Feedback talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Product Information/Oct 2009

Archives by Topic
Random Chatter Wiki Topics Game Related Topics Community & Website Product Information Misplaced Topics, Etc.

x64

I'm sorry to bombard you with questions lately, but here I go: will GW2 run on an x64 or x86 architecture? If the in-game graphics are as remarkable as they appear to be, a computer with x64 capability would almost be a de facto requisite to get the game working, and since there is virtually nothing to be gained by a user running the outdated x86 versions of Vista/Windows 7, using x64 to make the game could offer a strong improvement in performance in terms of game capabilities and operating speed. —Jette 08:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't this sort of thing be far more constrained by the videocard and not the OS? -- Hong 08:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

No because Single-threading Processors/OS's and Front Side buses are almost always the biggest bottlenecks. The only people who generally say otherwise are Nvidia Reps lurking-incognito, who just want to sell you a brand new Card every 6 months. ...the sad thing is that they actually get away with it with a surprising amount of "consumers"... --ilr 09:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

At this stage of the development cycle, it's extremely unlikely they could be swayed to use x64 architecture if they aren't already; you kinda have to plan for it. I just wanted to know. —Jette 09:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeh I wouldn't hold out too much hope if they haven't even filled this job yet... --ilr 09:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Multicore or multithreading has less to do with 64bit architecture. Regarding the topic; it's very unlikely that it will be x64 only (simply because even in 2-3 years x86 will still be used a lot) and I highly doubt they will make clients for both x86 and x64. poke | talk 17:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

...just making the point that they're not exactly loaded up yet on resources for "cutting edge" tech. --ilr 19:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The only real difference I would expect x64 to make is being able to use more than 2-3GB (depending on OS configuration) of memory, which likely won't be necessary anyway, and running natively (so fractionally faster) on 64-bit Windows. Theoretically, a 64-bit client is no bigger a deal than just recompiling the program, but in practice there are many ways to make that recompilation not work, and that's one of the reasons why so many vendors still don't do it. —207.216.111.208 16:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like I am not permitted to comment on system requirements at this time. --Regina Buenaobra 23:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 Art Book

Hello everyone. Just wanting to let you know that I got my Guild Wars 2 Art Book today and I'm really impressed. Artists are amaizing,I actually feel something when looking at those art works. Doing great job ANet. Looking forward to GW2.93.86.31.46 20:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I recently received my book and I too am impressed and enjoying the book. Quite a few good surprises in there too. Many thanks and props to the Artists and Writers. --Antiquus Lupus 04:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Could any of you upload the images? --Cursed Angel 16:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet said it's copyright violation until they say otherwise. - J.P.Talk 16:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

\o/ =) -- Regina Buenaobra 23:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Why is the newsletter rarely used?

I never even knew that Guild Wars had a newsletter...and apparently, neither had tons of other people. Why isn't this communication format being used more than 3-4 times a year? Karate Jesus 17:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd assume it takes a while to design, proof, and edit. Obviously, the newsletters published in the past have had artists working on them, which again increases the cost to produce. Likely, the number of users paying attention to them simply didn't warrant their production after a certain time. ··· Danny Pew Pew 18:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Then ask a player to write them, and put a link on the in-game announcements to the page suggesting that players sign up. Then, all you'd have to do is have the player email the team the article every week/month so they could go over it. Doesn't seem that hard to me. Karate Jesus 18:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

You, good sir, are confusing. Your talk page would suggest that this idea is impossible. ··· Danny Pew Pew 18:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Shhh! Don't tell Regina that! Karate Jesus 18:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

For someone complaining above about how all news should be placed within the log-in screen, asking for the newsletter (a source of information placed outside the game and limited only to those who know the newsletter exist and who have not changed their e-mail) to be used more often doesn't really make sense. It would be wiser to have the effort Arena Net would need to spend on the newsletter being invested on something more easily available, such as the main GW website. Erasculio 19:23, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

No, you are missing the point, Erasculio; since they are NOT using the in-game info tools, then KJ is just looking for alternatives that work. Now, seeing that something that can be used exists, he is just asking why it isn't being used. -- Large 19:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

And my point is that there is no point in using the newsletter given how the exact same effort could be used for something open to more players, such as the Guild Wars website. Erasculio 19:42, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

How is the Guild Wars website more open to players than them personally receiving emails? Why do I always feel like I'm banging my head against a wall when I talk to you, Erasculio? I am just trying to find ideas for better communication. One of them is better in-game communication and another is sending players emails.

