Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Why majority of WvW players stopped giving feedback.


Recommended Posts

@Israel.7056 said:

@Israel.7056 said:have to let people be mean and insulting and say mean words and that's apparently a bridge too far for Anet.

Guess all those school anti-bullying campaigns are way off the mark then, eh?

If someone needs to be mean and insulting to get on with life, they should stop playing video games and seek therapy.....immediately.

Our modern society has become so emasculated culturally that people have forgotten that we are still a species of violent cruel walking talking social warrior apes and that the impulse to kill and destroy the enemy whoever he/she is is not ever going away, it just has to be channeled into healthy avenues like exercise and play rather than unhealthy avenues like real physical violence and property destruction.

I am SO glad that there are other people out there who get it. Bravo!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Warlord.9074 said:I feel like this is very constructive feedback here. The biggest problem with this game are the matchups and the server pairings, yet taking about them is against the rules. Not sure if this is the proper word to use but it is paradoxical or a oxymoron and it triggers the entire WvW community and all of the players who play this game and its why no one wants to post of these forums, to ever give any feedback.

there was not any update from A-net regarding a dedicated wvw team with enough manpower to make changes. There were no major changes in wvw in the past , and the feedbacks were mostly ignored

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:I am now in my second week of not playing wvw. I am sick of thieves, mesmers and soulbeasts. That simple.

They are broken, they have been broken since PoF came out, nothing has been done to fix it.

Thanks anet.

Only 2 weeks since PoF been out? You're definetely slacking...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why many stopped giving Feedback? Honestly...Why bother?

Unless you're a WvW Otaku (still a few here), or you're a White knight (suspected but not confirmed to be a disguised employee) See - Sock-puppet.

The only type of Feedback I feel that's wholeheartedly allowed & encouraged on this particular forum...is usually cosmetically shallow or selfish in nature...anything else is quietly suppressed or discouraged...imho

While our WvW community in-game has been & continues to be decimated by the poor decision to implement Server Linking (Forced Team Creation).

Forum participation is a clear indication of what's happening in-game...the population of WvW is on a very harsh negative declining trend...which has been accurately predicted. See - June 2016.

Next, this harsh negative declining trend...in my opinion...will only continue to be reinforced by the upcoming Alliance Linking (Forced Team Creation).

Doing the same thing & expecting a different outcome - (Definition for Insanity) See - Urban Dictionary.

Forced Team Creation (Auto or Manually done) only destroys the heart of what makes WvW unique & enticing to play.

We lost the sense of country or nation...something so vital that no single individual, guild, or alliance could ever do in nurturing a greater sense of belonging...that should be insulated from & beyond control of any sort of incendiary player politics, but instead is given directly to players to use as they see fit with Alliance Linking.

There's a predictable pattern & high possibility for the WvW game mode to foster Toxic player behavior in the Long-Term...IF players are allowed this level of control within the game mode...imho


There's a better alternative to fixing the server stacking problem. It's to embrace the stacking that naturally occurs.

The Highest stacked server in both the EU & NA should be made the primary target for ALL Lower Ranked servers to be attacked by in a truly pure King of the Hill match-up model...the in-game mechanics are already in place & available to make it happen.

.

We need to Replace the current Fixed 3 way match-ups & at the same time...Get rid of the Fixed League Tiers. See - Gold, Silver, and Bronze Leagues.

A pure King of the Hill match-up model that uses existing mechanics to channel the natural raw power behind server stacking in a positive way.


"Highly Stacked Servers...are like cream...Good ones, rise to the top!"

We need to make the Highest stacked servers to be the primary target for Everybody to attack.

The Highest Stacked/Ranked servers (EU and NA) needs to be the villain that all Lower Ranked servers should scheme to topple.

We need to embrace server stacking & use a different match-up model...that encourages healthy competitive match-ups...that's player driven...yet ANet controlled.

Lower Ranked servers SHOULD BE ALLOWED to attack any Higher Ranked server for Greater Rewards. Attacking any Lower Ranked server should come with Reduced Rewards. All Servers SHOULD BE ALLOWED to choose to Rise or Fall in their WvW Rank (based on their efforts) in finding the right rank niche to call home...

Servers being pigeon-holed into the same 3 way match-ups that's segregated by "Fixed League Tiers"...in the long-term...will frustratingly & carelessly...waste this game mode's potential to evolve into the next eSport SuperBowl.

