Quote:
|
From a thread I made on another forum, this is the only "con" that has been presented by the PvE community of Unlock All Skills and Unlock All Runes. Supposedly, this is the only reason that UAS and UAR is not in Guild Wars at this very moment.
|
You're trying to infer what the developers' intentions are from posts on an online forum? I think a more solid reason for the lack of UAS would be that the developers felt it would unbalance or otherwise lessen total gameplay experience.
Quote:
|
In this thread, I would like to delve into the PvEer's psyche and discover what it is that makes them, or some of them, think this is true, and if it is a legitimate reason to deprive so many other players of a perfect PvP game.
|
The language suggests a poor appeal to emotion here. "Deprive so many others of a perfect game?" A fairer way to phrase this would be "To attempt to understand why others do not want this option implemented." And instead of delving into the psyche of another to discredit their argument, how about you instead development an argument of your own- that's not as offensive as you discovering why they'd want to "Deprive" you of a game.
Quote:
|
What do I think makes people believe PvE would be cheapened by UAS/UAR? I honestly cannot say, which is why I created this thread.
|
The answer you provide to your question should invalidate this whole topic. It seems to me that this is another rhetorical snipe at the No UAS camp, as you're making it seem like their reasons have no grounding in logic.
Quote:
|
I think that it is because they recieve a feeling of acomplishment from unlocking one more thing and getting one more advantage over an enemy player - or closing the gap, if they are behind.
|
I can accept this as a reason.
Quote:
|
But is this fair for a game that says, and quote: "You'll prove your wirth with every battle as skill, not hours played, decides your fate. Whether battling horrific monsters or competing at the highest levels of tournament play, it will always be your skill that earns you victory or defeat".
|
This is an interesting point, but one that works both ways. The game does involve a time investment- to be generous, it'd take a serious player a couple of weeks to hit droknar's and beyond. But beyond that initial investment, the hours spent provide dimishing returns. Their is a level cap, and a useable skills cap. After that initial period of play, every player has limitations that cannot be removed by time spent. In my mind, this is where the skills comes into: the strategic element of putting together 8 skills that complement each other and my team. Hours stills plays a purpose- building up a pool, but ultimately it's what you do with that pool, not the pool itself, that will determine victory.
Also, it's propagandic for the box to claim that experience (here meaning time spent playing) has no effect; the players who log the most time (in PVP or PVE) are the ones who are most familiar with game mechanics and class relations. Since skill and time are intrinsically related, any statement that subordinates one at the expense of the other need be viewed as propagand differentiating the game rather than an undeniable statement of the games purpose. Especially when the actual content of the game also contradicts the box statement.
Quote:
|
If my assumption is correct, which lets hope it isn't, then wouldn't that mean that PvEers are against UAS/UAR because they wish to gain an unfair advantage over an enemy because they play more, therefore they think they earned it?
|
Once again, your language is promoting rhetoric over solid argument. Also, you have a straw man here, suggesting the intent of your opposition rather than addressing any direct statement of an anti-UASer. If you wished to make a real argument, you would do better laying out your own reasoning. As it stands, all I need say to contradict your point is that I do not wish to keep UAS in to gain an unfair advantage, but rather to maintain a sense of accomplishment in game. Suddenly, your whole post addresses a non-existant argument, because you've put words in the mouth of your opposition.
Quote:
|
To shift the playing field in their favor assuring them victory even though they may not "have what it takes" under balanced circumstances? Why isn't The Fianna on the ladder yet? Are they afraid that unless they resort to such things, they, as well, will be put at a disadvantage?
|
If your only means of making an argument are ad hominem attacks and miscaricatures of anti-UASer motives, then you're better off quiet.
Quote:
|
Finally, I ask those of you that think in such a horrific manner: Would you actually *leave* Guild Wars if UAS and UAR were implimented? Please explain why.
|
Are you going to leave if it stays no PVP? It would be much better if you turned this kind of argument on yourself before suggesting they're so extreme as to say "my way or the highway"
And there's something called the burden of proof, where if you wish to make a point you provide the proof. You aren't doing that: you're mocking the opposition and then asking them to explain themselves.
