Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support DONE!!!!!

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Sorry Clown, I'm just not interested enough to look up the exact posts. You can do that if you want too. Your other questions were even less interesting or more confusing. (That is meant to be an inclusive "or" rather than an exclusive "or".)

this has nothing to do with interest. you would simply not be able to find proof for you claim, because it was made up in a lame attempt to blame and denounce the ones that werent agreeing with you. made up like your claim ggg manipulated statistics to promote lab (you even said yourself there is no proof for either the manipulation or the intention it would have been made in). but thats your approach of dealing with other opinions and things that doesnt fit into your agenda throughout this thread.

and i can understand that my other questions are "confusing" to you. beeing confronted with the illogicality of ones own words and claims can be confusing. your "lack of interest" is again a lame excuse, because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

this thread is nothing but a populistic sharade to pretend there is a majority for something, and to demand change based on that. and dont get me wrong: maybe there IS a majority that dislikes lab. but there is no way to prove it. and like you said: even IF there would be a majority, it wouldnt change the fact that this is not a democracy and ggg doesnt tally votes to make decisions.

so just leave it be and switch back to making suggestions on how to IMPROVE lab if you dislike it that much. that would be at least a sort of constructive and useful feedback. which this thread is definetly not.

Clown

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

I didn't say that namelock skills were good, don't misunderstand me.

But there are things like LW / Totems / Tornado shot / Flameblast that will just .......... I have no idea how much they could implement this on a controler with it being smooth and not having a fixed distance in a straigth line in front of the character.
I am speaking about those limitations.

Same for self cast curses ( yes, it is still possible in this game to self cast curses ! ).

Those are not small things at all.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

- you have answered no questions/delivered proof for your claim, which again you (simply) claim to be obvious (asking for prove for something is silly and meaningless, yeah... and this wasnt the most interesting question btw.)

- you (again) crop citations, leaving out the important parts.

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

... because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

- i have related to your op. the important parts that where in question: "...providing anecdotal evidence as to how a significant percentage of the player base dislikes the labyrinth..." "The purpose of this list is ... primarily to demonstrate that many people ... have posted in support of changes." (ive just cropped out where you rage against the "false assertions" of "the others", sry for that, but i need to break things down to fit my mediocre reading skills :) )

confront that with:

"

Turtledove wrote:

GGG is a company. GGG will decide to do something based on what they think, not some electoral process where people vote and GGG tallys votes to see if there's at least 50% voting for something. [...] Your majority assumption is made up nonsense. A figure you have pulled out of thin air, meaningless blather, worthless numbers, irrational thinking. Sorry, but that's plain and simple.

- we have a proverb where i come from: "there are no silly questions, just silly answers". q.e.d.


keep calling me silly, irrational, and dumb. i would "assert" that there is a "majority" of people that see this otherwise. :D

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

The question I answered was silly with an obvious answer that needed nothing more than some mediocre reading skills to have answered it yourself. You now seem totally uninterested in the answer because apparently you now realize what a meaningless question it was. So Clown, I answered your most interesting question. Now you make the ridiculous claim that I "would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless". You are being even more irrational than I thought. Look at the OP, Clown. The OP fully answers your silly question already. Although it might require some mediocre reading skills which seems to be the big challenge for you.

- you have answered no questions/delivered proof for your claim, which again you (simply) claim to be obvious (asking for prove for something is silly and meaningless, yeah... and this wasnt the most interesting question btw.)

- you (again) crop citations, leaving out the important parts.

"

Clownkrieger wrote:

... because if you would answer my questions, you would have to admit that the motivation of this thread is kinda senseless, if you take your own words into account.

- i have related to your op. the important parts that where in question: "...providing anecdotal evidence as to how a significant percentage of the player base dislikes the labyrinth..." "The purpose of this list is ... primarily to demonstrate that many people ... have posted in support of changes." (ive just cropped out where you rage against the "false assertions" of "the others", sry for that, but i need to break things down to fit my mediocre reading skills :) )

confront that with:

"

Turtledove wrote:

GGG is a company. GGG will decide to do something based on what they think, not some electoral process where people vote and GGG tallys votes to see if there's at least 50% voting for something. [...] Your majority assumption is made up nonsense. A figure you have pulled out of thin air, meaningless blather, worthless numbers, irrational thinking. Sorry, but that's plain and simple.

- we have a proverb where i come from: "there are no silly questions, just silly answers". q.e.d.


keep calling me silly, irrational, and dumb. i would "assert" that there is a "majority" of people that see this otherwise. :D

First, I admit that I didn't even read all of your post. You are just wasting time it appears to me. I don't intend to address anything you said directly in any case.

You seem to have a style of communication that can work well in a face-to-face situation. The question/answer style of communication does not work well in an Internet forum form of communication. The problem with that question/answer style of communication in this forum is that:
First, there is past information already available. The specific example in this case is that the opening post (OP) of this thread already contains the purpose of the thread. It appears to me that you haven't even read this information that seems to be directly pertinent to your stated goal.
Second, when a question is answered it can generate sub-conversations within the thread. This has a tendency to dilute or distract from the chain of thought that the question/answer style of communication requires.
Third, it is more difficult for the questioner to anticipate what the answer is going to be and to form relevant questions that lead to successful communication.
Fourth, the long pauses between question and answer and the next question with other unrelated posts sprinkled in between makes it difficult to keep the train of thought together.

Therefore, if you want to discuss a post I've responded to then read the posts that I'm responding to before forming your post. Put it in the form of an assertion rather than a question. You asked me to go back multiple pages and look up posts that I responded to. That is your job to read the posts that I responded to before you ask why I responded in the way that I did. If you want to talk about the purpose of this thread then you need to do your due diligence and read the OP first. Then come back and use that knowledge to form an assertion rather than asking me to do your due diligence for you. In other words stop-beating-around-the-bush and perhaps I'll find your posts more engaging and respond to them.

What's the point of a post like this?
Let's see... (wall of text inbound)
This is how I see it.


Let's understand Feedback and Suggestions first.
In games that are online (this game is online), and are being updated on a regular basis (this game is still being updated), and its developers attempt to say they're listening to what their players want to some degree (they have a feedback and suggestions forum, and they say they read reddit and watch some streamers), there is the understanding that the game makers want to see the feedback and suggestions being offered by their players.

A forum's population is a subset of the general game's population. I wouldn't call it a representative population, since they care more about the game than those who simply play it (that's not an all-inclusive statement, but a generalization based on the level of involvement with the game that goes beyond just enjoying their time spent playing it). They're usually most interested in news and updates, and care about other players experience in the game, and come to discuss what they like and dislike about the game, and find help in playing it better. (finding guides and tech support) The point is, in general, this population cares about the game and wants to discuss everything about it.

Feedback is inherently a personal opinion based on personal experience. Feedback can be positive or negative, both can be constructive. Negative feedback can be good for a game if the game makers use it properly. (positive feedback can be damaging to a product, if it's not in the best interest of the future of the game) Negative feedback often puts someone on the defensive if they have a vested interest in the success of the thing receiving a harsh remark about it. Feedback about a game is usually given by people who care about the game, and want to see its future success, otherwise they'd probably remain silent or just "live with it," or move on, if it's negative. (never hearing why a person leaves the game is damaging to the future of the game.)

Feedback does not require response from other players. It is intended for the game developers. Your personal experience does not change the validity of another person's experience. I can love something in the game, and you can hate it. Both are valid opinions. Neither one should love or hate it because of the other's opinion. Ideally, a game won't have things people hate in it, or at least, those parts would be optional, and if someone hates it, they don't have to experience it. The more things that people hate about a game that they can't avoid, the faster they get frustrated with a game and don't enjoy it, and end up leaving, despite loving everything else.

