Seems a loaded failtrain has pulled into the station

A lot of great stuff floating around today. First is this comment from Rammstein, responding to Azuriel yesterday, related to his and Blizzard’s claim that Cata failed because it was too hard:

Anything that Chilton says to the New York Times is “established fact”? LOL. You never considered any of the following?

1. He could be lying.

2. He could be wrong, which looks more likely when you consider he is part of the design team responsible for the drop.

3. He could be both lying and wrong, the most probable scenario.

4. He could be right. In this horribly unlikely case, what he said is STILL NOT ESTABLISHED FACT, as that would require something establishing it as a fact besides someone just saying it to someone else.


I remember hearing Chilton’s comment when it was originally made, and had a similar reaction to Rammstein (I might have blogged about it, not sure, too lazy to look). To take the word of someone who is partially responsible for sinking a runaway success as gospel is… silly at best. If anything, I’m pretty sure Blizzard has been writing a great “What not to do” book of MMO design since WotLK. MoP should be a thrilling conclusion.

And in that book, they should also include some footnotes, one being this. Raise your hand if you are shocked that a game that was good and then went full-on WoWtard is seeing players leave? Anyone, anyone? Again, much like WAR, it’s sad to see what could have been a nice entry in the MMO genre turn into a pile of wasted code.

Speaking of a pile of wasted code, this is amusing. If 300m can’t buy you semi-decent graphics that work (let’s be honest, even the high-res stuff still looks very meh compared to something like Skyrim), is there any hope? Sure, it’s impossible to catch something random like /dance turning on godmode, and we all know having more than a dozen players on a screen is technically impossible (I write this as I undock from Jita 4 4, with everything maxed (real maxed, not ‘high is a bug’ maxed), and my FPS sitting at 60), but is it too much to ask for 2008-ish graphic options? But hey, at least they shipped with AA enabled, right? I mean only a super-indy game from 2003 (Darkfall) would ship without that feature enabled… Oh… Hey… voice!

The worst part of all this high-res nonsense is that BioWare assumes everyone playing SW:TOR is an idiot (I know, I know). “Oh the ‘high’ setting is a UI bug”, “No no, the current high really is high, even though the beta high looked much better…”, or that long explanation of how drawing characters on a screen works. Thanks Doc. I never considered how having more characters might be taxing on a machine. Next you are going to tell me the whole problem is exponential! Hopefully they have emailed that wonderful discovery to Nvidia so maybe they can start working on a solution. And if only we had internet connections faster than 14.4…

Maybe it’s a generational thing? All of the current devs that believe handing out epics = retention while they stand on pillars just need to finally exit the industry, and maybe we can get some money spent on non-insta-fail design?

That’s not going to happen, is it?

Oh, one more point: all this “money is in casual themeparks, deal with it” crap. Hi, themeparks have/are failing, and they cost a hell of a lot more when they fail (WAR, AoC, Rift, EQ2, etc) than some 10m indy MMO that never got a chance (poor Shadowbane). Yes, WoW had 11m subs. Blizzard made a ton of cash. Everyone wishes they were WoW. I get all that. It’s not 2007 anymore. No one has even come remotely close to replicating WoW no matter how much they spent or how hard they mashed copy/paste. The current WoWs in gaming? A ‘hardcore’ PvP game and two ‘hardcore’ PvP games (LoL and BF/CoD).

Also Minecraft made a million dollars (read that in the Office Space “guy who invented the pet rock made a million bucks” voice)

About SynCaine

Former hardcore raider turned casual gamer.
This entry was posted in Darkfall Online, EQ2, EVE Online, League of Legends, MMO design, Random, Rant, Rift, SW:TOR, Warhammer Online, World of Warcraft. Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Seems a loaded failtrain has pulled into the station

  1. saucelah says:

    It’s a fact of everything in life: if it takes no effort, if it takes no thought, most humans will rapidly lose interest.

    • Torcano says:

      Sarcasm mode at full warp speed 9 here right?

      I hope so, as otherwise it’s pretty much polar opposite of reality.

