Warning for Ultra widescreen Mod after I disabled it

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

Got anymore of those god awful analogies? Or does higher fps equal higher field of view? Kek.

I'm so glad GGG is finally bringing down the hammer on that "mod" and evens the playing field. Imagine you get 21:9 and somehow that's not enough, still.

And it matters why?

Is the game competitive?

Yes, it is. Always has been, always will be. I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

Got anymore of those god awful analogies? Or does higher fps equal higher field of view? Kek.

I'm so glad GGG is finally bringing down the hammer on that "mod" and evens the playing field. Imagine you get 21:9 and somehow that's not enough, still.

And it matters why?

Is the game competitive? Are you racing players or fighting against them where having this huge field of view actually matters? Is that what the game is based around? Seems to me it's a single player ARPG mostly, where people mindlessly grind.

Why do people lie to themselves about this game. It's a single player game where 'some' players engage with a economy. This isn't league of legends, where being able to see the entire top lane with your monitor actually gives you an advantage.

Wrong.

You fundamentally don't understand the game.

First of all, MOST ppl (and not "some") play trade and engage with it.
Secondly, everyone who is engaging in trade is competing with everyone else over items, resources, etc.

You don't need direct competition like it is in "team-based" games with a ladder and rank to climb to be competitive.
Furthermore, PoE has an official ladder and races too.

So, having way more information than someone else is an advantage.

Big difference between being forced to engage, and choosing to engage.

I don't think most players want to engage with this economy. Given than over 90% of players quit by act 5.


So, is it a good thing to have in the game? I say no.

That's also great. A race here and there is a for fun competitive event. Doesn't mean the game is competitive. We had this argument before. Yes, the economy does make the game 'competitive'. But it doesn't add a ton of value outside of that.

That's the main reason it exists. So that the 1-3% of players grinding maps for 10,000 hours, have one more thing to keep them in the game. Everyone else just leaves.

But of course, we're going to completely ignore the fact that 90% of players quit this game before act 5ish, and continue arguing that the economy and the competition it brings to the game are necessary, and add tremendous value to the game, right Jakker?

Investing in 300 lightradius to actually make use of the 21:9 or 32:9 screen is fine with me. Fog of war should not show anything.

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

"

Ulsarek#7159 wrote:

Got anymore of those god awful analogies? Or does higher fps equal higher field of view? Kek.

I'm so glad GGG is finally bringing down the hammer on that "mod" and evens the playing field. Imagine you get 21:9 and somehow that's not enough, still.

And it matters why?

Is the game competitive?

Yes, it is. Always has been, always will be. I'm not going to pretend otherwise.

Yup, it's competitive with the economy.

But, wait. If 90+% of players are quitting around act 5-6.. And not engaging with the economy. Is it something we should keep?

I mean, of course you'll say yes. You like it. But is it good for the over-all health of the game? It's profits? Less than 3% of players ever even touched a boss in end-game PoE 1. Certainly seems like it's a mechanic designed for a specific purpose.

Hmm..

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Big difference between being forced to engage, and choosing to engage.

Nope, not a big difference because the game has a baseline (intent) of how it works and it's balanced around "trade".

"

I don't think most players want to engage with this economy. Given than over 90% of players quit by act 5.

What you "think" doesn't matter because we have something called "factual truth" and it's a fact that the vast majority of players play "trade".

Furthermore, why are you lying again? Not "90% of players quit by Act 5".
You know, stuff like this is why I call you out for making up things.

"

That's also great. A race here and there is a for fun competitive event. Doesn't mean the game is competitive. We had this argument before. Yes, the economy does make the game 'competitive'. But it doesn't add a ton of value outside of that.

Again. It does not need to add enough value for you, YOU are not the majority of the player base.

"

That's the main reason it exists. So that the 1-3% of players grinding maps for 10,000 hours, have one more thing to keep them in the game. Everyone else just leaves.

Prove it. You can't? I know.

"

But of course, we're going to completely ignore the fact that 90% of players quit this game before act 5ish, and continue arguing that the economy and the competition it brings to the game are necessary, and add tremendous value to the game, right Jakker?

Again and again. No facts so far presented by you, period.
You couldn't provide proof for your wild claims in weeks, not one... single... time.

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

Big difference between being forced to engage, and choosing to engage.

Nope, not a big difference because the game has a baseline (intent) of how it works and it's balanced around "trade".

"

I don't think most players want to engage with this economy. Given than over 90% of players quit by act 5.

What you "think" doesn't matter because we have something called "factual truth" and it's a fact that the vast majority of players play "trade".

Furthermore, why are you lying again? Not "90% of players quit by Act 5".
You know, stuff like this is why I call you out for making up things.

"

That's also great. A race here and there is a for fun competitive event. Doesn't mean the game is competitive. We had this argument before. Yes, the economy does make the game 'competitive'. But it doesn't add a ton of value outside of that.

