"Just Adapt"?... How about "Just Have Consideration"

[sephiroth.4217]

@Chaba.5410 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:Consideration is a unrealistic expectations from people of today. Just adapt,get gud and just dodge are all just troll replies by either players trying to justify or defend their broken spec/build or are posting just get gud or l2p on threads that players are either complaining about a nerf or are asking for a buff on a class they have a bias dislike for. It's always been this way and will never change, certainly not for the better lol.

So when the Warriors dominate the NBA, the response from other teams shouldn't be to adapt their strategies?

"Just adapt" isn't a troll response. It's the rational response to competition.

I rational response that can be used in a rational discussion yes true but also a irrational response to irrational discussions that are the norm here. As a example 3 out of9 classes could be blatantly over performing and dominating all other specs and one could just say adapt in response :) or instead of nerfing permastealth DE's arenet could have buffed their stealth and damage more and us thieves could have simply replied that all the players just need to adapt or get gud lol

Given the vagueness of the original post, examples we could come up with become meaningless. Both sentiments become correct. Nuance is lost as the OP attempts to hammer in one specific sentiment for a wide variety of situations like a blunt tool.

I apologize if I came across as vague in the OP. I'll try to break it down for anyone else that ether are not getting the full picture or misunderstanding what I'm really saying.

So basically, of course we are gonna have to adapt if we are going to continue playing the game :)I am saying we shouldn't "Just Adapt" when playing the game. We should consider what we are actually adapting into before we actually do it. Otherwise the game starts to become meaningless if people are just adapting for the sake of it.

In doing so... We should not just assume what is at the other end of that adaptation process... Is always going to be without fault. It should be worthy of adaptation by at least basic moral standards firstly. So that people can make a

healthy

adaptation.

• A somewhat recent example of this... Warclaw. I have no issues ultimately with it's existence. However, I would see people type to other's with a legit problem basically say... "Just Adapt". And this was also during when Warclaw could hop over gates much easier and before @Anet recognized it. Certain people would defend the thing up and down as if it were without "fault". Now, I didn't want to add a Warclaw example here, but it's one of the recent I can think of at this time.

So IMO, No... We should not "Just Adapt" into things. We should have consideration over what we are adapting into at all times.Now, if someone chooses not to... They can go for it, but I certainly will not follow. I'll stick with having consideration.

You shouldnt have to explain common sense but well done.

What are you going on about? Go back through this thread and count how many different interpretations of the original post was given. It jumps from "opinions" and "something they just don't like" to tangible changes to skills/traits to bugs and exploits with new things as everyone trying to guess what is being said and discover different situations it applies to.

I like what Trise above wrote the most. Consideration of the facts of game mechanics IS adaptation. That is something far different from considering a different opinion.

Well if you pressure someone for 8 different responses to describe the colour red, chances are that some descriptions may vary.

But I dont need a thesis as to why the sun rose, I can understand that opinions and not liking something is actually the same thing.

[EremiteAngel.9765]

@LetoII.3782 said:Everyone would like the fotm cycle to end on their build

Not for necro roamers though. We like being the underdogs and keeling the fotm classes. You won't find us complaining about balance much.

[Whiteout.1975]

@"Trise.2865" said:Using "consideration" to shape an adaptation does not significantly differ from "adaptation". The core implication is that one is passive while the other is active, yet both are and must be active. One cannot "adapt" without examining and "considering" the conditions to which they adapt. Conversely, the "consideration" of an environment is itself an adaptation, determining when and how to utilize that information.

This is a tautology disguised as epiphany, hence the arguments.

Well written :+1: , but I unfortunately must disagree...So the question becomes is it possible to adapt... Without careful thought (consideration)?

Well, for instance... Someone could have just have an initial thought about adapting to something... Go right into it... And still end up adapting to it.Someone could also have careful thought(s)... End up ignoring those thoughts... Just act... And still end up adapting to something.Someone could also not have a direct thought... Make an initial subconscious or instinctual choice... And still end up adapting.

Ether which way... Each scenario abandons the value of what it means to have consideration... because they do not develop a real "care" over that to which they are adapting to. Now, they may find that suitable somehow maybe, but I don't find that ultimately very meaningful or generally wise to stay on such a path... because that's how "care" get's lost and problems (including potential problems) overlooked.

So the answer appears that it is possible, but I think where we can both agree is that generally, if given the opportunity... Careful thought (consideration) should happen for a greater chance or opportunity at a better outcome. And that's kinda my main point. This is a great discussion though... Thank You :)

[Whiteout.1975]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:Consideration is a unrealistic expectations from people of today. Just adapt,get gud and just dodge are all just troll replies by either players trying to justify or defend their broken spec/build or are posting just get gud or l2p on threads that players are either complaining about a nerf or are asking for a buff on a class they have a bias dislike for. It's always been this way and will never change, certainly not for the better lol.

