Talk:Beta/BWE2 known issues

Creation

• I have no idea how to replicate the way GWW has individual updates... and then a page with links, etc, blah, blah.
• I have done the best I can with my limited knowledge. Hopefully after the BWE2, someone will make everything "right with the universe"... and perhaps explain something of what they have done/give me pointers for future reference.
  • HAVE A WICKED BWE2!!!    Frostty1 

This isn't really an update, it's a list of known issues for the BWE. (and here's the source) Dunno how we should handle this - I don't think the BWE1 "Known issues" were ever posted to the wiki. —Dr Ishmael 13:23, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

There should be a page for post-release issues, but I'm not sure if there's much point in documenting all pre-release bugs and issues in the wiki. Maybe some trivia note about well-known bugs like jumping while sitting, if people insist. Mediggo 13:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

For the sake of support, I could see listing known issued during the be events, then forward the list to a-net support at the event's close. Not to document 'hey, this was broke', but to serve as an alternative to the forum or in-game reporting methods. 97.118.203.23 13:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

That's getting kind of off-topic - this is an official list of already known issues that Anet is providing to the players. The issues are: 1) do we keep this on the wiki, and 2) what do we rename it to (because it is not a game update). —Dr Ishmael 14:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I don't feel we should aspire to set up such a list in main space, because the forums will have that option already. However, collecting it on a project's page specifically for locating, documenting, and listing bugs ready to be reported could work.

As for game updates, we could have a development process by listing the changes between every BWE, on a single page in the historical content category. - Infinite - talk 14:02, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

(reset indent... I'm slow... the new posts have messed up my formatting)
I beg to differ... well not 'beg'. I feel, that in the context of BWE's, it is exactly equivelent of an 'update'. My reasoning is as follows:

1. Have things changed in the game? >>> Yes.
2. Are these changes important enough that people should be made aware of them (more-so than directing them to an article)? >>> Yes.
3. Will having the info here (in the GW2W) provide answers to players, (possibily) reducing the number of questions asked (like 'is the game still CPU-bound' [yes it is]) >>> That is my sincere intent.
4. Is it important to have a lasting record of game changes? >>> I believe so. Additionally, the forum will be closed after the BWE2. The info will probably be deleted from the forum AND the link on the News page will be die a painful, horrible death. Excruciatingly so... :-(
   >>> That is the EXACT reason I did not link directly from the News page to the forum (I knew where the source was from :P). I was distracted and forgot to include the citation on the Update page.
5. You yourself stated that the BWE1 issues were probably not posted to the wiki. That info is most likely gone forever. As an avid fan of GW, I feel it has intrinsic value, to see how the game has progressed/changed over time. I am well aware that this is an ACTUAL BETA (not some BS marketing ploy). Consequently, the game is wide open to change... Just look at the introduction of Skill & Trait "Tiers". The effects & implications will change the underlying game-play of GW2 (in a good way... and time will prove that is a fact, not my 'opinion').
6. GW2W is a resource material. Having these kinds of records work in the favour of the Community. Having a permanent record, and being able to point to it, can show potential new players just how much ANET cares & respects its' player-base.

To paraphrase the recurring Victorian women character on the "Aaagh! It's the Mr. Hell Show!"... 'Alas, I am but a lowly peon editor' (but don't pee on me)... It is my fervent desire that:

1. The "Known issues" be recorded in the GW2W.
2. That the News page link to the GW2W Update page (with an included citation)... If not now, then definitely after the forums close.

Additionally, the Updates page will need to be created/implemented as some point. Now (informally) and more concretely after the BWE2 is a great time. Hopefully, I have gotten my point across. Please excused the verbosity (and perhaps grandiosity :-) It may be (perhaps) said, that I am 'very' interested in playing this weekend and being able to contribute to the wiki next week after a 16-24 period of recuperative sleep.    Frostty1  14:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, changes to the game should be documented. However, the inherent problem here is that this is not a list of updates or changes to the game. It is a list of things that are currently wrong with the game. Thus it should not be called "game updates".

