Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Flag DPS-Meter user in the game


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 518
  • Created
  • Last Reply

@Laila Lightness.8742 said:Might be better banning arc dps if this what is going too happend everytime someone gets wrongly kicked for doing their best

The way I see it, I'm not entitled to a spot in any group. There is a kick feature for a reason. Ultimately, as long as they aren't violating ToS, they have every right to remove me for any or no reason whatsoever.

Why not just suggest they remove the kick feature? That would solve the problem, right? If they want you out, their only option is to reform another group and start over without you! That'll learn 'em!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@Dayra.7405 said:With the hacker-ban wave ANet has shown that it can easily recognize such users of third-party software.Actually, the mass-suspensions used a different tech that showed whether one of 4-5 specific programs were running at the same time as GW2. ArcDPS (and other DPS meters) run by adapting part of GW2's own code, so it doesn't show via the same Windows API.

That said, it's probably not crazy hard to add the tech to check, but neither is it free.

ANet had the Windows API calls needed to detect ArcDPS (if they had added its hash(es) to the list of programs that get reported back to them) -- before the check that enumerated running all running processes, they had a check that enumerated all the modules loaded by the Guild Wars 2 process (EnumProcessModules) and then hashed those modules. Even though ArcDPS may have been named d3d9.dll, the code in the module would not match the real d3d9.dll so the hash of that module would have been a way to tell it apart from the real d3d9 library.

The downside to their check is that it only detects specific versions, so ANet would need to either update what they are looking for each time ArcDPS gets updated, or come up with a byte pattern to recognize ArcDPS instead of using a hash -- which is fairly trivial to do once they come up with a good pattern that doesn't change often. Never-before-released 3rd party DPS meters would be harder to detect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AliamRationem.5172 said:

@Laila Lightness.8742 said:Might be better banning arc dps if this what is going too happend everytime someone gets wrongly kicked for doing their best

The way I see it, I'm not entitled to a spot in any group. There is a kick feature for a reason. Ultimately, as long as they aren't violating ToS, they have every right to remove me for any or no reason whatsoever.

Why not just suggest they remove the kick feature? That would solve the problem, right? If they want you out, their only option is to reform another group and start over without you! That'll learn 'em!

Till they put up their group in LFG and you spite join forcing them to disban and reform over and over till they transcend looking for party members with that tool. Such is the power of freely joining groups without anyone consenting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RaidsAreEasyAF.8652 said:

@"Mea.5491" said:DPS meters shouldn't be allowed in the first place. I've been playing MMOs for 14 years but never used DPS meters. Having fun isn't about numbers. :D

For you its not about numbers. I like to play efficiently.

Yeah, that's you. I do my job efficiently but my video game is not my job. I just want to relax when I play and I really don't care if I don't deal "enough damage". I don't care if dps meters are available for self use, but using it to judge other players is just silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BolkovonHarnfeldt.1372 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:@BlaqueFyre.5678 already answered in good detail. The law isn't being enforced yet, and if know anything about EU laws and regulations, which i do, it will be a while before some countries transpose the regulation as national laws, and then there's the matter of actually enforcing it, which is on a whole different level.

An EU-regulation is an act of law which doesn't need national implementing legislation. But this regulation in question certainly doesn't pertain to players being able to see combat data of another player.

You're correct. Confused regulation with directive... That's the price of working in different languages ^_^

@ReaverKane.7598 said:Theoretically they can. They can track third party software use, that's how they banned the hackers, if they can do that, they can flag you in-game for doing so.If they should, ethically and legally, that's a different ballgame.

Yes but since it's not their tool there is little point in doing so. I mean that tool might not be around tomorrow, or other tools appear in the future. What then? They will need to monitor all the tools created, monitor if they remain in use, and adjust their code every time. If it was an in-house tool then it would make sense, but since it's not theirs to begin with, it's highly improbable that they'd waste their development time to do something like this.

