[State of the Game]: PvE to PvP

Bad choice of words describing PvErs? Check.

Accurate description of PvE -> PvP noobs? Check.


Get over it.

Well i mostly PVE but have touched PvP as well.

Ive taken the time to learn a few tricks, watched a few of the observer things to see how people play there classes and gain an idea of skills. I know too how theres skills that absolutly rule in PvP but suck in PVE and vice versa.

But that article I did find myself grinding my teeth thinking the arrogant jerk kind of thing.

I didnt like it cause the way he worded things and chose to say the things he did made him seem aloof/above/better then a PVEr, and did basically make it sound like all PVErs in general dont know what to do with there skills.

I mean sure theres people that suck in PvP at first well they learn the transition from PVE to PvP but the same goes both ways. I feel that if you want to talk about PVE at least know the fame of it. The whole mending thing urked me for example.

I felt that my playing style was basically under attack from reading his article. instead of further pulling me into PvP and play PvP more it was doing the opposite. I have noticed how there is an elietist attitude in PvP as is making it near impossible when your new like myself to get in a party and even if you are your generally brought in knowing you were a last pick simply cause they were bored of waiting thing.

I didnt like the elitism attitude because everyone of us can look at the time we thought Mending was wicked at first glance as an example. We were all noobs at one stage but we got better when nice people took time to teach us and through practice. But the elietism is counter productive, instead of bringing more people in and giving you more options and diversity it continous to close you in, bring less options and drives people away from the game.

Back on the main topic though the article did upset me and I hope A-net and this guy will be considerate enough to not do such a thing again. Mistakes happen this is just a pretty bad slap your players in the face feeling kind. Im tough though and shrug it off in hopes they dont do similar again.

The guys message may have been intended for good but it was lost in poor choice of words and lack of knowledge in PVE(at least with how he was speakign it definitly gave that impression). Like get a trusted friend to read it or advice from highly experienced/hardcore PVErs on what they play.

Like instead of giving an example of saying how mending tanks suck(basically what he said in a nutshell no sugar coating) say somethign along the lines of how say the warrior elite "Hundred Blades" can find itself some use in PVE and dependign on the build could be rather usefull. An eliete worth considering when your trying to plan some warrior AOE dmg build but in PVP Hundred Blades wont work when your facing non AI intellegence cause they spread out and casters flee warriors so there "paper" armor isnt exploited"
Really its NOT WHAT he said, its HOW HE said it.

In an area so impersonal like the internet one has to be more careful with there words. If he was this outcry and upsetting your player base situation could of been avoided and we wouldnt have these PVPs ruin everything, PVErs ruin everything argument wars.

That is the thrust of my argument right there. If he had not made the inclusion of PvE players as a whole in his opening statement then there would be no issue. Whether it was just poor writing or a deliberate jab the results are the same. It sets a condescending tone for the rest of the article that, in my opinion, diminishes any value it might have had.

The fact that he included beginning players in there in the first place seems like more of an afterthought to me anyway. Why would a beginning player make a transition to PvP? If you're going to go PvP from PvE then it stands to reason that you will have gotten a character to level 20 and by that time you will have figured out these common sense things he covers. Either you will be told that they are ineffective by frustrated party members or you will have figured it out on your own through experience.

It can be defended till everyone is blue in the face but the bottom line is that Adam made a gaffe through questionable writing and that sort of thing draws fire no matter what. If you are going to be published, even if only in an electronic format which doesn't hold quite the same prestige as a paper, then you should know these things. I think even highschool English these days teaches students to guard against generalizations when writing on topics like this. I know I learned it when I was in school.

At the end of the day the article was poorly written and as a consequence of that he has insulted a lot of PvE players through the implication that we are all ignorant of the ways of PvP. I would urge the author to more carefully consider his words before writing another article like this and to perhaps look into some writing classes if he intends to continue being published.

I completely agree that it speaks more about the posters of the forum more than the article itself. If you think this is bad, go over to the gwonline forums and look at the ruckus it caused there.