So when the Warriors dominate the NBA, the response from other teams shouldn't be to adapt their strategies?

"Just adapt" isn't a troll response. It's the rational response to competition.

I rational response that can be used in a rational discussion yes true but also a irrational response to irrational discussions that are the norm here. As a example 3 out of9 classes could be blatantly over performing and dominating all other specs and one could just say adapt in response :) or instead of nerfing permastealth DE's arenet could have buffed their stealth and damage more and us thieves could have simply replied that all the players just need to adapt or get gud lol

Given the vagueness of the original post, examples we could come up with become meaningless. Both sentiments become correct. Nuance is lost as the OP attempts to hammer in one specific sentiment for a wide variety of situations like a blunt tool.

I apologize if I came across as vague in the OP. I'll try to break it down for anyone else that ether are not getting the full picture or misunderstanding what I'm really saying.

So basically, of course we are gonna have to adapt if we are going to continue playing the game :)I am saying we shouldn't "Just Adapt" when playing the game. We should consider what we are actually adapting into before we actually do it. Otherwise the game starts to become meaningless if people are just adapting for the sake of it.

In doing so... We should not just assume what is at the other end of that adaptation process... Is always going to be without fault. It should be worthy of adaptation by at least basic moral standards firstly. So that people can make a

healthy

adaptation.

• A somewhat recent example of this... Warclaw. I have no issues ultimately with it's existence. However, I would see people type to other's with a legit problem basically say... "Just Adapt". And this was also during when Warclaw could hop over gates much easier and before @Anet recognized it. Certain people would defend the thing up and down as if it were without "fault". Now, I didn't want to add a Warclaw example here, but it's one of the recent I can think of at this time.

So IMO, No... We should not "Just Adapt" into things. We should have consideration over what we are adapting into at all times.Now, if someone chooses not to... They can go for it, but I certainly will not follow. I'll stick with having consideration.

You shouldnt have to explain common sense but well done.

What are you going on about? Go back through this thread and count how many different interpretations of the original post was given. It jumps from "opinions" and "something they just don't like" to tangible changes to skills/traits to bugs and exploits with new things as everyone trying to guess what is being said and discover different situations it applies to.

I like what Trise above wrote the most. Consideration of the facts of game mechanics IS adaptation. That is something far different from considering a different opinion.

Well if you pressure someone for 8 different responses to describe the colour red, chances are that some descriptions may vary.

But I dont need a thesis as to why the sun rose, I can understand that opinions and not liking something is actually the same thing.

Lol, yes it is quite hard to give one response when people are asking for different versions of it. Some of which are things that I never said to begin with :anguished:

[Whiteout.1975]

@Chaba.5410 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:Consideration is a unrealistic expectations from people of today. Just adapt,get gud and just dodge are all just troll replies by either players trying to justify or defend their broken spec/build or are posting just get gud or l2p on threads that players are either complaining about a nerf or are asking for a buff on a class they have a bias dislike for. It's always been this way and will never change, certainly not for the better lol.

So when the Warriors dominate the NBA, the response from other teams shouldn't be to adapt their strategies?

"Just adapt" isn't a troll response. It's the rational response to competition.

I rational response that can be used in a rational discussion yes true but also a irrational response to irrational discussions that are the norm here. As a example 3 out of9 classes could be blatantly over performing and dominating all other specs and one could just say adapt in response :) or instead of nerfing permastealth DE's arenet could have buffed their stealth and damage more and us thieves could have simply replied that all the players just need to adapt or get gud lol

Given the vagueness of the original post, examples we could come up with become meaningless. Both sentiments become correct. Nuance is lost as the OP attempts to hammer in one specific sentiment for a wide variety of situations like a blunt tool.

I apologize if I came across as vague in the OP. I'll try to break it down for anyone else that ether are not getting the full picture or misunderstanding what I'm really saying.

So basically, of course we are gonna have to adapt if we are going to continue playing the game :)I am saying we shouldn't "Just Adapt" when playing the game. We should consider what we are actually adapting into before we actually do it. Otherwise the game starts to become meaningless if people are just adapting for the sake of it.

In doing so... We should not just assume what is at the other end of that adaptation process... Is always going to be without fault. It should be worthy of adaptation by at least basic moral standards firstly. So that people can make a

healthy

adaptation.

• A somewhat recent example of this... Warclaw. I have no issues ultimately with it's existence. However, I would see people type to other's with a legit problem basically say... "Just Adapt". And this was also during when Warclaw could hop over gates much easier and before @Anet recognized it. Certain people would defend the thing up and down as if it were without "fault". Now, I didn't want to add a Warclaw example here, but it's one of the recent I can think of at this time.

So IMO, No... We should not "Just Adapt" into things. We should have consideration over what we are adapting into at all times.Now, if someone chooses not to... They can go for it, but I certainly will not follow. I'll stick with having consideration.

You shouldnt have to explain common sense but well done.

