[State of the Game]: PvE to PvP

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