The fact of the matter is this...while he may have used a bad sentence or two that "IMPLIED" that all pve players dont know how to play pvp, the rest of the article was essentially speaking complete truths about the majority of the population in Guild Wars. The people posting in insult here and on other forums fall into this category: We don't want to play pvp and we don't use those skills. The fact of the matter is though, this article speaks to the MAJORITY of the GW population, and anybody who plays pve or RA or AB with any regularity will discover that.

Exactly my point. In the class of people moving "From PvE to PvP," Adam listed common mistakes that many make. This is not the same thing as mistakes that everyone makes. Adam is speaking to a large group of people, but in absolutely no sense can it be fairly held to be all inclusive. Adam simply didn't say that, and to accuse him of it is at best unfair and at worst a gross mischaracterization of his article. It is intellectually dishonest to attack positions he doesn't espouse as if he did, and everyone who is doing so should know better.

Regardless of the semantics of many or all in the article the the information presented is so dumbed down that it is insulting to any PvE player of experience and let's face it if you're considering PvP you've been around the block in PvE a couple of times. It's like talking to a brain surgeon and trying to explain to him that the brain is located in the head and it is what makes people think and breathe and talk and act and move. He'd be insulted by your condescension and by you presuming to tell him what he already knows. I think that is the most insulting aspect of the article. He wrote poorly and apparently managed to alienate and insult a significant portion of his target audience by painting them in broad strokes.

From what I've gathered he did attempt to do a little research on the subject matter though by way of interviewing PvPers to see what PvE skills they see used. That was a good idea, the problem is we as people and as players tend to notice the glaring mistakes of others more often than the good stuff done. I seriously doubt as large a population of players actually uses the mentioned skills in PvP and I would instead put it to you that those are simply the most memorable mistakes people have seen, not necessarily the most frequent or common.

The bottom line? This article is poorly suited for its supposed target audience and would have been better suited to someone who just then rolled up a PvP only character. If that was his target audience then the article would be perfect. If they are new to the game and want to do the PvP section then they should definately read this, but to target it towards PvE players, who really do know more than they are given credit for, is just poor judgement and poor writing.

I think your observation is incorrect; so in contrast here are my observations.

1) Most PvE players would enjoy the opportunity for PvP play.
2) I believe PvP players ruin new player PvP experience because of rank emote elite status in HA and new PvP players and veteran PvE players see this far to often.
3) Both new PvPr's and new PvE'rs use those skills until they wake up and discover those skills just won't work for high end PvP or PvE. So stateing things such “Hailed by many PvErs as the most useful skill in the game” is offensive by many PvE people because its not exclusive to PvE play.
4) PvE players are sick and tired of skill balances that kills the PvE experience because of PvP player inability to improvise adapt and overcome creative team builds. Thus PvE concerns are summarily ignored as in the case of the last open beta observations.
5) PvP team builds become so polarized that once something "new" enters the arena it must suddenly be nerfed out of existence because the counter does not fit the polarized PvP view of team skill builds “a.k.a. the original Ritual Lord build for example”. PvP cannot change its paradigm thus PvE suffers a bit more and ruins the PvE experience yet again.
6) Most PvE protest PvP by simply not participating.

Just admit it there are PvP noobs just like there are PvE noobs. The difference is there is no starting area for PvP so most elite PvP assumes noob PvPr's are PvE primary. The average PvE player has thus become synonymous with “noob” because of PvP exclusionary practices and articles such as the one we are now discussing.

I want (strongly request) an apology from ANET.

That is the first time Ive ever seen this in a "State of the Game" article.
Question: was this added later this afternoon? I don't remember seeing this earlier this morning.

This is garbage.

Most of the pvp players I would consider good are anywhere from 18-30, only a handful are younger. A large number of these player are college kids, but there are also a lot of older 'professionals' who play seriously. A good majority of top gvgers are adults with normal lives and jobs.

Personality has a lot do to with which side the player chooses, not age. People choose competitive pvp over pve for the same reason some choose league sports play over friendly backyard games.

