Jump to content
  • Sign Up

[merged] I want to keep using Arc Build Templates... :/


Recommended Posts

@Roquen.5406 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You're definitely mixing me up for this mesmer ... it's one of my least played classes. But even if I was ... it has NOTHINg to do with this thread anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 396
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Obtena.7952 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense, not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Roquen.5406 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@"IndigoSundown.5419" said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense,
not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Until you know the cost and the function they give, the complaints are simply speculation. I love the irony that I"M not adding value when all the complaints are baseless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense,
not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Until you know the cost and the function they give, the complaints are simply speculation.

We know these things, if you haven't seen the showcase video then maybe you should take a look. They are also outlined in their blog post about templates and the clarification from the dev on the forums as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@"IndigoSundown.5419" said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense,
not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Until you know the cost and the function they give, the complaints are simply speculation.

That's complete nonsense and you know it. We saw the function and we know the price range. Both are facts. The system won't change, not even a minimum because it was announced around two weeks ago and they said they need bugfixing (and a pretty heavy one since items got "eaten" by their system). Additionally the pricing was stated too. There is no speculation about it if you announce it'll have comparable costs as bag and bank slots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Roquen.5406 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense,
not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Until you know the cost and the function they give, the complaints are simply speculation.

We know these things, if you haven't seen the showcase video then maybe you should take a look. They are also outlined in their blog post about templates and the clarification from the dev on the forums as well.

No you don't ... you don't PLAY a video and you don't know the cost.

There is NO case for complaining for change if there is no implementation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

@"Vinceman.4572" said:We saw the function and we know the price range. Both are facts.

Facts that you didn't see them in the game. /thread.

Is your sole goal on the forums to, "win"? Why is this comment even necessary? How does this help you, Anet, or the rest of the playerbase? Anet showed exactly what we are going to get, why is this a point you deny?

Do you have insider knowledge and they secretly made a bunch of changes that will appeal to more of the playerbase? If so, then fair enough but with how complicated their template system seems to have been to implement, I highly doubt that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

'Green lit' in NOT a indication that it's not illegal

I disagree - green-lit means exactly what everyone understands it to mean.

No green lit doesn't not mean what you
understand
it to mean. It means what it ACTUALLY means: Anet allowed it to be used. That doesn't change the legality ... they made an exception because of the impacts other choices would have. You can THANK them for that decision BTW>

@"IndigoSundown.5419" said:Regardless, this post comes from a player who is decidedly
not
part of the target market for templates, albeit one who does prefer that consumers provide value for money -- and in this case, I don't believe ANet is doing so.If that's the case, then it will be fundamentally reflected in the revenue, which is how the customer/provider relationship has always worked (and actually does work).

If the price is wrong for the value it gives, sales will be low. THIS is why the complaints people have are dishonest ... they are arguing the price and value aren't aligned ... but they don't know what the value and the price will be. It's just a dishonest way of complaining they don't get their 'feature' for free anymore.

Honestly, may you refrain from posting here unless you actually want to add value to a conversation?

I'm good then. If you don't think being told the truth is value, then you can add yourself to the list of those that are using value/price as a ruse for anger over losing 'a feature' for free.

You are addressing an issue that I did not even bring up. May you please stick to the points in my post. I'm talking about inclusion of the players that want more function from templates and in the general sense,
not leaving out players that want to support Anet.

Until you know the cost and the function they give, the complaints are simply speculation. I love the irony that I"M not adding value when all the complaints are baseless.

I thought it was guilty til proven innocent?I always get those backwards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Roquen.5406 said:

@"Vinceman.4572" said:We saw the function and we know the price range. Both are facts.

Facts that you didn't see them in the game. /thread.

Is your sole goal on the forums to, "win"? Why is this comment even necessary? How does this help you, Anet, or the rest of the playerbase? Anet showed exactly what we are going to get, why is this a point you deny?

Do you have insider knowledge and they secretly made a bunch of changes that will appeal to more of the playerbase? If so, then fair enough but with how complicated their template system seems to have been to implement, I highly doubt that's the case.

Is this where I turn the table and accuse you of not sticking to the topic and not adding value?

You don't know the implementation or price ingame ... until it is IN GAME, PERIOD. Any complaints are based on what is NOT implemented in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

@"Vinceman.4572" said:We saw the function and we know the price range. Both are facts.

Facts that you didn't see them in the game. /thread.