What are you going on about? Go back through this thread and count how many different interpretations of the original post was given. It jumps from "opinions" and "something they just don't like" to tangible changes to skills/traits to bugs and exploits with new things as everyone trying to guess what is being said and discover different situations it applies to.

I like what Trise above wrote the most. Consideration of the facts of game mechanics IS adaptation. That is something far different from considering a different opinion.

I can only help people's interpretations so much. Could I have done a better job? Perhaps... But I never claim to be perfect. For me, I was writing based on how the phrase often present's itself and saw this as enough. I did not view any unique situations in regards to where particularly necessary at this point... because it was just around "how" that phrase is often dished out in the context I originally presented it. If that was not enough for some people to grasp... Oh well it happens :#

I'll add my clarification in the OP since it appears necessary.

[Wiler.9873]

@"Gop.8713" said:In a PvP game mode where all the players are playing with the same rule set not all the breaks are going to go your way and adaptation is the only rational response. So if the OP is trying to remind everyone that having some consideration for the players who got the break next time something goes against you might make it easier for you to adapt, I'd agree . . .

Nobody cares about PvP and I don't know why people keeps bringing it to the table, in PVP you have everything unlocked and any nerf/buff can be ignored because you have everything there to make it work, now when you touch PvE and WvW then is when people "reeee" and with legit reasons, you have to spend your resources on runes, armor, sigils, weapons, etc, ditch away your old gear and sometimes your class goes to the shit so bad NOBODY wants you in their party, an example that almost gave me a STD was getting revenant out of meta almost 2 FREAKING YEARS when raids were released and I was forced to play things I don't enjoy not have fun with them, and whats the point of a game? to have fun.

I particulary hate nerf, I consider them toxic and bad for the game health and have had this argument in other games before, when you nerf something you take away options from the players you limit them or straigth up kill them, the right thing to do would be to buff everything else give the player more options, nothing is overpowered where everything is overpowered and you also stop having the "THIS IS THE ONLY VIABLE BUILD FOR THIS" issue to something you can change to the best as a situational requirement.

[LucianDK.8615]

Change is the essence of an mmo, if you cant cope with it, then its not a genre for you. If there was no changes it would grow stale.

[LetoII.3782]

@EremiteAngel.9765 said:

@LetoII.3782 said:Everyone would like the fotm cycle to end on their build

Not for necro roamers though. We like being the underdogs and keeling the fotm classes. You won't find us complaining about balance much.

Everyone also thinks it's the builds fault.

[Gop.8713]

@Wiler.9873 said:

@"Gop.8713" said:In a PvP game mode where all the players are playing with the same rule set not all the breaks are going to go your way and adaptation is the only rational response. So if the OP is trying to remind everyone that having some consideration for the players who got the break next time something goes against you might make it easier for you to adapt, I'd agree . . .

Nobody cares about PvP and I don't know why people keeps bringing it to the table, in PVP you have everything unlocked and any nerf/buff can be ignored because you have everything there to make it work, now when you touch PvE and WvW then is when people "reeee" and with legit reasons, you have to spend your resources on runes, armor, sigils, weapons, etc, ditch away your old gear and sometimes your class goes to the kitten so bad NOBODY wants you in their party, an example that almost gave me a STD was getting revenant out of meta almost 2 FREAKING YEARS when raids were released and I was forced to play things I don't enjoy not have fun with them, and whats the point of a game? to have fun.

I particulary hate nerf, I consider them toxic and bad for the game health and have had this argument in other games before, when you nerf something you take away options from the players you limit them or straigth up kill them, the right thing to do would be to buff everything else give the player more options, nothing is overpowered where everything is overpowered and you also stop having the "THIS IS THE ONLY VIABLE BUILD FOR THIS" issue to something you can change to the best as a situational requirement.

WvW is PvP. Ppl are talking about it bc the OP put this in the WvW section. If it was in a PvE section I would respond differently, and if it was in sPvP I wouldn't respond at all bc I don't do sPvP :p

[Vayne.8563]

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:Consideration is a unrealistic expectations from people of today. Just adapt,get gud and just dodge are all just troll replies by either players trying to justify or defend their broken spec/build or are posting just get gud or l2p on threads that players are either complaining about a nerf or are asking for a buff on a class they have a bias dislike for. It's always been this way and will never change, certainly not for the better lol.

So when the Warriors dominate the NBA, the response from other teams shouldn't be to adapt their strategies?

"Just adapt" isn't a troll response. It's the rational response to competition.

I rational response that can be used in a rational discussion yes true but also a irrational response to irrational discussions that are the norm here. As a example 3 out of9 classes could be blatantly over performing and dominating all other specs and one could just say adapt in response :) or instead of nerfing permastealth DE's arenet could have buffed their stealth and damage more and us thieves could have simply replied that all the players just need to adapt or get gud lol

Given the vagueness of the original post, examples we could come up with become meaningless. Both sentiments become correct. Nuance is lost as the OP attempts to hammer in one specific sentiment for a wide variety of situations like a blunt tool.