If I recall, they tracked third party software using a modified executable, that is not available anymore. It's not something that can be used permanently, so say they do this and flag some people as "dps meter" users, what if I stop using the meter the next day? What if I want to join a casual run with the meter disabled? I'll be flagged and some people like the OP won't even accept me in their team, even though I'll have it disabled now. Remember that the scan took time and was done by a modified game version only for a set period of time.

I'm not saying they should, in fact that might actually even be illegal... And surely is unethical. I'm saying is that technically they probably can.

@"Dreamy Lu.3865" said:There are two ways to "use" DPS meters:

  • Some use it to evaluate other players, against their will, and that's not nice.
  • Some use it to improve own performances. For those, this is an enormous help, for example when practicing with a guild team in PvE raiding and WvW.

I fully understand how unpleasant it is when some use it for evaluation of others against their will. To my eyes, this is a misuse of a tool that is otherwise very supportive.That's why, as said in other threads already: My personal opinion is that there should be a way to that DPS tools can be used as a supportive tool for for practicing, learning and improving, however with a possibility to protect ourselves against misuse (like not sharing data if not wanted by turning if off for example). Unfortunately, I do not know if it is possible and up to now, no good solution is available.

Generally, I believe that when a tool has good and bad sides, the solution is not to remove it, but rather to develop it one step further to minimize/remove the bad sides. To just remove the tool leads to lose the good sides of it, that's a bit sad.

Oookay... Welcome to life in a society.Whether you like it or not, you and anyone else are judging others when you interact with them.When you join a party you're instantly being appraised and evaluated based on your character name, class, mastery level, weapons, even the looks.9/10 when a thief or a Ele joins a fractal group i sigh and roll my eyes, because from my experience 5/10 of those will be constantly dying because they copied a build from metabattle and think they're the gods of fractals.All these evaluations are subjective and obviously most people won't act upon them, but as soon as you know someone, and this is just how human interaction works, you create a bias, a pre-concept of that person based on appearance and surface data.DPS meters are great in this because they allow you to confirm or deny that bias, and give you a concrete evidence about their performance.

In my personal example, if i didn't have a DPS meter and saw a Ele die a couple times, he could be the guy with least deaths in the run, but that would confirm my bias, again this is how human brains work, and i'd probably start getting mad at the guy for every tiny mistake, heck he could be carrying the whole group, that the bias would make me blind to it.Thing is DPS meters don't have bias, they give you hard numbers, and even if he's dying often, his DPS and total damage would tell a different tale, and my bias would be overthrown.

(DISCLAIMER: I'm not such a terrible person as i paint here, it's an exaggerated example, while factual.)

People that are afraid of being evaluated are only afraid because they know beforehand that their evaluation is negative.

@Laila Lightness.8742 said:Might be better banning arc dps if this what is going to happen every time someone gets wrongly kicked for doing their best

If their damage is that sub-par, they're definitely not doing their best. I mean you won't get kicked if you're doing 29K DPS instead of 30K DPS. You'll be kicked if you're doing like 5kDPS.

@Mea.5491 said:

@Mea.5491 said:DPS meters shouldn't be allowed in the first place. I've been playing MMOs for 14 years but never used DPS meters. Having fun isn't about numbers. :D

For you its not about numbers. I like to play efficiently.

Yeah, that's you. I do my job efficiently but my video game is not my job. I just want to relax when I play and I really don't care if I don't deal "enough damage". I don't care if dps meters are available for self use, but using it to judge other players is just silly.

Others do, and what gives you the right to infringe your opinion on others?Why is your freedom to play with crappy builds more important than mine to not spend more of my time doing a Fractal Run or a Raid than what's absolutely necessary, so i can do other stuff besides babysitting a bunch of slackers who didn't bother to put in a fraction of my effort and consideration.

