Goblin Squad Member
|
Right now there are two gates that are driving the game community mad: Ability Score requirements and Achievement requirements.
Why? Well, because we have to cross-train far too much.
I'm not sure we are all convinced that adding more skills (different cross-classing options, wee!) or rebalancing the numbers will do it- so I have an idea on how to fix this: it won't eliminate the 'grind' for that can never truly go away, but perhaps we can make it rewarding. We need a bigger carrot so we don't feel the stick hitting us so hard.
My proposal is this: Ability Score gains from Achievements.
There are a few different ways I could see this going:
Option 1, Related Ability Score Gain for Every Achievement:
Mineral Gatherer 1? You gain .025 Constitution. Mineral Gatherer 2? You gain .05 Constitution. - And so on. (Obviously the numbers aren't specifically important in my example. This seems flimsy to me, and in many ways is similar to simply blending the two Gates into one - not necessarily a bad idea, but if we're going to do that why deceive ourselves about it?)
Option 2, Related Ability Score Gain at Set Achievement Points:
Mineral Gatherer 5? You gain .5 Constitution. Mineral Gatherer 10? You gain 1 Constitution. (This is essentially the same thing, but spaced out more and therefore requiring higher dedication for the rewards.)
Option 3, 'Spend' Achievement Points on Ability Scores:
You have been a good little cleric, breaking skeletons and purifying their graves. You have 20 Divine Achievement points - and now you can spend them!
Go see the Temple trainer, and she will increase an Ability Score of your choice from 10 to 11. For 40 Divine, she could increase one from 11 to 12, etc.
A similar setup would exist for the other types of Achievement Points as well, meaning that you could spend your time doing whatever suits your fancy and whatever Achievements you gain could be spent in one place or another to increase your Ability Scores. This should go a long way towards removing the grinding feel, and allow players to do the things they want to do.
This could also be changed to simply adding the ability to spend from your Achievement Points as a whole - meaning that Divine/Crafting/Adventuring points all count the same. This makes it less nuanced, but it might be better on the balance when you consider how many more things you can do to gain Adventuring points than Divine points. (That said, since you can choose your Ability Score increased, it really shouldn't matter which point 'pool' this would come from.)
In case you cannot tell, this is my favorite of the ideas. It seems like a great way to return meaningful decision to the equation. (I still think you should be able to train a bunch of different feats if that's how you want to increase your ability scores, but you shouldn't feel you MUST do so.) You will not be able to advance any faster, since the XP-rate handles that just fine, so this will not give any player an advantage over another. Also, I think being able to see the Achievements giving them something instead of just acting as a barrier to advancement will have a positive effect or player morale. ;)
Another note I'd like to make is that although I talk about 'spending' points, I think it would upset people if they suddenly didn't qualify for something just because they opted to increase their Strength. (Then again, meaningful choices?) I think a spendable point pool based on your achievement points would be more likely to succeed with the player-base.
Thoughts?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My thoughts ?
Either you make Pathfinder a conventional MMO where you get better abilities by smacking gobbos in the face with a club or you leave it the way it is.
Any sort of hybrid will just end up a mess.
Achievements are purely a gating mechanism to force players to actually play rather than just wait till they max their character before going out to impress the gaming world with their elite PvP skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Right now there are two gates that are driving the game community mad: Ability Score requirements and Achievement requirements.
I'm a simple person. I started playing the game a week ago. I thought I understood the system, toiling away with one wizard and one cleric until I completed the sixth level requirements.
At this point I first noticed the attribute requirements. The fractional increase was very esoteric and not explained within the game in any way, and it lead me to discover the phenomenally awesome PFO NPC calculator.
This game was supposed to be released last Thursday for early enrollment. As I understand it, I could have started a new character that would be persistent. Does this mean I could spend experience points making decisions that are irreversible?
If this is the case, then don't you think that any of the suggestions you just made would have a drastic impact on what feats a player might select?
How soon before early enrollment will we have an idea of how our experience purchases will impact our long term characters?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It already is a hybrid. If we didn't want to get better abilities by smacking gobbos in the face, we wouldn't be using these gating mechanisms at all, we would just let the XP stand alone.
I completely understand the idea of forcing players to actually play, but right now the game doesn't require that you play, it requires that you invest in a mad combination of feats in order to advance. It's far more work than play. MVP has generally been defined as the least game you can have while still having fun - right now, it is difficult to have fun because we are all too busy running headlong into gates that might as well be walls.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This game was supposed to be released last Thursday for early enrollment. As I understand it, I could have started a new character that would be persistent. Does this mean I could spend experience points making decisions that are irreversible?
