[Suggestions] Updated: 20 in-game improvements we will 'likely' never see. 10 in OP; 10 from players

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

For a short time? I don't think years is a short time. Perhaps, you aren't familiar with Guild Wars...I don't know.

 

If the game being based on the same engine allows anything from Guild Wars to be enabled in GW2, then why, pray tell, do we not have Build Templates? Now, there's a head-scratcher. Could it be that everything possible in Guild Wars is not so easy in GW2?

 

(Just an FYI: It's not the _same_ engine, but a heavily-modified engine from Guild Wars.)

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> For a short time? I don't think years is a short time. Perhaps, you aren't familiar with Guild Wars...I don't know.

>

> If the game being based on the same engine allows anything from Guild Wars to be enabled in GW2, then why, pray tell, do we not have Build Templates? Now, there's a head-scratcher. Could it be that everything possible in Guild Wars is not so easy in GW2?

>

> (Just an FYI: It's not the _same_ engine, but a heavily-modified engine from Guild Wars.)

 

It is no head-scratcher at all. The answer to your question nobody wants to face is more than likely, quite possibly (as I have brought up earlier in this thread on Page 1) Anet has been purposely postponing implementing certain features in GW2 to ensure good sales on future Xpacs when they finally _do_ release features like Build Templates, etc. that we should have had 3-6 months after the game's release date. They are downplaying some (_not_ all) of their capabilities.

 

Furthermore, what do you think the words 'a heavily-modified engine _from_ Guild Wars' means? Those words mean the engine GW2 uses _is_ based off Guild Wars 1's engine, mind you, that has been improved through a spaghetti mess of code through the Dev's wizardry to make certain things in GW2 work that the engine was _not_ originally intended for, for example, Mounts, which is another thing I pointed out earlier in this thread on Page 1 (go read). That is why we Dismount every time we [F] Interact while Mounted because it otherwise bugged the game, proof that GW2's engine is _still_ dated when it bugs out on something simple like [F] Interact.

 

There was even one point roughly 2 years ago where the engine was collapsing on its own weight with everything it was trying to calculate where textures were starting to go missing out of nowhere, and many graphical artifacts were starting to show up. Anet then had to rig the engine to fix the issues that were amounting at the time, and I am sure with every change Anet makes to the game to this day that they have to work around their rigged fixes to ensure the same issues do not surface again.

 

With that being said, the game may not look pretty behind the scenes, yet Anet's Devs _still_ prove capable of doing the seemingly impossible, for example, like the way they made SAB (Super World Adventure) possible through their wizardry of code to deal with how the map handles the physics, among many other algorithmic complications.

 

My point is the game is under enough stress already. What part of any of that do you and **STIHL** not understand? The 'automatic clothes swap' system is _not_ a good idea.

 

**Now**, you may sit back and argue, "Yea, well, don't the ideas you came up with and other players throughout this thread come up with require certain 'checks' / 'verifications', etc.?" Absolutely, yet _not_ as many that would be required for an 'automatic clothes swap' system for each and every player in the game upon entering certain zones/areas. There is a _big_ difference in the number of 'checks' / 'verifications' being computed there.

 

**Conclusively**, the issues go well beyond me personally not liking the idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system. I should have been clearer on these things the first time, yet given how much explanation had to be exhausted (simplified for easier reading comprehension), I was not in the mood to get into it at the time.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Ahh, my bad. I thought 'same' and 'heavily-modified' were not the same thing.

I wish I had access to the Devs' reasons for the state of the game.

 

Good luck.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > As for the Town Clothing idea, that sounds silly, granted I read it right. I only want to see the clothing I chose to put on my characters, not for my clothing to be automatically switched out for Town Clothing upon entering towns.

>

> I have always thought that walking though a major city in full armor with a massive arsenal of weapons on my persons was moronic, the idea of swapping to "Normal" clothing in town has intrigued me since I heard about town clothing.

>

> To each their own on that tho.