  2. Mobs says:

    Actually playing rift again, it is fun and def (for me) better then anything else available.
    About 8 med-high servers (2 being PvP).

    Patch 1.7 looks awesome, they are tightening up progression and giving it a better feel then just, the massive leaps in power from one gear set to the next, also combining all the tier dungeons into one tier equaling roughly the difficulty of a T2.

    The progression changes are including PvP as well, basically to where rank 8 is still strong, but changing it from where everyone is little more then a speed bump to a rank 8 player. Taking out the PvP souls and adding a planar atunement tree focused on PvP, which I am all for. Also as always, PvP rifts are abundant and open world PvP is still very active, I have gotten in some pretty fun battles since I came back. Huge and Small. PvP in general is pretty balanced as is.

    They are offering other types of progression too, honestly glad I came back, the abysmal mess that is SWTOR sent me back to an MMO I am actually having alot of fun at. Their anniversary event and patch 1.7 look like alot of fun.

    Honestly, I love Trion, they are a good company, they screwed up earlier obviously, but they treat their players well and they actually talk and respond on the forums to what we have to say. By far my favorite dev around, I feel they get the right amount of things to do, I like that they focus on fluff stuff, pvp and higher end raid content, almost equally.

    I just find alot of things they introduce more fun then being an overwhelming challenge. Their raid progression though, definitely does have the right amount of challenge from one raid to the next. Each raid steps it up a bit. It’s pretty rad.

  3. Liore says:

    “Hi, themeparks have/are failing”

    Hi, sandboxes have/are failing. In 2011 SWG pulled the plug and EvE saw a hit in subscribers large enough that the CEO published an apology for bad business decisions. I’m curious what sandbox MMO is doing well right now?

    I really don’t think this is a case of “my MMO is better than your MMO”. MMOs in general are losing audiences (some people who played WoW will quit and never play another MMO), plus with more options there are fewer players for each game.

    • saucelah says:

      Eve was failing. Past tense. And for clear reasons that have nothing to do with sandbox versus theme park or a loss of the MMO audience.

      But nice try.

    • SynCaine says:

      EVE stumbled when it went more towards… WoW. That course has now been corrected, and in-game activity reflects that. Not fully back to growth (that I’ve seen/read), but things are looking up atm.

      What other sandbox had the amount of cash spent on it that even something like Rift had? DF is still up and running, as is AtitD, Wurm, etc. SWG got shut down because of the IP, not because of in-game populations exclusively.

      But the point was not that sandbox = 11m subs. Never has been. But again, remove WoW from the genre, and what’s the next MMO every dev would love to have? What games have hung around and made a lot of money longterm?

      • bhagpuss says:

        “What games have hung around and made a lot of money longterm?”

        Just about all of them, surely? We can quibble over the definition of “a lot” but presumably the ones that are still around are at least profitable, unless you assume there are a lot of MMO philanthropists out there.

        Pretty much all the MMOs I have played over the last decade are still running. The ones I can think of that I played and that have closed are Rubies of Eventide, Endless Ages, NeoSteam EU and that French one the name of which escapes me for the moment. Ferentis doesn’t count, much though I miss it, because it never came out of beta. SWG has gone but not because it wasn’t profitable.

        I might have missed one or two but that’s all the ones I can think of. I never played Tabula Rasa, Auto Assault, The Matrix or Shadowbane or AC2. What other major ones closed?

        The list of MMOs that are still running years after launch, on the other hand, is very, very long. There’s a big difference between not making as much money as you used to/could have and not making money.

    • Hong WeiLoh says:

      I think MMOs are failing simply because people are becoming asocial. Not anti-social — a-social. Just don’t care to be bothered with others.
      Look at EVE — find me a better example of a “Massively Multiclient” online game, please? Recent EVE customer survey asked how many _accounts_ does the respondent own… answers were up to 10, and “more than 10”? ACCOUNTS. At 3 chars per account, and a PLEX a month (or whatever credit card charges) to sustain it.
      “Dual-boxing” is so common and de riguer, with multiple alts for everything from “PvP” to as specific as “cloakiLoki ganglink booster”, or “T2 PI alt”… Hell didn’t Jester highlight a KOTW recently where some dude was multi-boxing a whole fucking SMALL GANG by HIMSELF???