Yes, it does.
If this is the case, then don't you think that any of the suggestions you just made would have a drastic impact on what feats a player might select?
I believe it would have a dramatic effect on what you would choose, after the change. Like you said, if we were in Early Enrollment your past choices would be permanent - but at least if this became an option your future feat choices wouldn't be essentially made for you because you have to cross-train (to an insane degree) in order to qualify for higher-level skills. These ability score requirements are not going to get easier to meet.
How soon before early enrollment will we have an idea of how our experience purchases will impact our long term characters?
That's a reasonable question. I doubt they plan to remove any feats from the game, so it's not as if we have to worry about truly 'wasting' XP on feats, but that's about all I'd be sure of at this point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How soon before early enrollment will we have an idea of how our experience purchases will impact our long term characters?
Their was already an announcement that the ability 11 gating at 7 was a mistake and it is being moved to 8. I am pretty sure their will be other adjustments.
The simple answer to your question is that 3 or 4 weeks cross crafting long term will have negligible effect because despite efforts change the game to the contrary PFO is not meant to be a "max level your character before you can really start to play the proper PvP endgame" sort of game. It is more of a temporary annoyance if you are trying to power level a single class.
The real problem is instead of trying to see what the game hopes to achieve a heap of people are trying to change the game into something they are more familiar with - either a clone of TT Pathfinder or some clone of their favorite PvP generic fantasy MMO both of which are single class power build focussed.
The game already has classes and abilities and neither were originally meant to be in the game at all.
The achievement gating will fix itself once their are more ways to get achievements.
The ability issue seems a result of a "quick fix" to the low level ability gating removed after Alpha 7 and hopefully will get adjusted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
right now, it is difficult to have fun because we are all too busy running headlong into gates that might as well be walls.
Getting my con up to 11 is going to take me some time. I need plenty of xp to advance my cleric Haagen from 6 to 7.
However, since I haven't played around much with crafting or socialized with trade I don't have many items that my advancements can use.
What requirements are you waiting for? What would make the game more fun for you? The responses I read indicated that we should be looking for gear as our rewards rather than advancements or achievements because gameplay doesn't actually change without gear. Also without PvP or settlements I don't really know what power accumulation will realistically be necessary.
I would just like a stable idea of what I should spend my xp on when early enrollment starts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's a reasonable question. I doubt they plan to remove any feats from the game, so it's not as if we have to worry about truly 'wasting' XP on feats, but that's about all I'd be sure of at this point.
As the game currently stands in order to increase Con a cleric needs to advance all of the armor feat for Healer, Evangelist and Crusader as well as fighter armor feats like Dragoon and Unbreakable which require Martial points as well as Divine.
Let's say a player does not want these feats as they aren't all needed to play. Let's say the player chooses these feats simply because he wants to increase his cleric role level. Now let's say after early enrollment the requirements change and these feats are no longer needed. Isn't it valid if a player then feels like this experience actually was 'wasted' if, post change, they would not have selected those feats?
When I first started playing (a whole week ago) I was going to avoid crafting and gathering, but now I'm thinking the safer bet for me is to hold off on spending my experience points altogether until I figure out how rapidly the post early enrollment rules change. Is there a downside to that?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unless you are using two battle foci the martial points tend to accumulate naturally with your longbow or whatever.
However I do see your point.
Yeah for the short term I don't mind killing thousands of mobs with a mace if the xp cost is going to take weeks to accumulate anyway. My concern is spending experience points and not being able to reverse that decision if the game changes drastically. I don't mind the game changing, but I would hope it doesn't require me to purchase something I do not want as a prerequisite to something that I very much need and then later remove that requirement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The real problem is instead of trying to see what the game hopes to achieve a heap of people are trying to change the game into something they are more familiar with - either a clone of TT Pathfinder or some clone of their favorite PvP generic fantasy MMO both of which are single class power build focussed.
I absolutely see what the game is trying to achieve, and have been on board from the very beginning. The problem - and I'm willing to accept that is problem could be fixed by adjusting Ability Score gains/Ability Score requirements - is that right now the game does not allow you to focus.
