[State of the Game]: PvE to PvP

hmm an apology from me?

Considering what you say there are some things ill apologise for.

Im sorry your maturity and counter argument dictates that even though I kept my argument anti flame(up to now at least), honest, fair and mature that YOU want to bring it down into an immature level that is at the very least borderline flame war.

Im sorry you lack the compasion or maturity to undersand the things that Ive said which is truthfull, honest and fair.

In my arguments Ive tryed to stay unbiased and present sides that I even agree on for both sides and unlike simply attacking like you seem to do Ive offered suggestions on how to perhaps fix this whole mess to bring it into a state where both sides could be happy.

I consider myself a PVEr before PVP for my own personal reasons even though I think both are fun in there own senses and keep a "To each there own" for playing style. Ive considered myself neutral cause I could and can honestly see both sides to the argument and have seen an honest way to at least put this argument to an end so both sides are happy.

Despite me bringing forth an argument and being civil and mature about it you decide to attack my credibility. Kudos to that, that your counter argument isnt an argument to me but instead a malicious flame attack to discredit me.

You may call what Ive brought into this thread as lame but from what ive read in here, from what youve said and what people have responded to for your posts you wont find a way to 1 up on me for as long as you decide to make your arguments an attack on a person instead of the true task at hand.

The ultamate thing im sorry for when I consider all this and the people involved here is bringing myself to answer to your low.
You should take some lessons from Sobo and Winstar and Gaile cause they bring respectable arguments to the table instead of a whine.

Honestly dude, calm down and quit crying. Its an editorial piece. Its a game. If you can't handle the fact that people have different viewpoints then you need to go find a cave and live there away from everyone.

You act as if ANet caused your loved ones to all get cancer and suffer horrid painful deaths.

I called your statement lame and gave my reasoning as to why, and you call that a personal attack? Then you turn around and call me "immature"...

So, why don't you answer my question? Forced apologies or apologies that aren't given honestly are worthless and of questionable value.

If you want to give into mobs with pitchforks and torches, go right ahead, I don't do that.

And you might want to go back and re-read my posts because I don't attack people I attack their suppositions when I disagree with them.

It's called debating.

So, why don't you show me how I have engaged in ad hominem attacks if that's what your claiming.

But in a world where a one page primer article can be called offensive and condescending, I suppose counter arguments could be considered acts of aggression. o.O

Well, in the world I live in, reality doesn't change no matter how many people are clicking their heels together.

Obviously Anet understands the tone of the article - read the disclaimer at the top. Nearly all of Gaile's posts agree that the tone was terrible. It doesn't matter if the person meant it - I'm sure the person believed they were being nice and helpful (if you truly believe that PvE'ers do not know how to play GW you do not mean offense by stating it - you are just stating what you believe to be obvious).

The defense of "I didn't say it" and "He didn't mean to make people mad" doesn't work in other places, no reason why it should here. I do not demand an apology or anything, not really going to affect me. But their community relations department *really* need to pay more attention - Gaile herself said it made her uncomfortable (too lazy to get the exact quote). That should be a good tip-off to send the article back to the person for a re-write or to choose another article. It was not well thought out, I rather suspect that the next ones will be done different.

So, size of post matters? Ok, then I guess either of these statements shouldn't be offensive since they are one sentence (and thus, even shorter than one page): "Anti-Iraq war people are a bunch of surrender monkeys who care more for their protecting their cushy lifestyle than the lives of millions of people" or "Pro-Iraq war people are bloodthirsty Nazi's that are murdering millions for their lust for Oil and to kill those of another race".

So, I don't believe either one (I'm only repeating what I have heard/read other places, and - obviously - I fit one of the stances on the Iraq War), it is only one sentence, and the people who said that didn't mean offence - they were only stating what they felt was obvious therefore there is nothing offensive about it at all. Correct?

I doubt that few actually buy that - and it isn't hard to come up with one liners that are WAY more offensive than that and still fit all the definition that many are using to say why this article isn't offensive. The article is condescending to most, and even all in places, PvE'rs. It should never have been chosen as a vetted/refereed/official article from a game cmpany.