I apologize if I came across as vague in the OP. I'll try to break it down for anyone else that ether are not getting the full picture or misunderstanding what I'm really saying.

So basically, of course we are gonna have to adapt if we are going to continue playing the game :)I am saying we shouldn't "Just Adapt" when playing the game. We should consider what we are actually adapting into before we actually do it. Otherwise the game starts to become meaningless if people are just adapting for the sake of it.

In doing so... We should not just assume what is at the other end of that adaptation process... Is always going to be without fault. It should be worthy of adaptation by at least basic moral standards firstly. So that people can make a

healthy

adaptation.

• A somewhat recent example of this... Warclaw. I have no issues ultimately with it's existence. However, I would see people type to other's with a legit problem basically say... "Just Adapt". And this was also during when Warclaw could hop over gates much easier and before @Anet recognized it. Certain people would defend the thing up and down as if it were without "fault". Now, I didn't want to add a Warclaw example here, but it's one of the recent I can think of at this time.

So IMO, No... We should not "Just Adapt" into things. We should have consideration over what we are adapting into at all times.Now, if someone chooses not to... They can go for it, but I certainly will not follow. I'll stick with having consideration.

The problem I have is with words without fault. Of course there's fault. There's always fault. From one point of view. And from another point of view, things might be fine and dandy. Some people care about specific things, and some people don't care about those things at all. Warclaw didn't destroy WvW for me personally but I see a lot of complaints about it. I don't reply to most complaints on the forums, unless they contain misinformation or they're phrased in a misleading way, or they're aggressive to the point where the issue is more about how something is being said.

My point remains. You want everyone to be more considerate. But the world is filled with people who aren't considerate. There are trolls in the world. They'll troll no matter what anyone says. There are people who are more considerate who will consider things. You're not wrong for wanting people to be more considerate. But in my experience a post on the net, pretty much any post, isn't really going to make that happen.

People who are more considerate will tell you to adapt, without trying to put yourself in their shoes. Unfortunately, a percentage of people will always do that. And you know, the more vested someone is in their opinion, the more likely they are to reply to a post they don't agree with. That's just human nature. Most people who can sorta see your point, even if they disagree won't need to reply. Just a thought.

[Whiteout.1975]

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:Consideration is a unrealistic expectations from people of today. Just adapt,get gud and just dodge are all just troll replies by either players trying to justify or defend their broken spec/build or are posting just get gud or l2p on threads that players are either complaining about a nerf or are asking for a buff on a class they have a bias dislike for. It's always been this way and will never change, certainly not for the better lol.

So when the Warriors dominate the NBA, the response from other teams shouldn't be to adapt their strategies?

"Just adapt" isn't a troll response. It's the rational response to competition.

I rational response that can be used in a rational discussion yes true but also a irrational response to irrational discussions that are the norm here. As a example 3 out of9 classes could be blatantly over performing and dominating all other specs and one could just say adapt in response :) or instead of nerfing permastealth DE's arenet could have buffed their stealth and damage more and us thieves could have simply replied that all the players just need to adapt or get gud lol

Given the vagueness of the original post, examples we could come up with become meaningless. Both sentiments become correct. Nuance is lost as the OP attempts to hammer in one specific sentiment for a wide variety of situations like a blunt tool.

I apologize if I came across as vague in the OP. I'll try to break it down for anyone else that ether are not getting the full picture or misunderstanding what I'm really saying.

So basically, of course we are gonna have to adapt if we are going to continue playing the game :)I am saying we shouldn't "Just Adapt" when playing the game. We should consider what we are actually adapting into before we actually do it. Otherwise the game starts to become meaningless if people are just adapting for the sake of it.

In doing so... We should not just assume what is at the other end of that adaptation process... Is always going to be without fault. It should be worthy of adaptation by at least basic moral standards firstly. So that people can make a

healthy

adaptation.

• A somewhat recent example of this... Warclaw. I have no issues ultimately with it's existence. However, I would see people type to other's with a legit problem basically say... "Just Adapt". And this was also during when Warclaw could hop over gates much easier and before @Anet recognized it. Certain people would defend the thing up and down as if it were without "fault". Now, I didn't want to add a Warclaw example here, but it's one of the recent I can think of at this time.

So IMO, No... We should not "Just Adapt" into things. We should have consideration over what we are adapting into at all times.Now, if someone chooses not to... They can go for it, but I certainly will not follow. I'll stick with having consideration.

The problem I have is with words without fault. Of course there's fault. There's always fault. From one point of view. And from another point of view, things might be fine and dandy. Some people care about specific things, and some people don't care about those things at all. Warclaw didn't destroy WvW for me personally but I see a lot of complaints about it. I don't reply to most complaints on the forums, unless they contain misinformation or they're phrased in a misleading way, or they're aggressive to the point where the issue is more about how something is being said.