The reason certain builds prevail in pvp is because they're effective. There is certainly room for creativity, but certain builds will always be more effective at a given task. You'd have to be a scrub to take issue with this...

The reason people expect players to adopt a cetain build is because pvp is a team initiative; builds are created with 4, 6 or 8 specific character builds in mind. For the team build to be sucessful, each individual build has to add to the overall goal of the team build. In pve this isn't really an issue. As long as you have enough damage to kill, and a couple monks, you can get through most areas without much thought.

Spiking is generally only effective at the lower levels of play. At levels where players actually understand mechanics and strategy, spiking become a desperation move that pressure builds pull out when their pressure isn't taxing the opponent's monks, or as an added tactic for scoring kills quickly.

When i do pve, I always see the same builds... WoH monks, SS necros, MMs, shitty stance tanks, Barrage rangers. Yeah, there sure is a wealth of creativity in pve builds.

It wasn't there earlier. Apparently someone at A Net has been reading the forum backlash on this one. This is basically just a cop out though. It's corporate speak for, " Don't blame us. He isn't on the pay roll and we won't censor anyone because we don't want to deal with that backlash either."

It's times like these that I wish there was a fee structure for this game because I'd cancel my subscription so fast it would make their accounts department's heads spin. That response generally disgusts me too. A Net had the final call on publishing the article and they did. Gaile is in here all the time and she should know about the PvP\PvE tension. Someone should have been better informed about their community and to publish this shows a woeful lack of insight by the Arena Net staff into their player base. They put up the disclaimer as a cop out but they are just as at fault as the author because as the publisher they have the right to make the call as to whether something is appropriately written and fit to be published on their site. Before anyone goes on about freedom of the press and speech that's not applicable here. Those freedoms are only guarantees against government interdiction not private interdiction. It reflects poorly on Arena Net that they would feature something like this on their domain. I mean if it was in a fan forum it would be different but when it's right there on the corporate website for the game then that just looks bad.

HA!

The game wouldn't have been successful at all with a "visible" fee structure.

Well, for all those hurt and sorely abused people out there, I hope we can collectively get our underwear untwisted without further incident or injury.

Being affronted by the harshness of a basic introduction to PvP must be a true shock to the system. I can only hope we survive, as a game playing community and as human beings.

Obviously, ANet has decided to purposefully exploit our sensitivities by allowing a writer to even insinuate that there are beginners or novices playing Guild Wars. This is an insult to every gamer out there and it must be protested.

The outrage is palpable and the disrespect to every freedom loving gamer can not be condoned.

Sarcasm gets you nowhere. The perceived slights are valid on all points and it is a poorly written article that simply would not hack it in any major publication. If this individual was a reporter for a paper and he wrote something that inflamed the readers to the degree that this has that reporter wouldn't be able to find work locally ever again.

It's not the insinuation that there are novice players it's the insinuation that PvE players don't know what skills are useful or even how to organize themselves for a PvP match which is simply untrue. It's the tone of the article and the way that it presents such basic information to an identified target audience,i.e. PvE players who want to try PvP. Said target audience can be safely assumed to be experienced enough to know that those skills that he chose to highlight are bollux in PvP. It is common knowledge.

It was a bad call on Arena Net's part to publish it and it was bad writing on the part of the author. That's it. End of story. The outrage is justified and some action has been taken in the form of that ridiculous cop out disclaimer but I hardly think that's enough. I personally emailed the community relations staff and urged them to print a retraction and apology without delay. I think that anyone else that is offended by the article should do the same.

[email protected] is their community relations email. If you don't speak up then they can't make amends. Numbers speak but even if only a handful of us write then representational statistics will do the rest for us.

I realy don't understand why some many people are up in arms about this, is it because this article challenges the fact that some skills that are used in PVE are absolute trash in pvp?

This article was meant to help PVE players get into PVP, it does a good a job providing some helpfull hints despite a few innacuracies (its certainly better than the lst one lol.

I see a lot of trash in this thread mainly jealousy, bitching about elitism, completly denying that the article has any truth in it.

Calm down you're getting worked up over something very stupid.