 

I never had this issue as I never liked looking like I'm armoured up and always aimed for normal/practical "casual" looks for my characters as I always found the whole "full armour look" a bit silly (FOR ME! OPINION! FOR ME! NOT FOR OTHERS)

[Shirlias.8104]

I would like to see WvW customization like SPvP's.

No equipment nor consumables.

Just A neck, 1 rune set and a sigil choice.

 

It would be great for balance and also it will definitely come in handy about devs work.

[Draco.9480]

inspect option in pve, wvw(only yer world), pvp (only yer team)

[Ayakaru.6583]

*and the removal of the 15 minute timer on combat tonics, its the most infuriating things since the design of the quaggan*

[Ayakaru.6583]

> @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > ArenaNet didn't _remove_ Mini-pet battles, for whatever reason (I can't imagine it would be for animal abuse; many Mini-pets are not animals); it was just never implemented.

>

> I reworded my comment regarding the animal abuse factor, that it resembled it so as to be interpreted as such, regardless if most Mini pets in-game are actual animals or not. And yes, the idea was never implemented, quite possibly because of said reason, that or Anet did not want to copy the concept of Pokemon --- wherever players level their Minis and fight against other players' Minis --- and face a potential lawsuit.

 

Its called polymock, and its established that even within the game, they are fake. Hence there’s no animal abuse if you polymock with a dolyak or whatever else. That said, five years later, im still waiting for polymock to return. They could pool minipets into groups for fighting, the appearances just being skins. So a rare minipet wont be stronger than a blue minipet, but the fun of having unique skins.

[RoxanaGul.2360]

So many great ideas and time savers! I would love to have the 'Y' and 'N' hotkeys and inventory quick slot access; it's surprising that those two were not added in the very beginning.

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > > > Hmm....I seem to remember some automatic gear swapping (option) when entering (or exiting) Towns in Guild Wars. I'm guessing the Devs didn't think such a thing is so far-fetched, after all. Perhaps, it is just more difficult to do, here in GW2, rather than an idea that serves 'no purpose' or 'wastes time'. Who knows?

> > >

> > > GW1 and GW2 run off the _same_ engine, so no, it is _not_ a matter of being 'a difficult thing to implement in GW2'. For example, what do you think happens to our character's gear upon [F] Interacting with Diving Goggles when we go diving? We change into a bathing suit, right? Therefore, code in the game already exists in GW2 to make changing into different clothes possible, the only difference being is changing into Town Clothes would be triggered upon entering towns instead of [F] Interact.

> > >

> > > With that being said in mind, unless you can explain how automatically changing a player's character appearance into Town Clothes is 'useful/beneficial', it _is_ useless and does _not_ serve a good purpose.

> >

> > Ya know for someone that is playing a game that is built purely around cosmetics, you seem to be stumbling at grasping the value of being able to set triggers to change those cosmetics, you sincerely don't see the QoL advantage of that huh?

>

> Just because the game is built around cosmetics, because that is the way Anet gets players to spend money at the Gem Store, does _not_ mean I am into 'Fashion Wars'. Maybe players like you are in that but not me.

 

Not being rude, but, So what if that is not your thing.

 

Some people don't like Jump Puzzles.. yet.. they are in the game, and more being added, because some people do like them.

Some people don't like the whole legendary Journey thing, yet they were put in because some people did like that.

Some people don't like fractals, yet they were put in and updated, because some people do like them.

Same with sPvP, WvW, Dungeons, Raids, Mini-games, in fact.. I am sure that everything you can do in this game. some people love and some people hate.

 

So, look, just because you don't like it, has no bearing on if a lot of other people would love this idea, and how much it would improve the overall quality of the game for those people.

 

I like this idea, and what I would like and want is just as important as anything you would like and want. for example, you don't see me losing my mind at your wallet idea even if I think that's a total waste of time and effort and not something I think would be worthwhile. What currency I have pops up when I go to the appropriate vendor. so it's not like I'll ever come to the point in this game where I need to know how many Symbols of Koda I have on me at all times. But you don't see me ragging on that idea, simply because I think it is a waste and kinda stupid.

