ArenaNet talk:In-game talk/20071029

Clarifications

I just noticed this page and I apologize for not having caught the small discrepancies earlier. The comments in the summary need a couple of points of clarification:

• On the summary point: "She did mention they're considering pet stable for GW2 and she'll try to look into it for GW1." My actual comment was "No word on a pet stable. I know it's a GW2 idea, if at all, but I'll keep asking." That meant only that the request was relayed to the devs and that, if implemented, I felt it would be less likely for GW than for GW2.

• On the summary points "Looking into dying hero armor" or "Looking into key holder." Actually, my comments were just about how much I like both ideas, and how I would pass the ideas along.

In all the comments there were no promises or hidden messages.

The reason that I am concerned about this is that the summary's comment about a pet stable, and a comment made another day about customizable guild halls, have been referred to on the Guild Wars 2 page as "Features Under Consideration." I feel that listing either of these two potential feature on the Guild Wars 2 page might give people the mistaken impression that they are on the feature list instead of the suggestion list. A million features are "under consideration" based on designer vision and player input. I would prefer that the GW2 page not put too strong an emphasis on features that were referred to months ago simply as suggestions that would be relayed to the dev team. -- Gaile 22:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)