One of the big sticking points is the way in which the information is presented. I'm not denying that the article is true, those are trash PvP skills but the thing is everyone ,outside of someone that just fresh bought the game, knows they are trash PvP skills and to present that article in such a manner is insulting to the intelligence of the PvE community. I've used this example before but I'll use it again. It would be like you, who I'm assuming for the purposes of this analogy are not a brain surgeon, walking up to a brain and saying." You know the brain is located in the head and it is responsible for all the nervous functions of the body." And saying it as if he wasn't aware of these facts. He would be insulted by your condescension and your implication that he didn't know these basic facts.

But wait! Didn't you say...

and...

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

But you are the King of Absolute Statements! What else have you given me to work on? If you supply no proof for your meandering spoutings, it's not my responsibility to supply them for you. I agree I am being intellectually lazy in arguing with you, however, as you do not put up much of a fight. For example, you make assertions like "you can't manage to be correct", but you never seem capable of giving any reason.

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

Good comprehension is difficult, if the writing you are reading is full of poor spelling and clumsy grammar. Demonstrating you can use language accurately would help convince us that your own reading comprehension is of a high enough standard for you to say:

Hmmm... can we say... 'hypocrisy'?

But you know, maybe you should avoid getting into more argument with me because to use your own words:

Tell that to the reigning champs. Or to the euros who won gold before that. Or to any of the other dozens of spike guilds that have held top 20, earned silver capes, and held their own in the playoffs. Or to any tombs player, where spiking is clearly the dominant strategy atm. Its only in guru forum wars that spiking doesn't work -- on guru every spike is infusable, disruptable, or splittable. But in the real world, it is alive and well and works in just about every game mode, every meta, and against just about every opponent.

PvPers like to pretend it takes much more skill to PvP; this is a joke. If you can follow basic instructions from a caller and run a bar you are given, you are as good of a player as at least half of the PvP players. It takes less skill to spike in HA than it does to correctly hold aggro in PvE. It takes the same amount of skill to mindlessly spam AOE in tombs as it does to spam aoe in PvE. If you are merely average in PvE, you can expect a lot of frustrating attempts to beat hard missions -- because they are always the same difficulty. In PvP, even if you are merely average you will win a lot of the time just because so many people are so bad -- and sometimes you will get lucky and win just for showing up. And you can always bust of the FoTM gimmick -- there have been a surplus of imba gimmicks ever since Factions was released.

One of the things that cracks me up is watching PvPers try to PvE. I recently was GvGing as a guest for a guild with a gold cape. One of them wanted to beat a relatively easy NF mission and the gvg team all got on their pve toons to help him beat it. It was a disaster. It felt worse than a pve pug. They failed miserably three times in a row before I offered to help the guy beat the mission with just him, me, and my heros. What happened to their skill (and make no mistake, they are great pvpers, despite being noobs at pve)? Easy -- they needed to unlearn the mistakes they learned from PvP (frenzy, heal sig, overextension, too much utility, too little damage, poor damage avoidance, etc). All their "skill" in pvp in knowing what to run and how to run it turned out to be time spent practicing and copying others, not skill in terms of being able to know what to do without being told. Kiting, preprotting, interrupting, knowing the skills, having good tactics or strategy.... none of these things are exclusive to PvP (and indeed most PvPers, inclungding those who post on guru, can't do these things well). Just look around tombs or RA for proof. The PvP crowd has at least as many wammo idiots, button pushers, or mindless copycats as PvE. Perhaps more.

How on earth did this condecending drivel make it up on their site? If you want to praise the virtues of PvP, by all means have at it. But, you can certianly do so without alienating PvEers. This thing makes it sound as if the PvE crowd doesn't like PvP because we're somehow too stupid to leave mending out or otherwise unable to put togeather coherent PvP build. Anet reps, if you seriously think thats why we don't PvP, I pity you.

By the reactions from the PvE players so far, do you think the article is a success as to bring PvE players to PvP?

Can Anet's management get any worse? I left GW for other games and check in from time to time. Too many have left this game for them to return and restore it to its once glory.

