sevenDEADLY.5281

> @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> Nope, that's not what I read. I get that it's what you want to have read, but "don't make story content require a group" is not the same as "don't make group content".

This isn't Icebrood Saga episode 3. Visions of the past is entirely new and it seems its going to be group oriented content, while living world updates (Icebrood saga episodes) intend to be single player. So yes, by demanding they make visions of the past exactly like living world, you are demanding they don't make group content, because this is new group content and you're demanding it not be. How is that unclear?

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

> I've never said that a MMO can only have 1 person or 100 person though. That's something you're accusing me off :D

> Reality is that MMOs also have single player content, so telling the OP to play another game is still wrong.

I'm not demanding they stop making single player encounters in the game, the OP is trying to prevent ANET from making multiplayer content. See the difference?

Also you very clearly have stated several times now that MMO means MASSIVE only and NOT multiplayer.

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

> > @"sevenDEADLY.5281" said:

> > > @"Raknar.4735" said:

> > > Yeah, the push for lobby based instanced content also isn't my thing and is weird. Nothing massive about that content.

> >

> > However, there is something VERY multiplayer about it.

>

> Yeah, but nothing with massively multiplayer. Just lobby multiplayer /shrug

Ah yes, so dungeons should never be allowed in an MMO ever, gotcha. Everyone knows successful MMOs only have 100% completely single player experiences or 100 people blobfests with nothing in between. Of course, how have all these other successful MMOs survived with all their 5 and 10 man dungeons. Clearly they need to get with the times.

> @"Raknar.4735" said:

> Yeah, the push for lobby based instanced content also isn't my thing and is weird. Nothing massive about that content.

However, there is something VERY multiplayer about it.

This whole thread boils down to "I don't like playing with other people, so arenanet should NEVER make any more new coop content EVER and no one else should be allowed to have it either!"

It lasts about 3 seconds then disappears. What's the actual problem here?

> @"Lizdeath.5143" said:

> Sadtimes, I was under the impression SAB was also in this patch

SAB is in April, unless I'm in some kind of crazy time loop, its March.

> @"zombyturtle.5980" said:

> maybe its just poor translation but why are some of the questions so biased? i dont really want to contribute to this when some choices are 3 words and others are full emotionally charged paragraphs and even have emotes...

> doesnt seem very valid.

If this is the case then then the research would be invalid as the questions themselves would be leading and biased.

Land Spear. Please, for the love of god. Make it happen

I can't think of any game ever where blocking someone magically makes them invisible on your screen. Sounds extremely frivolous. Not every minor inconvenience in life needs to be fixed by some higher level of authority, in this case Arenanet.

> @"coso.9173" said:

> people are not apples. and in a situation of actual abuse, if you stay neutral, you're indiretly taking the abuser's side. not saying this is the case. but there's no true impartiality on social issues where a minority has been abused for years by others.

> but lets get back on topic shall we? this topic has nothing to do with LGBTQ people or how many play the game. it's been stated many times already that this is about more options and leaving more choice instead of the usual tropes of sexy women and full armored guys.

This game already has many armor sets that are visually identical between sexes, and many that are not. Having different appearing armors between sexes is not a situation of abuse. The percentage of "sexy" armors vs non are also not in favor of someone trying to act like this game is forcing female characters to be dressed this way. If you personally are seeing a lot of "sexy" characters it's because people are choosing to make their characters that way. There are far more non sexy armor choices in the game than there are scantily clad ones.

More options are great, except as stated many many times already in this thread, creating 4 different versions of a single piece of armor per race instead of 2 is literally twice the work for barely any reward on Arenanet's part. Armor's in this game are custom fitted, they're not as simple as hitting a button to fit it to a form. Sometimes they make armor sets visually identical between the sexes, and sometimes they don't so there are actually options for everyone. My guardian for example is a huge norn wearing gladiator style armor that I would certainly not consider "fully armored." He has a lot of skin showing.

> @"The Greyhawk.9107" said:

> As such I don't think its conducive to at least an attempt at a semi-reasonable discussion to bring up stats of how much of the IRL population is gay or trans, or how many of them play GW2 or games in general. Its also not a good idea to be making inferences of bigotry against the other commenters, its disingenuous and helps no one.

How is statistical data bigotry? I made no comment about different communities or inference of hatred towards anyone. Why is statistical data suddenly "bigotry" when it's not 100% supporting a particular side? If I have 10 apples and nine of them are red and one is green, stating such doesn't suddenly make the data bigotry against green apples.

TLDR: I don't like something, so no one must like it.

> @"Hannelore.8153" said:

> Fwiw, we're alot more common than you think, its just that most of us are still in hiding because of this kitten. You really think that when the world is still saturated with thoughts and feelings like in this thread, anyone would come out?