Me, personally, if i think my build is sub-par, or if my ping isn't great at that moment, i won't play group content, because i don't want my ineffectiveness to hinder others. And i expect people to offer a modicum of that consideration back. You're probably in that segment of players that forget that on the other end there's another person, not a bit of AI, and that what you do will affect them as well.

@"sorudo.9054" said:privacy or not, being able to see who has a DPS meter on would already help tons and lowers frustration.Yeah, i would only group with people that use one, at least i know they can look at their screen and feel embarrassed when they're doing less damage than the Supports. As it stands there's a lot of people getting carried that even get offended when you say simple stuff like "hey man, you could be doing a lot better with that class". I had a guy PM me from 3 different accounts when i blocked him on the first, after he started rambling to me when i pointed out he did less than 1000 DPS in average during a T4 fractal run, on a warrior dps build, and still died more often than everyone else in the party. I think that just auto-attacking with 1 would do better DPS than he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Imperadordf.2687" said:Combat data is not private.

No, it's not private, but within the meanings of the new EU rules, it is what's called "personally identifiable" data. It is distributed to other players that your character did something. If DPS meters could only read the meter-user's data, many of the various problems attributed to them would not exist. (They would have less value, but not zero value.)

So the OP is wrong - it isn't about privacy - but citing the GDPR(1) rules is or at least could be relevant to the DPS meter debate.

(1) GDPR (General Data Protection Regulations) isn't about privacy as such. It is about how companies (etc.) make use of data that can be linked to a specific person. (That's essentially what "personally identifiable" means.) The rules are far stricter than past data protection rules, and the "blame targets" for that are large Internet companies, notably one whose name begins with G, another whose name begins with F, and a third whose name begins with T. (Obviously, not General Motors, Ford, and Toyota...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nightlark.4029 said:

@"Dayra.7405" said:With the hacker-ban wave ANet has shown that it can easily recognize such users of third-party software.Actually, the mass-suspensions used a different tech that showed whether one of 4-5 specific programs were running at the same time as GW2. ArcDPS (and other DPS meters) run by adapting part of GW2's own code, so it doesn't show via the same Windows API.

That said, it's probably not crazy hard to add the tech to check, but neither is it free.

ANet had the Windows API calls needed to detect ArcDPS (if they had added its hash(es) to the list of programs that get reported back to them) -- before the check that enumerated running all running processes, they had a check that enumerated all the modules loaded by the Guild Wars 2 process (EnumProcessModules) and then hashed those modules. Even though ArcDPS may have been named d3d9.dll, the code in the module would not match the real d3d9.dll so the hash of that module would have been a way to tell it apart from the real d3d9 library.

The downside to their check is that it only detects specific versions, so ANet would need to either update what they are looking for each time ArcDPS gets updated, or come up with a byte pattern to recognize ArcDPS instead of using a hash -- which is fairly trivial to do once they come up with a good pattern that doesn't change often. Never-before-released 3rd party DPS meters would be harder to detect.

Right, that's more accurate than the way I phrased it.

However, the tl;dr is the same: "it's not crazy hard to check, but neither is it free."

Given that the OP hasn't established a reason why ANet should invest resources in this, given their current stance on DPS data, it's hard to imagine them prioritizing anything close to what is proposed in the original post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@"Imperadordf.2687" said:Combat data is not private.

No, it's not
private
, but within the meanings of the new EU rules, it
is
what's called "personally identifiable" data. It is distributed to other players that
your
character did something. If DPS meters could only read the meter-user's data, many of the various problems attributed to them would not exist. (They would have less value, but not
zero
value.)

So the OP is wrong - it isn't about privacy - but citing the GDPR(1) rules
is
or at least
could be
relevant to the DPS meter debate.

(1) GDPR (General Data Protection Regulations) isn't about
privacy
as such. It is about how companies (etc.) make use of data that can be linked to a specific person. (That's essentially what "personally identifiable" means.) The rules are far stricter than past data protection rules, and the "blame targets" for that are large Internet companies, notably one whose name begins with G, another whose name begins with F, and a third whose name begins with T. (Obviously, not General Motors, Ford, and Toyota...)