I called your actions immature for that is what it was. Your not comming in to debate your comming in with open hostility and atempts of attacks to discredit someone.

Evidence is how you opened up your personal argument agaisnt me being "lame". You discredit any further bits of your argument from there, and continue to further deface your "debate" by now in your new post saying your in reality and in such a manner as to state that others, such as myself are not.

Since you seem so determined for an answer her it is.

Its not people are going in with an attitude of apologise or else or apologise cause you made me cry. They would like an apology to see that Anet and this guy meant the offended no ill will. The people would like to see it cause they know that if it was them who offended the other party the other party would like to hear an apology from them. Its only human.

Myself personally would in fact like to see one in some sense. Cause to see one would in fact show that Anet and/or the author ment no ill will. However I can live without but it would put a dent in my respect and faith in them if they chose to be aloof. Instead of looking upon them as great cause there fair and honest id think there simply ok cause they try but when they screw up they dont want to admit or if they try they do it by making sure they take as little responsibility as possible(the disclaimer stamp thing being evidence).

Although I support Sobos arguments in many senses in that hes bringing forth a valid argument of why people would be upset, I also agree with others that his anger right now seems a bit much on the overboard.

I have tried to remain neutral in a sense in this argument. Ive watched it for some time well pondering my own feelings. I came in with my views presented them is as much an unhostile effort as possible to avoid flame. Ive agreed and changed my views as opposing sides brought forth there arguments(in well presented mature arguments) and brought forth mine. If my arguments have in fact offended people to the extreme then for that I apologise as I respect players in general and know were all titled to our oppinions.

However when you come out with your "debate" being full blown aggressive where instead of debating the issue and instead attack the people such as you have done you discredit your argument before you even make it.

So my apology extends to Winstar, it extends to Gaile, and all the others who have come into this argument maturly and respectful but it doesnt really go to you untill you show me why I should respect you when your arguments are attacks against people and not an argument on situations.

The author didn't state that and that is the crux of the issue.

Just because people "think" or "feel" or "heard" something doesn't, in and of itself, mean they are being objective. In fact, it usually guarantees that they are not being objective.

If calling new players that haven't PvP'ed before "beginners"can be considered offensive, I can't accept that definition.

People need to be honest with themselves and others. It's clear they are upset, but the cause isn't the article. The article is just an excuse.

A very weak excuse.

ANet did what was expected, they stated the obvious: editorials contain opinions, please handle with care.

Have to slap a label on everything these days.

This thread needs more crocodiles.

Nice try, but i have already posted my analysis of the article in this topic thread I just choose not to include it every time I reference the article.

So, please, take the one line in the context it was given and not as a sole overarching summation of my world view and the price of tea in China.

I don't suspect that ANet wishes "ill will" for any of its customers. People should be able to rationalize that concept. I don't view my relationship with ANet as contentious.

But, selling out a principled position in order to give a feel good apology isn't a virtuous thing to do. Doing so would further cheapen the value of apologies and encourage more people to throw public temper tantrums over some very inane things seeking mollification.

Customers may always be right in the business world, but not when they try to buy your soul. That's a melodramatic way of saying that it is reasonable to set limits when trying to please people

So, I respect ANet more for not apologizing. Gaile was being agreeable and conceded that the article wasn't perfect, that should suffice. I think she was being more than gracious.

Well okay I didn't read all the emotional replies in this thread, I wouldn't be able to contain my cynicism otherwise.

As far as I see it, Mr. Sunstrom did a brief editorial on some barriers keeping primarily pve players from entering the pvp scene with any seriousness. I believe he's correct in that you have to unlearn some pve instincts in order to advance in pvp.

Whether he went about trying to break (or at least crack) this pve/pvp barrier with his suggestions with prudency and tact is another topic. ANet's already like slipped in a little disclaimer because of all the negative vibe, it seems.

I would like people to see past the humor though, and look at the underlying message. PvE and PvP are different animals. We won't dispute which one takes more skill, because that's not up to evaluation. It's just that you can't do PvP with the same set of 64 skills which you might use for PvE. That's all. That's the only thing being said. Please don't be offended. No one wants that.

