GW 2 Devs/Playerbase Twitter Discussion - Page 60 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

GW 2 Devs/Playerbase Twitter Discussion

15657586062

Comments

  • thruine.8510thruine.8510 Member ✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    You can only say what YOU experience, but you can't assume that level of experience is shared by all or even most new people. If most people didn't run dungeons originally, then in fact, most people won't run them now. The people who come here craving dungeons, because there were dungeons in other games, won't all be of the same opinion. And lest you think I'm just babbling. let me assure you, I speak to a whole lot of new people. I help new people in low level zones, but also run a guild with a lot of new people and indeed, a few of them do bring up dungeons, but far more new people just generally want to solo and don't care about dungeons.

    This game was never really based around the dungeons. It was centered, since launch, on it's open world content, and people who enjoy that most have found a home here. I personally never cared about or for dungeons even though I've done them all many many many times. But it's not my prime source of entertainment. It wouldn't matter to me if they were in the game or not in the game. So this isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for you and players who think like you. Which may be a lower percentage of the playerbase than you'd expect.

    Because some people simply ask and get the answer that dungeons were the original 5 man content, and they were replaced by fractals and not knowing any better, those people accept that answer and say okay fractals are the new dungeons and they don't think the game is shoddy.

    But then there's another group of people that still run dungeons, and they experience it differently because they still have fun with them when they do run them, but they're not so focused on dungeons. In fact, most people don't know dungeons are abandoned, most likely since more than half the playerbase probably not goes to the forums or reddit. They just play the game, and letters in their inventory or not, they happily ignore than dungeons are in the game. This seems to have been the case from the beginning.

    Lots of games have older content that either doesn't hold up to new content or the playerbase has given up on. That's normal for most MMOs, except for many, it's the open world. In this game we have more people in the open world, going back to the open world but fewer people in dungeons. What do you suppose would make more of an impression on most people?

    This isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for new players who are insistent that dungeons must be part of some diet that everyone eats. I assure you that's not the case.

    There's a flaw in your reasoning. The personal story, assuming all new players complete it, make the statement that the dungeons are important. You have taken this outlook that I've been talking about dungeons as a feature of games for being, well, dungeons. I've been talking how the personal story is so badly done with one of the reasons for it being so bad is because a major portion of it is locked behind a game feature which is ignored. The dungeons. Either fix the dungeons or fix the personal story. Neither one makes a good impression on new players as they stand now and just because everybody doesn't play them shouldn't mean those that do should have a bad experience. Removing a bad feature is better than leaving it in unless you don't care. I don't think they care as long as those playing the newest content are spending. Just my opinion of its issues. Its quite odd to find a game feature (dungeons) available in many games not have any interest in this one game. I think if they cared about them then they might have more interest from players. I certainly wouldn't have written them off so early. I tried to run them my first time through the PS and completely ignored them my second. It had nothing to do with not having the interest and not being directed to them (through emails). It was entirely the content itself which made the decision for me.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    JP doesn't speak for anyone else. She speaks for herself only. She likes to think and pretend she is noble, looking out for others, and doing them a favor with her actions. She doesn't have the capacity to analyze herself and recognize how she does far more harm to her claimed intention than support. She contradicts herself at every turn and demeans and sours the efforts of everyone else that is doing meaningful work to actually address the issues she claims to be fighting for.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @thruine.8510 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    You can only say what YOU experience, but you can't assume that level of experience is shared by all or even most new people. If most people didn't run dungeons originally, then in fact, most people won't run them now. The people who come here craving dungeons, because there were dungeons in other games, won't all be of the same opinion. And lest you think I'm just babbling. let me assure you, I speak to a whole lot of new people. I help new people in low level zones, but also run a guild with a lot of new people and indeed, a few of them do bring up dungeons, but far more new people just generally want to solo and don't care about dungeons.

    This game was never really based around the dungeons. It was centered, since launch, on it's open world content, and people who enjoy that most have found a home here. I personally never cared about or for dungeons even though I've done them all many many many times. But it's not my prime source of entertainment. It wouldn't matter to me if they were in the game or not in the game. So this isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for you and players who think like you. Which may be a lower percentage of the playerbase than you'd expect.

    Because some people simply ask and get the answer that dungeons were the original 5 man content, and they were replaced by fractals and not knowing any better, those people accept that answer and say okay fractals are the new dungeons and they don't think the game is shoddy.

    But then there's another group of people that still run dungeons, and they experience it differently because they still have fun with them when they do run them, but they're not so focused on dungeons. In fact, most people don't know dungeons are abandoned, most likely since more than half the playerbase probably not goes to the forums or reddit. They just play the game, and letters in their inventory or not, they happily ignore than dungeons are in the game. This seems to have been the case from the beginning.

    Lots of games have older content that either doesn't hold up to new content or the playerbase has given up on. That's normal for most MMOs, except for many, it's the open world. In this game we have more people in the open world, going back to the open world but fewer people in dungeons. What do you suppose would make more of an impression on most people?

    This isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for new players who are insistent that dungeons must be part of some diet that everyone eats. I assure you that's not the case.

    There's a flaw in your reasoning. The personal story, assuming all new players complete it, make the statement that the dungeons are important. You have taken this outlook that I've been talking about dungeons as a feature of games for being, well, dungeons. I've been talking how the personal story is so badly done with one of the reasons for it being so bad is because a major portion of it is locked behind a game feature which is ignored. The dungeons. Either fix the dungeons or fix the personal story. Neither one makes a good impression on new players as they stand now and just because everybody doesn't play them shouldn't mean those that do should have a bad experience. Removing a bad feature is better than leaving it in unless you don't care. I don't think they care as long as those playing the newest content are spending. Just my opinion of its issues. Its quite odd to find a game feature (dungeons) available in many games not have any interest in this one game. I think if they cared about them then they might have more interest from players. I certainly wouldn't have written them off so early. I tried to run them my first time through the PS and completely ignored them my second. It had nothing to do with not having the interest and not being directed to them (through emails). It was entirely the content itself which made the decision for me.

    Nope, no flaw. Experience. We ALL had the same statement, and yet most people still never did dungeons having had that same statement. I never thought dungeons were important. In fact, the personal story itself doesn't mention dungeons so much, just some emails you get as you level. Your bad experience isn't based on the dungeons being bad. They're old content. This is an MMO. This happens in every MMO.

    In an ideal world, there's enough development time for devs to do EVERYTHING they want to do. Happens in no game ever. Devs have to choose priorities and dungeons are not their priority AND NEVER HAVE BEEN. Not since day one. That's the truth of that matter. They were there, but they were not central to what the game was focused on.

    Some people come, and they've got dungeons on the brain from other games. It's likely to me those people will be disappointed in any event, because that's not what this game focuses on. Does it matter if they leave now or in a month? Not so much.

  • Slowpokeking.8720Slowpokeking.8720 Member ✭✭✭

    @Mike O Brien.4613 said:
    Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company.

    I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you.

    Mo

    That lady was over the line.

    However, I think Mr. Fries, while I don't agree with his opinion, didn't deserve such punishment. I feel bad for him.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Slowpokeking.8720 said:

    @Mike O Brien.4613 said:
    Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company.

    I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you.

    Mo

    That lady was over the line.

    However, I think Mr. Fries, while I don't agree with his opinion, didn't deserve such punishment. I feel bad for him.

    He chose a selfish, careless fool over his family, fans, company, and team. But please, feel bad for him. He deserves your sympathy even though he betrayed you and has no remorse about it.

    @Slowpokeking.8720 said:

    @Manasa Devi.7958 said:
    The kindest thing I can say is "I'm glad she's no longer around to keep doing harm."

    But I think what Peter got was a bit harsh.

    He got exactly what he deserved and chose for himself.

  • Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Slowpokeking.8720Slowpokeking.8720 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    He made mistake, but I don't think it's that bad with a direct dismissal.

    Probably because he's a dude, if you fire Price but not him there is gonna be "trouble" from stupid ppl. It's just my guess though, not blaming anyone.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Slowpokeking.8720 said:

    @Mike O Brien.4613 said:
    Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company.

    I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you.

    Mo

    That lady was over the line.

    However, I think Mr. Fries, while I don't agree with his opinion, didn't deserve such punishment. I feel bad for him.

    He chose a selfish, careless fool over his family, fans, company, and team. But please, feel bad for him. He deserves your sympathy even though he betrayed you and has no remorse about it.

    How did he betray you? How did he even betray Deroir?

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    And yet that "Protecc switch" was meant for JP and not his family or the rest of the team. He knew what he was doing, he didn't back out, and after the result, he still didn't care.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Slowpokeking.8720 said:

    @Mike O Brien.4613 said:
    Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company.

    I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you.

    Mo

    That lady was over the line.

    However, I think Mr. Fries, while I don't agree with his opinion, didn't deserve such punishment. I feel bad for him.

    He chose a selfish, careless fool over his family, fans, company, and team. But please, feel bad for him. He deserves your sympathy even though he betrayed you and has no remorse about it.

    How did he betray you? How did he even betray Deroir?

    Analogy time.

    You are a usual and known guest at a restaurant. You know one of the waiters there and they are kind to you. You chat about work and life sometimes and you have a decent employee/guest relationship. One day, a new waitress is working there and is now serving your table. You make a suggestion/request to her to bring extra napkins to the table since you use a lot. She goes off! Claims you think you know her job better than her. That she is the BEST and doesn't need to hear smack from anyone! Claims that you treat her this way because she is female. Responds COMPLETELY rude to you and insults you. Everyone in the restaurant sees it.

    Then you see that one waiter, who you know, coming over. You expect him to calm her down and help the situation, but instead he joins in and insults you, berates you, embarrasses you, doesn't support you in any way and lets you down. He makes all the employees and the restaurant look bad. Then she and he blame it on you by calling you a sexist.