Insightful feedback IS NOT valued here & it will probably just get lost in the shallow & selfish feedback of the day, but every so often...we can all wistfully dream that it can be otherwise...is how I feel.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

"Insights" are Opinions that when given enough time...are later confirmed to be true.


Before you vote to support anything...even this post...ask yourself...Can the WvW game mode be made better?

I firmly believe that both ANet & Players here want the WvW game mode to improve.

We appear to have ANet's ear at the moment & your vote here can let them know that players still want to engage them...if this thread doesn't for some reason or other...get buried & sink into obscurity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

This thread is so filled with misinformation and conspiracy theories, I doubt I can address them all, but...

  • The WvW Subforum is read.
  • Feedback is noted and, often, acted upon.
  • Negative feedback is perfectly fine as long as it's constructive.
  • The value of feedback is subjective, and what someone may see as "insightful" or "valuable" or "accurate" or "necessary" may, in fact, be a suggestion whose adoption is detrimental to the game as a whole. Since we all own our own opinions, it's really hard for any of us to accurately appraise the value of our comments. The devs do their best to look at things from a whole-game perspective, and that may result in the determination that the suggestion isn't practical at all.
  • Moderation is reasonable and necessary. Posts are not removed because they are "negative." We allow all sorts of negative comments on the forums -- look around you. (Look at this thread!) Comments will be removed when they're unacceptable. Let me put it this way:
    • Making a point is good.
    • Saying you don't like something is fine.
    • Giving constructive suggestions for change is marvelous.
    • Pointless ranting and raving, calling another member a horrible name, or asking for someone to be fired is wrong.
    • All that seems pretty clear to me and I think most are on board with that. If a post of yours is removed, read the mod note and try to look at the removal from an objective perspective. If we make an error, we'll right it. But we'll not go back and review every "I was 'banned' for saying 'pooh'" comment. You know how to appeal -- do it if you feel the need.

Lastly, NO ArenaNet employee posts on a sock-puppet account. I know this because I know and trust the team. But to increase your comfort level with my emphatic statement, I also know this because I have access to the back-end software, I would spot a sock-puppet account in seconds, and it would be gone. ArenaNet doesn't use fake accounts to post "white knight" comments or for any other reason. There are people who support us, and they're allowed to post. Don't besmirch them, or the devs, by suggesting they are fakers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Match-up threads probably aren't the answer. The constructive feedback that might appear in those is still perfectly fine to post elsewhere.

More generally, I've stopped giving feedback because--despite Gail saying that it's read and acted upon--it sure doesn't feel that way. That doesn't mean I don't believe her...just that it's a lot of work to take on when I'm essentially shooting in the dark. I can time all the yaks and determine exact or practical upgrade times and make a nice chart and all...but if Anet doesn't comment on whether they care that northern towers on ABL take massively longer to upgrade than any other structure anywhere, then what's the point? I can calculate how fast small-teams or zergs of various sizes can blitz a side keep but, without comment from Anet, I have no clue whether the numbers show that things are going too slow, too fast, or just right. I can give feedback on their siege changes but I don't know what their goal is for siege...so how can I tailor that feedback?

To give a few more specific examples, they made a change some years ago that allowed siege to be hit by crits and conditions. To compensate, they doubled siege health. However, they didn't boost siege vs. siege damage to compensate even though siege doesn't deal significant condition damage. Ballistae especially don't deal much condi dmg and their main role is killing other siege. Initially, I wasn't sure if this was intended or just an oopsie-goof, but I talked about it anyway. Anet didn't say a thing. Months later, they buffed the Ballista skill #1 to do double damage to siege which effectively restored anti-siege TTK for that one skill. I don't know if that was related and they didn't give a reason for it that I saw. They also didn't give a reason for keeping the doubling of TTK for all other siege/skills in place. It's possible that I gave feedback, they read it and they acted upon it...but who knows?

They also changed catapults to deal more damage with more charge, though they didn't say why. In doing so, they boosted the damage of proxy catas and catapult DPS generally. No word on if that was intentional. I said some things about that...no response, no changes. Now, it's fine if they don't comfort me every time I cry...but at some point in this process, I do need to have some clue as to what they're trying to do. If they don't tell me why they made a change, don't clarify the reason after making it and don't respond to feedback about it...why should I bother?