-edit-

My apologies I forgot to address the OP's questions:

What got me into pvp was actually the concept of the game itself. I played since WBE's and immediately got hooked. I always loved daoc pvp and CS, and liked how fast and intricate gw pvp was (and still is ^.^). Therefore as I started in playing GW, I sought out like-minded players and well it bloomed from there. :P

Yes Gaile, that is why YOU have stated that PvPers get their own version of the game. Yet PvEers will never have it. Btw go ahead and deny that, I have screens of it. Where I come from, one side getting something that another side doesn't, thats called favoritism.

I would have thought someone who have played game long as Adam would known that "pve to pvp" is hot topic. Would the article topic been "difference of pvp and pve" and not use sarcastic examples like monk using fire magic in pve, there would have been lot less flames here, because lot of pve players get easilly offended when someone try tell them move to "next level" and start pvp now that they have done some pve.

Article itself is hardly helpfull to anyone actually moving from pve focus to pvp, only contain handfull of skills. Best way to move from pve to pvp is go to RA or AB first and just try it. That article also suggest moving from PvE directly to GvG, which in my opinion is bad idea as GvG hardest level of pvp.

Article didn't offend me as I focus more on pvp when I play, but when I just read it, I knew there was this kind of threads on GW fansites. That's because I have played GW long enough to understand PvE community.

PvP'ers DONOT get there own part of the game, they can buy an unlock pack which gives them access to the classes and skills from a particular chapter, but that is all

Only one guild that I know of, out of quite a few that have been through the playoffs had to drop out due to under-age players [Deer]. I think you're wrong to be honest, I've never won HoH with someone under 16 that I know of and I've often won it with people who are old enough to have families/kids in the background etc.

Go take a look at the online store. I just did and guess what I saw?!?! PvP ONLY editions! *Gasp*

Godwin's Law.

You lose.

While I agree with the earlier point that Anet is really sitting on the PvE vs PvP fence, I completely disagree with this idea. Anet does not and SHOULD not offer an apology for an article that should not have been offensive, even if it did offend people. That would mean they would have to offer an apology to essentially everything they have ever done, which isn't realistic. Somebody brought up McDonalds as an example...well guess what, they didn't apologize when a lady spilled scalding coffee on herself. It was HER fault for getting injured, not theirs. Real companies don't offer apologies for everything they put out, especially if they disagree with the people being offended.

And that applies even MORE to this case because it was not the opinions of Anet itself. It was an editorial by an author that DID NOT express the opinions of the company. Some will say it was posted on the main site so they should apologize anyways, which leads me to my next point..

This is the second problem...NOBODY spent money to read the article. In fact, nobody spent anything for anything that is put up on the guildwars site. We pay for the game content, nothing more. That is the only thing that we can complain about rightly. If Anet decides to put an opinion article up on their site, that is their choice to do so and nobody can tell them not to. If people disagree with the article fine, but to get offended is ridiculous. It just reeks of PvE vs PvP aggression rather than rational thought.

Somebody elsewhere posted that you are either ignorant, foolish, or a jerk if you were offended by the article, and I may sound like some kind of ass saying this (and that is fine) but I completely agree with that post. Here is why:

I will now post exactly what I posted over on GWOnline...

----
I think article and thread makes the Guild Wars hall of fame. The fact that this thread is still going on tells me a lot more about the posters of this forum and the Guild Wars community in general than the article itself.

The fact of the matter is this...while the author may have given an opinion that people disagree with and may have used a bad sentence somewhere, the rest of the article was essentially speaking complete truths about the majority of the population in Guild Wars, and THAT is where people get offended.

The people posting here insulted fall into one of these categories:

1. They don't want to play pvp and are mad
2. They don't use the skills in the article and are mad
3. They use the skills in the article and are mad
4. They are defending somebody else using the skills and are mad
5. They think the article is talking about them and are mad

And guess what folks...NONE of those groups should be offended. This article was aimed at PvE players wanting to play PvP. Group 1 shouldn't care because they don't want to play. Group 2 shouldn't care because they already know the skills are bad. Group 3 shouldn't care because the article will help them if they ever want to PvP. Group 4 shouldn't care because it doesn't involve them. Group 5 shouldn't care because THE ARTICLE IS NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM.

