Difference between revisions of "Talk:Game updates"

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 104: Line 104:
:::Ele; that's how powerful it is :P Who needs runes. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]] -- <span class="sig-stack"><span>([[Special:Contributions/Vipermagi|contribs]])</span><span>&emsp;([[User_talk:Vipermagi|talk]])</span></span> 16:11, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
:::Ele; that's how powerful it is :P Who needs runes. --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]] -- <span class="sig-stack"><span>([[Special:Contributions/Vipermagi|contribs]])</span><span>&emsp;([[User_talk:Vipermagi|talk]])</span></span> 16:11, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
== FA turtles unglitched?? ==
I'll believe it when I see it... --[[User:Dosearius|Dosearius]] 05:58, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:58, 3 March 2010

Skill balancing schedule

First lol. - Are we gonna get a skill balance update this month? --Takisig2.png 19:44, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Remember they have changed their policy about updates. ANet is not promising or implying greater-than-bug-updates more than several times a year. They are sensibly combining skill balancing with other feature changes into fewer releases. (This is substantially more efficient than more frequent, smaller releases, especially considering the small size of the GW1 software team.) I don't expect any skill changes sooner than Wintersday.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:12, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
And there I thought I read somewhere that they said they'd do a skill balance patch every 2 months now?? --Takisig2.png 21:16, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
That was the interpretation made by some players on the official wiki of what they had read. I asked a while ago about whether they meant every two months vs. along with other feature changes; they said the latter. (I'll see if I can find the specific text.)
There's been a lot of misinformation about their plans...and ANet has done little to clarify, so the confusion is understandable.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:43, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I misinformed myself. Here's what ANet actually has said: Content updates will be done separately from the monthly maintenance and occur every three to four months.
  • Some players have interpreted that as a promise to update skills with a certain frequency; I don't.
  • My interpretation: (1) ANet will have monthly updates to release bug fixes (and whatever odd miscellany); don't expect any rebalancing in these. (2) There will be 3 or 4 more substantive updates, which will include new features (e.g. Dhuum, H'ween quests) and feature changes (which would include rebalancing and also the PvE henchbar changes).
ANet has never really clarified what they mean by monthly maintenance or Content update, which are terms that tend to mean different things to different software companies (and, I fear, different things within the same firm).
Short story: I don't expect any significant skill changes before Wintersday.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:08, December 3, 2009 (UTC)


Now there might be a really easy way to check this by going into the game files and such, but I'm not that smart. So does anyone else think with all these "crash bug" fixes that they are sneaking in content for an orgasmic wintersday or anything? ShoganKiller Shogankillerflag.jpg 15:45, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

The only thing you can really check in Gw.dat is plain text, but there hasn't been anything new there this month other than some stuff for the in-game store promotions. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 15:50, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
You mean they might actually be fixing crash bugs? O_O RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 16:47, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
haha, well I dunno, if all of these are bug fixes they should start killing the gnomes that are causing the bugs (or join the EEC, it would really help our membership) ShoganKiller Shogankillerflag.jpg 18:00, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Missing updates

So, there was an update on the 11th, but we no longer have a record of it. ANet never posted notes on their official site, so it's unlikely we'll learn what was in the code. I would prefer that we document such updates, even though we lack the details. I don't see any reason to treat them differently from updates that include notes, as long as we include some type of standard text (e.g. "ANet hasn't yet posted notes of this update.")   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 02:02, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

We have no historical precedent for this - neither wiki has ever kept close track of undocumented updates. Why start now? I still don't understand the benefit. If there's no update notes, then there's no update notes - no one ever signed a contract with Anet forcing them to release notes with every single update. And before you bring up the code development analogy again, no, this is not the same. Of course they'll keep internal notes about everything they've changed, but if the change was just a few minor bug/crash fixes, there's no reason to waste company time/resources to rewrite those notes in an external format. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 02:15, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any reason to treat these releases differently, even though they have been in the past. I'm not arguing ANet has any obligation to release notes on any updates. This wiki documents the game, so when game code is changed, let's make a note. I would prefer that we present something, even when the software company chooses to present nothing.
I also cannot argue that the benefits are substantial: Some people check both wikis when they see the game update spam in-game; many check whenever the see the auto-update feature engaged. So, an early note would be helpful to them. Others are curious whether ANet is getting worse (or better) at releasing changes, so they are interested in how many times/month the company puts out new software (and how often it is new content vs bug fixes or minor tweaks). Is any of that necessary? No, certainly not. However, it's cheap to provide the info/data, so why not?   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 02:57, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
Bah, arguing about it is just wasting more of my time. If you think it's worth spending time on, then do it. I don't care anymore. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 04:08, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
<insert conspiracy theory about a-net here> i rest my caseAkbaroth 08:59, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