No it’s not personally identifiable information under the GDPR since it would have to be able to identify the Natural Person which combat data does not in anyway shape or form, since players can’t identify other player’s natural person even with the information of their Display name. Again this does not fall under that scope or definition as per the GDPR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@"Imperadordf.2687" said:Combat data is not private.

No, it's not
private
, but within the meanings of the new EU rules, it
is
what's called "personally identifiable" data. It is distributed to other players that
your
character did something. If DPS meters could only read the meter-user's data, many of the various problems attributed to them would not exist. (They would have less value, but not
zero
value.)

So the OP is wrong - it isn't about privacy - but citing the GDPR(1) rules
is
or at least
could be
relevant to the DPS meter debate.

(1) GDPR (General Data Protection Regulations) isn't about
privacy
as such. It is about how companies (etc.) make use of data that can be linked to a specific person. (That's essentially what "personally identifiable" means.) The rules are far stricter than past data protection rules, and the "blame targets" for that are large Internet companies, notably one whose name begins with G, another whose name begins with F, and a third whose name begins with T. (Obviously, not General Motors, Ford, and Toyota...)

A number on a screen that is tied to an anonymous character is not personal data as it does not identify the person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"BlaqueFyre.5678" said:That was only one combat meter and it wasn’t in compliance within Anets Specifications due to other “features” that the Creator refused to remove and Anet Banned the Creator and the players that continued to use it.

Here is Anets statement on the collection of Combat Data.

“ChrisClearySkrittCoin-Miner• 1yWe have no problems with players using a 3rd party tool whose scope is only to collect and visualize combat data gathered directly from the game client. Anything beyond that scope is still considered a violation of the User Agreement.”

Thanks. :+1:

But that language leaves me asking something else: "directly from the game client", which I'm to assume is one's own interactions with other entities in the game. As in, you would see damage done to/from yourself, or boons applied to another or others' boons applied to you, but you would not naturally see another person's damage to the same enemy or boons applied to himself.

Assuming that's correct:

If more than one "non-compliant" is in a group, you can't actually know what their damage contributions are. You might know some uptime, ...maybe some of their conditions, since those remain on the enemy, but with only "basic math" afterward, you're only finding the average contribution with the missing data.Or, if a meter-player claims to "know" that unshared data in that muddled context, he's either making huge assumptions or obtaining that data against the TOS.

If the assumption isn't correct:...Well, I'd have some rather firm words about data security for Mr. C...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rauderi.8706 said:

@"BlaqueFyre.5678" said:That was only one combat meter and it wasn’t in compliance within Anets Specifications due to other “features” that the Creator refused to remove and Anet Banned the Creator and the players that continued to use it.

Here is Anets statement on the collection of Combat Data.

“ChrisClearySkrittCoin-Miner• 1yWe have no problems with players using a 3rd party tool whose scope is only to collect and visualize combat data gathered directly from the game client. Anything beyond that scope is still considered a violation of the User Agreement.”

Thanks. :+1:

But that language leaves me asking something else: "directly from the game client", which I'm to assume is one's own interactions with other entities in the game. As in, you would see damage done to/from yourself, or boons applied to another or others' boons applied to you, but you would not naturally see another person's damage to the same enemy or boons applied to himself.

Assuming that's correct:

If more than one "non-compliant" is in a group, you can't actually know what their damage contributions are. You might know some uptime, ...maybe some of their conditions, since those remain on the enemy, but with only "basic math" afterward, you're only finding the average contribution with the missing data.Or, if a meter-player claims to "know" that unshared data in that muddled context, he's either making huge assumptions or obtaining that data against the TOS.

If the assumption isn't correct:...Well, I'd have some rather firm words about data security for Mr. C...

Again Anet says that combat data isn’t private or personal and by directly from the client means that whenever a player does something it broadcasts it to every other player’s Client aka Gw2.exe. And yes any player can realistically figure out someone’s dps by watching the ingame UI since every mobs HP is a known value as per API you can see All health percentages and you can see what Boons a player has and when they are applied etc.

And by non compliant means that one combat meter did things other than pull combat data from the client, it would show the User other player’s gear and traits and other non combat related data as per Anets Specifications so those players and the creator using that combat meter were banned after everyone was told it wasn’t compliant for use.

While ArcDps only pulls Combat Data and nothing else from the game client.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DPS meter policy and implementation is flawed and disrespectful towards customers. Unfortunately devs do not want to participate in any discussion about the issue. Also, it's pretty obvious it's easier and cheaper to allow them this way and let players fight over it than restrict them and deal with hundreds of reports every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

@"altermaven.7385" said:There's a way to check your damage consistency that is built in game. While I don't mind the fact people want to benchmark their stuff. I
do
mind having it as a de-facto criteria for getting into high-tier stuff. Some games consider having the availability of everyone's DPS at their fingertips a bannable offense. Being kicked because you're sub-optimal, because you aren't measuring or sharing your damage output, because you're having a bad DPS day? Having meters as an 'available' option not part of the API is technically considered boundary-crossing, but regardless invites a large wave of unwanted toxicity.

And as for this "check" in the game? It's called a combat log. Sure it's not robust, but it's what you got. It may not measure your total output per second, but you can make rudimentary benches out of it.

To iterate: I'm not against measuring DPS, or having a means to measure it. I
am
, however, against having my details read by someone other than me. I personally do not use DPS meters, because by rights it is across that line that seperates "legit" from "suspicious".

They aren’t your details, all combat data is public data in gw2, and Toxicity hasn’t risen due to combat meters, since Toxicity was even more prevalent in the form of completely arbitrary reasons like AP or kick or full zerk or kick, and no Ranger and Necro or kick.

And they aren’t boundary crossing since the people that set the boundaries are Anet and they said as long as Combat Meters meet their compliance standards they are ok.

Yeah, I can clearly understand that. The whole thing that I stated is with the implication that the LFG has not been properly explicit. And from that, it is 80% of PUGs in general. Maybe if some people can be explicit in the intentions before threading groups to make sure everyone is on equal understanding grounds, then things will be okay.

We have our opinions and I understand you don't agree with mine. Personally, I would not mind if aNet brings a more standardized solution to the table. Outside of the rare TacO usage, I don't use third party apps that overlay GW2. If I wanted to use something like GW2Timer or the such, that's what multiple monitors are for.

I am saying that making the ability to measure/share DPS mandatory for entrance/participation will lead down dark paths. And trust me, it's a path you don't want to travel. We have days where we become sub-optimal. How can you tell if someone's having one of those days, besides scorning that person for not fulfilling the role?

EDIT: Any use of programs that inject code into legitimate programs is a risk. Just because it's safe now doesn't mean it's safe ever. There will always be a malicious actor that will capitalise on the fact and shut your system down with something carefully crafted. No, I'm not paranoid. I'm simply saying that it's not safe by default. You may trust it, but I rather keep my system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:DPS meter policy and implementation is flawed and disrespectful towards customers.How is it flawed? How it disrespectful? I get that it's not the policy you would implement, but that's different from it being morally or materially wrong.

Unfortunately devs do not want to participate in any discussion about the issue.They have participated in some discussion. They just don't agree that it warrants more back & forth, because (as we can see from this thread), people just keep repeating the same things that ANet has already addressed. Bring up something new and maybe ANet will decide it's worth further discussion.

Also, it's pretty obvious it's easier and cheaper to allow them this way and let players fight over it than restrict them and deal with hundreds of reports every day.ANet has said that, among the reasons they allow DPS meters is that they realized that their original policy of no meters no longer fits the current state of the game. Near as I can tell, they still think the original policy was sensible for the game at launch. However, they acknowledge with the inclusion of mechanics that literally depend on dishing out enough damage in a short period of time, that DPS meters have a lot of value now. And they further acknowledge that it's not something that they want to prioritize doing themselves, so they are content to let others do so (as long as they follow the newly established guidelines)

tl;dr ANet has explained their policy: DPS meters are useful for the current state of the game, game data isn't private (and it's not "personal" in the legal sense). The fact that some people don't like DPS meters doesn't mean that the policy is flawed or disrespectful; it just means that not everyone agrees with ANet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"altermaven.7385" said:I am saying that making the ability to measure/share DPS mandatory for entrance/participation will lead down dark paths. And trust me, it's a path you don't want to travel. We have days where we become sub-optimal. How can you tell if someone's having one of those days, besides scorning that person for not fulfilling the role?

By talking mostly, it can do wonders. "Hey sorry I messed that up, the cat jumped on me!". For common every day interruptions like that, talking can do wonders. Now if it's something deeper and not a simple interruption then I don't know that's different. Maybe if you don't feel up for a fast/experienced run, don't join such a run?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"altermaven.7385" said:I am saying that making the ability to measure/share DPS mandatory for entrance/participation will lead down dark paths. And trust me, it's a path you don't want to travel. We have days where we become sub-optimal. How can you tell if someone's having one of those days, besides scorning that person for not fulfilling the role?

By talking mostly, it can do wonders. "Hey sorry I messed that up, the cat jumped on me!". For common every day interruptions like that, talking can do wonders. Now if it's something deeper and not a simple interruption then I don't know that's different. Maybe if you don't feel up for a fast/experienced run, don't join such a run?

I was putting that in a perspective of a third party. If I'm not having a good day, I don't put myself in the hot seat. But I agree, communication is grand, as long as you make sure others understand. Not everyone is forgiving, but as long as you have the communication you'll be through it most of the time.

Still, the moderate point I'm making is that requiring that you can show you can do X to get in is like asking for a membership card most of the time. If you can show it, go ham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@altermaven.7385 said:

@altermaven.7385 said:I am saying that making the ability to measure/share DPS mandatory for entrance/participation will lead down dark paths. And trust me, it's a path you don't want to travel. We have days where we become sub-optimal. How can you tell if someone's having one of those days, besides scorning that person for not fulfilling the role?

By talking mostly, it can do wonders. "Hey sorry I messed that up, the cat jumped on me!". For common every day interruptions like that, talking can do wonders. Now if it's something deeper and not a simple interruption then I don't know that's different. Maybe if you don't feel up for a fast/experienced run, don't join such a run?

I was putting that in a perspective of a third party. If I'm not having a good day, I don't put myself in the hot seat. But I agree, communication is grand, as long as you make sure others understand. Not everyone is forgiving, but as long as you have the communication you'll be through it most of the time.

Still, the moderate point I'm making is that requiring that you can show you can do X to get in is like asking for a membership card most of the time. If you can show it, go ham.

Again let’s reiterate it, before Combat Meters were allowed Players were regularly excluded based on completely irrelevant and arbitrary information based upon AP, Class being played, what armor set they were wearing, what title they have etc. Combat Meters provide accurate and relevant information, and just because a player wants to be in a certain group doesn’t mean the other player’s have to allow them in or keep them in which has always been the case, player’s can choose who they want to or not want to group up with, they aren’t forced to accept anyone or everyone into their groups.

Also Combat Meters aren’t mandatory for anything and it’s relatively easy to find like minded people to group up with to do any content in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:DPS meter policy and implementation is flawed and disrespectful towards customers.How is it flawed? How it disrespectful? I get that it's not the policy you would implement, but that's different from it being morally or materially wrong.

Unfortunately devs do not want to participate in any discussion about the issue.They have participated in some discussion. They just don't agree that it warrants more back & forth, because (as we can see from this thread), people just keep repeating the same things that ANet has already addressed. Bring up something new and maybe ANet will decide it's worth further discussion.

Also, it's pretty obvious it's easier and cheaper to allow them this way and let players fight over it than restrict them and deal with hundreds of reports every day.ANet has said that, among the reasons they allow DPS meters is that they realized that their original policy of no meters no longer fits the current state of the game. Near as I can tell, they still think the original policy was sensible for the game at launch. However, they acknowledge with the inclusion of mechanics that literally depend on dishing out enough damage in a short period of time, that DPS meters have a lot of value now. And they further acknowledge that it's not something that they want to prioritize doing themselves, so they are content to let others do so (as long as they follow the newly established guidelines)

tl;dr ANet has explained their policy: DPS meters are useful for the current state of the game, game data isn't private (and it's not "personal" in the legal sense). The fact that some people don't like DPS meters doesn't mean that the policy is flawed or disrespectful; it just means that not everyone agrees with ANet.

I tried once to ahve a discussion about the policy and changing it, Chris Cleary came to thread, reposted the policy and ran away. That's not a discussion. There is no room to talk with devs about it. It's easier for them to ignore the problem they created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:I tried once to ahve a discussion about the policy and changing it, Chris Cleary came to thread, reposted the policy and ran away. That's not a discussion. There is no room to talk with devs about it. It's easier for them to ignore the problem they created.

The fact that he didn't discuss in that thread isn't the same as saying they have never discussed it. Again, from ANet's point of view, there's nothing new to talk about. In that context, engaging in conversation on the topic is perhaps less respectful, since it gives the illusion that ANet is considering a policy change.

If you want them to change their (collective) mind, come up with an innovation. Rephrasing the same points people made before, repeating cliches, or making declarative statements that indicate one isn't happy with the policy isn't going to do much at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ReaverKane.7598 said:Oookay... Welcome to life in a society.Whether you like it or not, you and anyone else are judging others when you interact with them.Sure, but it always depends on how they act on this judgement. Do they keep it to themselves? Or do they try to offer constructive critism?Or do they stomp on the n00b who dares not to be a tactical genius and yet have the audacity to play in a group?Perhaps they do so without realizing it, might be - some people think that being rude means being direct, and such...

I'm quite sure that I'm not playing at 100% efficiency - there's some skills I'd rather not use, but since ANet decided that weapons enforce skills, and for some reason I want to have FUN in this game (which includes using a weapon I feel comfortable with, not just the one with best efficiency), there is little I can do.

Also, long ago I realized that, despite playing lots of games, I'm not a machine where you stick in a different punch card to get a different program running. I know many people are like that - they look up the best gear/skill combo for a class and do exactly what the instructions say.Great for them, but not everyone works that way.

...

To get back on topic: as long as you stay civil, I don't mind if you record my behaviour in-game, combat or otherwise.If you're not staying civil, there should be options for that already (harassment and such).[edit]To clarify the last sentence - these options exist. Maybe they need to be enforced more strongly, I don't know, and hopefully never will have to know. So far I had a pleasant experience in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@"Kheldorn.5123" said:I tried once to ahve a discussion about the policy and changing it, Chris Cleary came to thread, reposted the policy and ran away. That's not a discussion. There is no room to talk with devs about it. It's easier for them to ignore the problem they created.

The fact that he didn't discuss in that thread isn't the same as saying they have never discussed it. Again, from ANet's point of view, there's nothing new to talk about. In that context, engaging in conversation on the topic is perhaps less respectful, since it gives the illusion that ANet is considering a policy change.

If you want them to change their (collective) mind, come up with an innovation. Rephrasing the same points people made before, repeating cliches, or making declarative statements that indicate one isn't happy with the policy isn't going to do much at this point.

Posting arguments and suggestions didn't help either. Chris completely ignored everything being said about the issue. That is direct declaration about their lack of will to do anything about it. I kinda understand them, it's easy and cheap to ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...