There are some other times where I've seen people give feedback and something related magically changed down the line, but it's hard to connect all of those dots. Also, since there's precious little communication at every point in the process, I don't think it's all on me if I've missed a few connections.

Basically, I'd love to give feedback. I have as much fun building spreadsheets and crunching numbers as I do scouting the borderlands. But it feels like I'm just shouting into the wind. I, for some reason, really love WvW. I'm sure that there are some Devs, somewhere, that also love WvW. But without any clue as to why they do what they do and don't do what they don't do, I can't be sure if my feedback is worth the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gaile,

Your response has been nothing but fair & professional...imho

In response...would it be possible to get a schedule on when to expect WvW Updates based on a consistent time frame that the community can come together over?

If you've ever sat in a white blank room without a clock...you'll understand the importance of being able to have a time reference in helping to keep your sanity.

Also, that spinning dial on your computer when you install something, or click on a web link...is there to help keep you from going nuts as you wait for the task to finish.

Can we at least get a spinning thingie for WvW Updates...that Displays % Complete to show progress?

No timeline or dates...just a Simple % Complete...that gets updated (monthly, quarterly, etc?)...if no updates are forthcoming...then a simple post saying no change to the % Complete status...but at least a log indicating that it is being watched.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:This thread is so filled with misinformation and conspiracy theories, I doubt I can address them all, but...

  • The WvW Subforum is read.
  • Feedback is noted and, often, acted upon.
  • Ghost Dolyaks. Been haunting the borderlands for years.
  • Guards at the gate out of Alpine borderlands' North Camps are hostile to whoever they're guarding for if the camp's taken by other servers since they implemented gliding.
  • The reworked stealth detector trap describes it as only needing 5 supply (as stated in the patch notes they were implemented in) but you need 10 supply to place it. (It will fail to be placed if you have less than 10 supply. Still consumes 5 supply after you place it.)

Taking your word about that feedback being noted, and often, acted upon. Please give me a glimmer of hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@kins.3294 said:

@Zero.3871 said:a dev showed up in wvw subforum? :open_mouth:is it my Birthday?

Uhhh, no. They just came in to tell us to stop crying and went back to ignoring the game mode.

No, no, that truly is not what I wanted to say. I didn't even want to hint that!

I have some insight into the studio and the team. That's why I feel I should tell you that WvW is not being abandoned, WvW players are not being ignored -- that's my honest assessment of the situation. I know it's sometimes hard to be patient, and @"Diku.2546" I totally understand the request, even like the idea of giving timeframes, but the company believes that doing that causes more problems than it helps. In an ideal world, we could say "We'll probably do this Q1 2019" and people would know that it's likely but not promised. But a certain number of people believe any form of a "about" or "probably" or "we're hoping" timeframe is an absolute, rock-solid immutable commitment or promise.

Think back, and I bet you can remember threads -- and believe me, I do ;) -- where a team member tried to provide a probable, anticipated, or hoped-for timeframe and, when for one of a dozen very good reasons -- from technical issues to the decision to do something even better than initially planned -- that timeframe slipped. Most people are understanding, but there are some who meet that sort of change in plans with comments like, "You promised this thing and it's not here" and even "You lied to us!"

We like to under-promise and over-deliver. I hope that things we do in the future help convince you of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry Gaile but from my perspective, there is no difference from devs that read the WvW forums and don't post anything and devs that don't read the WvW forums. Especially when I can see evidence of devs in PvP and PvE responding to players.

I have yet to see someone from the balance team on the WvW forums discussing with the players issues that the players see with builds/skills/traits that are overtuned in WvW and WvW alone.

From the very earliest threads about WvW it has been clear to the players that population and coverage are the biggest factors in determining the winners in a matchup. I realize that there have been several changes implemented to try to lessen the influence of population and coverage, changes I would call minimal. It's like you didn't want to blow up the system even after you realized that the system was the problem. Alliances will blow up the system, finally.

I'm sure that not many would agree with me but I would have had more respect for Anet if the devs just came out and threatened and/or forced the players to disperse to achieve a balanced WvW experience. There are many holiday PvP events where players are asked to switch sides to re-balance the match. I would also been happy if the devs, seeing that players took the initiative to start GvG, embraced it and encouraged it. Aren't there examples in GW1 and GW2 of some holiday events that were inspired by player initiatives?