>

> I imagine this thread will inevitably end up deleted

Even if the numbers were doubled it would still be an overwhelming minority. 88% > 12%. If your assumption is that 115 million people in the US are just "hiding it" then that's an unrealistic assumption. I have to once again point out that members of a minority group who constantly surround themselves with that minority group will always overestimate their numbers.

There are many armor sets that are the same between sexes, and many that aren't. Instead of demanding the ones that aren't be changed, maybe just use the ones that are instead of demanding the game be changed for your own personal taste while ignoring other's.

> @"AgentMoore.9453" said:

> > @"sevenDEADLY.5281" said:

> > Some quick research shows that roughly 4.5% of the US population and 6% in the EU identify as LGBTQ oriented.

>

> That is not game data. Additionally, LGBTQ is a separate issue from fashion, so I'm not sure why you're making them out to be mutually exclusive.

Typical gender stereotypes such as man = masculine and female = feminine are the way they are because they are the broadly traditional view of the sexes. While not mutually exclusive, in traditional views most men prefer to dress as men and most women prefer to dress as women. Even among members of the LGBTQ community this is the case for a fair amount. Your argument seems to be that you think for some reason a much much larger percentage of LGBTQ members consist of game players than the average population. If this is the case than I would point out that it is now you that needs to show your work and prove this. Again, members of any given smaller community always overestimate their group size because they surround themselves with said group constantly, giving them a false impression of the world ie: all my friends are x so people everywhere must be x.

> @"AgentMoore.9453" said:

> Show your work. Clearly you have access to game data to be able to proclaim those things as fact, right?

>

> Feel however you want about gender and clothes, but don't try to speak for others and isolate people by telling them they're part of a tiny group just because you disagree with them. The OP is asking why they can't wear both versions of an outfit on both genders; the core answer is game limitations, everything else is just noise intended to divide and hurt people.

Some quick research shows that roughly 4.5% of the US population and 6% in the EU identify as LGBTQ oriented. Saying he doesn't speak for others also applies to you, and the facts are that such a small percentage of population does qualify technically as niche. Any person that is part of a group always overestimates that group's size because they surround themselves with it. But numbers don't lie. So doubling your workload to cater to 4.5% to 6% of a population is unfortunately unrealistic.

Not everything designed in the game that isn't directly suited towards you is some purposeful plan against you.

> @"Elden Arnaas.4870" said:

> It would have been so much better to make raptor be present in both PvE and WvW, but with different special skills. (And obtainable through PoF or WvW) That would have been simple and done. PvE players would have no reason to covet/resent a separate WvW mount.

They specifically stated they purposely did not go this route by intention. PvE players have no reason to covet a separate WvW mount except for impractical visual choices, just as WvW players have no reason to covet a separate PvE mount except for impractical visual choices. You can rage against this choice all you want, it doesn't change the fact that this was a purposeful decision.

> @"Elden Arnaas.4870" said:

> If they never *intended* for warclaw to be used in PvE, _it would not have been released in PvE_ .(Hint - warclaw *was* released in PvE. It is not a PvE exploit or cheat) So please do link your proof that ANet "never intended for the warclaw to be used in PvE"

Being able to summon the warclaw in pve and it being useful in pve are two different things. As others have already pointed out, Arenanet themselves have stated several times they have no intention of making warclaw a useful pve mount. All the argumental rage you'd like to conjur will not change this.

No not really. I'm not a paid researcher of information that was previously released about the game. There are plenty of dev videos and interviews about the warclaw from its release

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> Okay, nice skin Anet. Looks appropriately intimidating and combat themed.

>

> Now do something about it being nothing but a worse raptor in pve.

>

> It's engage skill doesn't even do anything beyond the base damage that several other do on top of an additional effect like pulling in enemies or applying a barrier.

>

> There's currently no reason to use the warclaw outside of WvW other than for RP value and there's no real reason for this to be the case

They did this on purpose, fully explained exactly why it would be this way, and have never intended for the warclaw to be useful in PvE.

> @"Galmac.4680" said:

> As I understand the patch, the general nerf is also in PvE

No, those massive 33% to 66% damage reductions through power coefficients are wvw and pvp only. Hence why they're under the "wvw changes" or "pvp changes" section of updates only.

Damage reductions are in pvp and wvw only.

> @"Sapphic Savvy.8376" said:

> > @"sevenDEADLY.5281" said:

> > Most games let you join one guild. Why isn't five good enough? Is ten good enough? Is twenty good enough? What arbitrary number is to your liking?

>

>

> For the purposes of monetization why would people like you care if other people had the option to pay to have other guild slots? Like the level of closed minded here is baffling. Do you really want to force other people [who are willing to financially support the game that you also play] into your little box and deprive the developers of potential revenue in the process?

Ah, so you're the "make stuff I want and monetize it" crowd. Monetizing build templates worked out so well... it was only followed by the worst quarter for Arenanet to date on the finance report.

Most games let you join one guild. Why isn't five good enough? Is ten good enough? Is twenty good enough? What arbitrary number is to your liking?