      People just don’t want to bother, or be bothered by, other people anymore.
      Want proof of that? Pay some attention when you’re walking around town next time — how many people look at you as a person, acknowledge you, and NOT just with a quick glance and nod of the head, maybe a mumbled “hi” as they brush past, but REALLY look at you and acknowledge you? Even the cashiers at stores, restaurants, etc: no attempt at eye contact, no attempt at anything beyond the “hi, did you find everything ok? Good.” preprogrammed response pattern …

      How many people did you pass today, who regarded you not as another person, but a navigation hazard, just like a streetlight?
      Welcome to the new MMO — “players are just an NPC with a better AI.” Well, sometimes. ;-)

      • SynCaine says:

        Not sure what alts have to do with it in EVE. I have two accounts. One combat, one indy. If I’m running missions solo, the indy flies a Noctis to cleanup. If people are around and up for missions, I only fly the combat pilot.

        During mining Ops, the indy pilot is the main, and soon the combat one will be around in an Orca.

        For PvP the indy account is used for spying.

        None of this makes me less social, just gives me and my corp more options. Could I be a-social and solo-grind with my two account? Yup. just like I could solo-grind with one account, or ten.

    • loire says:

      The fact that you think:
      A) SWG was a sandbox any longer.
      B) It shut down do to something other than IP
      C) That EVE’s Monoclegate was a reaction to sandbox issues

      shows you have no idea what you are talking about. You can at least read Hilmar’s letter before citing it so you understand whats going on.

  4. Liore says:

    Oh, and for what it’s worth, RIFT is the best themepark MMO on the market. It’s just too bad no one plays it. :(

    • Mobs says:

      Rift is still doing well, well enough to pump out more content in a month then most see in 6. It is still very active, grouping is never an issue. What number is “no one?”

      • Mobs says:

        Also in my opinion, them shutting down and merging servers was a good idea. If you start a new MMO as a new player or even come back to one: what would make you feel better, 6-8 med/high server or 6-8 med/hi servers and 30 others that say low?

  5. Phedre says:

    I don’t really understand your argument about the poor graphics in SWTOR. If the graphics would have been great would it then have been a great game? Have great graphics anything to do with themepark vs sandbox? I think the poor graphics are only an argument for the next dev team to make another themepark, but now with great graphics. Since SWTOR failed because of the graphics. Even the hardcore guys said so.

    • SynCaine says:

      I generally enjoy games with better graphics than worse. I also enjoy games that run well rather than poorly. I also have this thing were I believe if you spend an obsene amount of money on a videogame, you might want to toss a few bucks towards graphics. Spending it all on voice acting would not be the direct I go in, but I’m odd like that.

      • Phedre says:

        You missed my point completely. Of course it is pathetic that the graphics are poor. But Bioware messing up graphics and their responses doesn’t mean themepark games suck. It just means Bioware sucks. So it doesn’t help the argument that developers should stop making themeparks. You are mixing valid points with cheap shots. Which is a pity because I want that sandbox too.

        • Rammstein says:

          You obviously missed HIS point completely because the argument “developers should stop making themeparks.” wasn’t made in today’s post. If you want him to support that argument, go back a few days to find a post where he actually makes that argument, instead of bitching pointlessly here? Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

        • Rammstein says:

          Actually I don’t know if he’s ever made an argument quite that broad, while we’re on the topic of straw men arguments.

          “I think the poor graphics are only an argument for the next dev team to make another themepark, but now with great graphics. Since SWTOR failed because of the graphics. Even the hardcore guys said so.”

          Here’s the thing. You’ve had a bunch of people try to make “a copy of wow, but we’ll spend a lot of money on cool features A,B and C and then people will love those shiny features and switch from wow to our new game”. All those attempts have failed, not because the strategy is inherently flawed, but because their copies have been badly done. RIFT was polished but the endgame was pointless, SWTOR is a pile of crap, AOC ended at lvl 20, etc. At this point, your plan to make another carbon copy themepark, but with great polish this time, looks pretty lame.