That's the problem I have too. There is usually fault... But if there is like you say "always fault"... Well then I guess things aren't so "fine and dandy" after all as much as someone would like it to be. Of course though, I'm drawing closer reference (though yes, not limiting) to things... That are more so just morally wrong (like I stated) and people acting like there's especially not a problem in a world. This can go as far as even when presented with facts and keep the same "pathetic" (as I say in the OP) attitude. It does no good for the game IMO.

Also, if you're implying (since you responded) that you found my post "aggressive"... Alright lol.

My point remains. You want everyone to be more considerate. But the world is filled with people who aren't considerate. There are trolls in the world. They'll troll no matter what anyone says. There are people who are more considerate who will consider things. You're not wrong for wanting people to be more considerate. But in my experience a post on the net, pretty much any post, isn't really going to make that happen.

Great, stick to your point. I've never disagreed with it and if anything... Support it :)The important thing is as you tell me "You're not wrong for wanting people to be more considerate". This should also be great too; as that's part of the main point.

My issue is ever since your first reply and even now are suggesting not only have "people told me not to complain", but am "complaining" here. When that is not something I have done/do on the forums in my posts. While also suggesting that I am expecting some profound change or change at all for that matter, since the OP. These are both very untrue and you're more than welcome to also read previous post of mine as much as anyone else.

The problem is the word "complain". I "criticize" and have "criticized". I don't just complain on the forums because I can... because I don't support it to begin with. Though, since there appears to be confusion, if you wish not to take it from me. Here's a suitable link that will explain the difference http://learnersdictionary.com/qa/The-Difference-Between-Criticize-and-Complain :)

People who are more considerate will tell you to adapt, without trying to put yourself in their shoes. Unfortunately, a percentage of people will always do that. And you know, the more vested someone is in their opinion, the more likely they are to reply to a post they don't agree with. That's just human nature. Most people who can sorta see your point, even if they disagree won't need to reply. Just a thought.

Yes, I agree with your thought and am aware. It is unfortunate. There's still even people like I originally described (but in a different scenario). Where they will just ultimately disagree because it goes against their agenda. Any further valid reasoning that goes against it... Does not matter to them unfortunately. Oh well lol.

[Ben K.6238]

I just adapted. It was easier than reading that.

[subversiontwo.7501]

I like this thread, it is a fresh change from all the whiny threads about classes and server performance that occupy the vast majority of the first page by now.It is also relevant because it regards this forum as much as the game and those aforementioned threads.

The complication is that the answer the question posed can be broken down into many levels.

For example:

Vayne already gave the answer to the first level as early as the second post in the thread. There is tendency to tell people to adapt because they keep reposting the same oppinions without adding to the discussion or meeting the arguments made against them. If it is pointless to talk to someone you tend to tell them to adapt or stay quiet. The recent threads about no-downstate week is a good example. It is relatively easy to deduce when that happens but it is more interesting to look at against what type of arguments those shut-down remarks are made. They can be made against constructive arguments as well so they can either be in the right or at fault. That is evident by this thread.

The second level has to do with the community at large. People in WvW have always been rather reluctant to use these forums and as the content in the mode is reshaped the way it is with more and more players clinging to fewer and fewer players the posting quality here obviously goes down with that. It is easy to see based on the amount of superficial complaints about classes or server performance. Threads like that has always been around but they used to appear between other threads from time to time and were quickly dismissed by the community. Now they linger and occupy most of the first page because the amount of interesting, constructive and discoursive threads have dwindled with the playerbase. I've made that argument before eg., discussion about meta has intensified because there are fewer groups or players around that can break or shape the meta. That does not make people talk less about meta, it makes them talk more about it. The attitudes we see here represent the shifts in the playerbase even if this forum has always only been a limited slice of that playerbase and alot of the WvW discussion has been hidden away on player-made forums and discords. However, the results of those discussions have seen more examples in the gameplay before. That causes larger splits in understanding among the people that discuss here.

The third level has to do with how Anet (and the rest of the industry in the past decade or so) has adressed and used their forums. If a forum is used by the developer itself as more of a statistics tool than a basis for discourse you will also see the forum becomming a platform for oppinions more so than discussion. That ties into the moderation applied to it as well since the moderation here has always been aimed more at what people say than how they act. That is the textbook example of how to attract trolls, uninvested single-line statements of oppinion and grandstanding statements laced with hyperbole and strawmen. Every other thread you go to here you will quickly see someone pretending to be all mad and blow fumes in every direction. That is regarded as fine as long as there are no expletives or flames, yet it is really destructive in terms of discussion.