Even if Alliances is released I probably won't come back because I really hate grinding for armor/weapons/trinkets in PvE in order to catch up with everyone else that has characters with BiS gear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but there was sooooo many plans to rework WvW and not many actually hit the mark and some were just lost down the line. Adopt a dev? Colin Johanson: " We are working on huge wvw overhaul"? Still waiting. Those 2 are just some i remember from the top of my head.

This video states that 150 GUILDS, WVW GUILDS applied to "adopt" a dev and i know for a fact that not all did that. Hell i didn't even know about that during the "application" period and i was already in hardcore gvg. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH THAT? Where is that community? And don't blame it on the people. We've dragged ourselves through draught and dirt and rightout hostility to sustain our WvW community and what is left from that? 10 or so guilds and we still plan on doing 2 tournaments, 1 on NA as normal and 1 on EU as draft with core+HoT only(might want to ask yourself why last year core only tournament was voted in and this year core+hot...). Don't try to preach to us. We all feel abandoned and given history we actually are.

Oh but casuals, hur dur. Well where are those casuals in WvW? Nowhere. Without commanders and most of those are not casual, because you know if you are a commander you aren't casual. We are going on 7, 7 YEARS and gameplay is still the same, well not actually the same, it's full of powercreep. Powercreep there, powercreep here. As for casual roamers, you can see them all on these forums on wvw, mesmer and thief pages.

As for:"We like to under-promise and over-deliver. I hope that things we do in the future help convince you of that."

There was much promised and not much delivered thought the years. Don't play innocent.Not to mention that alliances won't solve much at all. They are something needed because population is not sustainable. Would be great if we had this mechanic from the start or delivered somewhere in between, but not when we actually need something much more than this. Gameplay changes, changes in meta, better balance, rewards for actually being good? GvG where you represent a world and if that weekly turney is won you get additional benefits??? That would bring hardcore fight folk and hardcore ppters together.

Only thing that still gives any hope in this company is BenP.

Deleted 1,2,3....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that we get told "OH GUYS WE'RE LISTENING TO YOUR FEEDBACK AND WE GOT GREAT THINGS!!!!" yet the common practice is that we go 3 months without any updates literally at all in WvW even bug fixes that have yet to be addressed or even responded to for months. The only response we've gotten in the WvW forums about anything is from Gaile talking about how they're listening to us with absolutely no evidence of such a claim.

Like yeah I get the PR words, but actions speak way more than a bunch of pretty words tossed in a sentence. I'd rather hear raw dev details than read ultra powder coated PR uselessness. Anet doesn't seem to even have a high level scope of what they are developing in WvW, much less anything detailed and a timeframe.

It's pretty much guaranteed this next expansion is PvE crap only with literally nothing being added to WvW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Gaile Gray.6029" The underlying issue here is deeper than what is being addressed.
Yes, maybe the forums are being read, and yes, maybe it brings more problems than not to suggest time frames.
But that's not the real issue right? The issue is not how to deliver communication, is that the time frames (whatever they might be) are in dissonance with what players like myself might expect.
The segment of the players that focus on wvw (I am aware that many of us try to enjoy all aspects of the game, but some focus on one mode more than others) seems neglected to some extent, and not for some months, for years. A complicated system like what the new alliance system proposed seems to be, might take many hours of work and design, but years? is that reasonable? I'm pretty sure that you're right, giving a certain time frame might be problematic, at the same time not giving any works more on your advantage than that of the loyal players. Just as you can't say "Q1 2019" because you might not hit that mark, you will certainly not tell us "In two years it will be finished" because you probably know that many people, when faced with that prospect, will just leave the game.
The issue then is not about time frames, the work shouldn't be rushed, but there should be some contingency plan to make those two years not feel like waiting on the line for some attention.
I'm pretty sure that you will find plenty of suggestions, sometimes bitter tasted, sometimes hopeful, on this forums, but let's not miss the forest for the trees.
Remember that guilds are the building blocks of our community ingame, and sometimes guilds need the proverbial carrot in order to stay focused and active, beyond friendships and camaraderie, specially wvw focused ones, there's so much waiting you can take, and being a guild master under this circumstances is no easy task.

You have something very special with WvW, please don't give it up, and don't regard it as a secondary gimmick of the game, to many of us, it is the soul of what we love about guild wars 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:This thread is so filled with misinformation and conspiracy theories, I doubt I can address them all, but...