I know the second update on Dec 17 fixed a crash bug involving equipment templates and costumes. --Macros 09:57, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

December 21st Update

→ Moved to Talk:Game updates/20091221


How long has it been since the last content update? Roland Cyerni 23:39, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

2.5 months since Dhuum. 1.33 years since M.O.X. Did I miss anything in between? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 23:57, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
You missed "Major Content and Feature Additions" :P EM Signature.jpg ***EAGLEMUT*** TALK 01:13, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, you forgot the wiki-sploding traveler and his cow --Gimmethegepgun 02:21, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
You forgot the removal of the Xunlai House Tournament. Felix Omni Signature.png 04:28, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick and detailed response! Roland Cyerni 04:30, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
I'd rather finally have another just-balancing-patch to breathe some new life into PvP. --Takisig2.png 11:31, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Update Jan 18

→ Moved to Talk:Game updates/20100118


Can't log in? Any speculation on what might've caused it, aside from EoE. =P--Darksyde 00:17, January 29, 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why everyone is making a big deal about it. So there's a problem with logging in. ANet knows about it and is trying to fix it. (personally I'm enjoying the possibilties people are saying, such as EoE or nerfing shadow form, as the causes) Chibi Moon Shadow 00:27, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
You know, I'm not that worried, and would've never been if it weren't for all the talk of hackers. My friend told me on a messenger that she can't log in, and instantly I thought "Fucking hackers!". Looked into it, found this, and my only concern is that all the accounts would be deleted. However, Anet being pretty reliable, I was quite sure it wouldn't be it. Even still... scary though, eh?--Darksyde 00:28, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
Just cause I'm a picky jerk, it actually took about 40 minutes to fix the bug.--gene195 00:32, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's fixed now. And much to everyone's(I assume) relief they did NOT nerf Shadow Form. I do agree it was scary, but I found out orignally through the GuildWars fan page on Facebook. Within minutes of the bug they said that they knew something was wrong with the update and were working on a fix. I think I'll still change my passwords anyways, considering I almost forgot the one to my 2nd account. Chibi Moon Shadow 00:39, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
It was caused probably by their reconnection bug fix, as it dealt specifically with security question answers. Anyone who used a full command shortcut to login was able to do so, including myself, and those who logged in normally were blocked out. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 04:03, January 29, 2010 (UTC)

Update - Friday, January 29, 2010

→ Moved to Talk:Game updates/20100129

Feb 12

As soon as I finish downloading the update, GW immediately crashes, without finishing the update. Anyone else got this problem?--Darksyde 20:27, February 12, 2010 (UTC)

Same here, somewhat. Firing up the game like always crashed; Run as Admin did not. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 21:46, February 12, 2010 (UTC)
I am the administrator, I am on the only account on my computer, is there another way to start up?--Darksyde 21:51, February 12, 2010 (UTC)
I presume you're not using Vista then (thumbs up), which has the Run as Admin feature for administrator accounts :P Applications don't execute with admin priviledges by default. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 12:37, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that after I logon, the focus is no longer always on the character supplied in the security question. It's back to the way it was previously where it is focused on the last character that was played. Shadowlance 12:45, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that even before this update, not sure when exactly it happened tho. EM Signature.jpg ***EAGLEMUT*** TALK 13:39, February 15, 2010 (UTC)


→ Moved to Talk:Game updates/20100225

Skill Balancing? Really?