 

To coin a phrase.

 

Now since you said:

 

>It just sounds like laziness to dress your own character, which literally takes a few seconds to swap through Outfits from the Outfits tab or the Wardrobe tab.

 

Allow me to rebuttal your Wallet Idea: _It just sounds like laziness to open your own wallet, which literally takes a few seconds to scroll through currencies_

 

See.. not everyone shares what is valuable in this game, not all of us have the same goals or what we feel would make the game better.

 

Now either you can respect that and understand this would be a QoL update to me and those that share what I would like, even if not for you, and understand what you want, may or may not matter to anyone else and they may think it's stupid and a waste o Dev time.

 

As for the engine and graphics argument, that is graspin gat straws if Iever heard such a cry,. They already have in place model swapping, dye swapping, not to mention tonics, outfits, and now with the endless Mount/dismount. Please. they can handle people swapping their look when they enter an new zone, because the game can handle people swapping their look all the time while in that zone.

 

Look at mad King with the Costume Brawls, where huge packs of people would get transformed at once.. and you're trying to tell me that the engine can't handle a swap when I zone.

 

You're seriously gonna try and sell me and anyone else that changing the skins on my armor when I zone is more a burden then hundreds of people mounting and dismounting across various mount skin, dyes, and styles? Laughable!

 

I get that you don't like it.. but beyond.. "You don't like it" there is no reason not to do it. and, I like it, so, that's enough for me to say I want this. Your objection at this point is just raging.. which is a waste, because we already said.. you don't have to enjoy it.

 

> @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > > As for the Town Clothing idea, that sounds silly, granted I read it right. I only want to see the clothing I chose to put on my characters, not for my clothing to be automatically switched out for Town Clothing upon entering towns.

> >

> > I have always thought that walking though a major city in full armor with a massive arsenal of weapons on my persons was moronic, the idea of swapping to "Normal" clothing in town has intrigued me since I heard about town clothing.

> >

> > To each their own on that tho.

>

> I never had this issue as I never liked looking like I'm armoured up and always aimed for normal/practical "casual" looks for my characters as I always found the whole "full armour look" a bit silly (FOR ME! OPINION! FOR ME! NOT FOR OTHERS)

 

I totally get this as well, and I always found it odd that I would could be running around facing a dragon herald in "normal" clothing, It's like every game you play, what you slog though the sewers and fight slime in, is what you wear while walking though town.

 

Does anyone do this? I mean, does anyone wear their painting and gardening clothing when they go out to dinner with friends and family? Do we op to fix a broken sewer line in our Sunday best?

 

Now I get, this idea is not for everyone, some people love the idea of wearing the same outfit/armor all the time, some people would like the idea that their look changes to match an environment.

 

Each Holiday Event, I see a ton of people dressed up for it. So obviously people like the idea of changing their look around for the situation.

 

Not only that, GW2, had situations where my look changed to fit the situation (diving goggles, some hearts, and a few other things), I think it's a waste not to expand upon that.

 

In a game of cosmetics, I for one am amazed that while situational changing of your look is already in the game it's not more prevalent, and players are not given more control over it.

[notebene.3190]

I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

 

Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Not being rude, but, So what if that is not your thing.

 

It is not just not my thing; it will not be many players' thing, and I do not really see anybody in the comments here acclamating that an 'automatic clothes swap' system is such a great idea. Why? Because your one idea (an 'automatic clothes swap' system) out of the whole list of ideas you listed on Page 1 is _not_ important so as to serve a 'consistent' purpose (like when players open their Inventory), does _not_ qualify as true QoL, _is_ a waste of resources and time, and _is_ bad as a result of those said things.

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

>Some people don't like Jump Puzzles.. yet.. they are in the game, and more being added, because some people do like them.