  • The WvW Subforum is read.
  • Feedback is noted and, often, acted upon.
  • Negative feedback is perfectly fine as long as it's constructive.
  • The value of feedback is subjective, and what someone may see as "insightful" or "valuable" or "accurate" or "necessary" may, in fact, be a suggestion whose adoption is detrimental to the game as a whole. Since we all own our own opinions, it's really hard for any of us to accurately appraise the value of our comments. The devs do their best to look at things from a whole-game perspective, and that may result in the determination that the suggestion isn't practical at all.
  • Moderation is reasonable and necessary. Posts are not removed because they are "negative." We allow all sorts of negative comments on the forums -- look around you. (Look at this thread!) Comments will be removed when they're unacceptable. Let me put it this way:
    • Making a point is good.
    • Saying you don't like something is fine.
    • Giving constructive suggestions for change is marvelous.
    • Pointless ranting and raving, calling another member a horrible name, or asking for someone to be fired is wrong.
    • All that seems pretty clear to me and I think most are on board with that. If a post of yours is removed, read the mod note and try to look at the removal from an objective perspective. If we make an error, we'll right it. But we'll not go back and review every "I was 'banned' for saying 'pooh'" comment. You know how to appeal -- do it if you feel the need.

Lastly, NO ArenaNet employee posts on a sock-puppet account. I know this because I know and trust the team. But to increase your comfort level with my emphatic statement, I also know this because I have access to the back-end software, I would spot a sock-puppet account in seconds, and it would be gone. ArenaNet doesn't use fake accounts to post "white knight" comments or for any other reason. There are people who support us, and they're allowed to post. Don't besmirch them, or the devs, by suggesting they are fakers.

Do you really not see the contradictory logic of this post?

On the one hand you postulate that the value of any opinion is fundamentally subjective. At some level this casts doubt on the use of debate but that's another issue.

On the other hand you ask us all to look at post deletions objectively. But you already stipulated that value of any feedback is subjective. Whose perspective can be considered objective then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Israel.7056 said:

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:This thread is so filled with misinformation and conspiracy theories, I doubt I can address them all, but...
  • The WvW Subforum
    is
    read.
  • Feedback
    is
    noted and, often, acted upon.
  • Negative feedback is
    perfectly fine
    as long as it's constructive.
  • The value of feedback is subjective, and what someone may see as "insightful" or "valuable" or "accurate" or "necessary" may, in fact, be a suggestion whose adoption is detrimental to the game as a whole. Since we all own our own opinions, it's really hard for any of us to accurately appraise the value of our comments. The devs do their best to look at things from a whole-game perspective, and that may result in the determination that the suggestion isn't practical at all.
  • Moderation is reasonable and necessary. Posts are not removed because they are "negative." We allow all sorts of negative comments on the forums -- look around you. (Look at this thread!) Comments will be removed when they're unacceptable. Let me put it this way:
    • Making a point is good.
    • Saying you don't like something is fine.
    • Giving constructive suggestions for change is marvelous.
    • Pointless ranting and raving, calling another member a horrible name, or asking for someone to be fired is wrong.
    • All that seems pretty clear to me and I think most are on board with that. If a post of yours is removed, read the mod note and try to look at the removal from an objective perspective. If we make an error, we'll right it. But we'll not go back and review every "I was 'banned' for saying 'pooh'" comment. You know how to appeal -- do it if you feel the need.

Lastly,
NO
ArenaNet employee posts on a sock-puppet account. I know this because I know and trust the team. But to increase your comfort level with my emphatic statement, I also know this because I have access to the back-end software, I would spot a sock-puppet account in seconds, and it would be gone. ArenaNet doesn't use fake accounts to post "white knight" comments or for any other reason. There are people who support us, and they're allowed to post. Don't besmirch them, or the devs, by suggesting they are fakers.

Do you really not see the contradictory logic of this post?

On the one hand you postulate that the value of any opinion is fundamentally subjective. At some level this casts doubt on the use of debate but that's another issue.

On the other hand you ask us all to look at post deletions objectively. But you already stipulated that value of any feedback is subjective. Whose perspective can be considered objective then?