          The question is, why can’t anyone make a decent copy of WoW? The answer is pretty obvious, what do you need to make a decent copy of WoW? Large numbers of talented software engineers? Which is more interesting for a talented programmer, writing code to copy another game, or writing boring code for some wall street firm, where at least you’re trying to stay ahead of your competition instead of only copying, and making way more money? Perhaps as much of the cyclic behavior we see in game design and popularity has to do with game designers getting bored and switching genres than with the players getting bored.

      • Torcano says:

        Really? Dark fall and eve are the pinnacle of graphics?

        I say this because it seems counter to your previous opinions…I mean doesn’t gameplay come first before both shiniest and graphics?

    • saucelah says:

      The thing that would have bothered me is not the graphics but the insulting pat-on-the-head explanation they gave.

  6. katsuko says:

    @SynCaine: Let’s face it — you have a thing against themeparks, so of course you’re going to predict their “inevitable” demise and see it in every news item, which in no way makes your opinion true. People have been predicting EVE’s demise since it launched, and somehow it’s still around and very profitable. It will never be as popular as WoW or any similar “themepark” MMO game unless it changes in fundamental ways, but that doesn’t make it a failure. Same for themeparks Their demise has also been predicted for years, and yet they are still popular and still quite fun for an enormous number of players. TOR might never be as profitable as EA predicted, but that does not make it a failure. I happen to agree with you that it would be nice to have an MMO that can pull off a “sandpark” or “themebox,” though.

    Graphics are not a big issue. That bug will be fixed eventually. BioWare’s response is a different matter, and will probably cost them more subscribers than the bug itself. The success of any game depends more on whether it is fun to play, which depends in turn on game mechanics, not on whether a game has pretty graphics.

    I do think BioWare made some rather big mistakes with TOR. Using the Star Wars license was a big one. Brand-name recognition will only take a game so far, and is no guarantee of even medium-term success, as SWG so very clearly demonstrated; BioWare already has very recognizable in-house universes it could have used for an MMO, with all the benefits using an in-house setting provides, and they wouldn’t have had to pay Lucas for the privilege. Focusing so many developer resources on essentially solo content was another. The strength of an MMO lies in player-player interaction, whether against other players or against the world, but always with other players. BioWare has an amazing writing staff, and they could have used that staff to have the world respond dynamically to player decisions in detail, sort of like what should have happened in Rift and what CCP tried and then failed to do with faction warfare in EVE, instead of churning out more solo content. BioWare had the opportunity to DM an entire world for tens of thousands of players, and so far they blew it. Fully voicing everything is also eventually going to hurt TOR in a big way, because it adds a big cost to any content they want to add or significantly change, and I sincerely hope that is one thing no other MMO developer tries to do.

    • Rammstein says:

      You started off with a nice straw man/ad hominem combination fallacy, doubling down by blowing it up into a misleading comparison with mysterious hordes of EVE naysayers. (personally, I never ever see anyone predicting EVE’s demise, although I do see tons of people saying it’s a boring spreadsheet MMO)

      Then what happened next? By your third paragraph, you’re just regurgitating columns Syn wrote about TOR last month, a regurgitation that shows that you agree that Bioware is failing to produce a decent themepark, which is basically what you straw man’d into “Themeparks’ demise is near). How the hell do you transition from the one to the other? Is your post an elaborate troll?

      I’ll illustrate why it’s a straw man, just in case you were serious. Remember the tech crash around the year 2000, where a bunch of tech startups failed? I lived in Silicon Valley then, so most of my friends lost their jobs at that time. I would have said something like “Tech Companies are failing, including companies X,Y, and Z,, so all my friends are out of work or at a new job right now”. Analogously, you would straw man that into the claim that I was a neo-luddite who believed that in a few short years all computers would be rocketed into the sun, so that we could reconnect with the land and balance our chakras. That would be insane, as all I’d said was that companies X,Y,Z had failed. The rest, in this delightful analogy, would be the product of your overwrought imagination.

