SET FREE THE ASCENDANCY POINTS (or rework the lab) [New ascension methods/lab rework ideas]

"

goetzjam wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

ZiggyD said that the labyrinth tires him out.

Do you have a link to where he said that?

I'm sure you can find the link on your own. :)

"

ShaUrley wrote:

"

goetzjam wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

ZiggyD said that the labyrinth tires him out.

Do you have a link to where he said that?

I'm sure you can find the link on your own. :)

That's a no you can't find it isn't it? I'd also say that the lab tires me out though, it's a much more high tension and engaging experience than mapping.

ProjectPT quit and went to WOW due to a lack of confidence in GGG.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Ok so this streamer, PT and raiz (saw in another thread) don't enjoy lab. Is there any streamer that does?

Can't speak for them all, but I know Mathil finds it "toxic".

I saw him Emo-spiral at the Lab once I felt vindicated.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Based only on the data that Chris said the engineers were new hires that implemented labyrinth, my speculation is that Chris was trying to be supportive of them when he made that statement.

It's possible, I suppose, but would you give newly hired people free reign in designing a major game feature? I know it's a point of pride for Aussie and Kiwi companies to give their employees a lot of autonomy, as opposed to, say, China. But it still seems like much.

"

raics wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Based only on the data that Chris said the engineers were new hires that implemented labyrinth, my speculation is that Chris was trying to be supportive of them when he made that statement.

It's possible, I suppose, but would you give newly hired people free reign in designing a major game feature? I know it's a point of pride for Aussie and Kiwi companies to give their employees a lot of autonomy, as opposed to, say, China. But it still seems like much.

None of us is privy to GGG's internal discussions -- so who know -- but my strong impression from what Chris (and other devs) have said is that it's the lead devs, like Chris, who drove the labyrinth and put the ascendancy points behind it.

They must believe this makes the game better, but they seem blinded to the extent of its unpopularity (or are just determined to do it anyway). It may well be that some of the lower-level people who implemented the lab have a clearer view of things, but they're not calling the shots.

"

Phrazz wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

I don't believe a single second that you do reach the "super good at the lab" level that I used.

You know, when you use your words "bad faith" against me (and others in this thread), where does a sentence like this put you?

I mean, if I was to call you a liar, you would find it hard to debate anything. I mean, being good at the lab while still not liking the gameplay is sort of the BASE standpoint of many players in here, including me. When you dismiss this BASE standpoint as a lie, just because logic, it becomes impossible to have a fluid debate with you, and YOU are making it personal for everyone else.

We have a saying in my country: "Looking in the mirror is the key to understand others" (bad translation, but you get the idea).

If you were to call me a liar, I would probably just move on.
My point is not about not liking the gameplay, one more time.
It was really refering to the word "boring" ( and "tedious" too, quite similar ).


And if such a mirror was at the beginning of the corridor that all the lab haters go (run?) through, then it's miles and miles behind already I'm afraid.

"

Phrazz wrote:

What I fail to understand, is when someone finds the lab "easy", runs it fast, and at the same time doesn't believe that others are able to do it just as fast, because they don't get the same amount of "fun" out of it. That falls into the category; "arrogant", in my eyes.

If you are referring to me there, that is not what I said either.
I wasn't debating of the amount of fun that people get.
Just saying that boredom does hardly come for something that takes an insignificant amount of time ( let's add "imo" ), and that if those haters crying rivers could do it under 10 mins or so from the very starts, we would probably not actually have those rivers on the forum.
Some small ponds here and there maybe.
But noboy can know hat for sure, of course.

I never said that the design was not an issue for some either.


But to be honest, I do find the lab more fun ( my opinion, again ), if I am not rushing like a madman through it.
30 consecutive mins would probably be much, much of a bore than some spread 1min / 1min / 1min and then 10 min also.


PS : People multiplying a very small sample to scale it to try to make a "big picture" really do lack understanding of how statistics work, especially in an environment where the subjects are very based overall.
If they actually understand that, then it's just fallacious.

"

j33bus wrote:

So i've brought this up a lot but your 904 number is meaningless for anything but itself, simply because it conflates a lot of complaints, such as "the lab could be better" "the lab has a problem but is mostly fine" and "I hate the lab and it should be gutted in every way possible" the first two shouldn't be counted for your statistics and are much more prevalent than the last one on your list.

Now let's talk about being baysean, which you need to do, because being purely frequentist (like you are) is wrong 100% dead wrong, because we know things about the world already and it would be silly to forget them. We know that people are much more likely to give negative unsolicited feedback, we know that people are much more likely to bandwagon onto negative things, and we know so much more.

So if you want to try and draw any conclusion from your list other than this is a list and we know exactly what the list says and nothing more, you need to do much more work.

Our resident Dung Beetle says, "I love eating poop. I love living in poop. I love playing with poop. But, I especially love eating poop. Elephant poop is good. Cow poop is delicious. Sheep poop is fun. Pig poop is acceptable. But the best poop of all is labyrinth poop because labyrinth is poop heaven.

I have even had cousins moved to Australia and New Zealand by wise government officials because government officials know that eating poop is important for the good of the country and the good of the world.

I need to here and now lay to rest the silly scandal that I ever shot myself in the foot by accident. You see what really happened was that I shoot my feet all the time. It shows how wise, important, correct, how many spare feet I have and how drunk on the love of poop that I am. Eating poop makes it gooder than ignoring what I say, lol."

"

Fruz wrote:

Just saying that boredom does hardly come for something that takes an insignificant amount of time ( let's add "imo" )

So, basically, everyone claiming they run the lab fast, but still finds it boring, are liars? Because in your head, "boring" is developed over time? Please don't talk to me about "bad faith" again.

Several people in here have told you that they don't link "boring" to "over time". Several people in here have told you that they view "boring" as the opposite of "fun". Yet you keep rejecting to believe people, based on YOUR definition of the word "boring", even though you KNOW they have another definition?

Ok. Sorry Fruz. I can't seem to get you at all.

"boring" as the strict opposite of "fun" is anyway incorrect.
I could not care less if people taking "boring" strictly in this sense don't like what I say with this.
We could check for example this definition if you want, that clearly shows a relation to time ( which is of course linked to the interest of the subject ).


Anyway, the underlying point behind it ( that was a bit expressed by raics too ) is that there is a relation to difficulty.
This one depends heavily on the player of course.
But there is no way that the couple of people that have been throwing their tantrum about the lab for more than a year have absolutely no difficulty problem there ( as small as it might be ... or not ! ), despite what has been said by some.
This one is less related to semantics, I guess it might then be more easily understood.
Gameplay and difficulty are related notions.


Which does not change the fact that some hate the lab, and which obviously does not imply that getting better at the lab would make one enjoy it at the end no matter what ( I'm adding with line because some might be able to either start with fallacies, or just would start fixing up words without being fully conscious maybe, I'm not sure anymore ).