Single class power build focused? Sure, I'm looking for that - if you mean that the game as described by Goblinworks throughout the blogs. They spoke of a game with specialized characters working together towards common goals. That is not working right now.
Can this be fixed without the changes I offered? I imagine so. But that's not going to stop me from presenting the ideas.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What requirements are you waiting for? What would make the game more fun for you? The responses I read indicated that we should be looking for gear as our rewards rather than advancements or achievements because gameplay doesn't actually change without gear. Also without PvP or settlements I don't really know what power accumulation will realistically be necessary.
I am not waiting on any requirements - if they switched to Early Enrollment today, I would dive headlong into the game and grind my way through everything necessary to achieve my goals. (Which happen to be primarily Crafting.)
The game would be more fun for me if I did not have to purchase unrelated skills in order to advance the ones that matter to my character. Just because I know that I will grind through an unfun set of requirements doesn't mean I will enjoy that process.
I completely agree with anyone who told you that gear will be the key to advancement in this game - the keyword and crafting systems are some of my favorite things about this game.
Just for the record, I would be totally fine with it if it required a full year of XP to reach Tier 2 equipment crafting. It isn't the time that bothers me, it is the -requirement- to extend my training beyond the sphere that my character would logically train in. (Yeah, immersion breaking. It's a common complaint.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Can this be fixed without the changes I offered? I imagine so. But that's not going to stop me from presenting the ideas.
I like the suggestions. I personally don't like that there is a thread that says 'this is how you get from Con 10 to Con 11'. I like that I can purchase those ranks in any order that I want. I like that there are multiple options. Unfortunately it feels like I'm forced to spend experience points unnecessarily to reach a role level. I do not want to be forced to purchase Dragoon unless I'm going to use/have armor with keywords that match that feat.
However, in general if the game is going to make those changes I hope it's done before early enrollment starts. I also wish I could test, or at the very least hear from someone who has tested higher tier armor using 'minimum viable product' build before spending my xp on armor feats.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, if you have EE access you get to choose the date you start play - so you could comfortably wait a few weeks for the community to start getting settled to get guidance in your XP expenditure.
What would be the advantage of doing that versus beginning play and not spending xp?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playing the game right away (upon activating) rather than effectively paying to do nothing for a few weeks.
I could play and rack up achievements and earn money and gear without spending xp.
If someone plans on playing this game for any considerable xp accumulation I do not understand waiting why they would choose to wait a few weeks before beginning play. I am debating on if I should spend my experience points as I earn them or wait a bit to see how quickly the rules change. Once I do choose to spend xp, whether it's a week or a year afterwards, I would hope the game does not make radical changes and instead has a long term plan for how the basic system works.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, if you have EE access you get to choose the date you start play - so you could comfortably wait a few weeks for the community to start getting settled to get guidance in your XP expenditure.What would be the advantage of doing that versus beginning play and not spending xp?
Well if you started play on the last day of "backdated XP" your sub would last longer :D
There is also less risk of taking cross class feats that become unnecessary due to a an ability re-balance.
On the other hand being online for DAY 1 is historic and should be rather fun,you could even take selfies ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The idea of ignoring your XP for a while may very well be a wise decision, Takasi. I expect I will end up doing it myself, from time to time. (I'm bound to reach a point where I want to branch out.)
Am already doing this with my smelter alt in Alpha 8.
Though the recent announcement that the "ability 11 barrier" will be moved from level 7 to level 8 will see me spend a bit more.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
you could even take selfies ;)
Twitch selfies!
Though the recent announcement that the "ability 11 barrier" will be moved from level 7 to level 8 will see me spend a bit more.
What about the ability 12 barriers for most of the rank 6 training? I don't see how moving the role level 7 requirements to level 8 changes the overall selection process of ability increasing training, which is the real time sink.
I actually thought it would help me... like give me a bonus vs goblins, in the beginning. To get goblin slayer...
That would make sense, I think, to gain small amounts of ability for the achievements. Then, of course, people would push them.
Getting ability scores is good, too, because of the fact that they are also a gate. I AM THE GATE.
Edit: ODEARGOD. If achievements were removed and it just affected ability scores... (mind blown)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Takasi, there's one thing you might have missed: The night before EE starts, all the characters we're playing right now will be erased. Playing EE for a few weeks without spending any xp would mean whacking monsters with the freebie club feats, with starting hit points, etc. If somebody wants to do that, fine. It's a valid choice. Just realize that you won't stay at your current strength for those weeks; you'll be a Level 0 unspecialized character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The underlying issue with the OP is having or not having a gating system so you can't spend 6 months of xp in one sitting. For now, we have it.