    The manager fires them both. The waitress ends up blaming the restaurant, the entire company, claims only woman work there and do any work, and goes on vacation to treat herself. The waiter you once knew, goes on Twitter and pretends nothing happened. Gives no apology. Shows no remorse.

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

  • Soa Cirri.6012Soa Cirri.6012 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Cyrin.1035 said:
    You are a usual and known guest at a restaurant. You know one of the waiters there

    There's a couple of problems with this analogy.
    1. Servers are a combination of CS and sales. Their job is to represent the establishment and cater to every whim and pleasure of the customer, and put up with their kitten with a smile at all times. A better parallel to a server would be ANET customer service. A cook or chef would be a better parallel to a dev—the people who stand in the kitchen and make the food, but even then the analogy is pretty imperfect, because a cook is expected to address a customer's problem immediately (like delays, wrong orders, undercooked food, etc.), whereas bugs in games can take days, weeks, or even months to address. Writing devs are more like the people who design the menu and aren't even accessible even to customer complaints most of the time.
    2. I've worked in a restaurant—and anyone who has can tell you that servers (both male and female) are often (not always) devas, even on the best of days. But working as a server, unfailingly pretending to be everyone's friend for 6-8 hours and tolerating all of the kitten self-entitled kitten throw at you for not reading their minds, is incredibly stressful. Sooner or later, they will snap, and often at the worst times. There were servers who were rude to investors in the restaurant, personal friends of the owners who complained directly to those owner about the server's behavior.

    The servers weren't ever immediately fired for something like that. Were they reprimanded? Sure. Did the customer get consolation in the form of some discount or free meal? You bet. But in the end it worked out because if a business is not made completely out of glass that will shatter at the tiniest kitten-up, it can weather many, many such incidents before it even causes so much as a blip in the finances. Ultimately, where I worked had a reputation for mediocre service—but it also had a reputation for great food. And that's what kept people coming back again and again, even with servers who were occasionally rude. Now, if the servers got rude and the food was kitten, then there might have been cause to worry... but GW2 isn't kitten, is it?
    But to get back to the reason server rudeness was tolerated, it was because the owners acknowledged something that seems to often be forgotten: we're all human. But it's easier to attack a caricature than a human being, and while I have seen a lot of caricatures invoked in this thread, I've seen very little empathy. And that's pretty depressing.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Soa Cirri.6012 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:
    You are a usual and known guest at a restaurant. You know one of the waiters there

    There's a couple of problems with this analogy.
    1. Servers are a combination of CS and sales. Their job is to represent the establishment and cater to every whim and pleasure of the customer, and put up with their kitten with a smile at all times. A better parallel to a server would be ANET customer service. A cook or chef would be a better parallel to a dev—the people who stand in the kitchen and make the food, but even then the analogy is pretty imperfect, because a cook is expected to address a customer's problem immediately (like delays, wrong orders, undercooked food, etc.), whereas bugs in games can take days, weeks, or even months to address. Writing devs are more like the people who design the menu and aren't even accessible even to customer complaints most of the time.
    2. I've worked in a restaurant—and anyone who has can tell you that servers (both male and female) are often (not always) devas, even on the best of days. But working as a server, unfailingly pretending to be everyone's friend for 6-8 hours and tolerating all of the kitten self-entitled kitten throw at you for not reading their minds, is incredibly stressful. Sooner or later, they will snap, and often at the worst times. There were servers who were rude to investors in the restaurant, personal friends of the owners who complained directly to those owner about the server's behavior.

    The servers weren't ever immediately fired for something like that. Were they reprimanded? Sure. Did the customer get consolation in the form of some discount or free meal? You bet. But in the end it worked out because if a business is not made completely out of glass that will shatter at the tiniest kitten-up, it can weather many, many such incidents before it even causes so much as a blip in the finances. Ultimately, where I worked had a reputation for mediocre service—but it also had a reputation for great food. And that's what kept people coming back again and again, even with rude servers.
    But to get back to the reason server rudeness was tolerated, it was because the owners acknowledged something that seems to often be forgotten: we're all human. But it's easier to attack a caricature than a human being, and while I have seen a lot of caricatures invoked in this thread, I've seen very little empathy. And that's pretty depressing.

    It's a very basic, quick analogy, Soa. Not meant to be a point-by-point identical comparison between the two professions. But I do like the insight you provided on the comparison.

    It doesn't matter how rude customers are or what they go through. That's the job. What does matter, is what these two chose before, during, and after the incident.

    You seriously think the restaurant should keep this new waitress who will continually damage everything including the customers without a care in the world? Or the waiter who chose this waitress over them?

    JP and PF deserve as much empathy as they showed those two streamers. What's "depressing" or a more fitting word "disappointing", is people condoning and feeding the actions of people like JP.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

  • @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    And yet that "Protecc switch" was meant for JP and not his family or the rest of the team. He knew what he was doing, he didn't back out, and after the result, he still didn't care.

    My hypothesis is that no, he didn't know what he was doing, he didn't see that he made a mistake until it was too late, and he's still terrified to say anything for fear of bringing further wrath down on his head.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

    morrolan... XD

    JP and PF represent the company. They develop, market, and have even interviewed in public for an MMORPG made for many players. The moment you are part of something like that, what you say and do matters when your words can be verified.

    JP and PF absolutely have a relationship with Deroir and the playerbase. If you don't understand how that works, then you, unfortunately, do not understand the gravity of this situation.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    And yet that "Protecc switch" was meant for JP and not his family or the rest of the team. He knew what he was doing, he didn't back out, and after the result, he still didn't care.

    My hypothesis is that no, he didn't know what he was doing, he didn't see that he made a mistake until it was too late, and he's still terrified to say anything for fear of bringing further wrath down on his head.

    So, you are calling him unintelligent? I'd like to think he's a little smarter than that or at least 12 years at GW would have turned on a few lightbulbs of what is a bad idea for the company. If he didn't know he was making a huge mistake by supporting the insulting of a player, then that's even worse.

    Right... still terrified of bringing further wrath down on his head... Jobless, disgraced, 12 years down the drain... but yeah he's very terrified to say anything that might actually help him... like... an apology? There will be no apology, because he isn't sorry. He made his choice. JP and PF don't need anymore excuses. They need to be recognized for what they chose.

  • Soa Cirri.6012Soa Cirri.6012 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Cyrin.1035 said:
    You seriously think the restaurant should keep this new waitress who will continually damage everything including the customers without a care in the world? Or the waiter who chose this waitress over them?

    Well, I think it's preferable to use the devs=cooks analogy, even with its flaws. And in that case, I'd say: it depends.
    If a couple of cooks were on break and hung out outside the kitchen, and a regular customer wandered up and politely made a suggestion about the food, and the cooks felt impugned and flew off the handle at them, would either of them be fired?
    Did they come to work on time? Did they clean up after themselves? Did they do their prep properly and consistently? Did they do a good job as a cook? Did they fill orders quickly enough? Did they know the food? Did they mesh well with the rest of the team?
    If the answer was "no," to all of those questions, then yes, there's a decent chance they would be fired, but the blow-up would be more of a "final straw" or excuse to terminate than a decisive catalyst.
    But if one of those cooks was new, and the other one had been at the restaurant for over 12 years with nary a major complaint to that point,
    I can guarantee the more veteran cook wouldn't get more than a slap on the wrist at most.
    However, I think it's important to distinguish CS jobs from the "dev"-like jobs, because they require completely different skills. It's no coincidence that servers can be divas; their job is basically to be an actor. Holding a cook to the same function as a server, or a dev to the same function as CS, is like asking the director of photography to get in front of the camera and act. It's apples and oranges.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @Soa Cirri.6012 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:
    You seriously think the restaurant should keep this new waitress who will continually damage everything including the customers without a care in the world? Or the waiter who chose this waitress over them?

    Well, I think it's preferable to use the devs=cooks analogy, even with its flaws. And in that case, I'd say: it depends.
    If a couple of cooks were on break and hung out outside the kitchen, and a regular customer wandered up and politely made a suggestion about the food, and the cooks felt impugned and flew off the handle at them, would either of them be fired?
    Did they come to work on time? Did they clean up after themselves? Did they do their prep properly and consistently? Did they do a good job as a cook? Did they fill orders quickly enough? Did they know the food? Did they mesh well with the rest of the team?
    If the answer was "no," to all of those questions, then yes, there's a decent chance they would be fired, but the blow-up would be more of a "final straw" or excuse to terminate than a decisive catalyst.
    But if one of those cooks was new, and the other one had been at the restaurant for over 12 years with nary a major complaint to that point,
    I can guarantee the more veteran cook wouldn't get more than a slap on the wrist at most.
    However, I think it's important to distinguish CS jobs from the "dev"-like jobs, because they require completely different skills. It's no coincidence that servers can be divas; their job is basically to be an actor. Holding a cook to the same function as a server, or a dev to the same function as CS, is like asking the director of photography to get in front of the camera and act. It's apples and oranges.

    The analogy was meant to outline the betrayal aspect, but in the case of firing, that's where the analogy can be different. As you said, it depends. It depends on the class and reputation of the restaurant and the gaming company.

    Overall, what matters is if those two employees are now a liability. Does the company have to worry about them? For JP, the answer is clear. She should not have been hired in the first place - as she pointed out how they overlooked her behavior and ways. As for PF, for someone to do what he did given all the time he had there and having known better, he clearly made a choice, and a choice someone like him makes is going to be one he sticks by. Therefore, it was likely clear to Mo and the rest that he would still be a liability to the company and needed to go like JP.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

    morrolan... XD

    JP and PF represent the company. They develop, market, and have even interviewed in public for an MMORPG made for many players. The moment you are part of something like that, what you say and do matters when your words can be verified.

