NZGDC 2016 Developer Presentation: Labyrinth Design
|
There are alternatives to dark beer. That's the difference to your analogy being a good one, or being a bad one. (It's a bad one).
I don't need a carry. I can get through it fine on my own. But it's annoying, so I won't. |
|
" "In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so." "The ad populum fallacy is the appeal to the popularity of a claim as a reason for accepting it. The number of people who believe a claim is irrelevant to its truth." Me saying that many players do not like the labyrinth,true or false,is not an ad populum. It's just a statement that is either right or wrong. Me saying that god is real because many believe in him,is an ad populum. You still don't understand what the term ad populum is used for. | |
" I'm not sure what mental gymnastics you're doing to not see how that applies to you but I am sure it's pointless to argue with you if you can't. You made the statement that a big percentage of players hate to run Lab, which is both an empty claim (right or wrong) without proof, and an attempt to assert that the popularity of hating on the lab is a reason to accept that it's not a good feature. A statement can be both right or wrong, as well as an appeal to the popularity of something as evidence of it's merit or lack thereof. You're just lawyering up, to litigate how bad your argument is, in the absence of a stronger one. "only 10% of players care about melee" - Aesop's Fox if he was a GGG dev
"when you die in this game, typically you're getting one shot, you're dieing in one frame; almost always" -Ben_ |
|
|
It still is not an ad populum. It is at best a wrong argument.
Because if it turned out that most players (populum) do not like the lab,then the lab would obviously be a bad feature due to failing to satisfy the majority of customers. (No fallacy there) Since satisfying the majority of players is the goal of an online game,there are no other objectives. If it turned out that most players like the lab,then my statement would be false and just that. An ad populum would be that if it turned out that most players believe in god,then god is real. Just look at the definition of an ad populum fallacy,watch some debates where people use it and you will understand. If a new product fails to satisfy it's customers,the product is a fail since it doesn't do what it was made for. This is NOT an ad populum fallacy. This is basic marketing. |