      Anyway, that’s all cool, I mean you totally failed to comprehend English and then used a reprehensible group of fallacious arguments to back up your mistaken interpretation, but that’s pretty normal for the internet. The thing I don’t understand is what would possibly motivate that hostile response, when you demonstrably agree with so much of Syn’s viewpoint that your analysis of SW:ToR sounds like a summary of his columns? A situation puzzling enough to motivate me to respond, at the least.

      • katsuko says:

        Because I happen to agree with Syn on a lot of things, especially as to what makes a good MMO. Just because I disagree with someone on a particular point does not mean I have to automatically disagree with them on everything else.

        I disagree with his general thesis that the WoW-style themepark is inevitably doomed, and find that sort of argument just as questionable as the inevitable “EVE is doomed because of X” threads that crop up on the EVE forums all too frequently. Maybe I misread his posts, but so far implicit in all of his posts on the subject is the idea that themepark MMO games are doomed to inevitable failure.

        But to quote Syn:

        “Oh, one more point: all this “money is in casual themeparks, deal with it” crap. Hi, themeparks have/are failing, and they cost a hell of a lot more when they fail (WAR, AoC, Rift, EQ2, etc) than some 10m indy MMO that never got a chance (poor Shadowbane).”

        So much for me conjuring up a strawman and making unwarranted assumptions. Man says he thinks themeparks are failing. How else am I supposed to interpret that comment?

        Obviously no game has been able to replicate WoW’s success, but that does not mean they are failures, nor that WoW is doomed. Of course WoW will lose subscribers due to content exhaustion, and that process will accelerate as WoW’s graphics become more and more dated. But there are a lot of quite successful themepark games that are making money for their developers aside from WoW, and that’s unlikely to change.

        • SynCaine says:

          Saying I have a thing against themeparks is a little too broad. After all, I was all for Rift in beta. I was cool with that version of the themepark. I was a huge fan of Atlantica Online, which is more themepark than sandbox IMO. I obviously liked 2004-07 WoW. Themeparks can be done right, just like sandboxes can be done wrong.

          Now, if we want to get a little more specific; yes, current-day WoW is doomed, and anyone copying that design (SW) is doomed as well. Single-player games don’t keep people playing for months and years. It’s just not how they work. Skyrim is the best sRPG in years, and I played it less than 3 months. Whether you make a sandbox or a themepark, if you plan to make an MMO (something played for months/years), you MUST have strong social elements/mechanics (not going to break this down here, but hopefully you know what I mean).

          As for the part you quoted, you missed what I was getting at with that. Inevitably, anytime I bring up putting in Rift-sized money into a sandbox, someone is going to say only themeparks attract that number of players, and by ‘that number’, they mean WoW. And if they don’t mean WoW, then they are just wrong. EVE has just as many, if not more, subs than any themepark not called WoW, and has been around making money longer than any major budget MMO.

          One of the arguments I’ve always made, and you can quote me on this, is if someone takes Rift-sized money, and rather than creating a WoW-like themepark, makes a fantasy sandbox, they will reap more success long-term (all other things like game quality being equal of course).

        • Rammstein says:

          See, Syn replied and I already disagree with him. i think WoW can hit a sweetspot between old WoW and farmville and raise subscriptions again with a crappy but polished wowville game, even without any real MMO elements. The problem with farmville is that it’s a collectible game, without any enjoyable means of sharing or comparing collectibles, which deprives it of the social elements/mechanics that he agrees are necessary.

          “makes a fantasy sandbox, they will reap more success long-term (all other things like game quality being equal of course).”

          I agree, but with the caveat that holding “game quality” equal is a slippery condition. Designing a fantasy sandbox seems to be a more difficult task than designing a themepark, and there’s a bit of an apples vs. oranges situation here as well. But if a fantasy sandbox came out with the kind of impact that WoW came out with, I could definitely see it going huge and staying relevant for a long time.

      • Rammstein says:

        “So much for me conjuring up a strawman and making unwarranted assumptions. Man says he thinks themeparks are failing. How else am I supposed to interpret that comment?”