The more serious issue is how I take all the natural class skills -both prerequisite and not required but useful- and my pertinent stats are still only around 10.25 and I hit a wall that needs 11 to advance. They want me to cross train 75% of the way to my next attribute.
Achievements and attributes go hand in hand in their affect on character building, they are inseparable as long as it's gated. The designers' main job is to get both these systems working together and sorted out where character building is fun not aggravating or none of the other systems will matter.
If cross training really is needed, it should be 20% no more than 30% of each attribute level or players will jump ship on the game. Achievements could (should) be a partner in that along with feats. So it's an organic transition instead of described as "hitting the wall" when you're trying to train Milestone 7.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Takasi, there's one thing you might have missed: The night before EE starts, all the characters we're playing right now will be erased. Playing EE for a few weeks without spending any xp would mean whacking monsters with the freebie club feats, with starting hit points, etc. If somebody wants to do that, fine. It's a valid choice. Just realize that you won't stay at your current strength for those weeks; you'll be a Level 0 unspecialized character.
My current Edam main is 75% crafter and a good part of the other 25% went into his level 2 and 3 spells ( he only ever learnt 3 orisons from the trainer). He has one melee weapon, a +2 longsword, wears T0 heavy armor and has one longsword attack trained - whirlwind. He is effective enough to PvE solo most low level mobs.
Your not getting better than T0 heavy armor or basic weapons in those first few weeks so providing you do not train every available attack/spell for your weapon and go crazy leveling stuff like HP you should be able to play quite effectively with about half a days XP invested into gathering and 2 days XP invested into being competent with one armor, one melee attack some reactive and defensive passives and basic longbow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We may not know all the variables in the system, but it doesn't take a director to recognize a poor film. While we aren't privy to the inner workings of the game it is obvious that people have grievances with the current system, and understandably so. Don't try and dismiss these suggestions as being made out of ignorance.
The posts on this board and the GW forums are all suggestions - ideas of what could be done to improve the state of the game. These aren't demands. No one is cursing Goblin Works for their design choices. We're just trying to get across the point that we something that doesn't quite seem to work out the best and offer an alternative.
That said, I approve of Keign's suggestion here in just about every way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Decisions based on partial ignorance can be expected to be wrong in direct proportion to the ratio of ignorance to knowledge.
In a subjective decision making process the term 'wrong' is relative to the feelings of the decision maker and knowledge has absolutely no direct ignorance to opinion proportion ratio.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...an organic transition...
I agree. In exactly the same way as Ryan's been saying we'll earn Achievements in the course of doing the things we'd be doing anyway, I look forward to Stephen and Lee getting the balance right in Characteristics gained while training other Feats and Skills.
I lament the need to consult spreadsheets--even as I personally revel in them--as I know how few people truly enjoy that. The enjoyment of PFO should come from multiple directions, but "oh no, what do I do now" is in no way an enjoyable feeling.
Players should be able to advance their characters without crossing over from crafting to adventuring arenas, if that's what they choose to do, as easily as those who do cross over can accomplish.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Decisions based on partial ignorance can be expected to be wrong in direct proportion to the ratio of ignorance to knowledge.In a subjective decision making process the term 'wrong' is relative to the feelings of the decision maker and knowledge has absolutely no direct ignorance to opinion proportion ratio.
Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We may not know all the variables in the system, but it doesn't take a director to recognize a poor film.
The critic is not the artist. The critic is not the director, not the actor, not the writer. And these critics are passing judgment while the work is still in progress.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?
You are asking me a straw man question. In my statement I did not notice or distinguish between 'our' subjective opinion or 'theirs', so I do not know what detail, minor or major, that you refer to.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We may not know all the variables in the system, but it doesn't take a director to recognize a poor film.The critic is not the artist. The critic is not the director, not the actor, not the writer. And these critics are passing judgment while the work is still in progress.
For what purpose do directors, actors and writers allow a prerelease screening if not for critique?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For what purpose do directors, actors and writers allow a prerelease screening if not for critique?
They generally don't. In this case we are asked for our opinions when there is something about the design that could go one way or another, won't substantially affect everything else, and so can be adapted to our preferences. Our crowdforging is not intended to alter the core game design.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?You are asking me a straw man question. In my statement I did not notice or distinguish between 'our' subjective opinion or 'theirs', so I do not know what detail, minor or major, that you refer to.