People are throwing around this "all PvE players" phrase which was not mentioned anywhere in the article. The word "many" was used and that word CAN be used with experience in the game. This article speaks to the MAJORITY of the GW population when it talks about skills such as mending, and anybody who plays PvE or RA or AB or even HA/GvG for that matter with any regularity will discover that. And NO, it does not mean these are all PvE players. It is simply speaking to a MAJORITY, because most Guild Wars players are PvE players and this is well known.

I am shocked that this article has gotten so much outcry. It just shows me more and more that the Guild Wars community is divided when an article trying to help transition from one to the other is horribly misread and insulted. Reading this thread is starting to make me realize that maybe PvE and PvP should be seperated permenently, because this is ridiculous.
-----

You know, I am about 50/50 PvE and PvP player. I am being unbiased as possible. And honestly I almost never agree with Gaile Gray or Anet and their decisions with Guild Wars and the direction it is going. But I completely agree with the stance that is being taken here. If they do a 360 and offer an apology I will be horribly disappointed.

yes, i bought them aswell, because they give you access to all the skills and thats it!

they are a gimped version of what you have... 20% of the game tops!

Whoa what's the entire hubbub?

How come so many players are getting so annoyed with that article, in all honesty the best word I could use to describe it would be "bland" but to say it's the worst article ever is silly. If there is one thing I am most displeased about in his article is this comment about Bear in mind that was the only sentence, which I found rude or derogatory,

Most of his points are quite correct and are common knowledge among a lot of players. Being part of the pvp community I don't doubt that we pvpers can be quite rude.

I am beginning to believe that maybe it's not just the PvP community that has very aggressive and intolerant a players the way some of you are acting towards the post is a bit over the top don't you think.

I know for a fact that if a "newbie" pvp player came into this very forum waving a whammo or some other nonsense build under our noses. That players would scoff and laugh without offering sane advice at the build or even to direct them to a good place to educate themselves and a moderator would swiftly lock the thread, but not before making a derisive and condescending remark.

Here are a few examples:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10096401
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10087289
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10087324


Now don't get picknicity with me on these threads, the point I am trying to prove is that people publicly on these forums do the things, a lot of you seem to despise so much. Talking down and to act in a condescending tone is quite prevalent amongst a lot of PvP, PvE players and even moderators is it that much of a surprise when one of our "own" writes an article for the GW website that it comes out in "said" manner.

I don't see you guys laying into them or launching spam abuse at their condescending tone or manner to the average start up newbie.

Bear in mind I am also not saying there aren't people on this forum that don't try to help the start up newbies either, so don't jump to conclusions.

Yet when a somewhat makeshift journalist, creates a lukewarm article on the GW website about pvp, which in my opinion doesn't seem very rude or abrasive it seems to unleash an onslaught of emotion from the community. Ok it's light on any real information and bland that I agree on but some of the other things you people have been typing are a little out of order and somewhat off base.

I mean look at some of the violent and abusive stuff that people in this very forum have wrote about the post. I for one am not exempt from making the odd derogatory comment as well, but maybe we should all take a deep breath and take a look at ourselves in a mirror.

Maybe we might see a little of the "percieved" behaviour of Adam Sunstrom in our attitudes at one point or another.

If you guys are truly offended by it then you people need to grow a thicker skin.

But they did make changes. Not only did they pay her tens of millions of dollars. But take a look at the coffee cups from McD's. "Caution : Contents are Hot" That was never there before the lady vs the coffee.

it is the exact same game as the PVE people have.

just minus the

MISSIONS
QUESTS
ALL THE LANDSCAPE

in my opinion they are getting the short end of the stick just to have one chapters worth of skills unlocked.

it is the same game

The whole crux of the problem is that the article was addressed to new pvp players under the guise of pve players. If you did a simple text substitution in the I doubt anyone would have been offended.

As a pvpve'r I hear the telltale "Swhing" of mending on a warrior 10 times as often in RA/FA/AB than I ever do in PvE, because its not a "pve" skill its a "new player" (or niche farming) skill.