    JP and PF absolutely have a relationship with Deroir and the playerbase. If you don't understand how that works, then you, unfortunately, do not understand the gravity of this situation.

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

  • Loli Ruri.8307Loli Ruri.8307 Member ✭✭✭

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

    morrolan... XD

    JP and PF represent the company. They develop, market, and have even interviewed in public for an MMORPG made for many players. The moment you are part of something like that, what you say and do matters when your words can be verified.

    JP and PF absolutely have a relationship with Deroir and the playerbase. If you don't understand how that works, then you, unfortunately, do not understand the gravity of this situation.

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Most games in the Industry are not successful either.

    You know what, I do understand the idea of making things for yourself. Of course it also needs to be in the interest of the consumers, or else you have a product that will flop. But if you do make it big, one thing you need to look at is, is this product a niche, or is it a mainstream product? Making something new is risky, and may not necessarily be what customers are asking for, because it's new. But given that in this age and day, everything has been done before, the most you can do is hope to reach more customers with what they want, with as many players playing as possible, with a business model that reaps in the most profits to keep the books happy.

    Get woke, go broke.

  • Bloodstealer.5978Bloodstealer.5978 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

    morrolan... XD

    JP and PF represent the company. They develop, market, and have even interviewed in public for an MMORPG made for many players. The moment you are part of something like that, what you say and do matters when your words can be verified.

    JP and PF absolutely have a relationship with Deroir and the playerbase. If you don't understand how that works, then you, unfortunately, do not understand the gravity of this situation.

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    If you really believe that Deroir was being condescending then as a professional, boasting all that experience, within a role and industry that see's everything you do put front and centre for critique by your peers and your customers.. you could of, no you should of been able to rise above it and either act like a professional or simply said nothing at all... JP is fearless at stating she will instablock any rando as*hat who tries to do the same, tries to critique, tries to have an opinion other than her own.. but strangely she forgot that same tool was available to her when someone who dares to have a slight disagreement is in yours and hers mind, being condescending.. or is this just some selective double standard at play for a reason.... I say yes and call BS on the condescending paraphrase malarkey.. there was nothing of the sort.
    You don't praise someone you have publicly admitted you hold in such high regards to the point of considering a god within their work, then at the first opportunity (not even 24hrs later) set about public belittling that same god. No sorry that is just made up to pave the way for a narrative that simply never existed but it could create and angle in which JP could exploit to do what she craves most.. create controversy. It is who she is, it is what she does.
    She acts like a jerk, accuses who she likes, where she likes and for what ever she likes safe in the knowledge that once the controversy ignites and the topic is blown out of all proportions, she can throw out the victim card in the name of cause that she purports to support whilst becoming the very thing those causes are striving to put an end to every day.
    There is only so many times you can cry wolf before your credibility starts to tarnish, hopefully this is one such moment for JP, that's why she is doubling down to try and keep herself in the limelight and keep herself relevant for as long as she can in the hope others will rally to her defence.
    Good luck to them all who choose to sail with her as I believe she thinks she is so superheated with conviction every ice berg will melt in front of her now... time will tell.
    At least ANET saw that this person is bad for business and made the right call imo.

    Life is what YOU make it... NOT what others tell you!

  • Evon Skyfyre.9673Evon Skyfyre.9673 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    This thread is like a train with square wheels, it's not going anywhere. But maybe it helps illustrate a point, that we have come a long way as a species, and still have a long way to go.

    MsTrandentia - Leader of Tyrian Mystical Tours [PORT]

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then? But wait, let me guess, Are you going to say that you don't have to, that "anyone" should be able to see the condescension as others have done in this thread? If so, sorry, that doesn't cut it. You're issuing a conclusion using a word that means you have performed an analysis of his words and determined their syntactic role. I defy you to show condescension based on his syntax. For that matter, go ahead and use any other form of analysis you care to drum up to prove your conclusion.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • It's sad to me that two devs who were doing good work got the sack, what makes that even more sad is that it could have been avoided. I don't think JP and Fries were fired for blowing up at a handful of people, I feel like they pushed the issue further by the claims of "I don't have to pretend to like you in my off clock hours". Now most people can tell she was specifically meaning the trolls (of which there are many dogpiling into this mess) but once something is said on the internet, it never goes away and Anet would be forced to deal with, in perpetuity, the blanket statement of "we just pretend to like you". I feel like that is where the conversation went beyond the pale and forced Anet's hand.

    You can empathize with someone who just lost their job, and that's what we should be doing at this point. I respect Anet for doing what they have to and will continue to support them, but further demonizing or celebrating price and fries' firings doesn't do anything. While I def. feel that her reaction to Deroir was out of line, we should also look at what sort of things led up to that and show some compassion. I don't recall where I picked this up, but a saying I've quite liked comes to mind here, "you don't make peace with your friends". We don't have to like JP, and I think most sensible folks can't condone the reaction and subsequent aggressive conversation that followed, but we should show them the respect that all people are deserving of. Every time someone posts cheering the action, we as a community look like the frothy mouthed mob we are unfairly being painted as. We should take this opportunity to praise all the work Anet does and show our support to the devs that are still working hard to give us something that has made us all so passionate.

    (I'm not attacking anyone in particular here, I would just like to see us put this energy to better use)

  • Evon Skyfyre.9673Evon Skyfyre.9673 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    After much consideration, the fault in my opinion, is two fold. Poor judgement in responses, and poor judgement in wanting devs to interact. They are there to do a job. They can post on the forums via the CM. There should always be a buffer. They should always use a persona at work. If we all think about it and are honest with ourselves, we want an engaging game, compelling storyline, and fullfilling gameplay. We do not need to talk to the teams, they have work to do. The social media regs should prohibit any mention of where they work, on personal social media sites. Then you have grounds for termination of employees that ignore those rules. JP/PF are in the wind. Going forward my unrequested suggestion to Anet is focus on the game, and only the game. Like Jeff Strain a former founder of Anet said "Don't worry about what everyone else is doing. Make your game the best it can be".

    MsTrandentia - Leader of Tyrian Mystical Tours [PORT]

  • dontlook.1823dontlook.1823 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    Okay, quick PSA it's been couple of days I've had some time to collect my thoughts. And although I'm still jaded about the whole thing and I really still think the whole is just too polarized there should have been a strong middle-ground. I'm going to return in-game I've spent much too much time to and effort to call it quits like this.

    Some points I never got to make were
    1. JP Posted on Reddit about a topic about how something was done much like how a math problem is solved not very many ways on can one disagree - thats where the jadedness lies
    2. He is an okay fellow but he if felt so compelled to give feedback there is a thread under GW2 discussion titled LWS4 feedback. Simply as that.

    Fin. My apologies if I lashed out at anyone for any reason I genuinely connected with JP during the Guild Chat about month ago. Her boisterous enthusiasm, I felt, was an invaluable addition to the ANET team. Not to mention this most recent LW was off the charts in terms of narrative epicness. Because I'm a blind optimist, I hope she and Peter Fries have a chance for reconsideration that

    OR my Ultimate conspiracy theory: The next expansion is GW2 fractions and JP and PF have been relocated and now leaders of the Inquest. As it would make perfect sense since she named Rata Primus.

    More, more. More is always better. Chakata

  • Deihnyx.6318Deihnyx.6318 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    Did this waiter betray your trust and your relationship?

    No because Derroir clearly has no relationship at all with Price or Fries, let alone other customer watching it. And the situation is not analogous anyway because neither Fries nor Price are in customer service positions.

    morrolan... XD

    JP and PF represent the company. They develop, market, and have even interviewed in public for an MMORPG made for many players. The moment you are part of something like that, what you say and do matters when your words can be verified.

    JP and PF absolutely have a relationship with Deroir and the playerbase. If you don't understand how that works, then you, unfortunately, do not understand the gravity of this situation.

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Maybe these people should have a look at how it works in other industries. See if that behavior would be tolerated and even better, if they would get the internet support for acting unprofessionally.
    Communities are no more no less than a lobby. Just like any lobby they have some form of power to voice their opinion. It doesn't make them evil.

    Personally, when I read that it should be ok for professionals representing their company to act this way, it makes me wonder which industry actually has privileges over others.

    And I think we've established that the "condescending" part was at best a topic of debate, but not a fact set in stone. Many of us disagree that it was.

    (Edited to avoid double posting).

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @thruine.8510 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    You can only say what YOU experience, but you can't assume that level of experience is shared by all or even most new people. If most people didn't run dungeons originally, then in fact, most people won't run them now. The people who come here craving dungeons, because there were dungeons in other games, won't all be of the same opinion. And lest you think I'm just babbling. let me assure you, I speak to a whole lot of new people. I help new people in low level zones, but also run a guild with a lot of new people and indeed, a few of them do bring up dungeons, but far more new people just generally want to solo and don't care about dungeons.

    This game was never really based around the dungeons. It was centered, since launch, on it's open world content, and people who enjoy that most have found a home here. I personally never cared about or for dungeons even though I've done them all many many many times. But it's not my prime source of entertainment. It wouldn't matter to me if they were in the game or not in the game. So this isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for you and players who think like you. Which may be a lower percentage of the playerbase than you'd expect.

    Because some people simply ask and get the answer that dungeons were the original 5 man content, and they were replaced by fractals and not knowing any better, those people accept that answer and say okay fractals are the new dungeons and they don't think the game is shoddy.

    But then there's another group of people that still run dungeons, and they experience it differently because they still have fun with them when they do run them, but they're not so focused on dungeons. In fact, most people don't know dungeons are abandoned, most likely since more than half the playerbase probably not goes to the forums or reddit. They just play the game, and letters in their inventory or not, they happily ignore than dungeons are in the game. This seems to have been the case from the beginning.

    Lots of games have older content that either doesn't hold up to new content or the playerbase has given up on. That's normal for most MMOs, except for many, it's the open world. In this game we have more people in the open world, going back to the open world but fewer people in dungeons. What do you suppose would make more of an impression on most people?