To put it another way: "game updates" describe a process of change between 2 points in the game's development. This list of "Known Issues" describes a single point. They are inherently different. —Dr Ishmael 14:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

"If a party is split when traveling, players can right-click on the portrait of a separated party member and choose “Join in…” to reunite with them."

That ALONE makes it an "update". That is something that was not in the last BWE. Additionally, what's with such rigidness? EVEN IF the Updates page is ONLY recording the current "Known issues"... it is STILL an "update" to info about the current state of the game.    Frostty1  14:57, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Six months after the game has been release... "known issues" can just be archived. As it stands right now, this info is useful to people to know what they could BE EXPECTING to happen this weekend.

@ Infinite > I have no idea how to replicate the way GWW has individual updates... or I would have tried to do it that way.     Frostty1  14:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Well now, we do have the known issues source linked on the main page in News- I do think people will see that before they think to go to Game Updates. 15:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Everyone can and should expect a ton of changes and various versions of the game client and updates to it before release. Even if a certain section of this list of known issues refers to an updated feature or fixed bug in the beta client does not make it a game update. It is definitely a good thing that we get to know of some of these changes between BWEs. However, in two years, pretty much nobody will remember or care about them, so there's very little reason to get started on documenting all the changes made to pre-release client. Historical issues will become historical, and unless they are very well known (like sit jumping) there's no point in keeping even a trivia note for them. We (mostly) document the game as it currently exists, not how it used to be in pre-release or what all possible changes ArenaNet has or has not made. Mediggo 15:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

But it would only add to our status if we did document the development phase somewhere in a historical category. The idea has merit. It's just not in the correct location, in my opinion. - Infinite - talk 15:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I just think there's too much we don't know that it could be even fractionally comprehensive. Mediggo 15:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps, but look at it from the bright side; all content prior to BWE1 was under NDA (or only available via press and demos). That content was changed, and those changes are under NDA. We can't document NDA-subjected content in the first place. Starting from BWE1 onwards with lists like the one on this article is what we can legally document. It's not that we don't know enough; it's that we weren't allowed to know until recently. This has only just barely started. - Infinite - talk 15:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

"The idea has merit. It's just not in the correct location, in my opinion." That is exactly what I've been trying to say. —Dr Ishmael 15:36, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

EC'ed to have my words taken from me. Again. ;) Redshift 15:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

@Felix >>> :-) I had originally linked the News to the article... but the link was changed.

@Mediggo >>> "However, in two years, pretty much nobody will remember or care about them"... REALLY? How many GW1, two year old, ACTUAL "Game Updates" to YOU remember or care about?

@Mediggo >>> Your arguments are specious and they contradict themselves. "Even if a certain section of this list of known issues refers to an updated feature or fixed bug in the beta client does not make it a game update." >>> Umm... it may be beta... but it's still a "game". Therefore any updates to the beta are ipso facto "game updates"... AND being able to ”reunite with" your separated party is an update.

@Mediggo >>> "We (mostly) document the game as it currently exists" Ummm, that is E~X~A~C~T~L~Y what I am trying to do. Why are you so oblivious to that?

@***EAGLEMUT*** >>> SERIOUSLY? Your suggestion is a Deletion? Not a move? Absurd...

@Infinite >>> I realize that people may not have seen my note "(CREATING "Game updates", this is a starting point, which I fully expect to be moved/modified/better coded)". I did fully expect the page to be modified/moved by those who have more experience. I sincerely appreciate the feedback you gave yesterday. It motivated me to undertake a task like this. But, I regretfully feel that my attempt is (mostly) just being shit on. If there is no compromise... then I have just wasted my time. And THAT will leave a very bitter taste in my mouth.