Again. It does not need to add enough value for you, YOU are not the majority of the player base.

"

That's the main reason it exists. So that the 1-3% of players grinding maps for 10,000 hours, have one more thing to keep them in the game. Everyone else just leaves.

Prove it. You can't? I know.

"

But of course, we're going to completely ignore the fact that 90% of players quit this game before act 5ish, and continue arguing that the economy and the competition it brings to the game are necessary, and add tremendous value to the game, right Jakker?

Again and again. No facts so far presented by you, period.
You couldn't provide proof for your wild claims in weeks, not one... single... time.

I told you this once before. You should practice your abstract thinking. It's very difficult for people, especially when they don't use it very often, but it can help you learn common sense, and connecting things without actually having the correct 'facts'.

Lets practice it a bit here. I'll give you a statement, and then ask a question. And then you can use your abstract thinking to make sense of it, and then answer.

50-60% of Americans are either Diabetic, Pre-diabetic, or have insulin resistance/metabolic syndrome.

Should people continue following the guidelines from the American Standard Diet/Food Pyramid where they suggest 125 grams of grains/carbs per day, or 11+ servings of grains?

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

I told you this once before. You should practice your abstract thinking. It's very difficult for people, especially when they don't use it very often, but it can help you learn common sense, and connecting things without actually having the correct 'facts'.

Darling, you are not in the position to insult my abstract thinking.
So far, you never ever provided even the slightest proof to any of your claims,
failed basic math and always ended up in conclusion fallacies.
Look up "Dunning-Kruger". Because "fabricated facts" are not "facts".

"

Lets practice it a bit here. I'll give you a statement. And then you can use your abstract thinking to make sense of it.

50-60% of Americans are either Diabetic, Pre-diabetic, or have insulin resistance/metabolic syndrome.

Should people continue following the guidelines from the American Standard Diet/Food Pyramid where they suggest 125 grams of grains/carbs per day, or 11+ servings of grains?

This has literally nothing to do with "abstract thinking".
Before you come up with more nonsense, educate yourself about "abstract thinking" too, after you read about "Dunning-Kruger".

"

JakkerONAIR#4902 wrote:

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

I told you this once before. You should practice your abstract thinking. It's very difficult for people, especially when they don't use it very often, but it can help you learn common sense, and connecting things without actually having the correct 'facts'.

Darling, you are not in the position to insult my abstract thinking.
So far, you never ever provided even the slightest proof to any of your claims,
failed basic math and always ended up in conclusion fallacies.
Look up "Dunning-Kruger". Because "fabricated facts" are not "facts".

"

Lets practice it a bit here. I'll give you a statement. And then you can use your abstract thinking to make sense of it.

50-60% of Americans are either Diabetic, Pre-diabetic, or have insulin resistance/metabolic syndrome.

Should people continue following the guidelines from the American Standard Diet/Food Pyramid where they suggest 125 grams of grains/carbs per day, or 11+ servings of grains?

This has literally nothing to do with "abstract thinking".
Before you come up with more nonsense, educate yourself about "abstract thinking" too, after you read about "Dunning-Kruger".

What is actually wrong with you?

I've ignored your attempts to call me a liar, and insult me in various ways, and even when I make the effort to help you with something. You turn around and completely avoid the question, and continue to insult me.

You're really just here to fight, aren't you? You spend most of your day on these forums doing this. Last time I was here a few weeks ago, you got banned for this. Did you just ignore that, and assume no wrongdoing?

Dunning-Kruger he says. Oh the irony.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

What is actually wrong with you?

I've ignored your attempts to call me a liar, and insult me in various ways, and even when I make the effort to help you with something. You turn around and completely avoid the question, and continue to insult me.

You're really just here to fight, aren't you? You spend most of your day on these forums doing this. Last time I was here a few weeks ago, you got banned for this. Did you just ignore that, and assume no wrongdoing?

Dunning-Kruger he says. Oh the irony.

If you are not lying - present facts for your baseless claims.
But so far, you haven't and probably never will.

You don't know why I was on probation, but if you want... make things up again.

"

Akedomo#3573 wrote:

What is actually wrong with you?

I've ignored your attempts to call me a liar, and insult me in various ways, and even when I make the effort to help you with something. You turn around and completely avoid the question, and continue to insult me.

You're really just here to fight, aren't you? You spend most of your day on these forums doing this. Last time I was here a few weeks ago, you got banned for this. Did you just ignore that, and assume no wrongdoing?

Dunning-Kruger he says. Oh the irony.

Sorry, but I'm gonna side with @JakkerONAIR#4902 on this one. You literally said they lacked the mental capacity for abstract thought; there is no parallel universe in which that level of passive-aggressive snark is going to be positively received. If it was your intention to be helpful, then you're missing the mark.