    This isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for new players who are insistent that dungeons must be part of some diet that everyone eats. I assure you that's not the case.

    There's a flaw in your reasoning. The personal story, assuming all new players complete it, make the statement that the dungeons are important. You have taken this outlook that I've been talking about dungeons as a feature of games for being, well, dungeons. I've been talking how the personal story is so badly done with one of the reasons for it being so bad is because a major portion of it is locked behind a game feature which is ignored. The dungeons. Either fix the dungeons or fix the personal story. Neither one makes a good impression on new players as they stand now and just because everybody doesn't play them shouldn't mean those that do should have a bad experience. Removing a bad feature is better than leaving it in unless you don't care. I don't think they care as long as those playing the newest content are spending. Just my opinion of its issues. Its quite odd to find a game feature (dungeons) available in many games not have any interest in this one game. I think if they cared about them then they might have more interest from players. I certainly wouldn't have written them off so early. I tried to run them my first time through the PS and completely ignored them my second. It had nothing to do with not having the interest and not being directed to them (through emails). It was entirely the content itself which made the decision for me.

    Those dungeons the personal story refer you to are entirely optional, they do not play into your characters personal story at all...other than giving you filler information on the members of Destiny's Edge. Fractals of the Mists have taken the place of the "traditional" dungeon(what ever that is) but there's absolutely no reason to remove the original dungeons from the game because they do serve a purpose, for those that are interested in finding out the background of how you helped to get Destiny's Edge reunited...nothing more, nothing less, and if you don't find Fractals to your liking, then I can't help you.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then? But wait, let me guess, Are you going to say that you don't have to, that "anyone" should be able to see the condescension as others have done in this thread? If so, sorry, that doesn't cut it. You're issuing a conclusion using a word that means you have performed an analysis of his words and determined their syntactic role. I defy you to show condescension based on his syntax. For that matter, go ahead and use any other form of analysis you care to drum up to prove your conclusion.

    It doesn't need to be parsed Indigo, I've said before...it can be read as condescending, I'm not saying it is or isn't as it's all in the interpretation and the context you want to see the words in. I also stated I believe part of the problem is that English is not Deroir native tongue, it's a second or third or fourth language(you get the idea). I've also stated, that even though Twitter and Reddit and other social media sites state that part of their purpose is to allow open dialogue and discussion, that not everything people say or state is open for discussion, so I think they should all include an option for people to post something and do as YouTube does, allow that person to close Tweet or what ever to responses and discussion. There are often times I post stuff on my FB account that are existential stream of consciousness ideas and thoughts, sometimes they're open for discussion, and sometimes they're a statement, a final word have you and not open to discussion, but there's currently no way to prevent that without not letting anyone read it, which isn't the purpose of those thoughts.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then?

    This guy does a pretty good job:

    Basically Deroir is being polite but is actually doing exactly what Price called him out for doing, telling her how to do her job.

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:

    Maybe these people should have a look at how it works in other industries. See if that behavior would be tolerated and even better, if they would get the internet support for acting unprofessionally.
    Communities are no more no less than a lobby. Just like any lobby they have some form of power to voice their opinion. It doesn't make them evil.

    I've said it before but the degree to which people get sacked for being rude to customers has been overstated in this debate and thats even people in customer service positions which Price and Fries were not.

  • @morrolan.9608 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then?

    This guy does a pretty good job:

    Basically Deroir is being polite but is actually doing exactly what Price called him out for doing, telling her how to do her job.

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:

    Maybe these people should have a look at how it works in other industries. See if that behavior would be tolerated and even better, if they would get the internet support for acting unprofessionally.
    Communities are no more no less than a lobby. Just like any lobby they have some form of power to voice their opinion. It doesn't make them evil.

    I've said it before but the degree to which people get sacked for being rude to customers has been overstated in this debate and thats even people in customer service positions which Price and Fries were not.

    Basically, you are trying to spin criticism as bad.
    Nobody told her how to do her job, its plain ridiculous to even try to spin it as such.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @thruine.8510 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    You can only say what YOU experience, but you can't assume that level of experience is shared by all or even most new people. If most people didn't run dungeons originally, then in fact, most people won't run them now. The people who come here craving dungeons, because there were dungeons in other games, won't all be of the same opinion. And lest you think I'm just babbling. let me assure you, I speak to a whole lot of new people. I help new people in low level zones, but also run a guild with a lot of new people and indeed, a few of them do bring up dungeons, but far more new people just generally want to solo and don't care about dungeons.

    This game was never really based around the dungeons. It was centered, since launch, on it's open world content, and people who enjoy that most have found a home here. I personally never cared about or for dungeons even though I've done them all many many many times. But it's not my prime source of entertainment. It wouldn't matter to me if they were in the game or not in the game. So this isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for you and players who think like you. Which may be a lower percentage of the playerbase than you'd expect.

    Because some people simply ask and get the answer that dungeons were the original 5 man content, and they were replaced by fractals and not knowing any better, those people accept that answer and say okay fractals are the new dungeons and they don't think the game is shoddy.

    But then there's another group of people that still run dungeons, and they experience it differently because they still have fun with them when they do run them, but they're not so focused on dungeons. In fact, most people don't know dungeons are abandoned, most likely since more than half the playerbase probably not goes to the forums or reddit. They just play the game, and letters in their inventory or not, they happily ignore than dungeons are in the game. This seems to have been the case from the beginning.

    Lots of games have older content that either doesn't hold up to new content or the playerbase has given up on. That's normal for most MMOs, except for many, it's the open world. In this game we have more people in the open world, going back to the open world but fewer people in dungeons. What do you suppose would make more of an impression on most people?

    This isn't a problem for new players. This is a problem for new players who are insistent that dungeons must be part of some diet that everyone eats. I assure you that's not the case.

    There's a flaw in your reasoning. The personal story, assuming all new players complete it, make the statement that the dungeons are important. You have taken this outlook that I've been talking about dungeons as a feature of games for being, well, dungeons. I've been talking how the personal story is so badly done with one of the reasons for it being so bad is because a major portion of it is locked behind a game feature which is ignored. The dungeons. Either fix the dungeons or fix the personal story. Neither one makes a good impression on new players as they stand now and just because everybody doesn't play them shouldn't mean those that do should have a bad experience. Removing a bad feature is better than leaving it in unless you don't care. I don't think they care as long as those playing the newest content are spending. Just my opinion of its issues. Its quite odd to find a game feature (dungeons) available in many games not have any interest in this one game. I think if they cared about them then they might have more interest from players. I certainly wouldn't have written them off so early. I tried to run them my first time through the PS and completely ignored them my second. It had nothing to do with not having the interest and not being directed to them (through emails). It was entirely the content itself which made the decision for me.

    Those dungeons the personal story refer you to are entirely optional, they do not play into your characters personal story at all...other than giving you filler information on the members of Destiny's Edge. Fractals of the Mists have taken the place of the "traditional" dungeon(what ever that is) but there's absolutely no reason to remove the original dungeons from the game because they do serve a purpose, for those that are interested in finding out the background of how you helped to get Destiny's Edge reunited...nothing more, nothing less, and if you don't find Fractals to your liking, then I can't help you.

    It also might be added that the dungeons don't do that good a job of telling that story and you'd be much better off reading the novel (if you like reading anyway) Edge of Destiny which tells that story in far more detail.

  • Deihnyx.6318Deihnyx.6318 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    Well many in the industry don't believe that, they aren't making games for you and I they are essentially making something akin to art and to believe that they should be beholden to customers when not in customer facing roles is simply entitlement. Even if you believe they do they were rude to a customer who, when you parse his words, was being condescending to her, it doesn't warrant sacking.

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then?

    This guy does a pretty good job:

    Basically Deroir is being polite but is actually doing exactly what Price called him out for doing, telling her how to do her job.

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:

    Maybe these people should have a look at how it works in other industries. See if that behavior would be tolerated and even better, if they would get the internet support for acting unprofessionally.
    Communities are no more no less than a lobby. Just like any lobby they have some form of power to voice their opinion. It doesn't make them evil.

    I've said it before but the degree to which people get sacked for being rude to customers has been overstated in this debate and thats even people in customer service positions which Price and Fries were not.

    This guy starts off biased by calling the community a "mob", basically not recognizing that, just like every lobby, a community has a say in the matter and is not necessarily wrong (it can be, but it's fallacious to assume they are just because). Did the gaming community get called "mobs" when they tried to influence governments to ban lootboxes? Hell no.

    Furthermore, just like everyone else, he tries to focus on how condescending Deroir was (which can certainly be discussed, but in no way is factual) while "forgetting" to demonstrate how anything has to do with gender.... which is basically the one point that made so many people furious: Turning a matter of 'professional versus consumer' into politics issues (dare I say, opportunism).

    There -is- a precedent of people getting fired for burning out publicly and exploding on people.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:

    This guy starts off biased by calling the community a "mob", basically not recognizing that, just like every lobby, a community has a say in the matter and is not necessarily wrong (it can be, but it's fallacious to assume they are just because). Did the gaming community get called "mobs" when they tried to influence governments to ban lootboxes? Hell no.

    It was mob behaviour so its accurately described. And the community should have no say in matters like this. Staff behaviour should be evaluated against internal regulations, codes of conduct and whatnot.

  • Deihnyx.6318Deihnyx.6318 Member ✭✭✭

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:

    This guy starts off biased by calling the community a "mob", basically not recognizing that, just like every lobby, a community has a say in the matter and is not necessarily wrong (it can be, but it's fallacious to assume they are just because). Did the gaming community get called "mobs" when they tried to influence governments to ban lootboxes? Hell no.