Sounds to me like ANet is listening to the ones that cry the loudest, as many of us have always thought. These forums are a terrible place for constructive criticism because 99.9% of the time, there is none. It's just X killed me please nerf X and buff Y or ANet never listens to us, this game mode is dying long winded rant with no attempt to offer solutions to the problems followed by further pointing fingers at ANet.

If anything, I think ANet is listening too much. People rant and complain regardless of whether there are or aren't any updates. They're never happy and apparently ANet is trying to please everyone. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it but, if it's those that are making the most noise that are calling the shots, I'd much rather ANet ignore us almost completely and pay more attention to the statistics.

I apologize for all the whining and difficulty you guys must have trying to figure out what to do with WvW, Gaile. I can't say that I'm 100% satisfied with it's current state but I assure you not everyone is as negative and hostile as many of those you see here. And I don't believe "passionate" is a valid excuse for people only ever posting when they're angry and not when they're happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care how hard you claim to be "listening." It's all cheap, meaningless words we've heard 1,000 times before. I, and I suspect many others, want concrete action. We want to see change. Things that have been heard, discussed and turned into something tangible that actually affects the game and has an impact on players actually playing the game mode. You've had 7 years to listen. It's time for action: action that breaks the stagnation that this game mode has been in for quite some time which many people have lost hope in ever changing due to the lack of any concrete changes occurring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@"Israel.7056" said:

On the one hand you postulate that the value of any opinion is fundamentally subjective. At some level this casts doubt on the use of debate but that's another issue.

On the other hand you ask us all to look at post deletions objectively. But you already stipulated that value of any feedback is subjective. Whose perspective can be considered objective then?

I think I can answer this, if I understand the question. Objectivity is best achieved by those who don't have a pony in the race. Post deletions are not personal, are not targeted, are not determined by where you post, how much you play, what profession you choose, your spendings in the Gem Store, nor your astrological sign or shoe size. :) Post deletions are handled by team members who have professional training and experience in viewing each post with as much clarity and as little bias as humanly possible.

Post deletions happen when people go OTT in what is supposed to be a reasonable place for conversation. Name calling, rampant insults, attacks on another member, conspiracy theories, threats of legal action -- anything listed in the Forums Code of Conduct as a potential violation just shouldn't be posted. There's a reason we ask for people to be reasonable -- to support our community and their ability to have meaningful conversations.

@"SpellOfIniquity.1780" said:

I apologize for all the whining and difficulty you guys must have trying to figure out what to do with WvW, Gaile. I can't say that I'm 100% satisfied with it's current state but I assure you not everyone is as negative and hostile as many of those you see here. And I don't believe "passionate" is a valid excuse for people only ever posting when they're angry and not when they're happy.

I appreciate that! And I agree that "passionate" is misused when it's an excuse. "I verbally abused someone because I am 'passionate'" has very little -- probably zero -- validity. We forgive a lot of borderline comments because we do appreciate that people can get a little carried away with expressing themselves, but there is a limit, and that's why moderation happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:

@Zero.3871 said:a dev showed up in wvw subforum? :open_mouth:is it my Birthday?

Uhhh, no. They just came in to tell us to stop crying and went back to ignoring the game mode.

No, no, that truly is not what I wanted to say. I didn't even want to hint that!

I have some insight into the studio and the team. That's why I feel I should tell you that WvW is not being abandoned, WvW players are not being ignored -- that's my honest assessment of the situation. I know it's sometimes hard to be patient, and @"Diku.2546" I totally understand the request, even like the idea of giving timeframes, but the company believes that doing that causes more problems than it helps. In an ideal world, we could say "We'll probably do this Q1 2019" and people would know that it's likely but not promised. But a certain number of people believe any form of a "about" or "probably" or "we're hoping" timeframe is an absolute, rock-solid immutable commitment or promise.

Think back, and I bet you can remember threads -- and believe me,
I
do ;) -- where a team member tried to provide a probable, anticipated, or hoped-for timeframe and, when for one of a dozen very good reasons -- from technical issues to the decision to do something even better than initially planned -- that timeframe slipped. Most people are understanding, but there are some who meet that sort of change in plans with comments like, "You promised this thing and it's not here" and even "You
lied
to us!"

We like to under-promise and over-deliver. I hope that things we do in the future help convince you of that.

Gaile,

I remember well when the Devs used to give estimates, miss it by a week and the forum posters would crucify them. I like what one of the other posters here mentioned - just give some updates; no delivery dates, just updates

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...