Noaani wrote: » Recluse74 wrote: » Your argument seems to fall on the fact that all of these games have trackers now... but you cannot show that these games used trackers heavily at launch. I never said they were used heavily, I said they were available. Back in the 90's and early 2000's, it was more of a clandestine type of community than it is now. People assumed they were fine to use as they were simply using information the games were providing - but no one had asked any developers to check that their use was ok. No one wanted to because no one wanted them to say no. Combat tracker use started to go up around 2003, they were widely used during WoW vanilla raiding, with Recount being the most common (but neither the first nor only, and also wasnt the best featured) tracker used back then. This happened before raiding in WoW took off in popularity. Many of the trackers that were made for specific games have since been made redundant by multi-game trackers like ACT. This is why you would have trouble finding much before 2008, most of that simply doesn't exist any more. Now, it may well be that Steven has grand plans to bring MMO's back to 2003 or some such. The thing is, players have different expectations now. We now expect better graphics. Ashes will have that. We now expect better UI. Ashes will have that. We now expect better controls. Ashes will have that. We now expect better security. Ashes will have that. We now expect more in-game options. Ashes will have that. We now expect better communication channels. Ashes will have that. Players expect more details in their guild systems. Ashes will have that. You cant just say that Ashes wont have a thing because you (and Steven) didnt know it was around in 2003. There are many things player expect now that they didnt have back then that Ashes is going to cater towards. Combat trackers - or at least better access to information - are one of those things that people now expect in an MMO. As GW2 should demonstrate to anyone paying attention, the people will have what they expect, developer be damned. And at the end of the day, that is my argument. People that want a tracker will have a tracker. What you have to say about it doesn't matter. What I have to say about it doesn't matter. What Steven has to say about it doesn't matter. We can sit here and argue this all we want, or we can realize that people will indeed have a tracker if they want it, and then discuss what the best action to take with that information in hand is. My suggestion for the last several years has been to take that piece of information that people that want a tracker will have one, and work out the basic minimum functionality that would need to be available for the people that want a tracker to not have to resort to third party trackers. That minimum functionality is for the tracker to track their raid, and since their raid will be made up of members of their guild, that is another viable restriction.. From there, I came up with the idea of making a tracker a guild perk in Ashes, where guilds that dont value it have plenty of other options to pick instead. Guilds that do pick this tracker have it only work on members of their guild, that are in a group or raid with them. Build that in to the game and you kill off the need for third party combat trackers. That is my argument. Everything else is discussion.
Recluse74 wrote: » Your argument seems to fall on the fact that all of these games have trackers now... but you cannot show that these games used trackers heavily at launch.
Recluse74 wrote: » And from everything I have taken from your posts, is that you do not care about morals
In the end, we both know trackers will be used.
rikardp98 wrote: » If you think people that use combat tracker heavily, do not discuses how to synergize abilities and tactics based on observations during combat you are so wrong. Hardcore player (since it's those who uses combat tracker the most) talk more about the raid encounter and how to "synergize" more than any other player. They play the game more than anyone and talk about it more than anyone. Saying that they only look at the numbers is so false it's funny.
Dygz wrote: » I'll rephrase, "Because the focus is primarily on what the numbers say..."
Dygz wrote: » rikardp98 wrote: » If you think people that use combat tracker heavily, do not discuses how to synergize abilities and tactics based on observations during combat you are so wrong. Hardcore player (since it's those who uses combat tracker the most) talk more about the raid encounter and how to "synergize" more than any other player. They play the game more than anyone and talk about it more than anyone. Saying that they only look at the numbers is so false it's funny. I guess including the word all, obscured my intended meaning of focus. I'll rephrase, "Because the focus is primarily on what the numbers say..."
Noaani wrote: » The focus is still on the encounter, the numbers just back things up.
Noaani wrote: » At least, that is the case if you know what you are doing - I can agree that people that don't know what they -are doing may just focus on numbers - and people that don't know what they are doing may even think that is what everyone does.
rikardp98 wrote: » Just look at wow retail when the best guilds try to take down the new raids. They spend soooo much time trying to figure out the boss before it's released, then they spend hours and hours trying to take down the boss by both figure out the boss mechanics via the combat tracker, but mostly by learning the fight by doing the fight. We all know that doing a fight is much better than trying to figure it out just by the numbers. But the numbers are very very useful and helpful when progressing on a boss encounter, or trying to optimize the boss kill afterwards (speed clears).