@Infinite >>> ANY note pertaining to the BWE1 SHOULD have been recorded here. I think what some people are (narrow mindedly) OVER LOOKING is that the forum will be shut down and this info lost...

BOTTOM LINE: The bloody page didn't exist before I created it. EVEN IF it's not in the right place... who the F cares? UNTIL there are QUOTE actual UNQUOTE game updates, it can be used to serve THIS PURPOSE. I am dumbfounded (more-so than my usual self) at some of the obtuseness I am observing here... THIS IS AN "Update to the Known Issues: Beta Weekend Event 2". THIS IS AN update to the current state of the game. THIS IS A Game Update. For those who want to quibble... good luck. The truth doesn't need you to believe it; the truth simply is.

Again @Infinite, TY for yesterday's encouragement of, "comments as clear and logical as your own". It would seem that today, I've not been so fortunate. LoLz. Thankfully I gave up smoking a long time ago... Time to go nibble on some Snickers(tm)... "Because you get cranky when your hungry".     Frostty1  16:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

It may seem like this discussion is just occurring to divert you of your new bold attitude, but it's really not. The fact that you can spark a discussion like this will only be a beneficial aspect to editting on the wiki; discussions help sort out how to go about new wiki content.

All the users on this page may possibly agree that the information you put on the page is valuable to this wiki. However, the discussion points out that there are some aspects to the combination location + content that feel out of place (these are all opinions). The tag on the page right now is deletion, not because the content isn't valuable, nor the page shouldn't exist; it's there because the current combination is misplaced.

Your intention here is clear, but I'd also encourage to listen to other contributors and reflect on their opinions. Together we discuss which information goes where. No one should feel this content should just be removed again; the content is valuable. It just needs discussion as to how and where we present it. ;) - Infinite - talk 17:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Pre-release game is not a finished product. It will go through countless changes, and most of them we will never hear of. What is currently listed on the page is no doubt but a fraction of all the work that GW2 has received between BWE1 and BWE2. Beta client/serverside updates are not "game updates" to a finished product, which article "Game updates" should eventually come to have (on GWW, at least, it seems like a good practice). The current article is all about pre-development fixes, and that is why the current content should be moved (since you have already moved it to your own userpage, possibly for later mainspace use, there is little reason to keep the article here in place anymore). Don't understand me wrong: It is commendable if you wish to document the pre-release development, but I fail to see how that will do any good in the future. It will most likely end up with a bunch of references to external sites' articles which no longer exist, among with many "Izzy said that X was Y before Z" with no or incomplete references. It seems impossible to me to document the whole post-NDA development of Guild Wars 2 both accurately AND comprehensively. Obviously, certain changes, like those currently listed here, are accurate as they stand, but as I said, they are but a mere fraction of it all. Keeping track of accurate historical content or pre-release changes is all right, but if it can't be done in a manner that is neither inaccurate nor incomprehensive, it's better to be left to individual features' articles (trivia, notes, subpages, whatever). There's plenty of examples on GWW and I think we should follow that, unless people really intend to delve into deepest threads and articles and dig up and preserve all that information that has been released about beta phases... which is totally fine by me, if you're up for it. Mediggo 17:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

What about moving the content found on the page currently to [[Released beta weekend event issues]], or something more aptly named of the same nature. Without a doubt we'll be seeing more of these posts on the official forums and we might as well document them until we are 100% sure as to what we'll end up doing with this type of information. - Infinite - talk 17:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I was thinking about having a subpage under Beta, similiar to how drop research pages were kept. Mediggo 17:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

That can also work. I think that is a very nice location for these lists of known issues. - Infinite - talk 17:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

And once the game is released this type of information can go into historical content. It might not seem useful but I like having that kind of information for the sake of saving it somewhere, and for nostaliga sake :-). --Lania 21:04, 08 June 2012 (UTC)

Resolution

I have moved this page to a more appropriate location. —Dr Ishmael 15:25, 18 June 2012 (UTC)