 

95% of Jumping Puzzles _are_ optional and are _not_ forced (exception to the rule for Jumping Puzzles in the 5% throughout the world of Tyria players must complete to get where they need to go). Other than the forced 5% Jumping Puzzles (maybe even lower), they are for the most part in the game to give players more to do in the event they get bored of everything else, along with other game modes and things in the game to keep players occupied when they get bored of one particular way or two they have been playing the game for a while.

 

Not only that, the difference between Jumping Puzzles and your idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system is at least Jumping Puzzles give you item rewards and/or Achievement Points for completing them. Swapping into different clothes does _not_ reward players with items or give them Achievement Points at all.

 

**Now**, you can make the clumsy argument, "Yea, well, your Wallet idea does _not_ reward players items or Achievement Points, either!" and you would almost be right, except knowing exactly what we are being rewarded and the amount thereof upon opening the Inventory the first time: Karma, Unbound Magic, Volatile Magic, etc. _is_ a reward in itself.

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Some people don't like the whole Legendary Journey thing, yet they were put in because some people did like that.

 

Trying to acquire Legendaries is not only optional but they are _not_ required to beat the game, plus they are not allowed into PvP, so you gain no advantages there. All Legendaries dumb down to is aesthetic appeal with a touch more power to them than weapons of lower rarity. That is it!

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Some people don't like fractals, yet they were put in and updated, because some people do like them.

 

[Facepalm]

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Same with sPvP, WvW, Dungeons, Raids, Mini-games, in fact.. I am sure that everything you can do in this game. some people love and some people hate.

 

**Edit:** Look, there is a difference between 'ways players like to play the game and what they want to play' **vs.** an 'automatic clothes swap' system that serves nothing more than a niche automation for a system that already exists (the Wardrobe and Outfit system) and does _not_ fall under the category of 'ways players like to play the game and what they want to play' whatsoever.

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> So, look, just because you don't like it, has no bearing on if a lot of other people would love this idea, and how much it would improve the overall quality of the game for those people.

 

I am _not_ saying some players (like you) would not like the idea, just that the majority of players will _not_ like the idea (big difference), so why waste time implementing it?

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> I like this idea, and what I would like and want is just as important as anything you would like and want. for example, you don't see me losing my mind at your wallet idea even if I think that's a total waste of time and effort and not something I think would be worthwhile. What currency I have pops up when I go to the appropriate vendor. so it's not like I'll ever come to the point in this game where I need to know how many Symbols of Koda I have on me at all times. But you don't see me ragging on that idea, simply because I think it is a waste and kinda stupid.

 

>Allow me to rebuttal your Wallet Idea: _It just sounds like laziness to open your own wallet, which literally takes a few seconds to scroll through currencies.

 

Except it is _not_ laziness. I constantly open my Wallet in-game to see what currencies I have, anyway, and players will _still_ have to do so, anyway, with or without my idea. Plus, if you read my OP, you will see my idea only allows to keep track of up to 10 currencies at a time (to prevent clutter). There is a difference between my idea pointing out a User Interface inefficiency (in this case, the Inventory, aka, the single most used Interface in the game) **vs.** your idea that will _not_ be used all the time like when players open their Inventory. Your idea is more niche than mine will ever be. That is my point.

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> As for the engine and graphics argument, that is graspin gat straws if Iever heard such a cry,. They already have in place model swapping, dye swapping, not to mention tonics, outfits, and now with the endless Mount/dismount. Please. they can handle people swapping their look when they enter an new zone, because the game can handle people swapping their look all the time while in that zone.

 

> You're seriously gonna try and sell me and anyone else that changing the skins on my armor when I zone is more a burden then hundreds of people mounting and dismounting across various mount skin, dyes, and styles? Laughable!