All I got from the article was kind of a big... DUH! I'm sure if anyone has PvP'ed before they would know that those skills aren't effective. Although, it is pretty amusing pwning some character in their uber FoW underwear and uber farming build they're trying to use on me. Gives me a good laugh once in a while.

And, this is a good thing?

Civil suits and out of court settlements are the stuff of legal maneuvering that isn't always representative of the objective reality a given situation.

I am troubled by the need to have slap labels and disclaimers on everything because it often flies in the face of common sense, which isn't so common anymore.

*The views expressed in this post is the opinion and view point of the post's author. Any emotional offense, physical harm, metaphysical harm, spelling errors, minor typographical error or radical ideas are hereby nullified by this disclaimer.

Thats *why* there's such a big deal. He's just a catalyst for the explosive PvE-PvP/ elitism conflicts perpetuated by players. This is the pre-existing raw nerve he's touching on.

/rank



Noobs.

*this is a joke. don't take it too seriously

I understand what you are saying, but I think the situation is deplorable.

If people are just interested in finding any excuse to rage about something, then everything becomes fair game in that kind of atmosphere.

An innocuous article gets blamed for sparking controversy when it clearly is not to blame nor the source of the controversy.

The controversy was there already and anything can "spark" it. The absurdity becomes more pronounced when people demand that ANet apologize for the article. The loudest proponents of the lynch mob can't even definitively illustrate in what way the article is so offensive. Attempted explanation dredge up things that have nothing to do with the article or are based on "tone".

If tolerance is at such a low level that an article like this can cause spasms, then basically anything can do so.

Also anyone who has PvE'd before would know it too. It is insulting to think that this article is "useful" to PvE'ers. No, the author didn't come out and say PvE'ers are stupid - the whole article did.

The article is to help PvE's move to PvP and the sagely advice we get is mending isn't good, don't try to be a fire nuker with you monk. Ok, I'll file that away for future reference, I never knew any of that. Glad so many think that this is useful advice to someone trying to make the transition. If one ever wonders why a large portion of the PvE crowd dislikes many on the PvP side right there is it.

In celebration I'm going to RA some tonight and bring my warrior out, cast mending and balthazar's aura and run around shouting "I'm invincible". Hopefully some helpful PvP'er will be there to tell me it will not work, and I can inform them that Balth's Aura will kill anything that gets close before they can out damage my uber skill mending. Being a PvE'er that makes perfect sense - I need an article to tell me that is not going to be effective.

That's just a poor attempt at minimalizing my issue. If it seems petty to you then you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I'm not so fickle in my beliefs though to back down just because a few people disagree with me. I believe an apology is owed and I will not give up until one is given. I will continue to write Arena Net and NC Soft until a public apology is published by Arena Net for publishing the article without proper oversight and from the author for the general insult he brokered in the article.

I understand that people have different viewpoints. I obviously have a different one from you on this issue. If I feel slighted by your point of view then I'm going to say so. Individual responsibility though is very different from corporate responsibility. They have an obligation to their consumer base to not publish things that may offend. This one was so obvious that I'm suprised they let it go.

Just as there are differing opinions there are different personality types as well. I am confrontational. I make no apologies about it. I fight and that's all there is to it. Other people can let things go. I'm not one of those people and I'm not about to let this go.

*pets the deer*

I learned that there are 3 things you should never discuss outside of friends and family.
1. Religion.
2. Politics.
3. Guild Wars PvE vs PvP.

Don't forget Unyielding Aura ftw!!

Ummmm?

Grow Up?

Oooh, yea - I may do that when I have some time. That was more a joke than anything. Though I still sometimes think about seeing what the response would be, I just do not have fun ruining someone else's time in game..

I've thought about it some more and would express it this way (and why "tone" is important). This is a beginners guide to GW. Note the word *beginner*, not PvE, not a WoW player, not anything else. The unfortunate part is that the author used the acronym "PvE" to be synonymous with "beginner" and "PvP" to mean "Guild Wars". It strongly implies (and the content of the article does too, much more so than anything else) that PvE'ers do not know what to do - that we need the great PvP'ers to tell us not to run fire nukes on a monk. Had he chose things that PvE'ers run then there wouldn't be all this, but instead choose builds that noone other than a noob would think was decent and expand it to "PvE'ers". Even assuming he didn't really mean it, that is how the whole article reads.