The reason pvp is so hard to get into is because you need 8-10 people that are on at the same time just about everyday. Then you have to play down egos, rage, and temper when you lose. Most players are immature and think their shit doesn't stink.

You cannot teach PvP through a tutorial. PvP is all experience. The only way to learn it is to play. The only way to play is if you have experience. GW is caught in a viscous cycle. Combine that with very bad management and you have a downward spiral the game has been in for the past year.

People who want to get offended will find a way to get offended. In reading the State of the Game article, I didn't get any of this "PvP'ers are better than PvE'ers" nonsense that people are repeating here. In fact, the OP, who according to this week's GotW may be quite the accomplished PvP'er, seemed to word his post in a manner that ended up riling up the community into a PvP vs. PvE flamewar over a fairly innocuous article (including misquoting the article's author). I'm not saying that this is the OP's intention at all, but I wonder how many people actually read the article in an objective manner as a result.

First of all, I enjoy both sides of the game very much. I have beaten each chapter several times over with a variety of characters, and I have attained my fair share of PvP titles (wolf emote, champion) as well. I think people need to learn not to read more into things than is actually being said and respect that there are other people in the game that play it a little differently.

As for the article itself, actually reading through it reveals that a lot of the animosity in this thread may well be undeserved. Let's start with the beginning of the article. The tone seems innocent enough. It's true that the community is polarized--you can see that in this very thread. It's true that few dedicate the energy to learning both sides of the game, and note that he even says that few "are successful at both," which sounds like an acknowledgement that PvP'ers can have trouble with PvE, as well as vice versa. Note also that the actual line is "Someone who has learned the game while leveling up to 20 has a lot to unlearn to have a chance at playing PvP at a high level." Even the most avid PvE'er has to admit that there are those new to the game who think that maxing the character's level is the endgame, or at least really important in the general scheme of things. You can go line by line through this article, and--if you actually read the article--see that he has not written this with any of this anti-PvE attitude that many are trying to attribute to this article.

The author then proceeds to describe three key concepts that PvE'ers don't always grasp when they try to PvP. Again, I don't think there's anything to really take offense at here unless you're really trying hard to do so. And, btw, running Fire Magic on a Monk is a lot of fun in PvE, and if you haven't tried it, you should at least once, particularly if the PUG you went in with seems clueless about offense (and before you ask, no one died either...I brought my heals).

As to the skills featured, he acknowledges right off the bat that these are useful in PvE, and then goes on to explain why they don't always work out in PvP. So I'm not sure what the fuss is all about here. It's an article that's trying to encourage PvE'ers to play some PvP, and if you take the time to read it objectively, there's nothing to get all riled up about. It may not be for everyone, but it clearly wasn't meant to be either. Personally, I disagree about Remove Hex because it works fine on a Mesmer depending on the team build, but still, I didn't think the article was anything to post about until I saw this thread.

Well... definitely not for any angry posters in this thread because anyone who wishes to learn how to PVP have to lower their ego and actully deal with other players' attitudes.

PVE monsters don't flash their emotes at you or type "QQ L2P" when they kill you but some not so nice pvpers do that. Therefore, PVP is not for crybabies who write angry posts on this thread just because Adam spoke the truth on his article :P

Why can't we just all get along? In my opinion, PVE is relaxing and PVP is has socializing. Both are fun to play when I am bored with my work (slacking off >_<). That's what GW is for, right?

We have added a special note in the State of the Game articles that clearly spells out what we had thought was understood by all readers: The articles are personal, they are editorials, they are op/ed pieces. We allow, even encourage, the writers to express their opinions, just as we encourage you to express your thoughts--agreement, disagreement--with the opinions that the writers may express. Our Editing Team is careful to assure that no one includes rude or offensive content, and we're confident that the article in question meets those standards.

It's inevitable that that there will be controversy from time to time. We're very sorry for any offense that a reader may have felt, but we do stand behind the concept of supporting free discussion of a wide variety of topics, and we do not believe that anyone is justified in taking the articles, or the content, in any way personally.