I simply can't understand why you'd be against these things. I've seen you say that it would take resources away from other things, but for how long? How hard could it possibly be to type up an email once a month? I know they have to get them reviewed, etc., but the GWLT's (CR team's) job would be done as soon as they finished writing it. And emails don't require coding, so the only thing that would require dev work would be announcing it on the log-in. Karate Jesus 19:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

For a player to read the newsletter, he has to go to the website, learn the newsletter exists, join it, and not change his e-mail. For a player to read the website, he has to go to the website. That's how going to the website is open to more people than using the newsletter.

I'm not sure you have actually seen the e-mails sent through the newsletter. They look like the announcement pages on the website, complete with pictures and formatting and etc, going beyond just having to "type an email once a month".

And really, I'm against the whole "let's keep improving communication" thing. Arena Net already tells us far more than most companies do, those who are not satisfied with what they are saying right now are unlikely to be ever satisfied. I would rather have Arena Net's resources being used in improving the game than in improving how they talk about how they will improve the game. Erasculio 19:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Realisitically, it would take at least a full day to produce a newsletter. It could take more depending on whether or not the intial design has to be scrapped for some reason. ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Um...no they really don't tell us more than others do. You've played other games, right? And you missed a very important part of my suggestion. I think they could set up the newsletter again and link the log-in page to it. And then, *poof*, you magically get information about Guild Wars once a month (or twice a month) delivered directly to your inbox. You'd never need to visit GuildWars.com again. And, btw, you can sign up for the newsletter with whatever email address you want to. It doesn't have to be your log-in email.

Another reason I think this is a good idea is because it could keep players playing. Every month or so they'd get an email and think, "Hmm, there's some interesting stuff happening in GW. I think I'll go play again". How is this bad? Karate Jesus 19:58, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I think we just have to settle on the fact that Arenanet isn't using everything that it has avaliable, and that it's up to other developers to 'just do more', I updated your communications page KJ with another suggestion and it made me think of all the things other developers do that Arenanet doesn't, that it could but it chooses not to. I think continuing on at this stage is like smacking our heads into a brick wall, and probably more productive. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Good luck finding an Aion developer, or a Lord of the Rings Online developer, or a Conan developer talking to the community as much as Linsey does (which IMO is a sign of how much of her free time she wastes with GW, but anyway). The idea that Arena Net communicate less than other companies is part of this pseudo-crusade for a level of communication that does not exist nor is possible at all.

The wiki is already linked from within the game. Players would be as free to join the newsletter as they are free to look at the wiki, with both being done starting from the game; there is no reason to assume that they would do one more than the other. Together with how there are already other resources to receive news about GW without playing the game (again, such as this wiki, or the RSS feed, or twitter, and etc), adding one more thing would be a waste of the resources Arena Net already does not have. Erasculio 20:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) How about ANet adds a message to the login page that just says "Check the Guild Wars website and wiki for more information about the game!"? ··· Danny Pew Pew 20:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I think that defeats the purpose. However, I agree with 000. At this point, we're just banging out heads against walls. Time to stop. Karate Jesus 20:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

The newsletter is managed by the marketing department, and they use the newsletter for focused, targeted messages for specific purposes. The newsletter is seen as a more formal avenue for information, and one in which the team doesn't feel is good for providing a ton of information within the message. Research shows that brief, to-the-point newsletters have a better open and click-through rate than email newsletters that contain walls of text, which is why the newsletter would not be an ideal way to provide certain types of information (e.g. game updates). Additionally, producing a newsletter requires a graphic designer as well as folks at NCsoft (who manage the newsletter database) in the process. It's not as simple as composing an email and hitting "send". --Regina Buenaobra 22:31, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Regina! Would it be possible to use a similar format to a newsletter (perhaps without the graphics/walls o' text) to get information to players? Something that Anet had control over rather than NCSoft? Karate Jesus 22:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Martin and I are exploring options in terms of better tools we could use to provide players with info. We're aware that our wiki journals may not be the easiest place to access for some folks, we're aware of the limitations of the login screen, and of course not everyone reads the same forums. The web site could use a bit of a redesign, and it's something I've hoped for for a while. Unfortunately it's been a little slow. We're still looking for web people, and it's been a challenge to find the right people for the job, people who have the knowledge and skills to do what we (as a company, not just community) envision. --Regina Buenaobra 23:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense ...what with the flood of awful console games released this summer and winter, I bet the pool of industry sanctioned professional D00ky polishers is runnin pretty low right about now. --ilr 10:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The "misfortune" of some makes the fortune of others :) GO GO GO Team ! Yseron - 90.15.57.236 18:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)