An extension of all that is the useless thumbs-buttons. Things like that has no place on a proper discussion forum because there discussion is premiered and not discouraging people from forming unpopular oppinions with solid arguments in fear of vote burials or threadnoughting/brigading. Voting promotes oppinion, not discussion or creating discussion through arguments. It is really important to be able to form arguments in order to achieve discussion. If this is to be a discussion forum. All of these things have shaped behaviour here over time. The sight of people with conflicting oppinions here making good arguments and reaching consensus or PCG is incredibly rare. That also says alot about the quality of discussion since those are the times when discussion has usually been pretty good, civil, constructive and considerate.

[SoV.5139]

When they nerf/buff something to be more/less effective, then adapting is easy. The build plays the same way it did before but the output is different.When they remove/replace abilities then adapting is more difficult as it requires more time investment to figure out the optimal play for the build again.

[SkyShroud.2865]

i dont mind new thingsi have issue with old things be undecided like always changing the balance just using the concept of "we feel that blah blah blah"do people really think old and new alike enjoy the ever changing balance and relearning things that they once learnt?do people really think that many people play this game full time and got so much time on their hand to relearn things every time?

[DemonSeed.3528]

@"SkyShroud.2865" said:i dont mind new thingsi have issue with old things be undecided like always changing the balance just using the concept of "we feel that blah blah blah"do people really think old and new alike enjoy the ever changing balance and relearning things that they once learnt?do people really think that many people play this game full time and got so much time on their hand to relearn things every time?

I think change is good but not if change constitutes to relearning every time it is implemented, especially if the frequency is often enough. Some things should remain constant I suppose, but I do not know what the lesser of the two evils is - dumb down the game, or keep changing stuff so that people can't keep up in order to keep things "fresh" and give an edge to those that play a lot enough time to adapt.

[Obtena.7952]

This thread is misguided ... if you can't adapt, you shouldn't be playing MMO's. It's not about Anet or anyone else being 'considerate' because they can't do so in a way that will consider every player when they make a change. If they had to be considerate for every change, they would never be able to make any.

Op is wrong. It IS about adapting. MMO's aren't designed to be fair to everyone or ensure all variety is 'equal'. If that's a concept you can't live with ... better play chess or something.

[Whiteout.1975]

@"Obtena.7952" said:This thread is misguided ... if you can't adapt, you shouldn't be playing MMO's. It's not about Anet or anyone else being 'considerate' because they can't do so in a way that will consider every player when they make a change. If they had to be considerate for every change, they would never be able to make any.

Op is wrong. It IS about adapting. MMO's aren't designed to be fair to everyone or ensure all variety is 'equal'. If that's a concept you can't live with ... better play chess or something.

No you're wrong :p lol. It's Not just about adapting or simply being unable to adapt without a second thought...

Thankfully, you don't have to consider the in's and out's of ever player to form your own basic "moral judgement" (like I said) of right vs wrong. It's about adapting in way's that are at least worthy by moral values. Regarding (also "at least") what the game it's suppose to be about... Wherever it respectfully applies throughout it or in general. If you can't have or develop some consideration... Then just adapt I suppose :+1:

[Obtena.7952]

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@"Obtena.7952" said:This thread is misguided ... if you can't adapt, you shouldn't be playing MMO's. It's not about Anet or anyone else being 'considerate' because they can't do so in a way that will consider every player when they make a change. If they had to be considerate for every change, they would never be able to make any.

Op is wrong. It IS about adapting. MMO's aren't designed to be fair to everyone or ensure all variety is 'equal'. If that's a concept you can't live with ... better play chess or something.

No you're wrong :p lol. It's Not just about adapting or simply being unable to adapt without a second thought...

Thankfully, you don't have to consider the in's and out's of ever player to form your own basic "moral judgement" (like I said) of right vs wrong. It's about adapting in way's that are at least worthy by moral values. Regarding (also "at least") what the game it's suppose to be about... Wherever it respectfully applies throughout it or in general. If you can't have or develop some consideration... Then just adapt I suppose :+1:

I don't get your answer to me ... you think Anet does not consider things? That's obtuse isn't it? I don't even understand how 'moral judgement' enters into someone developing a game .. we aren't putting people to death here. Anet implements things ... if they don't like how it works, they change it. There isn't anything 'amoral' about that kind of process. Maybe you think attaching morality to their game development process will give your concern more gravity ... I don't see that happening.

Anet has been developing this game in a pretty standard approach for the last 7 years and what I said isn't wrong. Feel free to not adapt or not ... this is actually the perfect game if you are stubborn like that ... it's designed so mediocre people can succeed. I think the irony is that of ALL the games you chose to complain about this, you took the game that is most forgiving to people playing how they want and still being able to succeed.

[Whiteout.1975]

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:This thread is misguided ... if you can't adapt, you shouldn't be playing MMO's. It's not about Anet or anyone else being 'considerate' because they can't do so in a way that will consider every player when they make a change. If they had to be considerate for every change, they would never be able to make any.