I'm sorry, but this is not how critical thinking works. In critical thinking you analyze logically what a person actually said. You don't get to dismiss reality as "semantics" (which are, incidentally, totally valid points of contention. Only someone who doesn't understand what they are [ironically] would disagree) and pretend he said something he didn't. That's a logical fallacy, or a bit of specious reasoning, known as the Straw Man. The fact of the matter is: Adam never categorized all PvErs as anything (other than perhaps PvErs). Anyone who is saying differently is either A) Lying or B) Misreading. Neither of which is a valid platform from which to launch an attack on the article in question.

No, it's not. You are now comitting the other mistake I listed: mischaracterizing who the article was aimed at. To use your example, a brain surgeon would be the equivalent of a high-end PvPer. This article is not for them. This article would be more aptly described as a textbook in an intro to nueroscience course moving people from highschool biology into collegic classes. This article doesn't tell nuerosurgeons or high end PvPers a damn thing, and that is entirely intentional; it's not meant for them.

I don't see any problem with creating a "don't use skill A because X" list. You could also do a happy, warm, and fuzzy "you're all so special good work!" list, but I don't see how the former requires the latter.

No one is denying that some PvErs do know quite a bit about the game and can probably take at least a significant portion of their knowledge to PvP. But it is nevertheless true that the majority is not this way. It's a simple matter of natural selection. The PvErs lack the basic knowledge to push skills through the darwinian process of PvP skill selection. If you don't know the goals and mechanics, how can you possibly expect to make the right choices? Take Adam's example of rebirth. In PvE they let you get away with casting this awful, awful skill. In PvP it's a good way to make 2 corpses to replace the one you already have. Because PvE isn't as intensively Darwinian, the survival rate for skills is much higher. That means lots of skills make it on to PvE bars that don't make it onto PvP bars. Which, incidentally, is exactly what this article is addressing. Some PvErs realize this and go to obsmode for research, but a lot of them don't. This article addresses the "don't" demographic.

Just a note, but doesn't him downing remove hex say something about hex removal spells?

We need a non-elite skill that removes hexes faster and isn't interruption fodder.

We already have Convert Hexes, Purge Sig, Holy Veil, and bunch other non-elite hex removals.

Have you evenr played PvE? Because from your post it seems that you're saying that PvE is PvP light. It's a totally different game, if you try a PvP build and tactics in PvE you'd most likely fail. Miserably.
Rebirth could possibly be one of the best situational res spells there is in PvE.

As for the article being "intro to neuroscience course", I'd rather describe it as an ABC book for children age 4.

Just one observation: one thing that's wrong with the article is its approach. If you want to offer people advise on anything, you give them pointers on what to do. You don't tell them what they shouldn't do. A negative approach like that will always, without exception, come across as condescending.

Tell people what works, don't tell them what doesn't work. Give examples of what works, and as an aside, add some examples of what doesn't work for illustrative purposes. Don't start off with the latter and build your case from there. "Dos and don'ts" not "Don'ts and dos".

@Tea Girl:
Most of the hex removal skills can barely handle hex heavy or even a team with one or two hexers in their builds. Some of the popular hexes in GvG builds recharge faster than any of the skills listed like Reaper's Mark, Faintheartedness, and parasidic bond.

QFT

That is a very good explanation of what's wrong with the article. How it was written gives off an air of arrogance and cynicism because it says, in essence "Stop being freakin morons, people!". Since it's directed at PvEers transitioning to PvP, it comes off as calling all (or most) PvEers morons and noobs.

There is a possibility that it wasn't intended, and possibly that the guy doesn't think like that at all. If that is the case, he should've been more careful, and most of all, helpful in the article.

As far as anyone "blaming" Anet for the article, just read what Gaile said. It's an editorial, and it didn't contain anything directly offensive. Blame this guy, not Anet.

Eh... it's all just amusing now. I deleted my monk fire nuker, and I won't cast echo mending twice now (for extra health).

Most large companies have the 'newspaper test'. Basically, when about to do/write/create/research something, they consider how it would sound if it were front page on a newspaper. If it may upset lots of folks, they won't do it. So I hear what you're saying, but it's just natural that Anet feels a little heat here. It was on the GW website.

