Ignorance, not Malice

Unknown

I've spent a minute or two ranting on these forums recently about how D3P/Demiurge's business practices reveal some pretty rancorous views about its customers. I've also seen a lot of people complaining along the same lines, claiming the company is evil. Then I read the R66 release notes while I was updating the app and encountered this: "Loading screen now 300% more Galactic."

I thought to myself, "they're a small company, they have to have all read the release notes." Because I know when I was in software development, we were all required to sign off on release notes from marketing to business analyst to coder. Then I thought of my old friend Hanlon (who is ironically from Scranton, PA) while watching The Office season 9 on Netflix who is often attributed with what is probably Heinlein's Razor - "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice."

[Aside: For those of you who don't know what's wrong with that release note, I'll just tell you. 3 more than 0 is not a 300% increase, it's Undefined. Cause math and cause zero. http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/databa ... seph1.html]

Made my night. Not ruling out malice completely yet though.

Unknown

Just so you know most would consider Captain Marvel a "Galactic Hero" as the current series was well in space. That is probably where they were getting the 300% from.

I think the subject still is applicable, but just not in this case.

Unknown

I agree with this too.

Besides the fact they are greedy, they lack a lot of competence.

So either they are manipulators (David Hi-Fi being the spokesman) or just naive and incompetent as can be, or everything at the same time.

They're good at making money, but very bad at making A LOT MORE money.

Unknown

GuiltTrip wrote:

Just so you know most would consider Captain Marvel a "Galactic Hero" as the current series was well in space. That is probably where they were getting the 300% from.

I think the subject still is applicable, but just not in this case.

Oh please, Galactic with a capital G is a reference to Guardians of the Galaxy. As a comic book guy, I would say that, most would consider Captain Marvel as a "cosmic" character, not a Galactic one.

But yeah, even if they were referring to Captain Marvel, then they would be going from 1 to 3 and it would be 200% more Galactic. Still wrong. Cause math. 3 - 1 = 2 / 1 = 2 x 100 = 200%

Lidolas

noone_ wrote:

Heinlein's Razor - "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice."

I love this. I'd change stupidity to ignorance and/or humor, though. I could see some of the devs saying, "there is no Galactic presence on the screen, so how can there be any % increase?" But then another says, "that's why it's funny". Saying incongruous things like that is funny to me. I've got an odd sense of humor.

Dauthi

noone_ wrote:

For those of you who don't know what's wrong with that release note, I'll just tell you. 3 more than 0 is not a 300% increase, it's Undefined. Cause math and cause zero. http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/databa ... seph1.html]

Made my night. Not ruling out malice completely yet though.

You know you are taking things way too far when you start picking apart a joke out of spite.

You are trying way too hard.

Pylgrim

arktos1971 wrote:

I agree with this too.

Besides the fact they are greedy, they lack a lot of competence.

So either they are manipulators (David Hi-Fi being the spokesman) or just naive and incompetent as can be, or everything at the same time.

They're good at making money, but very bad at making A LOT MORE money.

Just so you know, an accusation of greediness implies factual knowledge of the accused's finances as being high above a comfortably sustainable level, and thus the existence of a blind and harmful love for money for the sake of money. Thing is that you are not privy to this knowledge. You don't know if they are just making ends meet, if they had a bad month and their reserves were depleted, if things are getting desperate and they just want to keep their jobs and keep working in something that they and many others love. We don't know these things.

It is funny/sad how every posts of yours is more poisonous, more hyperbolic and more baseless than the previous. (Hi-Fi a "manipulator? Really?) Soon we will be hearing from you that D3 are actually an Illuminati's branch that creates addictive, almost hypnotic apps to enslave humanity under their rule while filling their pockets with trillions of dollars that they spend almost exclusively into torturing kittens and puppies.

I pray for your sanity and ours that someone takes your account off your hands soon and then you are free to leave these forums and start rebuilding a life free of such an intense and misguided hatred.

Unknown

Pylgrim wrote:

Just so you know, an accusation of greediness implies factual knowledge of the accused's finances as being high above a comfortably sustainable level, and thus the existence of a blind and harmful love for money for the sake of money. Thing is that you are not privy to this knowledge. You don't know if they are just making ends meet, if they had a bad month and their reserves were depleted, if things are getting desperate and they just want to keep their jobs and keep working in something that they and many others love. We don't know these things.

