Sigmoid.7082

I wouldn't really say its that hard to understand. Time spent on not implementing something they would prefer more? Someone has to implement the feature and that takes time an resource. Neither of which is infinite. Its also competes with / diminishes the need for people to buy other, character specific, convenience items like bags, templates etc.

Bad design and "I don't like this" are two things people really need to stop conflating.

I suppose the point is to demonstrate that there is always going to be a bar and no matter what Anet do, especially as long as the game has mechanics of any sort. Someone is always going to be below it unless they completely remove the bar all together at which point you get what the poster you quoted insinuated. I'm all for fixing annoying things but is it worth doing if it's 1/10 people? Or the fix improves the one but then makes 3/10 upset with those changes? List goes on. There is an inflection point that some people do not like to accept: there is a certain point that the problem is not the game, it's you. It's also difficult to feel sympathy when the stance taken is often "don't tell me to get better or switch tact, change the game!"

Player: I always have to pick this trait. Make it baseline. Anet: In order to broaden the choices so players don't feel forced into certain traitlines we have reworked fast hands to something less dominate but still impactful enough to make an interesting build choice. Be careful what you wish for.

People have fun all the time. The concept of fun just isn't universal. Something you deem as a bit of fun others might find absolutely abhorrent and vica versa.

There will never be enough options to prevent threads like this one. There will always be something that someone doesn't like, or want, to do. Anet isn't going to, and should not have to, add alternative after alternative after alterative for players want to get something but lacking want to do the content. So where do they stop? Where do they draw the line? Example. Look at the skyscale. OW leg would very likely contain jumping puzzles. Anet literally added an option to avoid the jumping puzzle but in the thread about it being to expensive / grindy the replies to "you can buy the treat" are "no why should I have to? Its unfair! Add another way for me to do this, its impossible because [insert reason which essential equates to I just don't want to do it]". If they added OW leg there is always going to be something like this. There is also this massive conflation of need and want. There is a want for the item but the way its portrayed is that it is an absolute necessity, which is very far from the truth, that is being kept from people. "But why should they not be able to get something if they want it?" is an argument that comes up all the time but "If I want it I should be able to get it and if I cannot then things need to be changed until I can" just screams entitlement to me. I have no issue against another PvE legendary armour as long as the acquisition method is suitably as difficult and as time consuming at the current but I have seen no suggestion that does not essentially equate to "give it to me easier" as something being as difficult and as time consuming as now, but in OW, would result in threads like this anyways and not solve the problem because there will always be "something" in the way. More, equivalently difficult and time-consuming, options are fine but that's not really what I have seen people asking or suggesting every single time this comes up.

Having to play the game to earn rewards, and god forbid those rewards be unique to a specific content or game mode, is something that is broken and needs to be fixed...or so many of those posts on the forum tend to go these days.

I mean the makers of the game denote and split things into these three , apparently arbitrary, categories.

That's the point that is being made though? That this comes as part of the price of EOD since OP somehow believes Anet are going to be charging for episodic content after / between expansions.

There are a bunch of reasons why its not as high value as you think it would be but in short it boils down to how unimportant race actually is in the grand scheme of things in GW2 as a game as well as the sheer number of systems it would need to interop with render it no easy task to do so, resulting in an RoI that's not stellar for a team that's already, and admittedly, starved for resource.

I often forget there is a certain demographic that has the mantra " I want the thing, but I do not want to do the thing that gets me the thing. This is a problem, broken, and needs to be fixed".

"The Devs don't read the forum because they are specifically relying to me, giving me the answers I want and / or implementing the changes I specifically am demanding to the game. They don't listen to good quality feedback since I have been giving it and they are not doing what I am suggesting" This seems to be the general notion I get when people say the Devs dont read the forum or listen to feedback.

When did "we need" become a synonym for "I want".

The best bit has yet to come. When, not if, it eventually get nerfed you'll have some people still claiming it wasn't over performing, is a skill issue, and Anet are bad for caving to the unfair public outrage of their totally balanced spec.

This is half the problem, the idea is in no way innovative.

I'll give you the BOTD since I doubt you would be so purposefully obtuse. It's that's one side of the argument is clearly more ok than the other and it's ok to vilify and demonize the group against. But that's where I'll leave this since there is no point continuing due to the nature of the topic. Nobody has added anything new, it's derailing, devolving into reductive brick wall back and forths, and will eventually get a "be nice to each other" before getting locked like all the others.

It's not a personal attack. It's a general observation, which is why I didn't quote you since you're not the only person in this thread or on this topic to hold this sentiment. I have been following this topic for years. To the point I can probably post to myself and nobody else and cover near enough every single thing that someone else would bring up...

Always wondered why it's fine to say it's elitist and protectionist when when someone suggests playing the content for the reward but not lazy and entitled when someone says "no change the game and give me an option I specifically want". Since just the apparent notion of the latter places you in the former group..

Anet aren't telling me what they are doing every second of every day so they clearly aren't working on anything. They also aren't adding content I specifically want or that is specifically geared towards me to the game, so they clealy haven't , aren't ,and won't be adding new content to the game. If nothing new has been added and they aren't working on anything the game is clearly in maintenance mode no? /s

My issue with a topics of this vein is people having the thought process of Anet not doing what they want = Anet not doing anything at all.

I wouldn't really say it cry, cope , or seethe. If you watch the balance live stream where they are going through this change Cal already states that they he finds the change scary, that they will likely lower the damage at some point and are just waiting to see how the change, along with the other sceptre changes, impact competitive in their entirety. Its introduction with prefaced with , paraphrasing, "its likely quite / too strong and we will likely nerf it". I would say the "cope" is likely on the side of those who are clamouring to keep something out of balance.

I personally think it's partly because reading is effort and asking and recieving answers is not. Search engines these days are advanced enough that asking them a question often result directly in an answer and less and less something you need to read to find one. People are just used to that interaction. On the point if being called out for saying you would rather have resources spent elsewhere. I don't understand what people are expecting here. It almost feels like people expect that if you don't want to positively comment on their ides then you shouldnt comment at all. It's an open forum and nobody should expect an echo chamber. It's also a short and to the point rely instead of getting into one of those back and forths where it boils down to two people refusing to agree to disagree and ends up in a "[idea] , [reply why someone thinks idea isn't that great], my idea is great and you are just wrong / a troll". I get it, not all ideas are great and being told stings. But people need to realise if you ask for opinions not all of them will be positive.

My problem with the auto LFG idea has always been people say it would enable them to get in and get some clears, but how does the game quantify your your ability to perform the role you have signed up for short of removing the flexibility this games build system provides and doing the things people often complain about: suggesting / telling you what build to play and gear to use? At that point the game is telling you how to play and by the definition of those that ,incorrectly, quite the play how you want line would label Anet as toxic and elitist. Also how it's apparently toxic and elitist to teach when you want, your own time, but somehow not toxic or entitled to demand to be taught when you want , someone else's time.

The only facts I often seen downvoted are those where people are masquerading their opinions as such. I disagree here. To quote myself from ~3 weeks ago quoting myself from 3 months ago, since the opinion has not changed at all:

Which definition are we using for pay2win here?