Its a negative article which has the idea that pve doesn't pvp because they can't or because its oh so difficult. I think any reasonable person can watch some battles/read some fourms/practice and learn rather quickly what builds to run/maps/movement/timing etc. When I want to pvp i go play something like GoW/H2/CS etc., gw pvp imo is slow and boring after playing fps for so long. Yes i have watched many in game gvg/hoh and participated occasionaly but its just not my cup of tea.

When i play gw its with the intention to pve and relax. If anet continues the bias towards pvp its fine with me (it is thier game), but I think even more pve players will move on to games that cater more to thier play style.

Well... no. IIRC, there were PvP-oriented builds/teams playing out of #gwp when DoA was released and they were some of the earliest groups to complete it.

The only real 'hardcore' PvE specific form of play I can think of is farming*. PvE benefits from optimum builds and intelligent play just as much as PvP, It's just not necessary for the most part. Believe it or not the majority of people that would consider themselves PvPers have, at some point, played or still play PvE.

*People forming builds to clear areas efficiently. A puzzle-solving style of gaming.

I think it was quite an apt analogy , but perhaps this one is better suited. It would be like plopping down a childrens book in front of a grad student and saying, " This might be on your level." That is certainly more apt in that the only real points he makes in the article are about mechanics of PvP play that are common knowledge amongst people that don't even PvP. We know that team build is more important than individual build. We know the difference between the target calls in Pve and PvP, although recently the AI has been forcing us to make those calls more like PvP. We also know that you don't use rebirth in PvP just like you don't use it in the middle of combat. We know mending sucks, it's been a running joke in PvE for awhile now. It is insulting to publish this remedial tripe as if it were some new knowledge that us "poor ignorant PvE yokels" didn't know about.

My bone of contention was never the many or all argument but was instead the way in which the subject matter was presented and the audience it was supposed to address. The point of my statement to throw the semantics aside was to highlight that that particular issue wasn't really worth arguing about and that is why I did not address it further. Instead my point has been, and always will be, that this stuff is already common knowledge amongst PvE'rs whether you believe it or not and that to present it to us as if we didn't know is insulting.

@ Gaile: I know it's your job to spout that corporate bollux but that's just another cop out for this. This article would not have passed the "newspaper test" with your community and as much time as you spend on these forums you should have known that. I think it is fairly obvious now that this game is polarized around PvP and PvE and there is a certain amount of obvious friction between the two camps. Hindsight is 20/20, but in this instance I think the editorial staff should have seen the red flags from a mile away. I don't for a moment suggest that this should not have been published period, but I think some editorial powers should have been exercised and the wording changed to something less volatile. I know I personally will be shopping around for other ways to occupy my time and though I have been a loyal customer and bought every single one of the Guild Wars chapters, spent money in the store, and whiled my life away in your wonderfully created product I will not be purchasing chapter 4. It is simply unconscionable to me that a company can be so ignorant of their customer base. I'm not a lone voice in the wilderness here either as you can see from this forum and others. The friction between PvP and PvE has been obvious for quite some time now and for you, the company's community relations person, to hide behind the corporate CYA of " Our editorial staff didn't find anything offensive in this." is rubbish. You should have asked me or any one of the others on this forum how that article, worded as it was, would have been received and you would have gotten eerily accurate predictions of this self same predicament. I'm deeply disappointed in Arena Net. I'll still play since I already spent the money but Arena Net will not get one skinny dime out of me again unless something more real than a corporate cop out is offered for this.

Thank you str0b0.

I'm not one to arse-kiss and i'm not one to make long-winded posts, but I think that you may have summed it up for alot of people, and i'd like to tell you and all the others who read your post...

I get this eerie self innervation that quite a few others feel the same way ;-)

I do not read all articles we place on our website. I write all news posts, I am the producer for www.guildwars.com, that is, I coordinate what we post, But I am not asked, nor do I have time, to review each article. However, we do have people charged with that task. Three editors read the articles; three editors--all attuned to our community--did not feel that it was in any way beyond the line of acceptability. If fact, none of them thought that it strayed even near that line. And nope, we're not going to ask the community to approve our content before we publish--that's simply ridiculous.