    It was mob behaviour so its accurately described. And the community should have no say in matters like this. Staff behaviour should be evaluated against internal regulations, codes of conduct and whatnot.

    Mob: a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.
    You're assuming an intent of causing violence. Assuming. On my end, I see a crowd of people calling out rude behavior. There's certainly some people who just care to see the world burn, but you're assuming that's what the community wants. This is fallacious.

    A community just like any lobby has the power to influence, just like the "Jessica side" is overly doing it by having medias twisting facts whenever possible. One does not get the high ground on the other just because you say so.
    Factually though, the community didn't "vote" in the end. It didn't have a say in this. Literally nothing unusual happened there.

    Normal regulations in literally every industry is to treat a consumer somewhat respectfully. Even if you disagree with them, even if they're annoying. A disagreement (especially in that instance) is not a free pass to push political BS.
    A code of conduct will always tell you that representing a company in a bad way is a big no no. That some people conveniently try to make it sound that this rule is unclear aren't helping their case. If anything they even look LESS professional.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:
    Normal regulations in literally every industry is to treat a consumer somewhat respectfully. Even if you disagree with them, even if they're annoying. A disagreement (especially in that instance) is not a free pass to push political BS.
    A code of conduct will always tell you that representing a company in a bad way is a big no no. That some people conveniently try to make it sound that this rule is unclear aren't helping their case. If anything they even look LESS professional.

    It has actually become clear that the anet rules around social media were completely unclear and had not been updated since 2011.

  • Deihnyx.6318Deihnyx.6318 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 18, 2018

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @Deihnyx.6318 said:
    Normal regulations in literally every industry is to treat a consumer somewhat respectfully. Even if you disagree with them, even if they're annoying. A disagreement (especially in that instance) is not a free pass to push political BS.
    A code of conduct will always tell you that representing a company in a bad way is a big no no. That some people conveniently try to make it sound that this rule is unclear aren't helping their case. If anything they even look LESS professional.

    It has actually become clear that the anet rules around social media were completely unclear and had not been updated since 2011.

    Hence my call out that they look even less professional by claiming it isn't clear that someone representing a company shouldn't be blowing up on a consumer.
    You can certainly have discussions on how to protect your privacy, what is the process when you feel attacked, etc. But there's one thing for sure is that everyone is expected to know that you don't give your own company bad rep without consequences.

    I work in consulting and one of our guy got fired last year for being unprofessional on a client call. And it wasn't nearly as bad as that. He just had a condescending way of telling a client they were expecting too much (I don't have the details so I could be missing a few reasons)

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    Have you parsed Deroir's initial statement? You could share your analysis, then?

    This guy does a pretty good job:

    Basically Deroir is being polite but is actually doing exactly what Price called him out for doing, telling her how to do her job.

    All Mr. Teasdale is doing is offering his opinion. Not that I don't agree with a lot of what he says in general about discrimination, but I think he's off on Deroir. Sure, anyone can read anything they want into what anyone says, but that is not analysis, it's commentary. Deroir did not tell Ms. Price how to do her job. That was Ms. Price's interpretation and it is also Mr. Teasdale's.

    Do you want to know what Deroir's mistakes were?

    • Mistake 1: he made a clumsy attempt to engage someone he thought highly of in a discussion about a game he seems passionate about. Maybe that's down to his being a non-native English speaker. Maybe it's because he seems to be an amateur when it comes to getting people to talk about their work.
    • Mistake 2: he picked the wrong time on the wrong platform to try to engage.
    • Mistake 3: rather than just drop it, he expressed his disappointment with her response.

    Number 3 is the telling one. Had he said something like, "Oh, I can see now how you'd think that was what I meant. I'm sorry, not what I intended. What I really wanted was to hear why ANet doesn't use branching dialogue in GW2." I don't know if this would have mollified Ms. Price, but it would have cut the legs out from under those who later criticized her and made the situation worse after Deroir bowed out. Expressing his disappointment virtually guaranteed that the adds would aggro and the situation was at that point going to get worse.

    Ms. Price made a mistake, also. Had she said, in response to Deroir's initial comment. "I hope you don't think ANet's professional writers never considered branching dialogue. We don't use that option because <reason(s)>." Deroir would still be worshiping the ground she stands on. Ms. Price would have prevented the situation from escalating before it went past first base. Mr. Fries would not have become involved.

    So, what was her mistake? Reacting while stressed. Stress can have as bad an effect on judgment as alcohol, and is especially good at reducing our ability to act with dispassion.

    Fwiw, at this point, I also wonder if ANet management made a mistake. I don't necessarily trust the so-called gaming press. However, if the separation meeting with Ms. Price was an emotional one, then that would be a mistake.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:
    All Mr. Teasdale is doing is offering his opinion. Not that I don't agree with a lot of what he says in general about discrimination, but I think he's off on Deroir. Sure, anyone can read anything they want into what anyone says, but that is not analysis, it's commentary. Deroir did not tell Ms. Price how to do her job. That was Ms. Price's interpretation and it is also Mr. Teasdale's.

    This is all opinion, my opinion, your opinion MOB's opinion etc, etc. There's nothing objective in the debate at all.

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @morrolan.9608 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:
    All Mr. Teasdale is doing is offering his opinion. Not that I don't agree with a lot of what he says in general about discrimination, but I think he's off on Deroir. Sure, anyone can read anything they want into what anyone says, but that is not analysis, it's commentary. Deroir did not tell Ms. Price how to do her job. That was Ms. Price's interpretation and it is also Mr. Teasdale's.

    This is all opinion, my opinion, your opinion MOB's opinion etc, etc. There's nothing objective in the debate at all.

    There are actually quite a lot of facts. I tend to give credence to opinions that are based on them, and look with skepticism at the ones that fail to address them. In case you've forgotten, you were the one who brought up parsing, which is an analysis of syntax. Analysis is an examination of facts. Now, syntax offers little to the discussion, but when you talk about parsing, you are implying some analysis of facts was done.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • Did you know that I'm the reason why combo fields are color coded? It's true. I mean, I didn't personally program each of the combo fields, but it was a suggestion of mine. Back in the old forums I had a thread titled "Do what now? Or, why I'm no good at this game," and in it I talked about the absence of teaching tools for a complicated combat system. Particularly in contrast to other MMOs. I suspect that I'm directly responsible for a lot of things because of this, such as the dodge tutorials in low level zones, but color coded combo fields were one of the things I directly suggested and it is an idea that appeared nowhere else. On other issues, sometimes it might be an internal idea that I just happen to touch on, or maybe it is a popular complaint and I just haven't seen it anywhere else. But, those pretty little circles are mine.

    You're probably wondering what this has to do with anything. Here's the issue: if we directly take the line of thinking proposed by others here to say that Deroir has committed some kind of social sin in his tweets, and extend it logically to all similar circumstances, then we conclude that my suggestion for color coded combo rings was also some kind of social sin. Me, a non-professional, told seasoned professionals (many of whom are women) how to do their job unsolicited in a matter that is far more authoritarian than Deroir did. Not only that, but I've done it at least half a dozen times, making elaborate lists of problems and often having no real solutions due to a lack of creativity on my part.

    Never trust anyone who tells you not to think. When somebody says "Don't tell me how to do my job", what they are really saying is

    "You are not allowed to think about my work.
    "You are not allowed to discuss the philosophy of the work.
    "You are not allowed to make suggestions.
    "You are not allowed to criticize or attempt to criticize my work.
    "You are not allowed to tell me what you would like to see or would like to buy.
    "You are not allowed to question my decisions, even if they don't make sense to you.
    "You are not allowed to discuss my professionalism or behaviors.
    "If you have a concern for the game, for myself, or for yourself, you are not allowed to voice them or even have them."

    Which is all obviously very silly. The conclusion is that telling somebody how to do their job is a good thing because doing so produces good things. If you want to argue the contrary, then excuse me while I thump my bible here: (S)He who has never sinned may cast the first stone. Can you honestly say that you've never voiced an unsolicited suggestion or concern or criticism regarding class balance? Regarding allocation of development resources? Regarding game difficulty? Regarding WvW structuring? Regarding the economy? For any game you've ever played? For any media you consume? For every any transaction or exchange? And if not, have these unsolicited suggestions or concerns or criticisms never produced a good outcome? The idea is truly silly.

    It is obvious that Deroir did nothing wrong. There needs to exist some grand evidence to prove the contrary, and that evidence does not exist.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    And yet that "Protecc switch" was meant for JP and not his family or the rest of the team. He knew what he was doing, he didn't back out, and after the result, he still didn't care.

    My hypothesis is that no, he didn't know what he was doing, he didn't see that he made a mistake until it was too late, and he's still terrified to say anything for fear of bringing further wrath down on his head.

    So, you are calling him unintelligent? I'd like to think he's a little smarter than that or at least 12 years at GW would have turned on a few lightbulbs of what is a bad idea for the company. If he didn't know he was making a huge mistake by supporting the insulting of a player, then that's even worse.

    Right... still terrified of bringing further wrath down on his head... Jobless, disgraced, 12 years down the drain... but yeah he's very terrified to say anything that might actually help him... like... an apology? There will be no apology, because he isn't sorry. He made his choice. JP and PF don't need anymore excuses. They need to be recognized for what they chose.

    Why should he apologize for standing up for his teammate? This is the part that you seem to be missing, and I'm wondering if you have ever been a part of a team. You defend your teammates. That's the fairly obvious reason for why he said what he said. All of this "protection instinct" stuff is utterly absurd. He almost certainly would have done the same for any other coworker, and all of his former coworkers are likely fully aware of that (and so consider how his former coworkers must feel). All that Fries said was to point out that Price had not asked anyone for feedback, and that these were their personal twitter feeds and not official means to communicate with the company.