Quote:
|
As I said earlier, suggest any other possible "cons" of UAS/UAR. But before you jump at the chance, I shall throw out any that I think are simply rediculous.
|
It's arrogance and assclownery to dimiss the arguments of your opposition before they can even make them. If you think UAS should be in the game, state why it should be. Don't make up reasons why it shouldn't only so you can dismiss them.
Quote:
|
Feel free to bring them back up again, and hopefully someone else can make you see the light better than I can.
|
"See the light"? Rhetoric over argument= waste of bandwidth.
Quote:
"PvPers need to 'earn' their skills and runes!" -Why? The only thing a PvPer desires is his rating. Is that not all they must earn? You don't really "earn" anything through fighting mindless drones with horrible AI. You'd think monsters would move out of my Symbols of Wrath. But, nope... They stand right there and take the punishment. Why would this give me a feeling of accomplishment? So why must I, supposedly, earn my rigth to play the game I bought? I shouldn't. "Earning" things is just a stupid way to say "Hey! I played more than you! You haven't earned it yet!".
"PvEers will be put at a disadvantage" -If you're really a PvEer, then you don't play PvP, do you? And if you're a mix of both, why don't you have a slot left for a PvP character? And in any case, you're not put at any disadvantage. You just have to grind before you are competitive... Say... kinda like... Those are all I can think of, at the moment. If any more come to my attention, I'll make a new post or edit this one.
|
What follows here is a straw man argument at it's finest. Where are you getting your evidence for these claims? Off your other thread? Do you actually have the texts of the points your refuting? Have you considered the reasoning behind why some people might not want UAS in the game? Or is it simpler to generalize the opposition's arguments until they're at their easiest to dismiss?
Your first rebuttal shows a close minded understanding of what "earning" means. To those in favor of getting UAS, earning rank may be the only important thing. To those in favor of leaving it out, earning the runes/skills/weapons is a sign of investment and energy spent in the game- much like earning rank is a sign of investment and energy put into the game.
In both cases there is a reward for the effort spent; PVEer's gain a new skill, PVPer's gain rank. Providing all skills removes the PVE reward by making the rewards for one's efforts attainable by everyone at no effort.
Everything in your first rebuttal after "but nope..." is not exclusive evidence for your case, as it is highly relative opinion. It could be as easily said that skill in the PVP arena is only a sign of hours logged learning game mechanics and nothing else.
Your second rebuttal once again assumes motivation. You'd be so much better off trying to support your own position, rather than create a false one for your opposition and tear it down.
Quote:
|
And unless you have a new argument to present, instead of one that you stole from someone else and are trying to reitterate using the same analogy only changed to fool us, then don't post at all.
|
It's quite arrogant of you to accuse the anti-PvPer's of poor arguments when your own post is a mostly straw man and rhetoric. And once agin, you're implying negative motives on the part of your opposition. "Trying to fool you?" How about you recognize that they have real reasons and motivations just like you do?
***
This is a long post, and I do not state my own views on the UAS problem within it. But there's a reason for that. Reading these forums, UAS threads do not actually address the problem and work towards compromise and solutions. Most involve a generalization of the opposition, couple with a recycled rebuttal. What emerges are useless and repetative threads that do nothing more than infuriate the opposition. This is one such thread. Reading it, it doesn't seem like this guy thinks someone can be sane and support no UAS.
Quote:
|
No "flames" or reasoning that is not backed up by simple human logic will be tolerated
|
If this is really the case, then no one should be posting in response to the original poster, as their is very little logic to his post and he verges on flaming in characterizing and demonizing his opposition.
Edit (In response to the post below me)
Darrin: I don't see any reason why you shouldn't post if you have a valid point to make. That you instead choose to say "Must not post" leads me to believe you're only going to flame (you have a nice trend of ommiting content). If the latter's the case you would have done better to have said nothing in the first place.