You must have read Dickens too much

atomzed

arktos1971 wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

Just so you know, an accusation of greediness implies factual knowledge of the accused's finances as being high above a comfortably sustainable level, and thus the existence of a blind and harmful love for money for the sake of money. Thing is that you are not privy to this knowledge. You don't know if they are just making ends meet, if they had a bad month and their reserves were depleted, if things are getting desperate and they just want to keep their jobs and keep working in something that they and many others love. We don't know these things.

You must have read Dickens too much

Well, your post was accusatory in tone, contradicting yourself.

arktos1971 wrote:

I agree with this too.

Besides the fact they are greedy, they lack a lot of competence...

...They're good at making money, but very bad at making A LOT MORE money.

So you accused them of being greedy, and then went on to say that they *should* be more greedy.

Unknown

Lord knows I think d3p has screwed the tinykitty a number of times, but (1) even in its most egregious state (Thoress essentials I'm looking at you) this is like the least money-grubbing, least P2W, least "greedy" free to play game ever, and (2) they've stepped up their game a lot in being communicative and responsive to the forums (which is doubly impressive because given how every other post seems to be ridiculously over-the-top attacks on d3p devs and/or testers, if I were a d3p dev I'd probably hate you all and do everything possible to troll you)

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

Well, your post was accusatory in tone, contradicting yourself.


So you accused them of being greedy, and then went on to say that they *should* be more greedy.

If you read it on the first degree, absolutely.

But this was ironical and was meant to refer on things many guys, including me have said on the forum. I did not think necessary to repeat once again.

lukewin

gamar wrote:

Lord knows I think d3p has screwed the tinykitty a number of times, but (1) even in its most egregious state (Thoress essentials I'm looking at you) this is like the least money-grubbing, least P2W, least "greedy" free to play game ever, and (2) they've stepped up their game a lot in being communicative and responsive to the forums (which is doubly impressive because given how every other post seems to be ridiculously over-the-top attacks on d3p devs and/or testers, if I were a d3p dev I'd probably hate you all and do everything possible to troll you)

Well, they had arktos at a point of almost ragequitting, but then he didn't. So now every threat that he makes, has less of an impact. The boy who cried wolf.

HailMary

arktos1971 wrote:

If you read it on the first degree, absolutely.

But this was ironical and was meant to refer on things many guys, including me have said on the forum. I did not think necessary to repeat once again.

So, you were... trolling yourself.

... Yay?

Unknown

Dauthi wrote:

noone_ wrote:

For those of you who don't know what's wrong with that release note, I'll just tell you. 3 more than 0 is not a 300% increase, it's Undefined. Cause math and cause zero. http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/databa ... seph1.html]

Made my night. Not ruling out malice completely yet though.

You know you are taking things way too far when you start picking apart a joke out of spite.

You are trying way too hard.

LOL ironic/hypocritical much?

Unknown

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

If you read it on the first degree, absolutely.

But this was ironical and was meant to refer on things many guys, including me have said on the forum. I did not think necessary to repeat once again.

So, you were... trolling yourself.

... Yay?

If I read you on the first degree, yes I was

Unknown

gamar wrote:

Lord knows I think d3p has screwed the tinykitty a number of times, but (1) even in its most egregious state (Thoress essentials I'm looking at you) this is like the least money-grubbing, least P2W, least "greedy" free to play game ever, and (2) they've stepped up their game a lot in being communicative and responsive to the forums (which is doubly impressive because given how every other post seems to be ridiculously over-the-top attacks on d3p devs and/or testers, if I were a d3p dev I'd probably hate you all and do everything possible to troll you)

You know, I had to think about this for a minute before I responded to it.

I have to say, I'll never understand fanbois. In all my time as a gamer and a businessperson, I've never understood how it is that gaming attracts people who are so desperate to defend a company. Besides maybe some beloved brands like Disney general or Google, no other company/industry gets people coming to its defense for no reason other than they love the product that much. Or worse, they don't even love the product THAT much (which you clearly don't entirely), they just defend the company like the game maker is a bullied child by ugly forum posts.

I can't tell you how many customer complaints I've faced down in my time as a consultant who was a specialist in CRM (Customer Relationship Management) process and technology. Hell, I was hired as an expert to help deal with these specific issues for years. This company should feel lucky that ANYONE takes the time to type word one in these forums, let alone well constructed suggestions. I've made a few, albeit alongside some complaints but still. It's not the other way around. I shouldn't feel grateful they bother with me at all.

Honestly, these people aren't your friends. Trust me, your friends wouldn't charge you to play at their match-3/pack-opening casino, espescially with such sucky 3* drop rates (LOL). And to your point, I'm sure the devs don't like people like me all that much either. I've been behind the scenes in enough large companies to know. Usually though, most devs feel shame and confusion and worry when they see complaints of the magnitude and validity I've seen on the forums.

