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

"

dickhole_mcghee wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

dickhole_mcghee wrote:

Aha I am getting trolled sooo hard here, well played all around...


Remember the 'gate' conversation? It was only a few days ago. That stemmed from picking a piece of the OP and quoting. That was productive and went so well, right?

My recollection of the gate conversation was that it was essentially a semantic argument on your part that you dropped after finding out that I had copied the definition from an on-line dictionary. I'm not sure I'd consider that productive because I never understood why a semantic discussion on the meaning of gate had any relevant to the Labyrinth controversy?

You're a pro, almost godlike...


p.s. I hope you appreciate that the troll accusations are compliments. The alternative is, uh, not so flattering.

Here's THE problem, you never state what it is that is being discussed or what the argument is. You force everyone to just guess. You need to state succinctly and specifically what exactly it is that you are talking about. What you are arguing. You force me to guess and then when I guess wrong you say silly things like above.

Instead of ever stating your position you just ask things like is this a good definition of ARPG? What is YOUR point! In other words state it! What are you trying to get at? In other words state it! Don't beat around the bush. Just state what the heck you are talking about. What is your argument?

I think dick's first language isn't english. That's fine, it isn't mine either. Here are some other words that can be used instead of that one.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gate+synonyms

Hope it helped. :)

"

Pyrokar wrote:

I think dick's first language isn't english. That's fine, it isn't mine either. Here are some other words that can be used instead of that one.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gate+synonyms

Hope it helped. :)

Sorry for getting off topic. You might be right but, I think the main problem is that dick likes to argue using a question and answer technique. That can work great in a one-on-one verbal conversation. In written especially in a forum format like this, it doesn't work. What is needed is for the person to instead present the argument in a fully complete form and then the discussion can go on from there.

"

The irony of this statement is that the thread and the opening post are so sophomoric and fallacious that we haven't even got to the part where we discuss some of the more interesting aspects. People have been posting 'bullshit' to try to get you/them tighten up your premise before the actual discussion even starts. For 70 pages now!

And what you did since few pages instead of shitting more ?

"

The entire OP is nothing

"

it's like you people have never willfully debated or been forced to debate anything and don't seem to understand how it even works on a fundamental level.

Thats what almost everybody must think about you now

"

I've made a bunch of bullshits' in this thread.

fix'd

"

You (and Regulator et al) haven't seemed to even make the attempt to understand what the people disagreeing with you are saying, only that they vaguely are not agreeing with you.

A statement that can easily be done with you too.

"

Regulator wrote:

If they are going to balance the game after AC (which they probably will)

They will surely have to balance the end game (at least) on the ascendancy classes. There's no way it makes sense otherwise.

"

they will make changes to the lab and they ways to ascend on their own, im sure about it.

I wish I was as optimistic. The lab will stay in of course, as is just fine with everyone. But after all the effort they put into it, I'm afraid GGG may feel locked in to the current system and will continue to use ascendancy points to force people to play through the lab.

I hope they listen to the feedback, given how negatively many people have reacted. But I also understand that game devs would go crazy if they tried to satisfy everyone instead of following their own ideas.

"

ShaUrley wrote:

<snip> ... The lab will stay in of course, as is just fine with everyone. But after all the effort they put into it, I'm afraid GGG may feel locked in to the current system and will continue to use ascendancy points to force people to play through the lab.

I hope they listen to the feedback, given how negatively many people have reacted. But I also understand that game devs would go crazy if they tried to satisfy everyone instead of following their own ideas.

I agree with this. When so much effort has been put into something it's generally pretty challenging to change direction.

Looking back at recent history, those leading SWG and City of Heroes stuck with pushing through changes that faced sustained and vociferous resistance from players, even though they lost so many players that you could probably reasonably consider those changes as contributing to a long run death spiral for both of those games.

Even if Labyrinth could end up being a similarly disastrous watershed event for POE, which it might be given how foreign Labyrinth is to many ARPG afficionados, then it might still be very difficult for those leading GGG to make enough adjustments to keep their playerbase at a healthy level over the longer run.

The other issue that might end up declining is the level of trust on the part of players that they know what kind of game they're supporting, given how surprisingly unpleasant Labyrinth has proved to be for so many players.

"

EnjoyTheJourney wrote:

Looking back at recent history, those leading SWG and City of Heroes stuck with pushing through changes that faced sustained and vociferous resistance from players, even though they lost so many players that you could probably reasonably consider those changes as contributing to a long run death spiral for both of those games.

Even if Labyrinth could end up being a similarly disastrous watershed event for POE, which it might be given how foreign Labyrinth is to many ARPG afficionados, then it might still be very difficult for those leading GGG to make enough adjustments to keep their playerbase at a healthy level over the longer run.

If there is one good thing about your guys' continuing QQ about the lab, it is this. No game should last forever; it is in a project's death that it is iterated upon and has the chance to be reborn, better than ever.