I shared your concerns, and those expressed in other forums, on Monday. They responded by reviewing the article, and at that time they still felt that it was not at all offensive or divisive, but rather commented upon the division--even in the initial paragraph--about the existing divide between some of those who play the game.

I all honesty, I didn't like some of the content. I was not offended, but I did not like some of the phrasing. But you know what? It's an opinion piece! And Adam is entitled to his opinion, just as I am entitled to have an opinion about his opinion! Would you have me say "Oh, wait, that's not white bread content, it might not set well with som players?" Woudl you have all content reducted to the non-controversial, the simple, the bland?

If someone threatens to quit over the publication of such a benign opinion article--or if someone actually does quit--I wish them well. There are a million thoughts behind that message, but in the interests of closure, I offer you zero offensiveness, condescension, or hostility.

@Gaile
Its not just this article its the whole PvP knows best attitude the ruins the PvE experience. Recently I've retaken an interest in other games for reasons stated above by Str0b0. ANET helped create this polarization though the use of PvP Rank Emotes, whether intended or not. Quite frankly since the open beta and the condescending remarks from PvP players upset over PvE recommendations (heck even providing feedback) this situation is getting worse.

Furthermore not one PvE recommendation was implemented during the open Beta event. Until the condescension of PvP putting down PvE relaxes a bit or until we see ANET listening to its PvE base (i.e. moving bloodsong back to communing and moving Anguished was Lingwah to channeling) prepare for a tremendous backlash of your primary player base. Quite frankly your editors dropped the ball on this one. I can only hope you look a little closer to what gets printed on the ANET website.

BTW

Was not added until after the onslaught of angry PvE responders on forums such as this one. I hear its even worse on other sites.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this right here. Although I still can't say any blame belongs with Anet. Reason? Just look at the PvP Primers. They're written by what seems like the player's mothers, who are basing information on what their kids are screaming at the monitor in another room.

It seems that basic levels of advice is all they are really capable of, because anything more advanced, and it turns into another Primer debacle. Perhaps this is exactly what happened with this State of the Game article, just plain inexperience. Maybe he wasn't condescending, maybe he is just simply that ignorant.

Sorry, I can't sympathize. In any community with two diverse groups, you're going to get charges of favoritism, and complete, unwitting, and utterly unacceptable comments like "You don't do anything for [my type of gameplay]!!!" while I can give you chapter and verse that we do, in spades, and often.

PvP players complain: Why do you have events?
PvE players complain: Why are you testing HA?
And sometimes, they refuse to see what we're doing for their interests because they're focused on what we're doing for "the other side."

And both don't see, or won't see, that we're serving both communities very, very well, and that this jockeying for "favorite" position, this claim that they are being "ignored" or "pushed aside" or in some other way mistreated is simply inaccurate and is totally unfair to the company, the game, or to the community itself.

#1: mending flat-out owns sideways, upways, and downways. +3 regen makes me a GOD... A GOD YOU HEAR ME!?!!?!

#2: I don't think the article is favoring any specific crowd. But there is a huge hurdle to get into PvP, but there are tons of guilds out there that offer help to noobies, even though you must suffer untill you get the magic deer of leetness for them to stop harassing you. And I just started Hero battles today.... AWESOME... makes me want to play this game again and not just farm endlessly

#3: Heal Area is sorta useful for non monk primaries to recharge themselves after an infuse (HB Necros)

#4: Uh... Yeah... 4-6 flesh golems wailing on an enemy team will turn them to dust with proper coordination.

Otherwise his skill descriptions were correct. Except the fact that IW is fun. He forgot to mention that IW was fun. REALLY FUN...

Agreed completely.

After all, most of the content and events they work so hard on is PvE. Only the very rare event, like this coming weekend, and skill balances are really geared for PvP. As long as they keep the content heavily weighted toward PvE, I'll be happy