Bottom-line: they're a business. I pay them to play the game, to use these forums and for the right to complain to them in whatever way I choose. I do not feel blessed when they make incremental progress or respond to me in even a little way. Or worse, I do not feel the need to beg them for game improvements, be nice to them for the possibility of a forum response from a rep or be constructive each and every time just in the hopes that I'll get their attention in the slightest. I'll never understand people that do. You treat me like a cash machine, and I'll treat you like a game development machine plain and simple.

If they want to be my friend though, they're welcome to let me do everything in the game completely free. I'm down with that.

GothicKratos

Because being courtesy doesn't require the other body to be courtesy back.

[EDIT]

Also, as I stated in the actual update preview thread, I'm sure the pretense they were going for is that each of the three characters are whole (100%) "Galactic", thus making it a total of 300%. Multiplicative is not the only math.

Unknown

GothicKratos wrote:

Because being courtesy doesn't require the other body to be courtesy back.

[EDIT]

Also, as I stated in the actual update preview thread, I'm sure the pretense they were going for is that each of the three characters are whole (100%) "Galactic", thus making it a total of 300%. Multiplicative is not the only math.

LOL You're right, "multiplicative [sic] is not the only math." I know what they were going for but the only way the phrase "300% more Galactic" could have been correct is if the previous load screen contained:

3x + x = 3
where x = the original amount of Galactic characters on the load screen
4x = 3
x = 3/4
x = .75 "Galactic" characters on the previous load screen

Even if they meant "The Galacticness of this load screen is 300% of the previous screen" the previous load screen would still have to had contained one Galactic character cause:

3x = 3
x = 3/3
x = 1

So there's some algebraic math for ya.

The phrase, "this screen contains 300% Galacticness" would have had some merit but not really. But yes I knew what they were going for. My points was, it amused me that they didn't get it right.

atomzed

lukewin wrote:

gamar wrote:

Lord knows I think d3p has screwed the tinykitty a number of times, but (1) even in its most egregious state (Thoress essentials I'm looking at you) this is like the least money-grubbing, least P2W, least "greedy" free to play game ever, and (2) they've stepped up their game a lot in being communicative and responsive to the forums (which is doubly impressive because given how every other post seems to be ridiculously over-the-top attacks on d3p devs and/or testers, if I were a d3p dev I'd probably hate you all and do everything possible to troll you)

Well, they had arktos at a point of almost ragequitting, but then he didn't. So now every threat that he makes, has less of an impact. The boy who cried wolf.

Oops wanted to up vote you but accidentally down vote you instead. Sorry

atomzed

noone_ wrote:

I have to say, I'll never understand fanbois. In all my time as a gamer and a businessperson, I've never understood how it is that gaming attracts people who are so desperate to defend a company. Besides maybe some beloved brands like Disney general or Google, no other company/industry gets people coming to its defense for no reason other than they love the product that much. Or worse, they don't even love the product THAT much (which you clearly don't entirely), they just defend the company like the game maker is a bullied child by ugly forum posts.

"Fanbois" (your term, not mine) are driven the same way by the "cynics" in the forum.

The cynics see a wrong, and they complain.

The "fanbois" see a wrong (that the conpany are wrongly accused), and they defend.

Same reasons. One strike out to defend (their own rights against the company) and the other strike out to defend too ( the company rights).

GothicKratos

100(%) + 100(%) + 100(%) == 300(%), or did I miss a lesson in school? Maybe it's that new fangled Common Core Mathematics.

And your implication of me using 'multiplicative' incorrectly (since I didn't spell it wrong) is wrong, since, you know, multiplicative literally means "subject to or of the nature of multiplication", so my statement literally was saying that applications of multiplication are not the only forms of mathematics, but I guess my oh so terrible verbiage made that hard to understand, right?

So, with this in mind, we'll jump head first into the kindergarten mathematics lesson (or should I just refer to it as 'math', since we're in kindergarten now?). A whole of something is 100%. Right? Right. There's three of them, right? Right. So 100 + 100 is 200, right? Right. And 200 + 100 is 300, right? Right. So look there kids, there's 300. No fuss, no muss, but wait, there's more!

In all seriousness, yes, their usage of the phrase "300% more" is not correct mathematical syntax, but it's fairly obvious what they meant in plain English, and poking a hole in something so obviously unimportant just to throw stones, well, it's just petty. It's pretty clear the thread wasn't to point out some (un?)intellectual choice of words, but to post that video and make that reference to demean somebody else.