The muckety mucks at ANet, NcSoft or whoever drives the Guild Wars engine today are biting the hands that feed them. This theory to nerf other skills in order to balance another is ridiculous. Buff that skill to equal others! For instance, they ripped Demonic Flesh apart, yet claim they are trying encourage the use of Necromancer Blood skills. Also, when they change a skill this drastically why not stop using the name and create a new one? There is a large Guild Wars community in my area and many are leaving the game. This last borderline psychotic attempt at "skill balancing" has many people not only leaving Guild Wars, but also trashing Aion for good. There has been talk in the past about Izzy and his henchmen trying to make the game strictly PvP. Why would anyone do that to a game that generates a vast majority of its sales and gameplay through PvE? Are these people are so determined to irritate customers? We are the direct link to the dollars. I truly feel GW2 sales will falter. My once great guild has dwindled. Turn on Teamspeak and many people have not signed on for days now. Well, at least not to play Guild Wars...--Dockvudu 19:32, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Personally I think it's great that they still pay attention to GW1. Some players support the balancing attempts and others disagree, but at least ANet is trying. And I don't agree with you 100% on the buffing skills to match others point. Power creep is a problem they need to watch out for too, and that could ruin the pace of play. They are striving to find that middle ground where skills are neither too powerful or too weak so that the pace of the game for both PvP and PvE is ideal. (Although my point is somewhat broken by the existence of certain PvE skills...) Shadowlance 21:14, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

With some of the rationales I have seen developers giving are along the lines of "we felt that the momodogfaceinthebanannapatch skill was not receiving the attention it should" so we are nerfing it or buffing thethrobulatorwithchromeplatedmufflerbearings skill..... I would just as soon they left us alone except for new content or NEW skills (and that is what they are really doing when they totally change a skills functionality like they just did with Demonic Flesh or a while back with Wail of Doom. I have had folks try to tell me that they did not try to destroy teams or builds just trying to strike a balance of power, but I have seen too many dev talk pages where the devs themselves have said that nerfs would be done to destroy certain types of builds or team builds because they felt that suchnsuch types of teams and builds were just too hard to beat. So I am more in agreement with Dockvudu here. --Ravskau 21:46, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

In response to Dockvudu's comment that Anet is "trashing Aion for good" you might want to take a look at the numbers. I can't remember them exactly but I believe it was something along the lines that NCsofts profit margins increased by over 600% in 2009 and increase over 1200% in Q4 alone (compared to Q4 of 2008). While I also miss the good ol' days of Guild Wars, I view GW1 as a stepping stone; a game that introduced spectafic (that a word?) features into the MMO world with no subscription fees while providing Anet and NCsoft with experience that while be able to be used in the creation of a game that will make my little nerd heart quit beating. There is no doubt Guild Wars has changed drastically from what it used to be (some for the better, some for the worse), but MMO's as a whole have been changing and I think all we can do is keep looking forward in hopes of the release of superior games ShoganKiller Shogankillerflag.jpg 21:16, February 28, 2010 (UTC) (ps. pre-searing hasn't changed hardly at all; you might find it a good nostaligic retreat)
Other than disagreeing with you and OP (you two sound rather alike O_o), I would also like to add that "making" more skills is not an option for two reasons. First, there are already too many of them, which is why GW has become impossible to balance. Second, every "live" skill creates more load on the servers (I have read ANet devs explaining this specifically, so I'm not making it up), thus the more live skills, the more lag and high ping. This is why they are merging previously split skills, where possible, and re-rolling rarely used skills into new functionality, instead of just making more skills.
Also, this was one of the best balance updates in ANet history, doesn't look like they broke anything (so far), and they definitely improved a lot of stuff. Now stop your Q_Q and go pew-pew. RoseOfKali RoseOfKaliSIG.png 04:32, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
They broke Urgoz, actually. Felix Omni Signature.png 05:25, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Been a while since I've been there. What's broken now? That they killed the tank builds needed to get through some of the area conditions? oh wow. Forest's Binding --Ezekiel [Talk] 06:42, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
"Whateva nigga" ~Anonymous (The Boondocks)
re OP: Demonic Flesh was terrible for Blood Necros since it increased the amount of health you sacrificed drastically, thus effectively locking out Awaken the Blood. Barbed Signet is something they did turn into utter shit, though. Freaking Bleeding? Why? If you want to spread Bleeding, get Contagion and Signet of Agony. I doubt Barbed can even get multiple targets to bleed in one cast, but that's just a presumption.
As for balancing yes/no: I think they're doing a good job. Prog and I are pretty much only playing GWs when a new update is released to toy around with the new skills (such as Demonic Flesh this update, which turned out to be.. not that good. DWG is godly, though. My ele tore through Torc'qua :P ). --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 12:28, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Ele or Rit? A F K sig 2.jpg A F K When Needed 16:06, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Ele; that's how powerful it is :P Who needs runes. --- VipermagiSig.JPG -- (contribs) (talk) 16:11, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

FA turtles unglitched??

I'll believe it when I see it... --Dosearius 05:58, March 3, 2010 (UTC)