Op is wrong. It IS about adapting. MMO's aren't designed to be fair to everyone or ensure all variety is 'equal'. If that's a concept you can't live with ... better play chess or something.

No you're wrong :p lol. It's Not just about adapting or simply being unable to adapt without a second thought...

Thankfully, you don't have to consider the in's and out's of ever player to form your own basic "moral judgement" (like I said) of right vs wrong. It's about adapting in way's that are at least worthy by moral values. Regarding (also "at least") what the game it's suppose to be about... Wherever it respectfully applies throughout it or in general. If you can't have or develop some consideration... Then just adapt I suppose :+1:

I don't get your answer to me ... you think Anet does not consider things? That's obtuse isn't it? I don't even understand how 'moral judgement' enters into someone developing a game .. we aren't putting people to death here. Anet implements things ... if they don't like how it works, they change it. There isn't anything 'amoral' about that kind of process. Maybe you think attaching morality to their game development process will give your concern more gravity ... I don't see that happening.

Anet has been developing this game in a pretty standard approach for the last 7 years and what I said isn't wrong. Feel free to not adapt or not ... this is actually the perfect game if you are stubborn like that ... it's designed so mediocre people can succeed. I think the irony is that of ALL the games you chose to complain about this, you took the game that is most forgiving to people playing how they want and still being able to succeed.

Alright, I can try to break it down further I suppose :)

I do think Anet consider's things to the point of good intention... But they're not the ones saying "Just Adapt" to players ether. Which is the phrase this whole thing stems from. So I don't understand why they're at the forefront of this conversation.

Someone doesn't need to be put on Death Row to have or develop a moral judgment. Moral judgment can also apply to the environment for instance. In this case... a video game environment. So this goes back to my original example of using Warclaw to hop over gates... Nobody should have to go through extensive research to just know that's bad for the WvW environment. Yet we had people saying "Just Adapt"... As if the wrongness in that shouldn't have mattered. Which should matter to people aren't oblivious to their emotions. From which emotions they could otherwise use to determine their actual gaming experience... If that mattered at all to them.

Ok, so you were wrong by taking what I originally said... And taking it out of context while modifying it. For example, your focus on Anet here... When the focus was on the phrase "Just Adapt" being used. Which again, is a phrase I have never seen Anet use and I highly doubt they have ever.

So it's actually not that I'm "stubborn". I'm for change actually in general. I'm just not intentionally for changes that have a negative impact... because I have consideration.

Here's a thought however, I've been meaning to ask before in general... (answer if you want)

• If all that matters to a person is to "Just Adapt" ultimately (based one what I've seen). Then by what reasonable grounds would they have to tell me (anyone with consideration) that I/we are wrong; in mine/our way of thinking... If all that matters is to "Just Adapt" regardless?
• Also, along with that question. Why would it matter to them, regarding any outcome of that (intentional) considerate thinking... When they can always... "Just Adapt" apparently anyways?

You are right. That would be pretty darn ironic... If the "irony" actually existed. So you're another one who has used the word "complain". Which you can say, but it's actually not at all true. I've criticized in this post... And it wasn't actually at fault to the game itself. The game can't control people intentionally choosing whether or not to be considerate. Though, the game is being used as a tool to attempt to give justification to "Just Adapt"... So unfortunately it involves it.

Anyways, I choose this game to complain criticize on... Because I have a certain care for it; that has had 6+ years to develop. So maybe excuse me for having consideration, but I've had plenty time to develop some in regards to it :pSure though... "Just Adapt". If that's what you're gonna to do. What I have to say shouldn't really interfere with that. Especially for people who have a lacking in consideration towards the game in the first place :) :+1:

[Sykper.6583]

This is a surprisingly refreshing thread to read on these forums, Kudos.

That said, I'm in agreement with Vayne's point however I think we can get even simpler. Anet has made very specific choices and decisions to make WvW as 'friendly' as possible if you were to die. It's all relative, I don't think someone coming back after 3 years or whatever to play needs to be told to just adjust or whatever so quickly. Most players don't care.

And that's a reasonable approach, instead of either Adapt or Consider, why not suggest to the returning player to not care until they get back into the flow? How long does it really take for new or returning players to adjust to the current metas? If they actually want to return and put a mind to it, they can put the effort in themselves. We should make it simple.

Don't Adapt, don't consider, just play as you see fit. Make your own choices. All of it falls into place at some point.

[NuhDah.9812]

@Sykper.6583 said:This is a surprisingly refreshing thread to read on these forums, Kudos.

That said, I'm in agreement with Vayne's point however I think we can get even simpler. Anet has made very specific choices and decisions to make WvW as 'friendly' as possible if you were to die. It's all relative, I don't think someone coming back after 3 years or whatever to play needs to be told to just adjust or whatever so quickly. Most players don't care.

And that's a reasonable approach, instead of either Adapt or Consider, why not suggest to the returning player to not care until they get back into the flow? How long does it really take for new or returning players to adjust to the current metas? If they actually want to return and put a mind to it, they can put the effort in themselves. We should make it simple.