Perhaps Path of Exile's time has come. Perhaps it is beyond saving. Perhaps it must be allowed to die. If you lot wish to be the executioners, then by all means, don't let me stop you.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Pyrokar wrote:

I think dick's first language isn't english. That's fine, it isn't mine either. Here are some other words that can be used instead of that one.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gate+synonyms

Hope it helped. :)

Sorry for getting off topic. You might be right but, I think the main problem is that dick likes to argue using a question and answer technique. That can work great in a one-on-one verbal conversation. In written especially in a forum format like this, it doesn't work. What is needed is for the person to instead present the argument in a fully complete form and then the discussion can go on from there.

Quick aside:

For years I was a moderator for one of the biggest online forums in existence (at least, at the time 2007-2010, it was in the top 50). Because of this, I don't report posts except in extreme situations. On THIS forum, I haven't seen a post or series of posts that comes close to qualifying. (Like, imagine a user getting harassed by having every one of his posts get a reply of somebody posting bestiality porn, and that's just the tip of the iceberg) So that's the only reason I didn't report these two posts, but that doesn't mean they don't qualify as potentially offensive and useless clutter. And dumb. Prokar's post might be one of the dumbest things I've ever read online IF it didn't appear to me as a half-joke. Getting into a report-post war is the most childish and annoying things for a moderator to deal with.

"

I think the main problem is that dick likes to argue using a question and answer technique. That can work great in a one-on-one verbal conversation. In written especially in a forum format like this, it doesn't work.

I only resorted to the Socratic method (that's the, uh, 'question and answer technique) AFTER you people seemed unwilling or unable to have a discussion.

Imagine an alternate reality where I ask the question about the acceptable definition of an ARPG and somebody simply replies yes or no. And then imagine how streamlined the discussion gets afterwards. And yet, there have been almost two pages of wall-o-text posts without one person simply answering the question. Some might argue (heh) THAT is useless spam and clutter. One man's trash, etc.

So yeah, OF COURSE 'it doesn't work' if one party is unwilling to answer a simple yes/no question. What manner of gorilla logic is that, where YOU are the one stating it doesn't work, when YOU are one of the people willingly making it not work?

p.s. LOL

p.p.s. Somehow, Shovelcut understood immediately and even correctly predicted the outcome. But I guess he's also another ESL idiot with a strange and mystifying argumentative technique.

p.p.p.s. Apparently I have to lump all the replies together in one post or else Regulator will report me again and I will get regulated... Or something? I'm still trying to get a clarification on the exact rule.

Anyhow,

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

dickhole_mcghee wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

My recollection of the gate conversation was that it was essentially a semantic argument on your part that you dropped after finding out that I had copied the definition from an on-line dictionary. I'm not sure I'd consider that productive because I never understood why a semantic discussion on the meaning of gate had any relevant to the Labyrinth controversy?

You're a pro, almost godlike...


p.s. I hope you appreciate that the troll accusations are compliments. The alternative is, uh, not so flattering.

Here's THE problem, you never state what it is that is being discussed or what the argument is. You force everyone to just guess. You need to state succinctly and specifically what exactly it is that you are talking about. What you are arguing. You force me to guess and then when I guess wrong you say silly things like above.

Instead of ever stating your position you just ask things like is this a good definition of ARPG? What is YOUR point! In other words state it! What are you trying to get at? In other words state it! Don't beat around the bush. Just state what the heck you are talking about. What is your argument?

1st bold: Why on earth should you have to guess?!? It's all written down right here! That's the magic of the written word on an online forum. You can peruse to your heart's content. Heh, 'recollection', as if we're piecing together memories of our childhoods for our memoirs, and not something that happened a few days ago and is recorded right here.

2nd bold: Here is my point of asking if that's a good definition of ARPG. I want to know if the people talking about ARPGs in this thread, think that is a good definition of ARPG. So I asked if that is a good definition of ARPG. I honestly do not know how to make this discourse simpler. Any further and we might be in the abstract territory of discussing the philosophy of linguistics and THAT WOULD be some offtopic clutter...


p.p.p.p.s. Lol if this is the rule, it's the rule. Just seems odd. In my experience breaking up separate replies to separate posts is more streamlined, not less.

Why are you so mad? I am just trying to help you since you seemed confused about the meaning of a word... :(

Also,

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Hey dick, if you want to argue about the word gate or about the wiki definition of an arpg, do it in another thread as i believe it to be offtopic on this one. If it isn't, then plz elaborate.

Nothing new on that front huh?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

If there is one good thing about your guys' continuing QQ about the lab, it is this. No game should last forever; it is in a project's death that it is iterated upon and has the chance to be reborn, better than ever.

Perhaps Path of Exile's time has come. Perhaps it is beyond saving. Perhaps it must be allowed to die. If you lot wish to be the executioners, then by all means, don't let me stop you.

Your thinking is backwards. Those who post "QQ about the Lab," as you choose to characterize them, are trying to fix what they see as a terrible situation in a game they love. I.e., they want to CONTINUE playing. Otherwise why would they be complaining? They would just leave.

Any mass exodus of the game will be by these players who are not interested in playing a game they no longer find fun, yes. And they are the "executioners" of that game? How exactly do you consider them responsible for the game's death?