Didn't Chris say that they wouldn't introduce new higher tier item mods?
"
lolozori wrote:
People who buy a mirrored item are not buying bank bonds, it s more they are buying a Picasso or a Monet. They know another painting could worth more but they also think the painting they bought will be forever a master craft.
As an interesting aside to this analogy, the below piece of "art" (Blue Fool by Christopher Wool) last sold at auction for 5 Million Dollars.
== Officially Retired 27/02/2019 ==
Massive thanks to GGG for producing such a fun and engaging game, it has taken up faaaaaaar too much of my life over the last 5 years.
Best of luck in the future!
Last edited by CaptainWaffleIron#2395 on Jun 18, 2015, 1:12:42 AM
People who buy a mirrored item are not buying bank bonds, it s more they are buying a Picasso or a Monet. They know another painting could worth more but they also think the painting they bought will be forever a master craft.
As an interesting aside to this analogy, the below piece of "art" (Blue Fool by Christopher Wool) last sold at auction for 5 Million Dollars.
THIS. IS. REAL.
Lot Notes
Christopher Wool's brash, explicit paintings were developed against the backdrop of inner city blight and urban deprivation that affected most large cities in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Blue Fool, a consummate example of Wool's most celebrated word paintings, is intrinsically linked to the post Punk scene of New York, its energy and attitude running through the very heart of the work.
Its outsized capital letters leap out off the wall, seemingly barking insults at a volume loud enough to be heard over the noise of the city. Yet while the aesthetics are clear and explicit, the work's meaning remains more ambiguous. The participants in this dialogue remain anonymous with the short and perfunctory exchange becoming part of the millions of similar exchanges that take place everyday. In both its visual and subconscious meaning, Blue Fool is very much a product of New York in the Punk years.
The four large blue letters that spell out the word 'FOOL' are tightly constrained by the edges of a large, flat white aluminum support. Wool's use of gigantic lettering and his refusal to allow these letters space to breath creates an intimidating atmosphere. The letters dominate the room and being constrained by the tight edges of the work gives them a sense of being pushed out of the picture plane. This sense of foreboding is heightened by the typeface. Similar to the Stencil font adopted by the U.S. military after the World War II, Wool's typeface matches it in its utilitarian nature and these elements combined with its physical size creates a sense of stark authority.
Wool's emergence as a painter in the early 1980s coincides with a period of soul searching within the art world about the state of painting. In his 1981 essay "The Death of Painting" the influential critic Douglas Crimp condemned the belief in painting and the investment in the human touch that was perceived to be crucial to maintaining painting's unique aura. It was into this environment that Wool began his exploration of the painterly process and the different techniques that could be used to expand its properties. Wool began using words as imagery as early as 1987 after seeing a brand new white truck with the words 'SEX LUV' hand-painted across it. This first collection of word paintings was created during an intensely creative period for the artist and focused on words or phrases with multiple meanings. The effect was often only achieved when Wool broke them up in the composition of the painting. His 'AMOK' becomes 'AM OK' when enlarged to fit the scale of his canvas. Blue Fool, with the large letters that spell out 'FOOL', corresponds to the letters of the artist's name and simultaneously pokes fun at the viewer and at the same time creating a humorous self-portrait.
Wool's work is drawn from a variety of sources both inside and outside the art world. Like many artists of his generation he was concerned with the intrinsic nature of painting and was particularly interested in the process of applying paint on a surface. He was attracted the works of Richard Serra, and his sculptures of splashed lead in particular. These ideas became central to his ideas of process and the covering of surfaces in relation to painting, and to picture making in particular.
"Wool's work shares Pop Art's affection for the vulgar and the vernacular, and in form it recalls Pop's graphic economy of means, iconic images and depersonalized mechanical registration" (M. Grynsztejn, "Unfinished Business" in A. Goldstein, Christopher Wool, Los Angeles, 1999, p. 266). The no-frills lettering recalls Minimalism, especially the word works of Joseph Kosuth. However, where Kosuth's works are deliberately self-constrained, hermetically sealed by the words that they formed, Wool's Blue Fool is rogue; it is disjointed and points to the ambiguity of language. In this respect, Wool's word paintings have been seen as an attempt to illustrate the limitations and convulsive nature of language. By breaking up the words into their constituent parts and making the viewer reinterpret the meanings of those words used in his paintings, he highlights the underlying failure of language as an effective and objective way of communication.
People who buy a mirrored item are not buying bank bonds, it s more they are buying a Picasso or a Monet. They know another painting could worth more but they also think the painting they bought will be forever a master craft.
As an interesting aside to this analogy, the below piece of "art" (Blue Fool by Christopher Wool) last sold at auction for 5 Million Dollars.
THIS. IS. REAL.
Lot Notes
Christopher Wool's brash, explicit paintings were developed against the backdrop of inner city blight and urban deprivation that affected most large cities in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Blue Fool, a consummate example of Wool's most celebrated word paintings, is intrinsically linked to the post Punk scene of New York, its energy and attitude running through the very heart of the work.
Its outsized capital letters leap out off the wall, seemingly barking insults at a volume loud enough to be heard over the noise of the city. Yet while the aesthetics are clear and explicit, the work's meaning remains more ambiguous. The participants in this dialogue remain anonymous with the short and perfunctory exchange becoming part of the millions of similar exchanges that take place everyday. In both its visual and subconscious meaning, Blue Fool is very much a product of New York in the Punk years.
The four large blue letters that spell out the word 'FOOL' are tightly constrained by the edges of a large, flat white aluminum support. Wool's use of gigantic lettering and his refusal to allow these letters space to breath creates an intimidating atmosphere. The letters dominate the room and being constrained by the tight edges of the work gives them a sense of being pushed out of the picture plane. This sense of foreboding is heightened by the typeface. Similar to the Stencil font adopted by the U.S. military after the World War II, Wool's typeface matches it in its utilitarian nature and these elements combined with its physical size creates a sense of stark authority.
Wool's emergence as a painter in the early 1980s coincides with a period of soul searching within the art world about the state of painting. In his 1981 essay "The Death of Painting" the influential critic Douglas Crimp condemned the belief in painting and the investment in the human touch that was perceived to be crucial to maintaining painting's unique aura. It was into this environment that Wool began his exploration of the painterly process and the different techniques that could be used to expand its properties. Wool began using words as imagery as early as 1987 after seeing a brand new white truck with the words 'SEX LUV' hand-painted across it. This first collection of word paintings was created during an intensely creative period for the artist and focused on words or phrases with multiple meanings. The effect was often only achieved when Wool broke them up in the composition of the painting. His 'AMOK' becomes 'AM OK' when enlarged to fit the scale of his canvas. Blue Fool, with the large letters that spell out 'FOOL', corresponds to the letters of the artist's name and simultaneously pokes fun at the viewer and at the same time creating a humorous self-portrait.
Wool's work is drawn from a variety of sources both inside and outside the art world. Like many artists of his generation he was concerned with the intrinsic nature of painting and was particularly interested in the process of applying paint on a surface. He was attracted the works of Richard Serra, and his sculptures of splashed lead in particular. These ideas became central to his ideas of process and the covering of surfaces in relation to painting, and to picture making in particular.
"Wool's work shares Pop Art's affection for the vulgar and the vernacular, and in form it recalls Pop's graphic economy of means, iconic images and depersonalized mechanical registration" (M. Grynsztejn, "Unfinished Business" in A. Goldstein, Christopher Wool, Los Angeles, 1999, p. 266). The no-frills lettering recalls Minimalism, especially the word works of Joseph Kosuth. However, where Kosuth's works are deliberately self-constrained, hermetically sealed by the words that they formed, Wool's Blue Fool is rogue; it is disjointed and points to the ambiguity of language. In this respect, Wool's word paintings have been seen as an attempt to illustrate the limitations and convulsive nature of language. By breaking up the words into their constituent parts and making the viewer reinterpret the meanings of those words used in his paintings, he highlights the underlying failure of language as an effective and objective way of communication.
Just as a quick clarification, I don't deny that there is intrinsic value in the creation of art, or the manufacturing of goods - however, this is a good method of underlining again that perspective must be maintained. Value of an object (or playstyle) is very much in the eye of the beholder - comparative value, functional value, percieved value etc. are all transient things that are governed more by external factors than the simple dollar value of time spent.
== Officially Retired 27/02/2019 ==
Massive thanks to GGG for producing such a fun and engaging game, it has taken up faaaaaaar too much of my life over the last 5 years.
Just as a quick clarification, I don't deny that there is intrinsic value in the creation of art, or the manufacturing of goods - however, this is a good method of underlining again that perspective must be maintained. Value of an object (or playstyle) is very much in the eye of the beholder - comparative value, functional value, percieved value etc. are all transient things that are governed more by external factors than the simple dollar value of time spent.
A lot of people in this thread spent money on virtual pixels.
The perspective is mainly in each individual eyes, similarly Christopher Wool's art might look stupid to you but maybe POE look stupid to him.
If I was to maintain an absolute perspective on things, Thinking everything should be compared to higher and more virtuous subject, shouldn't I think Boting in POE is not a big deal since it is not vital for my own self and anyway POE is just a video game that will not last forever?
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/
Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Jun 18, 2015, 1:54:03 AM
Just as a quick clarification, I don't deny that there is intrinsic value in the creation of art, or the manufacturing of goods - however, this is a good method of underlining again that perspective must be maintained. Value of an object (or playstyle) is very much in the eye of the beholder - comparative value, functional value, percieved value etc. are all transient things that are governed more by external factors than the simple dollar value of time spent.
A lot of people in this thread spent money on virtual pixels.
The perspective is mainly in each individual eyes, similarly Christopher Wool's art might look stupid to you but maybe POE look stupid to him.
Are you simply rephrasing my point, or are you directing something specific at me?
== Officially Retired 27/02/2019 ==
Massive thanks to GGG for producing such a fun and engaging game, it has taken up faaaaaaar too much of my life over the last 5 years.
Just as a quick clarification, I don't deny that there is intrinsic value in the creation of art, or the manufacturing of goods - however, this is a good method of underlining again that perspective must be maintained. Value of an object (or playstyle) is very much in the eye of the beholder - comparative value, functional value, percieved value etc. are all transient things that are governed more by external factors than the simple dollar value of time spent.
A lot of people in this thread spent money on virtual pixels.
The perspective is mainly in each individual eyes, similarly Christopher Wool's art might look stupid to you but maybe POE look stupid to him.
Are you simply rephrasing my point, or are you directing something specific at me?
I was answering to those who talk about keeping perspective when perspective is not an absolute and define thing, quoting you because I agree mostly.
The reaction on wool painting define that. Some people have an aversion to it and make fun of it, some other buy it for millions. Who is right? Like in drawing the perspective depend of your point of view and you can have different perspective point.
But my English language is too limited to really express things clearly.
"
CharanJaydemyr wrote:
Spoiler
Oh, I was talking more about the lot notes. Someone had to write those with a straight face, and you can bet it wasn't the sucker buying it.
I can and do (frequently) justify my support of GGG -- I play and love the game, which is intrinsically free to play but not free to make. Simple. I consider myself a patron to GGG; I don't think you can say the same here, given Wool has no idea who even owns his most famous work, Apocalypse Now.
It's a whole different relationship.
Either way, I spoiler-tagged the lot for a reason...
I think wool know who own this art at least... a rich fool :P
Forum pvp
https://www.instagram.com/critterspencils/
Last edited by lolozori#1147 on Jun 18, 2015, 2:11:59 AM
I was answering to those who talk about keeping perspective when perspective is not an absolute and define thing, quoting you because I agree mostly.
The reaction on wool painting define that. Some people have an aversion to it and make fun of it, some other buy it for millions. Who is right? Like in drawing the perspective depend of your point of view and you can have different perspective point.
But my English language is too limited to really express things clearly.
In that case you have my strong agreement. I own a number of works that a lot of people would probably consider pretty stupid - but their value lies in both scarcity, uniqueness, and the comparative value of other works by the artists.
However, there is no scarcity inherent to 'mirrored' items - the very fact that they are mirrored completely negates it.
If (a big if) I had been crafting them, I would have established artificial scarcity by only allowing a small number to be mirrored - and would have advertised and marketed them by providing a copy to established POE master build crafters to further hype their functional value.
So all you have is percieved item and functional value - which is what is causing the rage. New items may technically be functionally better. But the only option to protect that is to create a locked market. Which means GGG having to lock the market, and ensure content is only created and balanced around existing items and systems.
In which case we need to rename Standard to Stagnant, and pack up the tents because this festival just went into its third hour of hippie jam bands.
== Officially Retired 27/02/2019 ==
Massive thanks to GGG for producing such a fun and engaging game, it has taken up faaaaaaar too much of my life over the last 5 years.
Best of luck in the future!
Last edited by CaptainWaffleIron#2395 on Jun 18, 2015, 2:12:55 AM
I guess I learned a very important lesson during the past couple of days. No matter what I say or do, I will never get any sympathy or support from anyone who is not a 1%er. It was quite naive of me to think otherwhise.
There is one consoling thought, however. When everything is said and done, when the expansion is released and the dust settels, when the new mirrorable items have been crafted, you will visit our shops and buy our legacy items and pay our mirroring fees. We will welcome you and politely conduct our business. Just like in real life.
And you hereby manage to lose any chance you had left of getting any sympathy.
Sure, traders tend to be unjustly frowned upon by other players, but you have to keep in mind too that, for a trader such as yourself, getting 2000 exalts back is infinitely easier than it is to people who need to actually grind it such as myself. Your "1000 hours" you lost would be closer to 5000 for another player. Plus, despite that loss, you still get to be among the closest to the new perfect items.
Honestly, it feels as if you were the first in a race, with 1000 Km between you and the next racer, at 10 Km from the finishing line, and then you complain because the organizers add 100 Km to the race. Sure, it sucks, but you're still going to be first unless you seriously mess up.
"
CharanJaydemyr wrote:
Spoiler
"
nait2k4 wrote:
"
lolozori wrote:
People who buy a mirrored item are not buying bank bonds, it s more they are buying a Picasso or a Monet. They know another painting could worth more but they also think the painting they bought will be forever a master craft.
As an interesting aside to this analogy, the below piece of "art" (Blue Fool by Christopher Wool) last sold at auction for 5 Million Dollars.
THIS. IS. REAL.
Lot Notes
Christopher Wool's brash, explicit paintings were developed against the backdrop of inner city blight and urban deprivation that affected most large cities in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Blue Fool, a consummate example of Wool's most celebrated word paintings, is intrinsically linked to the post Punk scene of New York, its energy and attitude running through the very heart of the work.
Its outsized capital letters leap out off the wall, seemingly barking insults at a volume loud enough to be heard over the noise of the city. Yet while the aesthetics are clear and explicit, the work's meaning remains more ambiguous. The participants in this dialogue remain anonymous with the short and perfunctory exchange becoming part of the millions of similar exchanges that take place everyday. In both its visual and subconscious meaning, Blue Fool is very much a product of New York in the Punk years.
The four large blue letters that spell out the word 'FOOL' are tightly constrained by the edges of a large, flat white aluminum support. Wool's use of gigantic lettering and his refusal to allow these letters space to breath creates an intimidating atmosphere. The letters dominate the room and being constrained by the tight edges of the work gives them a sense of being pushed out of the picture plane. This sense of foreboding is heightened by the typeface. Similar to the Stencil font adopted by the U.S. military after the World War II, Wool's typeface matches it in its utilitarian nature and these elements combined with its physical size creates a sense of stark authority.
Wool's emergence as a painter in the early 1980s coincides with a period of soul searching within the art world about the state of painting. In his 1981 essay "The Death of Painting" the influential critic Douglas Crimp condemned the belief in painting and the investment in the human touch that was perceived to be crucial to maintaining painting's unique aura. It was into this environment that Wool began his exploration of the painterly process and the different techniques that could be used to expand its properties. Wool began using words as imagery as early as 1987 after seeing a brand new white truck with the words 'SEX LUV' hand-painted across it. This first collection of word paintings was created during an intensely creative period for the artist and focused on words or phrases with multiple meanings. The effect was often only achieved when Wool broke them up in the composition of the painting. His 'AMOK' becomes 'AM OK' when enlarged to fit the scale of his canvas. Blue Fool, with the large letters that spell out 'FOOL', corresponds to the letters of the artist's name and simultaneously pokes fun at the viewer and at the same time creating a humorous self-portrait.
Wool's work is drawn from a variety of sources both inside and outside the art world. Like many artists of his generation he was concerned with the intrinsic nature of painting and was particularly interested in the process of applying paint on a surface. He was attracted the works of Richard Serra, and his sculptures of splashed lead in particular. These ideas became central to his ideas of process and the covering of surfaces in relation to painting, and to picture making in particular.
"Wool's work shares Pop Art's affection for the vulgar and the vernacular, and in form it recalls Pop's graphic economy of means, iconic images and depersonalized mechanical registration" (M. Grynsztejn, "Unfinished Business" in A. Goldstein, Christopher Wool, Los Angeles, 1999, p. 266). The no-frills lettering recalls Minimalism, especially the word works of Joseph Kosuth. However, where Kosuth's works are deliberately self-constrained, hermetically sealed by the words that they formed, Wool's Blue Fool is rogue; it is disjointed and points to the ambiguity of language. In this respect, Wool's word paintings have been seen as an attempt to illustrate the limitations and convulsive nature of language. By breaking up the words into their constituent parts and making the viewer reinterpret the meanings of those words used in his paintings, he highlights the underlying failure of language as an effective and objective way of communication.
To my recollection, the answer is yes. How about a linked source, so we can put it to rest? At the moment it's just one side's word against another, and i tend to believe my recollection rather than another 3rd party's (no offense ;).
I distinctly recall ~4-5 years ago, not long after i heard about PoE, one of the marketing/"promises" was that items would not be invalidated with expansions in this game. I.e. "we will not do this". What you're saying goes squarely against my recollection. The idea wouldn't have stayed in my mind if it was "we'll try not to obsolete player items through expansions like other games do".
I'm not saying Chris himself necessarily said this, but it was posted one or more times by GGG / on the website, whoever it was. In those early days it's likely it was him.
omfg how the current mirrored gear is invalidated ? Thanks to stop this childish whine and go ahead.
If you really want to know what means "invalidate" or "obsolet" go play Diablo3, you will see what it does REALLY mean.
I start to think that GGG should start to introduce new Tiers every minor patch so you can really cry for a good reason.
And again, think about that : people didnt wait the harbinger bow and its crit implicit to mirror bow. There are a lot more things in the game that may invalidate mirror gear than a 2.5 % more damage Tier availability.
IGN TylordRampage
Last edited by Malone#6946 on Jun 18, 2015, 3:09:01 AM
Well, don't care about the politics of the hive, if you will. They care about the health of the hive and the output, and maybe there's a stronger relationship between the former and the latter than I realise. My original analogy (in an earlier draft; yes, I draft my longer posts, or at least edit the fuck out of them) was a child with an ant farm...;)
THAT would have been the way better one (given that i am a total bee-expert after reading one article about beekeepers). And i can agree to that. Even if i don't like the way the kid is communicating with the ants.
"
I would bet my balls there was never any such promise. This is a broader issue regarding GGG's choice of language, interpretation and intention. Have GGG, has Chris, ever struck you as the sort of voice that makes promises about things they cannot guarantee? Let's stick with Chris here. He is conservative by nature; it's part of what makes him a successful businessman. He chooses language that leaves things open. A typical Chris sentence might be 'we'd rather not do that' or 'we do plan to explore that option in the future'; he'd never say 'we will never, ever do that' or 'we're going to do that for sure'. Because Chris isn't an idiot. He knows the future is unknown and things can change. The only constant is.
Nah, he never did struck me with guaranteed facts. His famous Q&A-answers still howl in my head. Coming to the next point:
"
Now, it can be said that such language can be the same as a promise to the ears of the hopeful, but it's extremely important to remember that it's not. We still have yet to see any evidence in this thread that Chris has said 'we won't be doing that', in that strong a language. I wouldn't doubt he's expressed sentiments that revolve around maintaining player satisfaction and rewarding experiences, but that's the sort of vague thing he can get away. If players want to draw a line between that and specific changes, so be it. As long as he didn't, then he never said it.
By law he is innocent, i get it. And i also don't think that he ever made any 100% sure promises. But it would have been damn nice if he, himself and not Mark with his "don't touch my buddy" speech, would have made this pretty clear AFTER some people went on a riot. As i said: If he did not promise anything, your point is valid that people should calm the fuck down. And it would not cost GGG too much to make your point valid. But still: silence (or am i wrong?).
"
And it's against everything we know of Chris' character to make assertions unless there is utter certainty. Shit, they won't even commit to a vague Awakening date beyond 'we're on track for'. And that's Carl, not Chris, who is neither MD nor ultimately the guy who has to answer if things go belly-up. It's not just against Chris' character to make assertions unless there is utter certainty -- it's against the character of anyone who wants to be taken seriously.
Yeah. But in terms of seriousness: Are those who rage in anger are taken seriously? Or are they next to ignored and shot at and stand there, in the rain, in the middle of the city, preaching the return of an alien spaceship to save us all ;) Or to say it so: I don't like that nearly every outrage, rightfully or not, is fought by silence. The item-deleting-bug, the new tiers: I would appreciate some more professional counters by GGG. (You can see: I am out of arguments regarding the topic of promises given or not given. That is because i find this riddle pretty annoying and don't want to play devcil's advocate, especially "against" you).
"
But here I am making an assertion when there isn't utter certainty! I don't really need to be taken seriously, though; not here -- I'm not GGG. I just believe and I feel. And sometimes I rationalise. But mostly I just draw attention to things for smarter people to deal with. ;)
I am fine with that. And joining you in awaiting the messias ;)
"
I want to address something specific now:
"
ghamadvar wrote:
a trustworthy, solid-to-death institution
'Trustworthy, solid-to-death institutions' don't fucking exist. Anywhere. And that's coming from someone who currently lives off bank investment dividends. Solid? Yes. Do I lose money regularly nonetheless? Oh hell yes. Do I make more overall? Of course. That's what a good investment is -- it's offsetting loss with gain. Common fucking sense, that.
But it's ALWAYS a risk.
There is risk everywhere. Real life goods, virtual goods. Monetised youtubing, streaming. Always a risk. And these people getting upset? I can't help but think, 'didn't you listen when you were told not to put all your eggs in one basket?'
Yeah. I regret saying this ;)
"
And I think the truly wealthy of PoE will still be truly wealthy after almost ANY change, because they'll still have the as-solid-as-possible items in the game: currency. Sure, they might have 'invested' in some top tier gear here and there, but you can bet they weren't stupid enough to burn the lot on 'the hottest model of 2013' because they KNOW it's going to be inferior to 'the hottest model of 2015.' Top tier items *aren't* an investment, they're a splurge. Anyone blowing all their dough on a luxury car believing it's a sound investment that will always be worth the same is an idiot. Someone spending SOME of their wealth on a luxury car because they can afford to without losing their livelihood is not an idiot because of that alone.
Yes.
"
In contrast to this, the relative value of currency might shift, but it'll always be currency. As any financial advisor will tell you: cash is king.
Yes.
___
"
Regarding my usage of 'virtual items': No, they are not 'just pixels' and I never meant to imply as much. But they're still not as tangible as real goods, no matter what we may feel when we read about situations such as bitcoin, Silk Road, angry partners deleting WoW accounts, etc. We're not there yet.
Now I'll play a little game. Let's assume Chris/GGG did express, in no uncertain terms, that top tier items NOW would always be top tier items regardless of whatever expansions and changes they make to the game over the next ten years/ten act plan (...just typing that makes me feel a bit bad for people who'd believe it). Let's. Assume.
...Actually, I can't do it. Because every time I go from there, I just make GGG look far more stupid than imaginable, and players more gullible than is fair.
I can't even pretend GGG/Chris would ever say that. It's utterly beyond my comprehension and any scenarios in which they do say that would have ended long before now, mostly in a disastrous loss of confidence from supporters. Because while no one ever truly trusts anything 100%, a claim like that is so impossible to meet given the aforementioned unknown factor we call 'the future' that anyone making it would be a laughing stock.
Yes.
And that folks, was the story about Gham being convinced by Charan. ;)
I have nothing more to say. Well done sir.
(i thought it would be nice to show the process of persuasion instead of just writing "you are right". Just because of the effort you put into this)