No, I don't deal in straw man tactics. The detail is that we do not have design authority over the development of the game. We are asked our opinions when the developers find something that could go more than one way and wish our input. Those are the points where we can influence the design. We can describe for them our subjective take on what we see, but we are guests in someone else' home. It is not our place to start rearranging the furniture, knocking out walls, and throwing carpets outside when we dislike the color.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For what purpose do directors, actors and writers allow a prerelease screening if not for critique?They generally don't. In this case we are asked for our opinions when there is something about the design that could go one way or another, won't substantially affect everything else, and so can be adapted to our preferences. Our crowdforging is not intended to alter the core game design.
They generally don't?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_screening
What is core game design, substantially affecting, go one way or another has no impact on our opinion. Do you like it? Is it ready? Those are very simple questions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, I don't deal in straw man tactics. The detail is that we do not have design authority over the development of the game. We are asked out opinion when the developers find something that could go more than one way and wish our input.Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?You are asking me a straw man question. In my statement I did not notice or distinguish between 'our' subjective opinion or 'theirs', so I do not know what detail, minor or major, that you refer to.
I did not distinguish in my statement who has what opinion. Stating that I did not notice a detail related to a statement I did not make is by definition a straw man tactic.
'In a subjective decision making process the term 'wrong' is relative to the feelings of the decision maker and knowledge has absolutely no direct ignorance to opinion proportion ratio.'
This statement applies to anyone, design developers, consumers or anyone whether they are aware of this scenario or not. It is a direct response to:
'Decisions based on partial ignorance can be expected to be wrong in direct proportion to the ratio of ignorance to knowledge.'
That statement is false in relation to my response.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do you like it and is it ready are radically different from rewriting the Constitution. Pre-screening isn't people walking about shouting on-stage while the cameras are rolling.
Who is doing that?
Assuming there was no agreement as a part of screening to preclude it, what's wrong with a viewer saying 'this sucks and here's how I would change it'?
If the producers, directors, crew or actors listen and make their own decisions accordingly then why would it bother you?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you like it and is it ready are radically different from rewriting the Constitution. Pre-screening isn't people walking about shouting on-stage while the cameras are rolling.Who is doing that?
Someone urging the abandonment of a core design element like achievements from a game that regulates the realization of advancement potential over time with a second metric that appears to intend a requirement that someone also has to actually play the game, like achievements. The argument was that achievements should be removed, when achievements are integral to the game design. That is like rewriting the game's constitution to be more favorable to someone who wants to accumulate xp and a year later pop up on the radar out of nowhere with the power of someone who has been playing the whole time. Xeen's idea to replace that regulating mechanism with gold would be fine, unless I'm missing something, if there were no way to transfer gold to that dormant character.
Assuming there was no agreement as a part of screening to preclude it, what's wrong with a viewer saying 'this sucks and here's how I would change it'?
By the same token what is wrong with my disagreeing with their opinion and being vocal about it?
If the producers, directors, crew or actors listen and make their own decisions accordingly then why would it bother you?
It won't. But if you say something I disagree with, recommending a change I think will harm the game, what is wrong with my giving voice to my disagreement?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did not distinguish in my statement who has what opinion. Stating that I did not notice a detail related to a statement I did not make is by definition a straw man tactic.No, I don't deal in straw man tactics. The detail is that we do not have design authority over the development of the game. We are asked out opinion when the developers find something that could go more than one way and wish our input.Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?You are asking me a straw man question. In my statement I did not notice or distinguish between 'our' subjective opinion or 'theirs', so I do not know what detail, minor or major, that you refer to.
I didn't say you had asserted 'Our'. I said 'Our' as opposed to 'their', meaning the designer/developer.
Mine wasn't a straw man argument. A straw man argument is a rhetorical device whereby you describe the person you mean to discredit as holding a position you can prove to be wrong. Then you show how that 'straw man' you set up is wrong, and your audience will be inclined to disbelieve the guy you discredited. I did no such thing. I identified that what we are supposed to do is different from what the developer is supposed to do. Our role as opposed to their role.