        He quoted SPECIFIC THEMEPARKS THAT ARE FAILING. You’re supposed to interpret that as THOSE THEMEPARKS WHICH HE NAMED AS FAILING, ARE FAILING. Among others. This is like the third time this has been explained to you, it’s wasting time.

        “I disagree with his general thesis that the WoW-style themepark is inevitably doomed”

        At that level of abstraction, that statement is obviously true. Nothing lasts forever. When the last human dies, if not before. If you want to discuss at a level specific enough to be relevant to our lives, then rephrase your statements at that level. Even better, go back a few weeks to a post where that would be on topic, and respond to that post. Then I’d probably agree with you, I think Syn’s a bit too optimistic about the intellectual desires of the average gamer.

  7. Quelldrogo says:

    EVE’s graphics are gorgeous, and even look great in jita generally. But those 100 peeps on station aren’t shooting each other. Get into a fight with 100 ships on grid, and i think you’ll probably want to switch to low texture maps, low shaders, turn off turret effects, drone models, etc…

    Not to defend the the TOR spin, but yeah… it is exponential once you start throwing in the action and effects.

    Or maybe it’s time to upgrade my box.


    • loire says:

      One hundred man fleet fights are actually very smooth now (although probably not in Jita).

      I think the threshold for lag is now set at 500 people on grid shooting.

  8. Azuriel says:

    Since you made a new post, I’ll just reply here.

    On an intellectual level, the argument that Chilton could have been “lying” is so ridiculous I cannot believe either you or Rammstein were serious. Chilton is saying the same think Morhaime has been saying in investor calls throughout all of 2011, which is the same thing Zarhym, Daxxarri, Bashiok, and Ghostcrawler have been consistently saying since their about-face in February of last year.

    Nevermind how they have been “living the lie” since February with the heroic dungeon nerfs, the nerfing of raids ahead of schedule, the boss nerfs, the introduction of LFR, and the BlizzCon announcement that MoP’s heroics were going back to Wrath-level difficulty and length.

    Could they be wrong about the cause? Maybe. Blizzard is the only one with access to precise usage statistics, exit surveys, and so on, and according to them:

    “By looking at actual stats, actual progression, time spent playing, where, and to what extent, we can see that most people are looking for more accessible raid content, so yes, we absolutely are able to tell without a doubt that the plan we’re enacting is actually what players playing the game want and need, and are not just listening to people on the forums.”

    The “I’m siding with the people betting the $1 billion farm” argument is not particularly compelling, I know, but neither is your “I am philosophically correct despite the contradictions” counter-argument. If difficulty is king, why aren’t harder games doing better? If difficulty is king, why did Blizzard lose 2 million subs in Cataclysm (subs dropped before the nerfs went in)?

    These days, I even agree with you that challenging games are great, and move the medium forward. I simply don’t agree that challenge has a place as the de facto difficulty of daily, repeatable social content.

    In any case, if you, Rammstein, or anyone else wants to review the year-worth of collated, sourced data I am calling Established Fact, feel free.

    • saucelah says:

      And how have their numbers done since February?

      I wish I could live in a fantasy world where I can’t imagine that businessmen might lie about their business, where Cataclysm was actually hard to begin with, and where nerfing Cataclysm brought WoW’s numbers up.

      For what it’s worth, continuing to quote people is not “collated, sourced data” — it’s just a bunch of quotes that may or may not actually reflect reality. The only thing that can be said for certain is that those quotes were actually said, and that they are what they want members of the public to accept as reality.

      My training is in literary criticism. It’s rather accepted in that field that the last thing we pay any attention to is what the author actually had to say about his or her books. Why? Because author’s lie, authors intentionally screw with critics, and author’s decide it sounds cooler to claim motivations other than what they really had. So it’s all rather useless information.

      Same with what Blizzard says about Blizzard.

      Hell, am I supposed to accept that SWTOR is innovative just because one of their devs insisted it is while talking to Eurogamer? What a joke.

