The numbers never lie.

"

DiabloImmoral wrote:

Even good leagues typically only last a month and a half before trade goes dead. This league was great but it's basically over.

If they don't add a meaningful grind for players (like a new Delve or a new Heist) player retention might end up in the toilet for the next few leagues even if the mechanics are good. Loot drops and farm viability were maximized across the board this league. So much so that the Archnemesis mechanic wasn't even worth touching. What is the hook going to be going forward? It can't be more loot that we already have. It has to be something new.

A month and a half is pretty good when there is a high likelihood that many of the players that left by that point will be back 6/7 weeks later. I tend to get 2+ months out of each league and then goof around in HC or something else. Even if others get only 2 weeks, that's still pretty good since you don't have to pay for each league.

Weak bait.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

"

DoubleU wrote:

"

The game lost its magic.

And yet, you somehow managed to get 32 challenges.

I'd bet real money that he gets 36 before he gets off probation.

Damn, I should have taken that bet :)

"

DoubleU wrote:

"

The game lost its magic.

And yet, you somehow managed to get 32 challenges.

Tbf plenty of people say quite similar things about their habits and addictions. Do they really mean it? I think they think they do.

So I don't think that is as strong a rebuttal as you may believe, friend.

Either way, looks like GGG provided an interesting treatment method.

I was more than a little surprised at the 'Deleted'.
My response was a bit snarky no doubt.

I can never remember their names when they do this, which makes me feel awful because I know I knew it.

As for the snark, I appreciate that. I do. But like I said, the denial of the impact of one's addictions is a pretty common reaction, especially upon slipping. I remember this one HBO special, way back in the 90s, back when it did the sorts of documentaries networks wouldn't touch -- they followed a bunch of heroin addicts around to try to 'demystify' their daily lives. And this one girl, she quit for a while, was seemingly happy, but then relapsed and was almost immediately saying, 'this is nowhere near as good as I remember anyway, why did I do this?' and of course she kept going and was dead before the show ended.

This really stuck with me, and made clear there are more complicated mechanisms in play with addiction than what I'd been taught (peer pressure, weak self will, history of abuse, 'bad upbringing') -- whatever it is that drives the need or desire to use, the addict themselves can't always come to terms with it.

So I think it's perfectly valid for someone with even 40/40 to believe, wholeheartedly, that the game is genuinely a bad thing.

Of course that hinges on the premise that a video game can be as addictive as a substance that chemically alters your body, which is at the very least a well-worn road in these parts. Even if not, I think the dichotomy of loathing and attraction inherent to substance abuse (and the helplessness of both) isn't too dissimilar.