Your assertion that I was making a straw man argument would itself have been a straw man had you read carefully.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Someone urging the abandonment of a core design element like achievements from a game that regulates the realization of advancement potential over time with a second metric that appears to intend a requirement that someone also has to actually play the game, like achievements. The argument was that achievements should be removed, when achievements are integral to the game design.Do you like it and is it ready are radically different from rewriting the Constitution. Pre-screening isn't people walking about shouting on-stage while the cameras are rolling.Who is doing that?
But the designers write the constitution and film behind the scenes. In the analogy the audience asked to participate in a test screening are not on-stage interfering with art development. The purpose of the test screening is to receive feedback. I do not see, in the case of PFO, where there is a correlation between gamers and the audience with rewriting a constitution and interfering with filming. Where is this?
Assuming there was no agreement as a part of screening to preclude it, what's wrong with a viewer saying 'this sucks and here's how I would change it'?By the same token what is wrong with my disagreeing with their opinion and being vocal about it?
I don't know, that's why I asked the first question. Please feel free to share the problems you have with dissent and expressing negative opinions with the current state of the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I did not distinguish in my statement who has what opinion. Stating that I did not notice a detail related to a statement I did not make is by definition a straw man tactic.No, I don't deal in straw man tactics. The detail is that we do not have design authority over the development of the game. We are asked out opinion when the developers find something that could go more than one way and wish our input.Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?You are asking me a straw man question. In my statement I did not notice or distinguish between 'our' subjective opinion or 'theirs', so I do not know what detail, minor or major, that you refer to.I didn't say you had asserted 'Our'. I said 'Our' as opposed to 'their', meaning the designer/developer.
Mine wasn't a straw man argument. A straw man argument is a rhetorical device whereby you describe the person you mean to discredit as holding a position you can prove to be wrong. Then you show how that 'straw man' you set up is wrong, and your audience will be inclined to disbelieve the guy you discredited. I did no such thing. I identified that what we are supposed to do is different from what the developer is supposed to do. Our role as opposed to their role.
Your assertion that I was making a straw man argument would itself have been a straw man had you read carefully.
You said 'Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?' Why did you ask me about a detail to review related to a statement I did not make? I take that as you trying to prove wrong a position I did not take.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Please feel free to share the problems you have with dissent and expressing negative opinions with the current state of the game.
I have no problem with dissent, Takasi. You are misrepresenting my argument and it appears to be intentional. I argue against recommendations to disembowel the game design.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You said 'Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?' Why did you ask me about a detail to review related to a statement I did not make? I take that as you trying to prove wrong a position I did not take.
So you took it wrong. I made an observation, and based on my observation tried to point out to you a problem with your argument. You took it as a misattribution of your own argument. You were mistaken, simple as that.
Do you mind terribly being wrong again? Is it a real problem or manufactured?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Please feel free to share the problems you have with dissent and expressing negative opinions with the current state of the game.I have no problem with dissent, Takasi. You are misrepresenting my argument and it appears to be intentional. I argue against recommendations to disembowel the game design.
You argue that the deisgners shouldn't disembowel the game design, or that people shouldn't recommend it at all? Please help me represent you properly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You argue that the deisgners shouldn't disembowel the game design, or that people shouldn't recommend it at all? Please help me represent you properly.Please feel free to share the problems you have with dissent and expressing negative opinions with the current state of the game.I have no problem with dissent, Takasi. You are misrepresenting my argument and it appears to be intentional. I argue against recommendations to disembowel the game design.
You might be cute, but you can do your own work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You said 'Ours is the subjective position but we are not positioned to make business decision for them, or had you noticed that minor detail?' Why did you ask me about a detail to review related to a statement I did not make? I take that as you trying to prove wrong a position I did not take.So you took it wrong. I made an observation, and based on my observation tried to point out to you a problem with your argument. You took it as a misattribution of your own argument. You were mistaken, simple as that.
Do you mind terribly being wrong again? Is it a real problem or manufactured?
Why did you include my quote? Who is the 'you' directed to in your question? In my judgement your observation was connected to my statement yet I feel it was unrelated. What is the problem with my argument? How exactly did you point out this problem, using the exact verbiage you provided?
I do not mind being wrong. I am asking for more information so that I can be the judge of my own manufactured problems.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I argue against recommendations to disembowel the game design.You argue that the deisgners shouldn't disembowel the game design, or that people shouldn't recommend it at all? Please help me represent you properly.
I think players make recommendations; designers generally don't, or not in forums visible to us. I imagine that when players recommend completely gutting the game design, the designers are perfectly capable of appropriately weighing such input.