    The consequences of firing someone for standing up for a teammate is that the company has made it clear that not only will they not defend their employees, but they will actively punish any employees who chooses to defend a teammate, if ANet later decides that the teammate was wrong. I can assure you that no dev wants to work in that sort of environment. That will quickly become a toxic situation. Especially when the firing comes from the CEO directly, without even speaking to the employees' direct supervisors (not to mention the message that it sends to the supervisors as well). Employees will remain there only until they can get an offer somewhere else, which will lead to more churn which will lead to lower quality and missed deadlines. And it goes without saying that you're going to be seeing a lot more generic corporatese fluff from ANet employees from now on, no need to risk your job by posting anything other than the official company statement, since the only guidance they have is "don't draw Mike's attention".

    This is why the analogy to a restaurant is flawed, this is a completely different type of industry. You can fire a server and you will have a dozen more lining up to take the job who have nearly identical skillsets and there will be little change in overall quality. Most professional-level jobs are not like that. When I made a similar mistake as Price many years ago, my boss went out and hired more customer service staff because he knew that it would have been easier to find 100 CSRs, much less the half-dozen that he needed, than it would be to find another programmer to step in and complete those projects at the same level of quality. Is that fair? Nope, not at all. That's why many working-class jobs really do need unions. But a lot of high-skill jobs have a certain level of protection simply because those employees are badly needed, and the market forces work in the employees' favor. This is one reason why other companies in the industry are now focusing on putting out clear social media policies. It's not to try to keep their employees from embarassing them on Twitter, oh no, it's to send a message to their employees that they are not going to pull an O'Brien and tear a team apart based on a tempest in a social media teapot.

    You're seeing this purely from a customer's perspective. Employment is a marketplace as well, with its own market forces and its own PR. And unfortunately for ANet, that marketplace tends to have a longer memory and it is much more difficult for a company to shed a bad reputation in that marketplace. Employees do a lot more due dilligence than customers, they have longer memories, and their decisions have a much greater impact on the success or failure of a company. There was virtually no chance that a significant number of customers were going to boycott ANet because of anything that Price or Fries wrote. There is a virtual certainty that people who work in the industry will blacklist ANet because of the way that they treated Price and Fries. Choosing to side with a small but vocal group of customers over your employees is simply not a smart decision in an industry where you have to compete to attract high-level talent.

  • yann.1946yann.1946 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Jahar Shadowblade.8695 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Cyrin.1035 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Personally I don't blame Fries that much, too, for a few reasons. The Protecc instinct is a strong one. It takes an inordinate amount of soy to override that programming. Peter also probably didn't dig through the twitter profiles of all of his coworkers, so he wouldn't know her history. Peter is also on the left, so he probably also buys the line that discrimination is an incommunicable ethereal phenomena, and should be taken wholly on trust alone from marginalized groups. Or rather, anyone who doesn't look like himself. So, here is what I think what happened:

    Peter sees JP freaking out over something. Being a woman in his inner social circle, his Protecc instinct activates. He takes JP's madness as face value truth, then comes to back her with whatever post rationalization he can come up with. After all, he believes that he can't truly know sexism, so if an anointed one with unique knowledge calls foul, then clearly there's a cause that he just can't see. So he backs her horse and stands fast, assuming that she is in the right. It is only after events unfold that he sees his horse foaming at the mouth. But by then, it is too late. So, he attempts to bow out with tact, because seriously stay away from that horse.

    His true motives and beliefs remain hidden. For all I know, he is a radical, but his radicalism doesn't permit him to talk. But I can't help but see myself making a similar mistake once my Protecc switch is flipped.

    And yet that "Protecc switch" was meant for JP and not his family or the rest of the team. He knew what he was doing, he didn't back out, and after the result, he still didn't care.

    My hypothesis is that no, he didn't know what he was doing, he didn't see that he made a mistake until it was too late, and he's still terrified to say anything for fear of bringing further wrath down on his head.

    So, you are calling him unintelligent? I'd like to think he's a little smarter than that or at least 12 years at GW would have turned on a few lightbulbs of what is a bad idea for the company. If he didn't know he was making a huge mistake by supporting the insulting of a player, then that's even worse.

    Right... still terrified of bringing further wrath down on his head... Jobless, disgraced, 12 years down the drain... but yeah he's very terrified to say anything that might actually help him... like... an apology? There will be no apology, because he isn't sorry. He made his choice. JP and PF don't need anymore excuses. They need to be recognized for what they chose.

    Why should he apologize for standing up for his teammate? This is the part that you seem to be missing, and I'm wondering if you have ever been a part of a team. You defend your teammates. That's the fairly obvious reason for why he said what he said. All of this "protection instinct" stuff is utterly absurd. He almost certainly would have done the same for any other coworker, and all of his former coworkers are likely fully aware of that (and so consider how his former coworkers must feel). All that Fries said was to point out that Price had not asked anyone for feedback, and that these were their personal twitter feeds and not official means to communicate with the company.

    The consequences of firing someone for standing up for a teammate is that the company has made it clear that not only will they not defend their employees, but they will actively punish any employees who chooses to defend a teammate, if ANet later decides that the teammate was wrong. I can assure you that no dev wants to work in that sort of environment. That will quickly become a toxic situation. Especially when the firing comes from the CEO directly, without even speaking to the employees' direct supervisors (not to mention the message that it sends to the supervisors as well). Employees will remain there only until they can get an offer somewhere else, which will lead to more churn which will lead to lower quality and missed deadlines. And it goes without saying that you're going to be seeing a lot more generic corporatese fluff from ANet employees from now on, no need to risk your job by posting anything other than the official company statement, since the only guidance they have is "don't draw Mike's attention".

    This is why the analogy to a restaurant is flawed, this is a completely different type of industry. You can fire a server and you will have a dozen more lining up to take the job who have nearly identical skillsets and there will be little change in overall quality. Most professional-level jobs are not like that. When I made a similar mistake as Price many years ago, my boss went out and hired more customer service staff because he knew that it would have been easier to find 100 CSRs, much less the half-dozen that he needed, than it would be to find another programmer to step in and complete those projects at the same level of quality. Is that fair? Nope, not at all. That's why many working-class jobs really do need unions. But a lot of high-skill jobs have a certain level of protection simply because those employees are badly needed, and the market forces work in the employees' favor. This is one reason why other companies in the industry are now focusing on putting out clear social media policies. It's not to try to keep their employees from embarassing them on Twitter, oh no, it's to send a message to their employees that they are not going to pull an O'Brien and tear a team apart based on a tempest in a social media teapot.

    You're seeing this purely from a customer's perspective. Employment is a marketplace as well, with its own market forces and its own PR. And unfortunately for ANet, that marketplace tends to have a longer memory and it is much more difficult for a company to shed a bad reputation in that marketplace. Employees do a lot more due dilligence than customers, they have longer memories, and their decisions have a much greater impact on the success or failure of a company. There was virtually no chance that a significant number of customers were going to boycott ANet because of anything that Price or Fries wrote. There is a virtual certainty that people who work in the industry will blacklist ANet because of the way that they treated Price and Fries. Choosing to side with a small but vocal group of customers over your employees is simply not a smart decision in an industry where you have to compete to attract high-level talent.

    Will their are some valid points made. Peter didn't just defend Jessica, he also trew insults

  • fizzypetal.7936fizzypetal.7936 Member ✭✭✭

    What JP said (copied and pasted from her Twitter feed)

    thanks for trying to tell me what we do internally, my dude 9_9
    Today in being a female game dev:
    "Allow me--a person who does not work with you--explain to you how you do your job."
    like, the next rando axxhat who attempts to explain the concept of branching dialogue to me--as if, you know, having worked in game narrative for a kitten DECADE, I have never heard of it--is getting instablocked. PSA.
    Since we've got a lot of hurt manfeels today, lemme make something clear: this is my feed. I'm not on the clock here. I'm not your emotional courtesan just because I'm a dev. Don't expect me to pretend to like you here.
    The attempts of fans to exert ownership over our personal lives and times are something I am hardcore about stopping. You don't own me, and I don't owe you.

    Let’s say a man said the same thing to a woman:

    thanks for trying to tell me what we do internally, my dude 9_9
    Today in being a male game dev:
    "Allow me--a person who does not work with you--explain to you how you do your job."
    like, the next rando axxhat who attempts to explain the concept of branching dialogue to me--as if, you know, having worked in game narrative for a kitten DECADE, I have never heard of it--is getting instablocked. PSA.
    Since we've got a lot of hurt womanfeels today, lemme make something clear: this is my feed. I'm not on the clock here. I'm not your emotional cortesan just because I'm a dev. Don't expect me to pretend to like you here.
    The attempts of fans to exert ownership over our personal lives and times are something I am hardcore about stopping. You don't own me, and I don't owe you.

    Pretty sure that outburst of a man to a woman would have resulted in a firing.

    Now let’s remove gender completely:

    thanks for trying to tell me what we do internally, my dude 9_9
    Today in being a game dev:
    "Allow me--a person who does not work with you--explain to you how you do your job."
    like, the next rando axxhat who attempts to explain the concept of branching dialogue to me--as if, you know, having worked in game narrative for a kitten DECADE, I have never heard of it--is getting instablocked. PSA.
    Since we've got a lot of hurt feels today, lemme make something clear: this is my feed. I'm not on the clock here. I'm not your emotional courtesan just because I'm a dev. Don't expect me to pretend to like you here.
    The attempts of fans to exert ownership over our personal lives and times are something I am hardcore about stopping. You don't own me, and I don't owe you.

    When you remove gender from the whole equation, it still reads bad. Dev A attacking a customer – with Dev B jumping in to defend Dev A’s position. Dev B seemingly validating Dev A’s points. It would not be a stretch to wonder if these two devs are representative of how ArenaNet regard their customers. GW2 is 6 years old in August. There is a lot of competition for customers. The last thing ArenaNet need are rogue staff members going postal on Twitter.