In the end, had a similar article come out about transitioning from PvP to Pve in which the PvP'er was shown as a complete noob and the PvE'er as the experienced player many more would understand the problem here. For whatever reason many need to be the butt end of a "making fun of" to understand it.

The problem is that Anet chose this as an article amongst how many? PvP'ers would be up in arms if an article made them out to be fools (say, the average PvP'er thinks ele fire nukes are good on a monk - even though I mostly see mending and fire nukes on a monk in PvP it is more a noob problem than PvE vs PvP - others who are blaming it on PvE'ers seem to agree that they mostly see them in RA and no where else. Hmm, if I weren't so sure that it was "noob" more than anything else I would make some here mad that are happy the PvE'ers were bashed).

It's not so much that any spark will ignite this flame - this article *could* have been decent - it is that the condescending attitude of the article is horrid, let alone that it is an official Anet publication. As I said, if one notes all the damage control Anet has done it isn't that the article is non-biased - it is that we all should suck it up. In fact, the *official* word from Anet is that they felt uncomfortable with it and *knew* it was such but ran with it anyway - even after it was pointed out the them. I do not expect an apology (in fact, I expect nothing at all from them - a statement either way is going to backfire once this was put out. There is no way to spin a flaming bad of dog poo on your porch), but I do expect some more thought into State of the Game articles in the future.

A PvE to PvP guide isn't a bad idea - there are differences - and a PvP to PvE isn't bad either taking advantage of a predictable AI isn't the same as running builds against the FotM.

In the larger scope of things, or the bigger picture...yes this is a VERY minmal issue. Demanding or requiring an apology can never gain you a well meant apology and thus the demand is it's own failure. For what point is there to an insincere apology?

Your problem is that you think you are right no matter what anyone says and that inflexibility to at least let go will only get you bitter and no apology.

People die of hunger and disease and suffer a great many things and you insist on an apology because of how you interpret an article about game play? That's sick and wrong.

I still agree with Str0b0, as far as the interpretations of the article goes...

But, seriously, Str0b0, calm yourself. cthulhu reborn is right in that requesting an apology will only net you an insincere apology - which ain't worth the post it's typed in. The best thing you can ask for is that something like this doesn't happen again. Screw the apology.

Remember, this is your opinion, even if it is shared by others, it's still just an opinion. The point you make in your posts is being diluted by your blind rage. At this point, it's now vengeance, and you have to ask yourself: What's more important? Revenge, or getting your point across?

Not the best example. McDonalds lost the case, and badly. Once you learn the facts of the case, it's pretty clear McDonalds was extremely negligent and discriminatory.

The article states that newbies do the following:
1) Try to tank with warriors instead of doing damage
2) Bring a lot of healing skills (such as breeze and healing hands) on their non-monk character
3) Inappropriately use their secondaries trying to dabble in everything (Mo/E with fire magic is the given example.)
4) Try to use long cast time rezes on monks

I don't see 4 so commonly anymore. However 1-3 are very common occurrences. Alliance Battles are a PvP area where are majority of the players are more PvE oriented. Go to alliance battles and look for these things. I found everything except #4 today.

Some of the worst things I saw:
-Mo/E with inferno, flame burst, meteor
-W/Mo with mending, healing hands
-W/Mo with dolyak signet, riposte, deadly riposte
-A/Mo with prot spirit and apparently no offensive abilities

All these mistake are common occurances. Players first transitioning over to PvP get into warrior duels all the time. If you know the things he is explaining are bad ideas congrats, you aren't who he is talking about. A lot of players need this kind of advice though.

People are getting enraged because they say the author assumes all PvErs are idiots. Yet, they assume the author is an arrogant PvPer who holds nothing but contempt for PvErs. The insults I have seen directed at the author of this article are far worse than what he wrote.

That entire post would have been a much better article itself

He said what I said, he's just nicer about it.

The thing is that 3 out of 4 of those things are I've only ever seen on a build in AB/RA - both pvp areas. I've certainly never encountered them in the L20+ areas of pve.

The core insult is still there - it boils down to equating pve'ers with poor/new players.