      • Azuriel says:

        The quotes match the actions, which is as close as it is possible to get to knowing what Blizzard believes the problem is/was. And while that might be useless if we assume they have no idea what they are doing, it is extremely useful if we assume they are headed by rational businessmen driven by data; in the latter case, we can extrapolate what 10 million MMO subscribers want in a game.

        It certainly beats otherwise baseless claims that X MMO is failing because it is too easy or whatever. Which are claims held to considerably less scrutiny here, I have discovered.

        • Rammstein says:

          I don’t recall seeing a claim that an MMO is failing because “it is too easy or whatever.” It is hardly surprising that claims that were never made were held to less scrutiny. If you cared to link an actual claim, then I could give you an actual reason as to why it was held to less scrutiny, if indeed that were so.

    • Rammstein says:

      1. “could have been lying”–as I already explained, lying here was shorthand for direct lies, lies of commission, and lies of shading the truth. Saucelah has covered most of the responses I would have made, but I think it’s important to note that any of the above types of lies would make his statements diverge from “established fact”, and also that the possibility of a direct lie was made in response to your claim which seemed to imply that anything anyone ever said to a reporter is established truth. Your reply, which carries a bunch of additional information that you then claim makes the initial possibility “so ridiculous”, is then completely irrelevant. Can’t you see that? If you say X because A, then I say well given A, not X is also possible, look at this situation where they coexist, you can’t then say “OMG, that’s ridiculous, not-X can’t be true because of these 35 pages of other quotes and facts.”. Something that contradicts those 35 pages isn’t ridiculous if it was said prior to you introducing them into the conversation. I’d go on about shorthands and formalities in modes of argument, but there’s really just no point going in that much detail with you, when you can’t even get the outline correct. You’re really quite an odd fellow.

      2. “we absolutely are able to tell without a doubt that the plan we’re enacting is actually what players playing the game want and need,”

      This is obviously a lie, and they are wrong, it’s just both. They had all of that data for the past 6 years, and they’ve been going wrong for the last 4 years, but they are absolutely able to tell without a doubt now? Why now but not before? This is a load of unadulterated bullshit, and you are drinking the koolaid like it’s made of valor points.

      Giving players what they need? No one needs to play WoW. Giving players what they want? Crowdsourcing as a method of game design is an obvious minefield. It’s scarcely worth arguing against something so naive, but I can’t productively argue against your argument in this section Azuriel, all you did was adumbrate a straw man argument based on “difficulty is king”, something I’ve never said and which is also fairly irrelevant to this line of argument.

      • Azuriel says:

        I will take considerably more care with the wording of my four-sentence responses to obvious trolling in the future.

        • saucelah says:

          Neither of us are obviously trolling you. Trolling requires posing as someone or something you are not, while espousing ideas you do not necessarily believe in specifically to cause trouble. Rammstein’s done a pretty good job of talking to you about fallacies and arguments and why yours doesn’t work. He believes what he says and is quite sincere. Same for me.

          Somewhat related: seems whenever someone says they want more challenge in games, the automatic reaction is along the lines of “not everyone is as leet as you, Mr. Hardcore.” But it’s not a dichotomy, all or nothing deal. It’s quite possible to have a gradual scale from one game to another, not just “this easy, that hard.”

          Personally, I occasionally enjoy theme parks. But I would like a reason to actually pay attention to what I’m doing rather than just spam the same abilities in a particular rotation. That’s what I want when I ask for more difficulty. Maybe there could be abilities that work best in specific conditions or when the enemy is triggering certain types of abilities. Maybe, just maybe, they could have actually played KotOR again and put in heat, energy, and melee shields so I’d at minimum have to notice what the color of the glow around my opponent is and adjust my tactics accordingly. That’s really not asking for much, but it is more than they did with SWTOR.

          If difficulty is such a problem, why do all these PvP console games that take much more attention and, well, practice not completely bomb?

        • Rammstein says:

          You might want to look into taking more care with the wording of all your posts, while you’re at it.

  9. Pingback: Established Fact « In An Age

  10. Paragus says:

    Saw this over on and it made me laugh.

  11. saucelah says:

    fail train kept a rollin’, all month long

Comments are closed.