Dygz wrote: » Noaani wrote: » The focus is still on the encounter, the numbers just back things up. When analyzing the encounter, the focus is primarily on the numbers.
As if there aren't so many players who "don't know what they're doing" that the game experience in general doesn't become so toxic that it warrants Steven choosing not to include combat trackers
Ramirez wrote: » Really that 2 top posts are about dps meters? So many important features to discuss ....
Noaani wrote: » As if the people that cause toxicity while using a combat tracker wouldn't be toxic without one.
Noaani wrote: » Recluse74 wrote: » And from everything I have taken from your posts, is that you do not care about morals I do not care about your morals - or other peoples morals. I do care about my own, and my morals do not change just because a game has a different set of rules. My morals in relation to this are that I will use them, and up until the point I agree to an EULA that prevents them, I will openly talk about the fact that I will use them, as well as discuss some of the basic principles of how the two I am following will work. I am doing this because that gives Intrepid all the information they need to know they won't be able to prevent their use. Basically, my morals on this point see me as little more than an open book. That said, I still don't care what you think of any of this. I am guided by my morals, not yours. You are welcome to have your own, I neither care about them nor have any interest in trying to alter them. In the end, we both know trackers will be used. And I want the game to be designed with this in mind, you don't. At best, you will have 12 months of game time where combat trackers are kept somewhat in the shadows. Then you will have a game not designed for combat trackers, but that has many players using combat trackers. A far better plan would be to design the game with the idea that combat trackers will be used from day one - how ever Intrepid want to take that in to consideration. Then you will always have a game that is designed based on it's own reality. To not design the game with them in mind is not a whole lot different to burying your head in the sand and yelling "IF I CAN'T SEE YOU, YOU ARE NOT REAL!" This is what you are suggesting as the best course of action. Taking this back to morals, my morals here are guiding me to give Intrepid the information they may want to consider in order to make the best decisions for the game. Your morals are guiding you to be happy that the game is being designed with with the games creative director having his head buried in the sand )at least in this situation), and are happy at the fallout that this will create down the line. While I am sure you are happy with your mortal compass here - and I am not at all trying to alter that - you should be able to see why others may look at this and be displeased with your position - as it is blatantly not the best position for the game. This is why you shouldn't complain about others morals - others will always be able to find things wrong with your own.
Dygz wrote: » Noaani wrote: » As if the people that cause toxicity while using a combat tracker wouldn't be toxic without one. Steven believes that is generally true, due to his experiences with MMORPGs, and Steven is the one making the decisions on features and mechanics are implemented. When you make your own game, you get to base what's in it on your own philosophy.
Nagash wrote: » Ramirez wrote: » Really that 2 top posts are about dps meters? So many important features to discuss .... its either that or PvP or PvE or Corruption. It changes every week
Recluse74 wrote: » You have just described yourself as an immoral person... so at least we know who we are dealing with.
Noaani wrote: » Recluse74 wrote: » You have just described yourself as an immoral person... so at least we know who we are dealing with. It seems you cant read. An immoral person has no morals. I said several times that I do, and that I stick to them, and that they do not change when the rules around me change. I also said that my morals may be different to yours. There is no way you can read and comprehend that post you quoted and come out thinking I am immoral, unless you believe your morals are the only valid morals. That says more about you than it does me. Also I have not "forced Steven's hand", I have simply informed him of some of the lengths people will go to use a combat tracker, and the history in other games that have taken the same stance he is taking now - both things he was unaware of. He is then free to make his own decision. The funny thing is the analogy between that and combat trackers. All I did was provide information, exactly as a combat tracker does for players. He is then free to do with that information as he pleases, as is the case with combat trackers. If it turns out he makes a decision that he needs to backpedal on in the future, at least he has no one to blame but himself.
Asgerr wrote: » Could you guys not get a room? All this sexual tension is giving the thread a weird vibe. Stop bickering about morals please and go back to discussing the actual matter at hand, even if you disagree on them. No need for ad hominems here. We're all nerds. One digital world. One people (and yes that is a Falcon and the Winter Soldier reference).
Asgerr wrote: » I agree with Steven in that too much reliance on DPS meters breeds toxicity. However, tough raid boss mechanics and failing them causes much more of that. DPS meters I think at most will be used as gatekeepers from high end raid groups. Otherwise I think I have grown to be fine with them, so long as they are used for self improvement rather than more discriminatory options.