 

In case you have not noticed, I am toying with you, although some points I pointed out regarding the state of GW2's engine _are_ facts. Other than those points, of course I am not trying to sell you my line of B.S. regarding the game engine's incapability of handing a 'automatic clothes swap' system. I am merely testing your mettle, that's all. I like to see where one's common sense stands to get an idea of whether or not they actually know the game, know how it functions, and know why it functions the way it does sometimes when handling certain mechanics, etc.

 

**Edit:** That being said, your counterarguments are nothing I did not already know, and I still stick to my guns that the idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system is _not_ important because it serves _no_ purpose beyond a niche automation for a system that already exists (the Wardrobe and Outfit system) **whereas** my Wallet idea _does_ serve a purpose beyond a niche automation. Furthermore, not only does my Wallet idea serve a purpose beyond a niche automation for a system that already exists, it can easily be toggled On or Off at any time (as explained in my OP), that and my Wallet idea is _not_ trying to 'automate' any system that already exists.

 

Those are the points in the above stated I am giving to you for free. I do not have to try and sell those points to you because they should already be obvious.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

And, the Wardrobe serves no purpose other than aesthetic appeal, yet was pretty widely accepted as being a nice QoL. It's not necessary, in any way, to play the game.

 

Regardless, I'm not sure how anyone can know to what percentage any suggestion may appeal to the playerbase. As is often quoted on these forums, options are always good. :)

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> And, the Wardrobe serves no purpose other than aesthetic appeal, yet was pretty widely accepted as being a nice QoL. It's not necessary, in any way, to play the game.

>

> Regardless, I'm not sure how anyone can know to what percentage any suggestion may appeal to the playerbase. As is often quoted on these forums, options are always good. :)

 

No. You are wrong. The Wardrobe and Outfit system _are_ needed for some form of aesthetic appeal. In fact, if not for the existence of the Wardrobe and Outfit system, the idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system would not exist, because where would your clothes/gear be stored? Don't tell me "The Inventory" because that does _not_ count as an answer since that would be an inefficient way to store our clothes/gear, that which is why the Wardrobe and Outfit System exists in the first place.

 

My general point is we simply do _not_ need a second system (automatic clothes swap) on top of the system we already have in place that does just fine where we can switch between Armor Skins very easily.

 

**Now that I think about it**, instead of me saying, "The 'automatic clothes swap' system serves no purpose beyond aesthetic appeal", what I should have said is, "The 'automatic clothes swap' system serves no purpose beyond 'automating' a system that already exists (the Wardrobe and Outfit system)", the only difference being you have to dress yourself manually when using the Wardrobe and Outfit system, the way it should stay.

 

Furthermore, quote me where I gave a 'specific' percentage of players who would want an 'automatic clothes swap' system **vs.** those who will not want it? I used the word 'majority', which is anything above 50%, yet that is _not_ considered a 'definite' percentage value (big difference). With that being said in mind, to say more than 50% of players would want an 'automatic clothes swap' system would be wrong, and if I had the tools to do so, I would create a Poll on the idea (for or against) just to prove a point.

 

**Options ARE nice**, **yet** having Anet waste time and resources on a system to automate another system that is unnecessary excess tacked on to a system that already exists (the Wardrobe and Outfit system) and _is_ sufficient enough so as to garner _no_ complaints (except from STIHL, and very few players like him), is _not_ nice.

 

**P.S.** My most previous comment has been changed (two edits) near the middle of my reply and at the very end of my reply to strengthen my argument regarding why an 'automatic clothes swap' system is the equivalent of unnecessary excess to a system that already exists (the Wardrobe and Outfit system), in conjunction with the fact it is a waste of time and a bad idea as a result of that.

[Bast.7253]

Anything guild related is pretty much dead. So there’s probably another 5. Including missions update and guild hall renovations or additions outside of the 5 non-festival overpriced decorations we get an expansion.

 

Buy in bulk for festival decorations.

 

Anything dungeon related.

 

Those are my biggest concerns along with the general junk you get from festivals that fill up your bags and aren’t worth anything and sometimes can’t even be vendored.