    As of this writing, JP is still wearing the ANet badge on her twitter profile. PF is not – I can’t remember that he ever did. If JP thinks ANet is such a bad company to work for, specifically for women, why is she still sporting the badge in her profile?

    And those that think it is okay to treat customers this way, cool if that works for you. Gotta say though, if I’d been in Deroir’s position, being shamed in front of thousands of people like that, I would have reported JP to ANet. It would appear that JP didn’t give Deroir the benefit of the doubt before launching into her little tirade – bringing name calling, prostitution and gender in to it just for good measure. I wouldn't have asked for her to be fired - not my call - but I would be asking for some sort of redress for that sort of embarrassment.

    The least we as paying customers are entitled to, is a bit of respect when dealing with us - whether it be private or public communication.

  • The Knight of Hope.8023The Knight of Hope.8023 Member ✭✭
    edited July 19, 2018

    Imagine for a moment if the former ArenaNET employee here had chosen to be polite to the gentleman responding to her tweets instead of lashing out at him. Imagine how much better of an outcome that would have been for everyone involved: Everyone could have been happy to have had their thoughts heard, even if they had not managed to find a single thing agree about during the exchange. Imagine also if the gentleman had actually been rude, how foolish it would have made him look if she had just been humble and agreeable anyway. This would have made it obvious to everyone, like her or not, that the aggression that was being directed towards her was unwarranted. Not only would ArenaNET have taken her side in this, but so would everyone else, myself included. (ArenaNET said so in their statements after the fact.) Moreover, in either case, the situation would have been diffused instantly with no harm to anyone. The fact that this possible course of action goes unrecognized and is not talked about at all is a tremendous blindspot in the conversation we’ve been having about ethics in our culture as of late.

    The primary reason why people choose not to go this route is because they are motivated by a desire to prevent the other side’s thoughts from being heard or taken seriously. Smearing the character of someone you disagree with is a simple way to shut down conversation and signal to other people who are generally inclined to agree with your point of view to not listen to your opponent. This happens because many people fear the discomfort of criticism to the point that they feel they have something to lose if anyone’s point of view opposite theirs is allowed to be recognized as being thoughtful or reasonable. After all, if their criticism holds water we might have to expend the effort to change our views or how we do things. This temptation is also difficult to avoid in an era where we must interact with an incredibly large number of people on a regular basis but are still biologically predisposed to seek simple solutions that allow us to avoid such effortful and time consuming interactions.

    Compounding this problem, the victimhood culture and general nihilism which have been on the rise recently prescribe no responsibility to anyone to be kind. These ideas place no value on the positive results of people choosing to be amicable in negative situations, as if it were not even a possibility. This is because they arbitrarily and preemptively attribute all of the blame for any altercation solely to one side, giving all the moral authority to the other side, thus providing the morally superior party no incentive to try to seek a mutually favorable resolution. This forces every substantive human interaction between two or more people who want different things into a framework of winners and losers, a kind of zero-sum game where someone is always taking advantage and someone is always being taken advantage of. This is a framework under which few if any mutually beneficial relationships can be built and no lasting respect can be earned between people who don’t already agree about literally everything. Obviously, if we want to mostly stay out of each other’s ways, find mutually beneficial solutions to our problems or even just avoid fighting to the last man over every issue, this is not a good framework to base our society on.

    This is why the ideological assumption that everyone who happens to disagree with us must be a bad person is so dangerous: It doesn’t allow us to see the redeeming qualities in others that would make us want to choose to get along with them even when we disagree about something or find each other annoying. This also places everyone on one of two irreconcilable sides that must fight over everything, (those who agree with us and those who do not,) such that no one is allowed to be neutral and no one is allowed to resolve their differences without a knock-down drag-out confrontation. Such battles cost us social capital and the desire to cooperate with each other towards shared goals. To start them carelessly over things that don’t matter is wasteful and counterproductive. This mindset also engenders an all-consuming sense of bitterness because even when favorable terms are reached for both parties, such an ideologue assumes a less favorable outcome for the other party would have been more moral and appropriate, even if that vengeance would have come at a cost to themselves as well. There is a never-ending cycle of assigning blame, seeking revenge and rationalizing it afterwards caused by this which can never be resolved until this poor assumption is abandoned.

    Our greatest civil rights leaders here in America understood something that victimhood ideologues and nihilists need to understand today: They knew that if society was willing to tolerate the systematic mistreatment they were experiencing after the Great Depression upon exposing it and peacefully protesting it in public, such a society could not be forced to improve by other means. They decided that it did not help their case that they were valuable members of society to try to tear down that society in order to get it to listen to them. Things did eventually improve, thanks in part to this assumption. In the same way, ideological nihilists need to understand that if they presume our society or mankind generally to be irreparably wicked, then it is counterproductive to try to force any particular policy on such a hopeless set of circumstances. If one assumes the average person in a society such as ours cannot recognize better when they see it, then how are any of us deserving of any improvement anyway? How will any system function for a population of people who are that irredeemably evil that is not oppressive, grinding and dictatorial? And how can anyone be trusted with that kind of power generation to generation? The reality is, they can’t. So it would be better to either assume people are doing a little better than we’re giving them credit for, or that there is no solution short of trying to leave each other alone as much as possible. If the ideologues who are pushing this victimhood narrative on our culture today thought this through fully, they would come to understand this.

    To help them along in this regard, allow me to try to put all of this negativity and angst about the human species into context: It’s hard to imagine sometimes, but we currently have 7 billion people living on planet Earth. Most of us don’t like each other, to put it mildly. Yet, the extreme majority of us are doing the best we can to mind our own business, to try to eat, to sleep and to get by. The extreme majority of even the most disgruntled and disagreeable among us have never actually tried to hurt anyone in any meaningful way. With this many people around, if we were all at each other’s throats constantly, our lives would be much worse than they are. But our modern world is the least violent and needy we have managed to have in all of human history. In light of this, it makes far more sense to assume that others are neutral towards us until they have actively tried to do us harm. Maybe if we can start from this more reasonable assumption, we can better find the value in each other and in trying to treating each other well.

    (Edit: Added statement in parenthesis to paragraph one.)

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Did you know that I'm the reason why combo fields are color coded? It's true. I mean, I didn't personally program each of the combo fields, but it was a suggestion of mine. Back in the old forums I had a thread titled "Do what now? Or, why I'm no good at this game," and in it I talked about the absence of teaching tools for a complicated combat system. Particularly in contrast to other MMOs. I suspect that I'm directly responsible for a lot of things because of this, such as the dodge tutorials in low level zones, but color coded combo fields were one of the things I directly suggested and it is an idea that appeared nowhere else. On other issues, sometimes it might be an internal idea that I just happen to touch on, or maybe it is a popular complaint and I just haven't seen it anywhere else. But, those pretty little circles are mine.

    You're probably wondering what this has to do with anything. Here's the issue: if we directly take the line of thinking proposed by others here to say that Deroir has committed some kind of social sin in his tweets, and extend it logically to all similar circumstances, then we conclude that my suggestion for color coded combo rings was also some kind of social sin. Me, a non-professional, told seasoned professionals (many of whom are women) how to do their job unsolicited in a matter that is far more authoritarian than Deroir did. Not only that, but I've done it at least half a dozen times, making elaborate lists of problems and often having no real solutions due to a lack of creativity on my part.

    Never trust anyone who tells you not to think. When somebody says "Don't tell me how to do my job", what they are really saying is

    "You are not allowed to think about my work.
    "You are not allowed to discuss the philosophy of the work.
    "You are not allowed to make suggestions.
    "You are not allowed to criticize or attempt to criticize my work.
    "You are not allowed to tell me what you would like to see or would like to buy.
    "You are not allowed to question my decisions, even if they don't make sense to you.
    "You are not allowed to discuss my professionalism or behaviors.
    "If you have a concern for the game, for myself, or for yourself, you are not allowed to voice them or even have them."

    Which is all obviously very silly. The conclusion is that telling somebody how to do their job is a good thing because doing so produces good things. If you want to argue the contrary, then excuse me while I thump my bible here: (S)He who has never sinned may cast the first stone. Can you honestly say that you've never voiced an unsolicited suggestion or concern or criticism regarding class balance? Regarding allocation of development resources? Regarding game difficulty? Regarding WvW structuring? Regarding the economy? For any game you've ever played? For any media you consume? For every any transaction or exchange? And if not, have these unsolicited suggestions or concerns or criticisms never produced a good outcome? The idea is truly silly.

    It is obvious that Deroir did nothing wrong. There needs to exist some grand evidence to prove the contrary, and that evidence does not exist.

    Can I honestly say that I've NEVER voiced an UNSOLICITED suggestion or criticism...100% unequivocally YES. I've never, ever offered an UNSOLICITED suggestion for anything that did not have to do with the job I perform...why, because I don't know a kitten thing about the job. I have offered suggestions and criticism when it's been asked for, but I refuse to offer UNSOLICITED suggestions or criticisms, that's the easiest way to get yourself beat up(figuratively speaking of course) or dumped on. Even when I was a member of the Alpha team way back in the first couple of years I never offered UNSOLICITED suggestions, nor did I criticize anything...not until it was asked for did was that information put forth, but I did keep notes on what I might say when it was asked for. As far as I know none of my suggestions or criticisms have ever resulted in anything, so it's not silly to say that they produced a good outcome, because they produced no outcome. Also, I don't think responding to someone else's suggestion or criticism falls in the same category as it's usually stating why it might or might not work, or it might offer an alternative to the original suggestion(which I'm usually suggesting to the OP and not to whomever it's directed at). I think it's silly to suggest we might know more than the devs...we don't have the metrics or the numbers behind the metrics they do...which is a hell of a lot more important that feelings or other reasons.