Is your sole goal on the forums to, "win"? Why is this comment even necessary? How does this help you, Anet, or the rest of the playerbase? Anet showed exactly what we are going to get, why is this a point you deny?

Do you have insider knowledge and they secretly made a bunch of changes that will appeal to more of the playerbase? If so, then fair enough but with how complicated their template system seems to have been to implement, I highly doubt that's the case.

Is this where I turn the table and accuse you of not sticking to the topic and not adding value?

You don't know the implementation or price ingame ... until it is IN GAME, PERIOD. Any complaints are based on what is NOT implemented in the game.

Sigh, I really was trying to level with you. You don't seem to care about what's potentially beneficial for anyone. You just want to "win" whatever conversation you are having. There's nothing more to be said to you until Tuesday I guess. And who knows what your stance will be then - but I guess that's what you need to believe the system is what Anet showed us it will be.

Have a great weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Roquen.5406 said:

@"Vinceman.4572" said:We saw the function and we know the price range. Both are facts.

Facts that you didn't see them in the game. /thread.

Is your sole goal on the forums to, "win"? Why is this comment even necessary? How does this help you, Anet, or the rest of the playerbase? Anet showed exactly what we are going to get, why is this a point you deny?

Do you have insider knowledge and they secretly made a bunch of changes that will appeal to more of the playerbase? If so, then fair enough but with how complicated their template system seems to have been to implement, I highly doubt that's the case.

Is this where I turn the table and accuse you of not sticking to the topic and not adding value?

You don't know the implementation or price ingame ... until it is IN GAME, PERIOD. Any complaints are based on what is NOT implemented in the game.

Sigh, I really was trying to level with you. You don't seem to care about what's potentially beneficial for anyone.

I do ... I'm just not so presumptuous that I'm willing to jump into the fray of ridiculous discussions based on speculation. I don't know the cost and neither does anyone else so until then, I don't know what is 'potentially beneficial' ... and neither do you ... unless you are just one of these people that think it should cost nothing or next-to-nothing because they had a free version already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Trollocks.5084 said:No, I won't pay extra for something that should have been included in the base game. Don't speak for me.

Template Slots would not have been part of the base game is what I'm telling you; you would highly likely to have to buy slots just like any other quantity-based feature that have been in the game since day 1 ... I'm not 'speaking' for you just because you don't care to understand what you are being told ... so settle down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have my post ready for Tuesday, 6:01 CET, since apparently it is speculation to talk about the pricing and the function before that very release although both are crystal clear and set in stone. And no, I don't discuss about variances of 50 gems because that will be the next discussion point if templates are 350/550 and not 400/600 gems. I bet someone will come around and then say: But, but the prices aren't exactly the same of bag and bank tabs. Trust me. =)
We were talking about those threads here in the forum in our discord. For us it seems that some people are so deeply connected with Anet in an emotional way so they have to agree to everything the company is doing and it's not possible for them to retreat one little step as it would be losing their face. Ridiculous but funny. For me it's not worth to post here any longer (just the one on Tuesday), the dungeon, fractal & raid forum is a healthier place than this skritt show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop feeding the troll. At this point I think it's pretty clear that a certain someone is a bad actor trying to derail any conversation such as this so it ceases to be constructive.I get that it's very temping to want to correct someone who is blatantly misrepresenting yours and others reasonable points, or to address needless derailing via nonsense blanket statements/excuses, but nothing you could ever say will make them understand or sympathise, because they don't want to.

They are not here to discuss the features, pricing or any issues with that, nor are they interested in being productive in finding a better solution that includes all of the community, to make for satisfied customers in benefit of the long term health of the game.

It's just to stir the pot and it's unfortunate to see every discussion go out of the window as soon as they show up and are engaged with, as it drives away anyone who could still benefit from such a discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Delta's ArcDPS build templates exist would not be a problem IF release of ANet's templates was actually an improvement for QoL. As long as they will fill the gap and get closer to what already was free - all the problems of pricing and legitimacy of Arc will disappear. If this upcoming update was well implemented people would've paid for it. Here comes to mind the question " are they going to do something about it? ".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ the vast majority of gw2 do no use arcdps so it is a Vast improvement of QOL. For arcdps, the primary argument seems to be cost, and I can understand that, but they fail to see the big picture, every years costs go up, gw2 needs income, and players need good quality useful items to buy. These people need to remember they are playing with no sub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...