 

Guild related stuff is my biggest gripe, missions which will never change and always be the same thing every week with no new kinds of missions.

 

Guild halls being practically pointless with no real reason for people to come in and appreciate the insane amount of time and gold I’ve spent decorating them, along with said decorations being limited with a clunky placement tool and most too expensive and complicated to craft anyway.

 

And then dungeons or even fractal style dungeons would always be nice. Something that isn’t raid difficulty but has a connection to the lore or environment with lots of explorable areas and at least somewhat challenging bosses that aren’t just 527 mechanics happening at the same time and every one can two shot you.

 

 

Guild stuff though for sure. Needs some major love.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Gee, and yet they had an automatic gear (for cosmetic purposes-only) in Guild Wars with no Wardrobe to be found. Imagine that!

 

Heavens forbid there be any automating of systems already in existence. Why would that be a QoL?

 

I don't think anyone can definitely say someone else's suggestion is a bad idea or worthless, other than that is their opinion. I'm not sure why any of the suggestions should be championed, since, according to the thread title, they will 'likely never be seen'. Kind of a waste of forum space, then, no? /shrug

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"cptaylor.2670" said:

> Anything guild related is pretty much dead. So there’s probably another 5. Including missions update and guild hall renovations or additions outside of the 5 non-festival overpriced decorations we get an expansion.

>

> Buy in bulk for festival decorations.

>

> Anything dungeon related.

>

> Those are my biggest concerns along with the general junk you get from festivals that fill up your bags and aren’t worth anything and sometimes can’t even be vendored.

>

> Guild related stuff is my biggest gripe, missions which will never change and always be the same thing every week with no new kinds of missions.

>

> Guild halls being practically pointless with no real reason for people to come in and appreciate the insane amount of time and gold I’ve spent decorating them, along with said decorations being limited with a clunky placement tool and most too expensive and complicated to craft anyway.

>

> And then dungeons or even fractal style dungeons would always be nice. Something that isn’t raid difficulty but has a connection to the lore or environment with lots of explorable areas and at least somewhat challenging bosses that aren’t just 527 mechanics happening at the same time and every one can two shot you.

>

>

> Guild stuff though for sure. Needs some major love.

 

My biggest gripe with Guilds beyond everything else wrong with them is the fact players who choose to run a very small-sized Guild, a small-sized Guild, a medium-sized Guild, a large-sized Guild, or a very large-sized Guild are _not_ given those 5 options to choose from during the process of creating a Guild.

 

**For example**, before we create our own Guild, a dialogue box should pop up, asking, "What size Guild do you want to run?" and the 'Member cap' options to choose from would be:

 

A very small Guild that caps out at 100 Members

 

**1.** A very small-sized Guild that caps out at 100 Members

**2.** A small-sized Guild that caps out at 200 Members

**3.** A medium-sized Guild that caps out at 300 Members

**4.** A large-sized Guild that caps out at 400 Members

**5.** A very large-sized Guild that caps out at 500 Members

 

**Now**, the cool thing about the above stated idea is if you choose to run a very small-sized Guild or a small-sized Guild, the Material required to Upgrade those size Guilds will _not_ cost as much Gold so as to break your pocket **vs.** running a large-sized Guild or a very large-sized Guild that _will_ break your pocket.

 

Currently, the game just automatically _assumes_ every player wants to run a very large Guild from the very beginning that caps out at 500 Guild Members.

[crosknight.3041]

Build templates (2-3 per character to start off with (preferably 3), ability to buy more; also with legendary armor functionality)

legendary weapon sigil swap

update to world completion rewards (core game/HoT/PoF; lack of 100% reward for HoT/PoF, 100% core game reward underwhelming.)

 

those are all that come to mine for me at the moment

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> Gee, and yet they had an automatic gear (for cosmetic purposes-only) in Guild Wars with no Wardrobe to be found. Imagine that!

>

> Heavens forbid there be any automating of systems already in existence. Why would that be a QoL?