Don't Adapt, don't consider, just play as you see fit. Make your own choices. All of it falls into place at some point.

So your proposal is to give them a no answer when they ask for advice... well, that seems very well thought. But intead of this fake interaction with someone I'd rather give them some real options if they come to me or to anyone in the comunity for them. What they do with it is their choice, but if they don't care as you say most players don't (even though I don't think that really is true), they will play whatever they want anyways without anyone informing them that is an option.

And if someone only wants this sort of shallow kind of answer without considering other given options, advices, improving or adapting, than it means they are just a sort of attention seekers, not interested in real answers anyways, only in venting some frustrations, victimising themselves or they have other unrelated agenda, a behivior I don't think it's healthy and wouldn't encourage nurturing.

[JTGuevara.9018]

OP, your post is not vague! I understood it immediately when I read it. Both before and after your clarifications! I assume you're talking about the "git gud" crowd when they try to weasel their way out of criticism, which I agree.

It's also amazing to see people in this thread make it more complex than it actually is. It's basically, don't blindly adapt just for the sake of adapting, LOOK AND CONSIDER what you're adapting into! Be more critical of what you're adapting into. Simple!

[Sykper.6583]

@NuhDah.9812 said:So your proposal is to give them a no answer when they ask for advice... well, that seems very well thought. But intead of this fake interaction with someone I'd rather give them some real options if they come to me or to anyone in the comunity for them. What they do with it is their choice, but if they don't care as you say most players don't (even though I don't think that really is true), they will play whatever they want anyways without anyone informing them that is an option.

I mean personally, it's a mixed bag when it comes to these interactions. On a consistent basis map chat might get someone clearly new asking 'What do we do?' or 'How do I win, I need help!'

I think asking them to 'adapt' is probably the most proposing answer, but depending on how they have asked for help, pending mood, pending whatever attitude they bring into chat my default answer since saying 'Adapt' isn't telling them much is to 'play how you want'. They will eventually figure out if playing how they are is or isn't giving them the satisfaction they need, and they will either give up or figure out something.

I might even tell them to go look up something on Metabattle or something, but then you might get something snarky back like 'wtf I had to build a certain way to play, that's stupid'.

It's way too much effort, I'm not going to helicopter parent everyone.

And if someone only wants this sort of shallow kind of answer without considering other given options, advices, improving or adapting, than it means they are just a sort of attention seekers, not interested in real answers anyways, only in venting some frustrations, victimising themselves or they have other unrelated agenda, a behivior I don't think it's healthy and wouldn't encourage nurturing.

Ding Ding. I'm a leaning on 'no answer' if I can clearly tell someone is baiting or not really interested, you can see that from chat interactions.

[Whiteout.1975]

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:OP, your post is not vague! I understood it immediately when I read it. Both before and after your clarifications! I assume you're talking about the "git gud" crowd when they try to weasel their way out of criticism, which I agree.

It's also amazing to see people in this thread make it more complex than it actually is. It's basically, don't blindly adapt just for the sake of adapting, LOOK AND CONSIDER what you're adapting into! Be more critical of what you're adapting into. Simple!

Haha thanks for some extra conformation. Though, yea... basically.

So far, I've so been through some people Not acknowledging my criticism, but rather reducing it to simple "complaining". I'm assuming in order to bring what I say to of lower value. In order to make arguing against it easier. Would be my guess anyways.... Because if they're simply telling someone (anywhere) to "Just Adapt" when a person is actually offering criticism instead of an "complaint". That doesn't really put those "Just Adapt" people in a good place to appear as the good guy here. Though of course they'll appear as the "good guy" to others also reducing criticism's to simple "complaint's".Or... They honestly can't tell the difference and give the same "Just Adapt" reply. Which still create's problem.

• Though, this actually makes me wonder how often criticism get's reduced to a simple complaint?... Interesting. I mean it wouldn't surprise me if it happened often. In fact I bet it does. Maybe I/We should just start typing "The Following Is Criticism" or something like that since I can't completely rely on people to make the distinction. Or as some sort of preventative tool for people whom are intentionally trying to reduce it to a "complaint".

I've also dealt with people (talking in general) putting thoughts, ideas and words in my mouth as opposed it coming strictly from them. Not sure what to do about this one yet... Though, I tried to have some conversation out of respect even though they did that show that same "respect" to me by doing such things...

Other than that I've been enjoying being apart of/reading from the people whom agree/disagree on my/our stance :+1:

Yea... You're right. It should be "simple". Though, some the people whom have said or support "Just Adapt" in the past/now want to feel completely right in that mentality. So I somewhat have to deal with all these different angles being thrown at me. Even if that involves attempting to reduce and/or contort what I've actually said :/

Anyways, thanks for the comment and thanks for being considerate :) :+1: