Add Gear Inspect => More Transmutation => More Revenue $$$

[yoni.7015]

No to gear inspect! That is a terrible feature.

[Rasimir.6239]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Hugheszie.6291 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

Can you explain how that works? If it's literally just checking skins currently in use, how would people feel 'alienated'?Same way that, for example, people like Brasil felt alienated when they realized that they weren't the target audience for Arena Net, because of the mount monetization.Sorry, that's a reason that applies to absolutely anything that ANet does. It's not a positive reason for doing something, nor a sufficient negative

absent any specific context

.

Of course it applies to everything they add to the game, which is why it needs to be measured, and in this case adding a specific skin-only-check, would be a case where it would have been poorly measured and decided.Thing is, there is a substantial amount of people that want this, as they want DPS meters, and removing DPS meters or adding a half-baked gear check would serve only to aggravate people that want a full gear check. And you can go around with circular talks of whether it's significant or not, the only way to know is to do the wrong thing.

There are also a larger variety of "right answers" than people tend to acknowledge. In any game, there's a herd mentality to push towards the most theoretically efficient builds. In this game (as well as others), that is counterproductive. Most teams don't play at the level of snowcrows, where phases are so quick that many mechanics (and damage sources) can be ignored, sometimes completely ignored.I'm not saying otherwise, in fact i encourage people to do their own builds, in fact, it's like you say, snowcrows builds requires a certain level of efficiency and tactics, that don't always translate. Which is why i tend to do the build "brainstorming" with guildmates more often than you seem to believe plausible. Which is a bit ironic that you dismiss that first, then appeal to it when it suits you.I didn't dismiss it; I just haven't seen it used often. I even acknowledged it can help some people. The point is: is that often enough to make it worth doing?No, you first dismissed it, as not being used often. And again,

your personal experience

, is that, your personal experience. My personal experience is that, in GW2 helping a friend with his gear is more complicated than in any number of other games that allow me to inspect gear.

And yes, you were being disingenuous. First you dismiss that with:

1-2 per account, until people learn how to build their own or

borrow from the usual websites

.Not using a straw man fallacy or anything, right? But not happy with that, you then show that you can go both ways, by then appealing to build diversity when trying to prove that there is such a thing as "toxic" gear shamming. You can't first dismiss it by saying that everyone will just copy the builds from website, and then, when it's convenient for you, talk about how there's a lot of build diversity.

The big advantage of DPS meters alone, over any sort of gear check: no one has to care about

how

anyone reaches sufficient DPS. Any build that allows people to deliver "good enough" damage will work. With a gear check, the attention would change.Would it? Can you prove it would? Because i've been playing MMORPGs and been a guild master since 2005. And in about 80% games i've played had gear inspection, and still, everyone would use DPS meters when available.I probably explained poorly. What does guild inspection add when there are already DPS meters? DPS meters alone (which the game has, albeit 3rd party) allows people to measure the objectively important results, without caring about how people get there.Gear inspection, in contrast, is about how people get there, not about results.EXACTLY!See, here your rush to just stand your point makes you fail to see the broader picture.You're trying to imply toxicity and prejudice about gear, and i'm telling you, that outside people who will be negative by their own, this will enhance that experience towards being more inclusive.With a DPS meter, you can only see the end-result. As in, this guy has or hasn't sufficient DPS (there's a whole different debate of what that is, but experienced people will have a standard). What can you do then? You either kick him, or "DPS shame him" as some would call it.If you can inspect his gear, you can avoid kicking him, entirely, and work out the problems. If someone has the correct gear, but has low DPS, you can ask them about their rotation, and try to help him fix it. If he doesn't have the correct gear you can instruct him in what would be a better build for him.Having to ask a person to link his gear, and having to check it item by item, just makes the process so much more cumbersome, that it results in a complete lack of dialogue about this in most cases.

You're just speculating without any basis. Every other game out there has both of these things, and at least one of them is always integral to the game, and yet, there's as much toxicity here than in those games, if not more. Because in those games, the toxicity usually comes from loot sniping, and kill stealing, in here it's actually from the players lack of willingness to play the content as offered.Again, I probably explained the idea poorly. Toxicity exists everywhere; it's a function of human nature, not of any specific tools. My point, again, is that it's not clear that adding gear inspection adds that much value.

I've demonstrated the value of it. You dismissed it, and claimed it could be toxic, your words not mine.

That is, you've speculated that it's a good thing and I am saying I don't think it's a strong claim.No, apparently unlike you, and as i explained already, i've played a number of games where you can inspect gear, and never has it resulted in toxicity. If anything GW2 has more toxicity due to it's lack of a gear inspector, because it results in people requiring other kinds of checks, that are more arbitrary.

---

Regardless, the

stated reason

for the original suggestion is to encourage people to transmute (either from borrowing or stealing ideas or wanting to be one of those from whom ideas are borrowed or stolen). To make that possible, only wardrobe inspection is necessary. Gear inspection, even as explained by others, serves an entirely different purpose.

No, Gear inspection, as i explained, serves several purposes, including the one asked, which is actually the least necessary one, since it won't encourage transmuting. Might facilitate copying, but i doubt it would increase the frequency with which people transmute, since it's already pretty pervasive, but yeah, i speculate here.This thread, however, asks for help in fashion wars.

To create a wardrobe only share, they'd have to add a second layer of filtering that shows only the skin from the weapon, instead of the weapon itself. To do so, requires extra computation to extricate the skin resource from the skin and show it separate.The UI would be new regardless. The filtering already exists in the API.

So how, if this was ever added, would you justify spending extra resources obfuscating the gear, when it's much simpler to just share it whole?I don't think it's likely that it would take

extra

resources to do either; they are probably close to the same sized project. The bigger work is going to be the UI, not the ability to show skins (which exists already in the preview window -- that's probably a bigger road block, because that interface itself is wonky and barely suited for GW2 circa 2012).

1) The UI already exists... They just need to show the exact same character skin we see when we press H, minus the number stats. No need for major UI overhauls.2) The game holds state for the gear equipped, the skin is a property of that gear item. To show just the skin, they'd need to have a function that would have to just extract that property, associate it with it's skin, and display it in the UI. While for full gear inspection they just need to either query the full item ID, which since you can link to the chat is readily available, and display it on a UI, or simply grab the equipment table from a player and display it. Regardless of your opinion, adding obfuscation always requires more work.

@Aktium.9506 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:Legendary Weapons can be done in a couple minutes if you have most of the materials readyTook me like an 1+ hour of just sitting around waiting for the crafting station to finish spitting out 10 000 mithril ingots and 10 000 elder wood planks, just fyi.

I guess in your hurry to reply you failed to read the very last words of the sentence you quoted.

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

And i'd posit that making a wardrobe check, instead of a full gear check, would actually just make people that actually want gear check, for these and other reasons, feel alienated.Can you explain how that works? If it's literally just checking skins currently in use, how would people feel 'alienated'?Same way that, for example, people like Brasil felt alienated when they realized that they weren't the target audience for Arena Net, because of the mount monetization.Same way that some PVE players feel alienated because of Raids.Well, in that case, you forgot to mention that introducing a gear check would also make some people alienated. And i'm sure that it would alienate way more people than it would "un-alienate" And not making gear share of any kind (so, no partial solutions either) would not alienate anyone that already wouldn't feel this way. It's not like we would remove a feature from the game after all.

I never said, to add or remove gear check, or partial, i just said that adding a partial one would be a bad move. And while i disagree with your assessment that it would alienate more people by adding a full one than otherwise, i'll ask you a question:Who do you think you should protect more? People that care for their builds, and spend time building up their characters, or those that are afraid they'll get "gear shammed" because they tend to not worry about that and just ride on other people's shoulders? Who do you think will have a stronger reaction, or who do you think invests more time in the game, hence being more likely to be a source of profit?

@ReaverKane.7598 said:If you have a part of the community asking for gear checks, because there are people that do so, and because there are people that will lie and try to leech of other people in raids and fractals. And then if Arena Net put up a partial gear check, that still obfuscates what those people asked, yeah, you can be sure a lot of them will feel that Arena net doesn't care for their enjoyment, and is tacitly approving of people leeching on group content.And we have a part of the community adamantly against gear checks of any kind. If Anet would put up gear check, it would alienate that group and make them feel Anet doesn't care about

their

feelings.Again, my question is, why should that group be protected? Evidently their reasoning is simply so they can hide their lack of commitment to the higher tier content. Just like they don't want DPS meters, because that makes it obvious how badly they're performing.There's only 2 scenarios possible here:Either you have a bad build, and you'll get called out for having a bad build, get kicked, and you will be unable to do the content, but that's your fault.Or you have a good build, but run into a guy that can't recognize it. You get called out erroneously, and either get kicked, or get the chance to turn the tables on the actual noob in the group. Either way, you probably don't want to play with that guy anyhow.

Basically you're either in the wrong, and need to get right, or you're right, and avoid being around people that are wrong.

@ReaverKane.7598 said:To create a wardrobe only share, they'd have to add a second layer of filtering that shows only the skin from the weapon, instead of the weapon itself. To do so, requires extra computation to extricate the skin resource from the skin and show it separate.So how, if this was ever added, would you justify spending extra resources obfuscating the gear, when it's much simpler to just share it whole?Probably wouldn't. But then adding neither of those features would be even simpler, and create no negative backlash at all. So, better on both counts.

So, basically, by your own arguments, it's better for Anet to not introduce any gear checks (partial or not) at all. Which is something i fully agree with.That's debatable, but yeah, sure. While i'd prefer a gear check, because, again, 14 years playing MMORPGs and never had a problem with gear check, in fact GW2's community is the first time i've ever had people crying about gear checking and DPS meters (which just shows you how many people do like to ride other people's coat tails here).

I too, have played MMOS for well over a decade, be honest, gear check creates toxic environments, often.

Cite examples please? I haven't, and having had most of the times 100+ players on my guilds, and not ever having people complain about it, i'm kind of baffled at how you can say this.Example: In a previous MMO I played in one of the top raiding guilds, with people that actually had world first kills to their name. My builds were tailored to my abilities and the environment I was playing in, which meant that especially when pugging they were non meta because meta didn't take into account people actually knowing how to pull off some builds and play intelligently rather than strictly sticking to a rotation somebody else came up with. I was able to pug any content in that game with either of my two main characters, and able to solo most if not all non-raid instances. Still I've had a sizeable number of encounters in random groups where people tried to talk me down for using the "wrong" gear and traits after inspecting me (without asking and with a quick, flawless instance run) simply because they weren't able to grasp what a build actually does (unlike the guildies I preferred to play with).

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

I'm all over it :) Though for a different reason. As a guy who finds at least 80% of high-tier items and outfits simply obnoxious/stupid/cheesy/impractical for combat uses, I tend to actually transmutate my high-level clothes into low-level ones because they at least look like something I would wear during activity where I have to jump, fall and bump onto spiky things :P And most of those items look like either a fashion-show costume, or comic-con costume, or both, or just simply impractical to a point it becomes absurd. Then, some of them at least look like an functional armor/protection gear, but just too bland and generic.

Thus, transmutation charges is my most precious treasure, as of now. And I would appreciate a way to prove others in a group that I'm indeed geared properly for the job, despite how it looks like :D

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:Well, in that case, you forgot to mention that introducing a gear check would also make some people alienated. And i'm sure that it would alienate way more people than it would "un-alienate" And not making gear share of any kind (so, no partial solutions either) would not alienate anyone that already wouldn't feel this way. It's not like we would remove a feature from the game after all.

I never said, to add or remove gear check, or partial, i just said that adding a partial one would be a bad move. And while i disagree with your assessment that it would alienate more people by adding a full one than otherwise, i'll ask you a question:Who do you think you should protect more? People that care for their builds, and spend time building up their characters, or those that are afraid they'll get "gear shammed" because they tend to not worry about that and just ride on other people's shoulders?

Wrong question, because it assumes way too many things that aren't true. For example, i'm generally up with the meta on all characters on which it's relevant (with the exception of some made specifically for OW, where it simply doesn't matter). Adding gear checks

would

make me feel alienated.

Why?

But back to your original question - who Anet should protect more? The group whose dissatisfaction would have bigger impact on their purse, of course.

Yep. And i'd speculate, that by the measure of effort invested into their characters, it's less likely to be the people unwilling to have a good build.

Who do you think will have a stronger reaction, or who do you think invests more time in the game, hence being more likely to be a source of profit?The bigger group? The group that will feel more negatively about this? (which, by the way, probably wouldn't be the hardcore group, because they already have no gear checks so they will hardly feel any more alienated than they are now).

There's a difference between not having something, and seeing something being added that is just a mockery of what you've been asking for.

Again, my question is, why should that group be protected? Evidently their reasoning is simply so they can hide their lack of commitment to the higher tier content.Bullkitten. There's a lot of people that do have commitment to the higher tier content but still feel strongly against gear checks.Why?

Just like they don't want DPS meters, because that makes it obvious how badly they're performing.There's only partial coverage here.What do you mean?

There's only 2 scenarios possible here:Either you have a bad build, and you'll get called out for having a bad build, get kicked, and you will be unable to do the content, but that's your fault.Or you have a good build, but run into a guy that can't recognize it. You get called out erroneously, and either get kicked, or get the chance to turn the tables on the actual noob in the group. Either way, you probably don't want to play with that guy anyhow.Or you have a good build, do a good dps, but unfortunately your build is tweaked to your personal preferences and isn't on Snowcrows list. You'd probably outdps most pugs, but you will never get the chance to show it, because due to the gear check you will get kicked right away.That would put you in the second scenario, no?

(hint: many of the builds that are in meta now or were part of the meta at some point in the past before they got nerfed were created this way, and might never have had a chance to become popular if everyone'd have been gearchecking and kicking them when they were still not commonly known)

Lol... You don't realize how meta comes to be do you? Meta builds are called meta builds because they work. If 100 guys that know their classes make 100 builds trying to achieve the same goal (be it max damage, max healing whatever), they'll end up with pretty much the same build with only some variations.Half the time there's a meta shift and i change my builds, it's only to find out in a couple weeks, that if i change a skill or two, a trait, or a rune, i'm playing meta builds, because that's how meta works. It's not one guy affixing the build, it's the community picking up on what works, and that gets disseminated. And you know how that goes by faster? If when you see someone performing well, you can just gear inspect and see how they're doing what they're doing, instead of having to ask, and then that person having to write a full descript of their gear and traits, and skills, when you could have seen that with a click.The only reason to dislike gear checking is if you have something to hide.

So, basically, by your own arguments, it's better for Anet to not introduce any gear checks (partial or not) at all. Which is something i fully agree with.That's debatable, but yeah, sure. While i'd prefer a gear check, because, again, 14 years playing MMORPGs and never had a problem with gear check, in fact GW2's community is the first time i've ever had people crying about gear checking and DPS meters (which just shows you how many people do like to ride other people's coat tails here)....you really weren't paying attention in all those MMORPGs, were youI can assure you i was. Although i usually shift around games a lot, i've had top players in their classes coming out of my guilds from guys i helped learn and theory craft. My guild was top 10 in several games by the time i moved out.

(Hint: discussion about gear checkers and dps meters is as old as the tools themselves, and here in GW2 we actually have it still quite peaceful, compared to other places)

Usually the discussion on DPS meters comes in the form of them being allowed or not, as coming from third party sources. When embeded in games, i've never seen complaints, and yeah, i'm usually pretty active in the forums of games i actively play.

Examples? Because, honestly, i can't prove a negative, i can't give you evidence of something i haven't experienced. But you can give me evidence of this for yourself.I've never viewed or had reasons given to view gear checking as anything but a positive thing. Sure it can be used to discriminate players, but so can just about any other public aspect of your character from your name, to your level, your class, etc. And if you doubt the name part. Here's a hint: players with Country tags on their name like FR, BR, ES, etc.

@Rasimir.6239 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Hugheszie.6291 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

Can you explain how that works? If it's literally just checking skins currently in use, how would people feel 'alienated'?Same way that, for example, people like Brasil felt alienated when they realized that they weren't the target audience for Arena Net, because of the mount monetization.Sorry, that's a reason that applies to absolutely anything that ANet does. It's not a positive reason for doing something, nor a sufficient negative

absent any specific context

.

Of course it applies to everything they add to the game, which is why it needs to be measured, and in this case adding a specific skin-only-check, would be a case where it would have been poorly measured and decided.Thing is, there is a substantial amount of people that want this, as they want DPS meters, and removing DPS meters or adding a half-baked gear check would serve only to aggravate people that want a full gear check. And you can go around with circular talks of whether it's significant or not, the only way to know is to do the wrong thing.

There are also a larger variety of "right answers" than people tend to acknowledge. In any game, there's a herd mentality to push towards the most theoretically efficient builds. In this game (as well as others), that is counterproductive. Most teams don't play at the level of snowcrows, where phases are so quick that many mechanics (and damage sources) can be ignored, sometimes completely ignored.I'm not saying otherwise, in fact i encourage people to do their own builds, in fact, it's like you say, snowcrows builds requires a certain level of efficiency and tactics, that don't always translate. Which is why i tend to do the build "brainstorming" with guildmates more often than you seem to believe plausible. Which is a bit ironic that you dismiss that first, then appeal to it when it suits you.I didn't dismiss it; I just haven't seen it used often. I even acknowledged it can help some people. The point is: is that often enough to make it worth doing?No, you first dismissed it, as not being used often. And again,

your personal experience

, is that, your personal experience. My personal experience is that, in GW2 helping a friend with his gear is more complicated than in any number of other games that allow me to inspect gear.

And yes, you were being disingenuous. First you dismiss that with:

1-2 per account, until people learn how to build their own or

borrow from the usual websites

.Not using a straw man fallacy or anything, right? But not happy with that, you then show that you can go both ways, by then appealing to build diversity when trying to prove that there is such a thing as "toxic" gear shamming. You can't first dismiss it by saying that everyone will just copy the builds from website, and then, when it's convenient for you, talk about how there's a lot of build diversity.

The big advantage of DPS meters alone, over any sort of gear check: no one has to care about

how

anyone reaches sufficient DPS. Any build that allows people to deliver "good enough" damage will work. With a gear check, the attention would change.Would it? Can you prove it would? Because i've been playing MMORPGs and been a guild master since 2005. And in about 80% games i've played had gear inspection, and still, everyone would use DPS meters when available.I probably explained poorly. What does guild inspection add when there are already DPS meters? DPS meters alone (which the game has, albeit 3rd party) allows people to measure the objectively important results, without caring about how people get there.Gear inspection, in contrast, is about how people get there, not about results.EXACTLY!See, here your rush to just stand your point makes you fail to see the broader picture.You're trying to imply toxicity and prejudice about gear, and i'm telling you, that outside people who will be negative by their own, this will enhance that experience towards being more inclusive.With a DPS meter, you can only see the end-result. As in, this guy has or hasn't sufficient DPS (there's a whole different debate of what that is, but experienced people will have a standard). What can you do then? You either kick him, or "DPS shame him" as some would call it.If you can inspect his gear, you can avoid kicking him, entirely, and work out the problems. If someone has the correct gear, but has low DPS, you can ask them about their rotation, and try to help him fix it. If he doesn't have the correct gear you can instruct him in what would be a better build for him.Having to ask a person to link his gear, and having to check it item by item, just makes the process so much more cumbersome, that it results in a complete lack of dialogue about this in most cases.

You're just speculating without any basis. Every other game out there has both of these things, and at least one of them is always integral to the game, and yet, there's as much toxicity here than in those games, if not more. Because in those games, the toxicity usually comes from loot sniping, and kill stealing, in here it's actually from the players lack of willingness to play the content as offered.Again, I probably explained the idea poorly. Toxicity exists everywhere; it's a function of human nature, not of any specific tools. My point, again, is that it's not clear that adding gear inspection adds that much value.

I've demonstrated the value of it. You dismissed it, and claimed it could be toxic, your words not mine.

That is, you've speculated that it's a good thing and I am saying I don't think it's a strong claim.No, apparently unlike you, and as i explained already, i've played a number of games where you can inspect gear, and never has it resulted in toxicity. If anything GW2 has more toxicity due to it's lack of a gear inspector, because it results in people requiring other kinds of checks, that are more arbitrary.

---

Regardless, the

stated reason

for the original suggestion is to encourage people to transmute (either from borrowing or stealing ideas or wanting to be one of those from whom ideas are borrowed or stolen). To make that possible, only wardrobe inspection is necessary. Gear inspection, even as explained by others, serves an entirely different purpose.

No, Gear inspection, as i explained, serves several purposes, including the one asked, which is actually the least necessary one, since it won't encourage transmuting. Might facilitate copying, but i doubt it would increase the frequency with which people transmute, since it's already pretty pervasive, but yeah, i speculate here.This thread, however, asks for help in fashion wars.

To create a wardrobe only share, they'd have to add a second layer of filtering that shows only the skin from the weapon, instead of the weapon itself. To do so, requires extra computation to extricate the skin resource from the skin and show it separate.The UI would be new regardless. The filtering already exists in the API.

So how, if this was ever added, would you justify spending extra resources obfuscating the gear, when it's much simpler to just share it whole?I don't think it's likely that it would take

extra

resources to do either; they are probably close to the same sized project. The bigger work is going to be the UI, not the ability to show skins (which exists already in the preview window -- that's probably a bigger road block, because that interface itself is wonky and barely suited for GW2 circa 2012).

1) The UI already exists... They just need to show the exact same character skin we see when we press H, minus the number stats. No need for major UI overhauls.2) The game holds state for the gear equipped, the skin is a property of that gear item. To show just the skin, they'd need to have a function that would have to just extract that property, associate it with it's skin, and display it in the UI. While for full gear inspection they just need to either query the full item ID, which since you can link to the chat is readily available, and display it on a UI, or simply grab the equipment table from a player and display it. Regardless of your opinion, adding obfuscation always requires more work.

@Aktium.9506 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:Legendary Weapons can be done in a couple minutes if you have most of the materials readyTook me like an 1+ hour of just sitting around waiting for the crafting station to finish spitting out 10 000 mithril ingots and 10 000 elder wood planks, just fyi.

I guess in your hurry to reply you failed to read the very last words of the sentence you quoted.

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

And i'd posit that making a wardrobe check, instead of a full gear check, would actually just make people that actually want gear check, for these and other reasons, feel alienated.Can you explain how that works? If it's literally just checking skins currently in use, how would people feel 'alienated'?Same way that, for example, people like Brasil felt alienated when they realized that they weren't the target audience for Arena Net, because of the mount monetization.Same way that some PVE players feel alienated because of Raids.Well, in that case, you forgot to mention that introducing a gear check would also make some people alienated. And i'm sure that it would alienate way more people than it would "un-alienate" And not making gear share of any kind (so, no partial solutions either) would not alienate anyone that already wouldn't feel this way. It's not like we would remove a feature from the game after all.

I never said, to add or remove gear check, or partial, i just said that adding a partial one would be a bad move. And while i disagree with your assessment that it would alienate more people by adding a full one than otherwise, i'll ask you a question:Who do you think you should protect more? People that care for their builds, and spend time building up their characters, or those that are afraid they'll get "gear shammed" because they tend to not worry about that and just ride on other people's shoulders? Who do you think will have a stronger reaction, or who do you think invests more time in the game, hence being more likely to be a source of profit?

@ReaverKane.7598 said:If you have a part of the community asking for gear checks, because there are people that do so, and because there are people that will lie and try to leech of other people in raids and fractals. And then if Arena Net put up a partial gear check, that still obfuscates what those people asked, yeah, you can be sure a lot of them will feel that Arena net doesn't care for their enjoyment, and is tacitly approving of people leeching on group content.And we have a part of the community adamantly against gear checks of any kind. If Anet would put up gear check, it would alienate that group and make them feel Anet doesn't care about

their

feelings.Again, my question is, why should that group be protected? Evidently their reasoning is simply so they can hide their lack of commitment to the higher tier content. Just like they don't want DPS meters, because that makes it obvious how badly they're performing.There's only 2 scenarios possible here:Either you have a bad build, and you'll get called out for having a bad build, get kicked, and you will be unable to do the content, but that's your fault.Or you have a good build, but run into a guy that can't recognize it. You get called out erroneously, and either get kicked, or get the chance to turn the tables on the actual noob in the group. Either way, you probably don't want to play with that guy anyhow.

Basically you're either in the wrong, and need to get right, or you're right, and avoid being around people that are wrong.

@ReaverKane.7598 said:To create a wardrobe only share, they'd have to add a second layer of filtering that shows only the skin from the weapon, instead of the weapon itself. To do so, requires extra computation to extricate the skin resource from the skin and show it separate.So how, if this was ever added, would you justify spending extra resources obfuscating the gear, when it's much simpler to just share it whole?Probably wouldn't. But then adding neither of those features would be even simpler, and create no negative backlash at all. So, better on both counts.

So, basically, by your own arguments, it's better for Anet to not introduce any gear checks (partial or not) at all. Which is something i fully agree with.That's debatable, but yeah, sure. While i'd prefer a gear check, because, again, 14 years playing MMORPGs and never had a problem with gear check, in fact GW2's community is the first time i've ever had people crying about gear checking and DPS meters (which just shows you how many people do like to ride other people's coat tails here).

I too, have played MMOS for well over a decade, be honest, gear check creates toxic environments, often.

Cite examples please? I haven't, and having had most of the times 100+ players on my guilds, and not ever having people complain about it, i'm kind of baffled at how you can say this.Example: In a previous MMO I played in one of the top raiding guilds, with people that actually had world first kills to their name. My builds were tailored to my abilities and the environment I was playing in, which meant that especially when pugging they were non meta because meta didn't take into account people actually knowing how to pull off some builds and play intelligently rather than strictly sticking to a rotation somebody else came up with. I was able to pug any content in that game with either of my two main characters, and able to solo most if not all non-raid instances. Still I've had a sizeable number of encounters in random groups where people tried to talk me down for using the "wrong" gear and traits after inspecting me (without asking and with a quick, flawless instance run) simply because they weren't able to grasp what a build actually does (unlike the guildies I preferred to play with).

Was that the majority? Was the problem the gear inspect, or is it more likely that the person would have been toxic regardless of being able to inspect your gear?Because, lo and behold, GW2 doesn't have Gear inspect, and you'll get those same comments, and in fact, seems to be more often than in most other MMORPGs. Granted, because of the way the game developed, by the time HoT released there were like 10 out of 100+ members in my guild that were still playing, so i do pug more often in GW2.

[Astralporing.1957]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:Wrong question, because it assumes way too many things that aren't true. For example, i'm generally up with the meta on all characters on which it's relevant (with the exception of some made specifically for OW, where it simply doesn't matter). Adding gear checks

would

make me feel alienated.

Why?Because it would be a further shift towards hardcore community away from what the game was originally. Or at least how i perceived it. I am already feeling strongly about anet introducing Raids and think that it was a move in the bad direction, so obviously i don't want the game to follow even further that way.

Also, i don't think gear checks have a net positive effect on the community, because they appeal mostly to people that do not in fact care about efficiency, but the ones that mindlessly follow established meta.If you do good dps/give good boons/heal well, there's no point in checking your gear. Noone reasonable would care about it. Someone in exotics/nonmeta build can easily end up doing a better job than another in a full meta build, but not skilled enough to make good use of it.

Thus, dps meters promote changes for a better efficiency, while gear checks work the opposite way - they suppress and slow changes because they promote being conservative.

There's a difference between not having something, and seeing something being added that is just a mockery of what you've been asking for.Ah, but would that be a mockery? Maybe for you, but i'm not so sure it would be the same for others.

Again, my question is, why should that group be protected? Evidently their reasoning is simply so they can hide their lack of commitment to the higher tier content.Bullkitten. There's a lot of people that do have commitment to the higher tier content but still feel strongly against gear checks.Why?For many reasons. Having strong beliefs about privacy for example. Some people just don't like to be spied on, even if they have nothing to hide. Also, see my first answer in this topic.

Just like they don't want DPS meters, because that makes it obvious how badly they're performing.There's only partial coverage here.What do you mean?Meaning that those two groups (those that do not want dps meters, and those that perform badly) are not necessarily the same people. There will be people belonging to one group, but not the other.

There's only 2 scenarios possible here:Either you have a bad build, and you'll get called out for having a bad build, get kicked, and you will be unable to do the content, but that's your fault.Or you have a good build, but run into a guy that can't recognize it. You get called out erroneously, and either get kicked, or get the chance to turn the tables on the actual noob in the group. Either way, you probably don't want to play with that guy anyhow.Or you have a good build, do a good dps, but unfortunately your build is tweaked to your personal preferences and isn't on Snowcrows list. You'd probably outdps most pugs, but you will never get the chance to show it, because due to the gear check you will get kicked right away.That would put you in the second scenario, no?So, you wouldn't want to pug together with most people wanting gear checks. Duly noted.

(hint: many of the builds that are in meta now or were part of the meta at some point in the past before they got nerfed were created this way, and might never have had a chance to become popular if everyone'd have been gearchecking and kicking them when they were still not commonly known)

Lol... You don't realize how meta comes to be do you? Meta builds are called meta builds because they work.And you can see that they work because they don't get kicked before they will have a chance to prove it.

If 100 guys that know their classes make 100 builds trying to achieve the same goal (be it max damage, max healing whatever), they'll end up with pretty much the same build with only some variations.In theory, yes. In practice, there were quite a number of popular builds that started because someone wanted to check some options other players overlooked before. Minstrel Chrono for example started as a joke, that surprisingly ended up working well. A few other builds became popular because some streamer decided to promote them, causing a lot of people to try to test them out. Those things would have no place in a mentality that is driven by gearchecks (that, in oposition to dps meters, enforce strict meta compliance over actual effectiveness).

Half the time there's a meta shift and i change my builds, it's only to find out in a couple weeks, that if i change a skill or two, a trait, or a rune, i'm playing meta builds, because that's how meta works. It's not one guy affixing the build, it's the community picking up on what works, and that gets disseminated. And you know how that goes by faster? If when you see someone performing well, you can just gear inspect and see how they're doing what they're doing, instead of having to ask, and then that person having to write a full descript of their gear and traits, and skills, when you could have seen that with a click.And do you know when it goes slower? If you get your traits/build checked before fight, and get kicked because it's not meta.

The only reason to dislike gear checking is if you have something to hide.Considering that i dislike gear checks, while also being up to meta on all my relevant chars, you are objectively wrong here.

[Biff.5312]

The reasons against are far greater than those for allowing gear inspection. Regardless, people seem to love linking all their gear without provocation while in town, so if you really want people to know that you have a legendary (which I promise you, they don't care about), link it in chat.

[kharmin.7683]

If they really want revenue, they should implement gear check and then offer a paid option to exempt out of it. I think more players would pay to avoid gear check than would pay to implement it.