    P.S. - I still don't see why we needed the combo fields color coded, it's not like you weren't told about them...but then I mostly play ranger so I guess it was easier for me to just figure them out(which is almost how I learn all things, I just figure them out on my own).

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @The Knight of Hope.8023 said:
    Imagine for a moment if the former ArenaNET employee here had chosen to be polite to the gentleman responding to her tweets instead of lashing out at him. Imagine how much better of an outcome that would have been for everyone involved: Everyone could have been happy to have had their

    You're making a lot of assumptions

  • @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Did you know that I'm the reason why combo fields are color coded? It's true. I mean, I didn't personally program each of the combo fields, but it was a suggestion of mine. Back in the old forums I had a thread titled "Do what now? Or, why I'm no good at this game," and in it I talked about the absence of teaching tools for a complicated combat system. Particularly in contrast to other MMOs. I suspect that I'm directly responsible for a lot of things because of this, such as the dodge tutorials in low level zones, but color coded combo fields were one of the things I directly suggested and it is an idea that appeared nowhere else. On other issues, sometimes it might be an internal idea that I just happen to touch on, or maybe it is a popular complaint and I just haven't seen it anywhere else. But, those pretty little circles are mine.

    You're probably wondering what this has to do with anything. Here's the issue: if we directly take the line of thinking proposed by others here to say that Deroir has committed some kind of social sin in his tweets, and extend it logically to all similar circumstances, then we conclude that my suggestion for color coded combo rings was also some kind of social sin. Me, a non-professional, told seasoned professionals (many of whom are women) how to do their job unsolicited in a matter that is far more authoritarian than Deroir did. Not only that, but I've done it at least half a dozen times, making elaborate lists of problems and often having no real solutions due to a lack of creativity on my part.

    Never trust anyone who tells you not to think. When somebody says "Don't tell me how to do my job", what they are really saying is

    "You are not allowed to think about my work.
    "You are not allowed to discuss the philosophy of the work.
    "You are not allowed to make suggestions.
    "You are not allowed to criticize or attempt to criticize my work.
    "You are not allowed to tell me what you would like to see or would like to buy.
    "You are not allowed to question my decisions, even if they don't make sense to you.
    "You are not allowed to discuss my professionalism or behaviors.
    "If you have a concern for the game, for myself, or for yourself, you are not allowed to voice them or even have them."

    Which is all obviously very silly. The conclusion is that telling somebody how to do their job is a good thing because doing so produces good things. If you want to argue the contrary, then excuse me while I thump my bible here: (S)He who has never sinned may cast the first stone. Can you honestly say that you've never voiced an unsolicited suggestion or concern or criticism regarding class balance? Regarding allocation of development resources? Regarding game difficulty? Regarding WvW structuring? Regarding the economy? For any game you've ever played? For any media you consume? For every any transaction or exchange? And if not, have these unsolicited suggestions or concerns or criticisms never produced a good outcome? The idea is truly silly.

    It is obvious that Deroir did nothing wrong. There needs to exist some grand evidence to prove the contrary, and that evidence does not exist.

    Can I honestly say that I've NEVER voiced an UNSOLICITED suggestion or criticism...100% unequivocally YES. I've never, ever offered an UNSOLICITED suggestion for anything that did not have to do with the job I perform...why, because I don't know a kitten thing about the job. I have offered suggestions and criticism when it's been asked for, but I refuse to offer UNSOLICITED suggestions or criticisms, that's the easiest way to get yourself beat up(figuratively speaking of course) or dumped on. Even when I was a member of the Alpha team way back in the first couple of years I never offered UNSOLICITED suggestions, nor did I criticize anything...not until it was asked for did was that information put forth, but I did keep notes on what I might say when it was asked for. As far as I know none of my suggestions or criticisms have ever resulted in anything, so it's not silly to say that they produced a good outcome, because they produced no outcome. Also, I don't think responding to someone else's suggestion or criticism falls in the same category as it's usually stating why it might or might not work, or it might offer an alternative to the original suggestion(which I'm usually suggesting to the OP and not to whomever it's directed at). I think it's silly to suggest we might know more than the devs...we don't have the metrics or the numbers behind the metrics they do...which is a hell of a lot more important that feelings or other reasons.

    P.S. - I still don't see why we needed the combo fields color coded, it's not like you weren't told about them...but then I mostly play ranger so I guess it was easier for me to just figure them out(which is almost how I learn all things, I just figure them out on my own).

    Here's a thread of you doing exactly what you claim to not to.

    "Self awareness is knowing when you're sitting at the throne of ignorance." --Leo G.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:
    Did you know that I'm the reason why combo fields are color coded? It's true. I mean, I didn't personally program each of the combo fields, but it was a suggestion of mine. Back in the old forums I had a thread titled "Do what now? Or, why I'm no good at this game," and in it I talked about the absence of teaching tools for a complicated combat system. Particularly in contrast to other MMOs. I suspect that I'm directly responsible for a lot of things because of this, such as the dodge tutorials in low level zones, but color coded combo fields were one of the things I directly suggested and it is an idea that appeared nowhere else. On other issues, sometimes it might be an internal idea that I just happen to touch on, or maybe it is a popular complaint and I just haven't seen it anywhere else. But, those pretty little circles are mine.

    You're probably wondering what this has to do with anything. Here's the issue: if we directly take the line of thinking proposed by others here to say that Deroir has committed some kind of social sin in his tweets, and extend it logically to all similar circumstances, then we conclude that my suggestion for color coded combo rings was also some kind of social sin. Me, a non-professional, told seasoned professionals (many of whom are women) how to do their job unsolicited in a matter that is far more authoritarian than Deroir did. Not only that, but I've done it at least half a dozen times, making elaborate lists of problems and often having no real solutions due to a lack of creativity on my part.

    Never trust anyone who tells you not to think. When somebody says "Don't tell me how to do my job", what they are really saying is

    "You are not allowed to think about my work.
    "You are not allowed to discuss the philosophy of the work.
    "You are not allowed to make suggestions.
    "You are not allowed to criticize or attempt to criticize my work.
    "You are not allowed to tell me what you would like to see or would like to buy.
    "You are not allowed to question my decisions, even if they don't make sense to you.
    "You are not allowed to discuss my professionalism or behaviors.
    "If you have a concern for the game, for myself, or for yourself, you are not allowed to voice them or even have them."

    Which is all obviously very silly. The conclusion is that telling somebody how to do their job is a good thing because doing so produces good things. If you want to argue the contrary, then excuse me while I thump my bible here: (S)He who has never sinned may cast the first stone. Can you honestly say that you've never voiced an unsolicited suggestion or concern or criticism regarding class balance? Regarding allocation of development resources? Regarding game difficulty? Regarding WvW structuring? Regarding the economy? For any game you've ever played? For any media you consume? For every any transaction or exchange? And if not, have these unsolicited suggestions or concerns or criticisms never produced a good outcome? The idea is truly silly.

    It is obvious that Deroir did nothing wrong. There needs to exist some grand evidence to prove the contrary, and that evidence does not exist.

    Can I honestly say that I've NEVER voiced an UNSOLICITED suggestion or criticism...100% unequivocally YES. I've never, ever offered an UNSOLICITED suggestion for anything that did not have to do with the job I perform...why, because I don't know a kitten thing about the job. I have offered suggestions and criticism when it's been asked for, but I refuse to offer UNSOLICITED suggestions or criticisms, that's the easiest way to get yourself beat up(figuratively speaking of course) or dumped on. Even when I was a member of the Alpha team way back in the first couple of years I never offered UNSOLICITED suggestions, nor did I criticize anything...not until it was asked for did was that information put forth, but I did keep notes on what I might say when it was asked for. As far as I know none of my suggestions or criticisms have ever resulted in anything, so it's not silly to say that they produced a good outcome, because they produced no outcome. Also, I don't think responding to someone else's suggestion or criticism falls in the same category as it's usually stating why it might or might not work, or it might offer an alternative to the original suggestion(which I'm usually suggesting to the OP and not to whomever it's directed at). I think it's silly to suggest we might know more than the devs...we don't have the metrics or the numbers behind the metrics they do...which is a hell of a lot more important that feelings or other reasons.

    P.S. - I still don't see why we needed the combo fields color coded, it's not like you weren't told about them...but then I mostly play ranger so I guess it was easier for me to just figure them out(which is almost how I learn all things, I just figure them out on my own).

    Here's a thread of you doing exactly what you claim to not to.

    Perhaps I should have posted that in the bugs forum as a bug and not as a suggestion...since we've been asked in the past to let them know about invisible walls and such(which doesn't specifically make that an unsolicited suggestion now, does it?), but then that's a matter of semantics...and nothing came of it anyways, so I'm half correct in saying nothing has ever come of such a suggestion.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • The Knight of Hope.8023The Knight of Hope.8023 Member ✭✭
    edited July 19, 2018

    @Blood Red Arachnid.2493 I mean, it also bears pointing out that one need not solicit responses in a public conversation on Twitter. There is no such thing as permission to respond when someone puts themselves out in front of the public that way. The only reason why anybody would claim that this is a thing is because there was nothing rude or unkind about what was actually said by the gentleman who chose to respond. It's telling that what was actually said in that conversation is still not being quoted at all in reference to the idea that this person was being rude or uncalled for.

    It turns out that there's also nothing inherently unkind about giving someone feedback about how they're doing their job, by the way; The most effective creative people want engagement from their audiences to find out how they feel about the job that they're doing. You could be technically incorrect if you were telling a surgeon or a physicist something that was inaccurate about surgery or physics, but creativity is not a technical field that requires understanding of rigid rules or rigorous qualifications in order to engage in it. This means there is no hard factual basis to tell someone that they are not qualified or technically correct when it comes to discussing or giving feedback about the arts.

    (Edited to add second thought.)