Suggestions are the next step beyond feedback. A person cares enough about the situation to think: "What would I do if I were the game company and I understood the issue that I see here the way I see it?" ... and then come to a conclusion:"Yes, this is what I'd do." Now, the point of view and the solution offered may not take all variables into consideration, or it may only result in good for that individual, while negatively impacting how someone else plays the game. Some suggestions are just "anything is better than what we have" style outbursts (still valuable to hear).

However, it is not the responsibility of a person giving feedback or suggestions to be a professional game developer. A person knows whether they are having fun or not. Doesn't take a degree or job position to tell you that. A person's feedback is not "wrong". A person's suggestion might not be ideal for the game, and need tweaking. Sometimes, when other variables are introduced to a suggestion's context, the suggestion is no longer needed, or it changes the understanding of the issue at hand, and the reason the suggestion was proposed in the first place. (this is where forum conversations can be useful again)

---
Ok, that might clear up a few misunderstandings I've noticed as I've read these boards, but there's more, and this gets to the point of why a thread like this one exists at all.

Arguments in threads on this "feedback and suggestions" forum can devolve to "your feedback or suggestion isn't worth talking about, because only a few people care about it." Or, "the developers shouldn't waste their development time on something that only impacts a few people. There are bigger problems to worry about." (there is even the case of: "we're a minority, and we don't like what the majority like, so don't force it on us.")

Variations on these can be found all over.
---

A single person may have a suggestion that would make the game better to them. That single person's suggestion is valuable. If the developers agree, that one post could spark such an implementation in the game. As has been stated before, there is no democracy or voting to make decisions here. That 1 person's suggestion was enough in such a case. (no majority needed, not even a vocal minority, unless you count that one person's suggestion as a vocal minority)

Debating the pros and cons of suggestions leads to getting more viewpoints on a topic and helps refine the basic suggestion to a more and more usable state, which may or may not help the developers decided to use, or be inspired by, such suggestions. That's healthy enough for a game community.

This particular topic has drawn out the criticism that not enough people "hate" the labyrinth, or don't find enough things wrong with it, for it to be worth talking about. Which boils down to, "Shut up and live with it, we do. And we even love it!" (trying to impose their experience onto others, in effect, calling the other personal experiences "wrong".)


This particular thread is in response to those erroneous statements that are trying to shut down any conversation about the Labyrinth. It demonstrates that the topic is more prevalent than they like to think. It is a topic worth discussing, and the developers should take note. It does not attempt to demonstrate a majority. It does not need to.

This thread should not need to exist, but enough claims were made about the subject only mattering to a couple dozen people, that it seemed appropriate. The list continuing to grow is showing that the issue hasn't just blown over as people get used to it as being a core part of the game and accepting it.

I have recently learned that some people actually pay others to carry them through the Labyrinth, so they get their ascendancy points easily.

I can't help but wonder how many, among those who are so loudly against the idea of providing alternate ways to get the ascendancy points, have been part in such transactions.

"

Erasculio wrote:

I have recently learned that some people actually pay others to carry them through the Labyrinth, so they get their ascendancy points easily.

I can't help but wonder how many, among those who are so loudly against the idea of providing alternate ways to get the ascendancy points, have been part in such transactions.

I can't speak for the others but I have helped many people through just about every difficulty of the laby and have never asked for compensation of any kind or accepted any tips.

@Zaludoz - Excellent post! Many others could do well by reading and understanding what you've had to say here.

@Shovelcut - Thank You for your kindness to others. Makes the game a better place

"

Erasculio wrote:

I have recently learned that some people actually pay others to carry them through the Labyrinth, so they get their ascendancy points easily.

I can't help but wonder how many, among those who are so loudly against the idea of providing alternate ways to get the ascendancy points, have been part in such transactions.

I don't think that I have ever carried anybody through the lab like this, and if I had .... that would proably be a friend or someone that I am just "helping", not selling services to.

Don't know about the others tho.