>

> I don't think anyone can definitely say someone else's suggestion is a bad idea or worthless, other than that is their opinion. I'm not sure why any of the suggestions should be championed, since, according to the thread title, they will 'likely never be seen'. Kind of a waste of forum space, then, no? /shrug

 

There is a big difference between saying 'never' and 'likely never', the former denoting it will _never_ happen, and the latter denoting it _may_ happen. With that being said, I am done arguing about the 'automatic clothes swap' system (because it falls under the 'never' going to happen category), and I am moving on to other things to talk about in this thread.

 

Furthermore, I merely 'trusted' your word that such an 'automatic clothes swap' system existed in GW1, even though you cited no source to support your claim. With that being said in mind, even if you do prove that was 100% once a thing in GW1, then the system Anet went with (inspired by the idea of automatic clothes swapping) was the idea of 'automating' your gear through Gear Templates where you did not have to re-stat your gear with Runes, etc. all over again.

[STIHL.2489]

> @"notebene.3190" said:

> I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

>

> Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

 

Yah.. if I had known this just was gonna be some thinly veiled excuse to attack other peoples Ideas.. I would not have bothered.

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"notebene.3190" said:

> I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

>

> Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

 

The idea is to post ideas that are 'likely never' going to happen instead of ideas that we all know will 'never' happen. As explained to Inculpatus cedo, 'never' denotes it will _never_ happen, and 'likely never' denotes it _may_ happen.

 

The only time Anet will start caring about very 'petty' ideas is when they hit a brick wall, desperate for ideas to keep the game interesting, yet they are not at that point yet.

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > @"notebene.3190" said:

> > I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

> >

> > Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

>

> Yah.. if I had known this just was gonna be some thinly veiled excuse to attack other peoples Ideas.. I would not have bothered.

 

But yet it is okay for you to attack back? You're not so humble yourself, regardless whether or not I threw the first argument against an idea I did not agree with, and _only_ that one idea throughout this entire thread. Do not make it sound like I attacked every single idea other players in the community here made when I did not.

 

To be fair, I may have had very subtle disagreements with a few other players' ideas, yet they were quickly resolved by improving/rehtinking them. I did not just throw their ideas out to the dogs like I did only with your one idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system. I even said your other ideas were great, but that particular one was not, and I am sorry you do not like that. In addition to that, neither do you like most of my ideas, either (mind you, beyond just one idea), so that makes us even.

 

That is the idea of a discussion: if/when you do not agree with the OPs ideas or someone else's ideas, you say something (like you did about my Wallet idea, to which I defended it), but do not just be completely passive and say, "Yea, that's a really great idea" or worse, not say anything at all, when you believe/think deep down it is really _not_ a good idea (like I said about your idea).

 

I said what I had to say about your 'automatic clothes swap' system, and you said what you had to say about my Wallet idea to display various currencies we can toggle On or Off at any time. If you can't take the heat during a discussion, then don't dish it back out. It is that simple.

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > @"notebene.3190" said:

> > > I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

> > >

> > > Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

> >

> > Yah.. if I had known this just was gonna be some thinly veiled excuse to attack other peoples Ideas.. I would not have bothered.

>

> But yet it is okay for you to attack back? You're not so humble yourself, regardless whether or not I threw the first argument against an idea I did not agree with, and _only_ that one idea throughout this entire thread. Do not make it sound like I attacked every single idea other players in the community here made when I did not.

>

> To be fair, I may have had very subtle disagreements with a few other players' ideas, yet they were quickly resolved by improving/rehtinking them. I did not just throw their ideas out to the dogs like I did only with your one idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system. I even said your other ideas were great, but that particular one was not, and I am sorry you do not like that. In addition to that, neither do you like most of my ideas, either (mind you, beyond just one idea), so that makes us even.

 

Oh.. I only respond because I thought that was what you wanted..since you feel that its fine and proper to attack other peoples ideas, I was just extending the same curtsy towards your stupid wallet idea.

