moved, maintaining the page history. (Which is also good for the server for mass edited large pages like this. And then there is GW1 suggestions...). Backsword 03:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO the current page would be an adequate front page after splitting off the scratchpad section, although it could use some brief instructions for posting new suggestions. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 04:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Freedom

I have play GW1 for a long time now and if i can make a suggestion not related to any other MMO that is out there but is a major turn on for many of us and that in GW1 is not possible i would say "freedom". Do not get me wrong i love the story line of guild wars and all that goes around it but what i mean is freedom in the maps that if some forsaken reason i wanna jump of a cliff because my target is down there i be able to do it. the road thing on all the game is good u spend more time on the path to were u have to go but at the same time make the game rigid. I have been a player for a long time like most of the people that make suggestions here and if there is any aspect of any game that i have play since 1987 is the freedom of moving around even if is doing nothing and just walking, jumping and exploring. That be the main thing that i can say that GW fail completely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.119.20.17 (talk • contribs) at 13:01, November 18, 2008 (UTC).

Please post suggestions in the correct areas, it makes the lives of those who maintain these suggestions so much easier. Thanks! The Cabal 22:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Random question...

So I've been going through the pages and have noticed that some pages don't have reasons as to why they are good or bad. So what do we do with them? Do we just add delete tags and move on or do we add the reasons? Some examples can be seen here and here. The Cabal 04:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)