 

If you don't like that.. then you shouldn't do it.

 

P.S. Notice others are starting to defend my idea now... Hummmm not so alone as you thought.

[Eidolonemesis.5640]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > @"Eidolonemesis.5640" said:

> > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > @"notebene.3190" said:

> > > > I have weird feelings about this post. I've had lots of suggestions over the years that are most likely too small for anyone to care about that I think would be good QoL things, or just new neat things (like my idle animations idea), but I'm reluctant to post them hear, as I feel I shouldn't have to pass an arbitrary filter of _you liking it_.

> > > >

> > > > Appreciate your effort, and some of the ideas I see.

> > >

> > > Yah.. if I had known this just was gonna be some thinly veiled excuse to attack other peoples Ideas.. I would not have bothered.

> >

> > But yet it is okay for you to attack back? You're not so humble yourself, regardless whether or not I threw the first argument against an idea I did not agree with, and _only_ that one idea throughout this entire thread. Do not make it sound like I attacked every single idea other players in the community here made when I did not.

> >

> > To be fair, I may have had very subtle disagreements with a few other players' ideas, yet they were quickly resolved by improving/rehtinking them. I did not just throw their ideas out to the dogs like I did only with your one idea of an 'automatic clothes swap' system. I even said your other ideas were great, but that particular one was not, and I am sorry you do not like that. In addition to that, neither do you like most of my ideas, either (mind you, beyond just one idea), so that makes us even.

>

> Oh.. i thought that was what you wanted..since you feel that its fine and proper to attack other peoples ideas, I was just extending the same curtsy towards your stupid wallet idea.

>

> if you don't like that.. then you shouldn't do it.

 

It _is_ what I wanted, and I handle my end of the discussion well in the event somebody brings up an issue with an idea I have in mind, and I either improve upon it, or sometimes, I will remove an idea entirely from my OP in the event someone gives very valid reasons why one of my ideas is not beneficial at all.

 

**However**, since you did not provide very valid reasons why my Wallet idea was terrible, to have more Currency values displayed at once, I am _not_ convinced to improve it or remove it entirely from my OP, because I know the idea _will_ streamline the Inventory UI and make it more flexible to suit players' needs when it comes to Currency tracking.

 

Furthermore, when you post _your_ ideas/thoughts in any thread like this, don't _you_ want feedback? Or do you expect no one to not say anything, meanwhile, you are left hanging on the assumption, "Oh, well, nobody said anything negative about my idea(s), so they must be good!" If so, that is _not_ how it works in any discussions thread. When you put your two cents in a thread, you are asking for feedback, be it what you want to hear or be it what you do not want to hear.

 

**Look**, I knocked only one of your ideas, STIHL (mind you, _not_ every single idea posted throughout this thread), and you knocked only one of my ideas thus far, so let's get over it already.

 

**And if I may add**, I cited your name 2 times on 2 different ideas in my OP, and you get bent out of shape over me knocking only one of your ideas. You don't have to agree with all my ideas no matter how much I defend them, neither is everyone else going to agree with all your ideas no matter how much you defend them. That is the punch we take during a discussion, try as we do to convince other players in the community our ideas will benefit other players.

 

If I was such a terrible guy you seem to believe me to be, I would have performed a really low blow by removing your ideas from my OP out of spite, even though the ideas are good. That is what defines a real jerk, _not_ somebody who does not like only one of your ideas (big difference).

[fixit.7189]

Better visual ques for mob attacks. Basically, what I mean is that some mobs show a floor based aoe, which gives a player time to react and if they step/stay in it, the fault is all on the them. But in GW2, it seems some mobs will display their attack cones/circles while others do not.

 

ie. mobs in istan that drop posion circles but most of the time there is no graphic at all for it. Or regular mobs that do a cone hammer knock down smash which shows the telegraph, yet the veteran versions display none. It's inconsistant.