Okay it has been a few days since the nerf announcement...

CNash

As long as the character is kept in the same tier, the developers can simply reject any claims for refunds over and above their basic offer - "You bought covers for a 4* character, and Thor is still a 4* character". They don't delineate within the tiers as we do on the forums - because that would mean admitting that they create characters which are objectively worse than other characters of the same tier. The most we get is a kind of cagey admittance - "Yeah, in hindsight Beast could use improvement..." - i.e. they won't come right out and say "Beast stinks, sorry about that".

So to them, one 3* is as good as any other 3* (and 4*, etc.) despite the fact that you can't expect to do very well in PVP if you run a team of Beast / Doc Ock / featured.

evil panda

taloncarde wrote:

evil panda wrote:

wirius wrote:

If you're looking for an echo chamber, I'm not giving it. You know what fraud prevention is for? Its not to help upset people that their characters got nerfed. Its to prevent real credit card theft, real companies bilking customers, and to protect consumers. When you flood their office with this bogus temper tantrum, you cost a legitimate business money, both google, and D3.

this is false. credit card companies have a regulatory obligation to conduct an investigation when its users tell them that they did not receive the product or service that they used their credit card to pay for. this is not 'fraud prevention' (although you're the only one who's using the word fraud in this thread), but a different provision concerning 'billing errors'.

i'm not saying that everyone who calls their bank should expect a full and permanent refund, but the cc companies will investigate and if they find that you truly did not receive what you paid for, there will be chargebacks. i think the nature of digital goods makes this particular type of issue a lot more difficult to arbitrate, though.

What did you pay for? Hero points. Did you get Hero Points? Yes. Beyond that there is nothing to be done. Please grow up and don't falsely report fraud because you disagree with a change.

You need to learn to read. I specifically said this is not a case of fraud. And I have a lot of experience regarding this kind of stuff on the banking side. A lot of people do raise disputes with their cc company, and some even win. It all depends on the EULA, what can be defined as "materially different", etc. Please grow up and learn to read before you tell someone to grow up for making a post you didn't bother to comprehend.

I apologize to everyone else for bringing down the tone of this thread, but I am only responding in kind

Unknown

taloncarde wrote:

kensterr wrote:

If you paid for a 2 litre engine car and months down the road the manufacturer calls for a recall of all cars and does a mandatory swap of the engine to a 1.3 litre. If you refuse to swap they say all warranty will be void. How would you feel?

But you didn't buy a 2 litre engine car. You bought virtual currency, you received the virtual currency. The amount of currency you received has not changed and it has not been removed. So there is nothing for anyone to reimburse just because you don't like a change made to virtual items.

This is the silliest argument I've ever heard. You're being pedantic, and if you know it. Of course he didn't buy a 2 Engine car, or whatever that metaphor represented, because it's impossible to buy it outright. You have to buy virtual currency before you can buy the car. But that's just a technicality. If you bought the currency to buy the cover, then clearly that's what you're buying, never mind what steps you have to take to get there. So if they reneged on their end, why the heck should you have to keep your end? If they don't care about your business, then you sure as heck shouldn't care for theirs.

Now if this is all in good faith, then pray tell, why aren't they offering you back the said currency? In my book, that's called thievery.

rednailz

philos wrote:

taloncarde wrote:

kensterr wrote:

If you paid for a 2 litre engine car and months down the road the manufacturer calls for a recall of all cars and does a mandatory swap of the engine to a 1.3 litre. If you refuse to swap they say all warranty will be void. How would you feel?

But you didn't buy a 2 litre engine car. You bought virtual currency, you received the virtual currency. The amount of currency you received has not changed and it has not been removed. So there is nothing for anyone to reimburse just because you don't like a change made to virtual items.

This is the silliest argument I've ever heard. You're being pedantic, and if you know it. Of course he didn't buy a 2 Engine car, or whatever that metaphor represented, because it's impossible to buy it outright. You have to buy virtual currency before you can buy the car. But that's just a technicality. If you bought the currency to buy the cover, then clearly that's what you're buying, never mind what steps you have to take to get there. So if they reneged on their end, why the heck should you have to keep your end? If they don't care about your business, then you sure as heck shouldn't care for theirs.

Now if this is all in good faith, then pray tell, why aren't they offering you back the said currency? In my book, that's called thievery.

They are offering you back HP and ISO, not the money you used to buy them. The offer is for PR damage control, and could be hastely chalked up as a "promo", or compensation. Like me getting a couple bucks off my tab at dinner if my service sucked. I still ate the food and paid for it, but I'll get a few bucks off so I'll come back despite poor service.

I'd have to agree with the post you are argueing with....you bought the game currency. D3 didn't tell you what to spend it on.

Unknown

lingnanhangyee wrote:

bonfire01 wrote:

Arondite wrote:

It really gets under my skin when people toss around the term robbery so lightly. You're defaming them inappropriately and inaccurately.

Argue all you want that what d3 is a sign of poor foresight, planning or a lack of awareness regarding game balance and health, or even indicative of poor customer service. All of these things are a matter of opinion, and you can argue them effectively without defaming anyone or outright lying.

But robbery does not fit. No matter how you twist or turn the situation, what has happened here is far from robbery.

Call a mosquito a mosquito, not a spider.

Your inability to recognize a metaphor is absolutely stellar... 10/10.

"What D3 is doing is complete and utter robbery" does not equal claiming they have taken part in the crimnal act of robbery but is likening their actions to that of committing robbery.. If I say they turned Spiderman into a pile of **** i'm not exactly saying he is a brown smelly heap.... just likening him to it. In fact add "like" in between "is" and "complete" and you make it a simile instead and you get the meaning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor

On the other hand YOU said the guy has defamed D3/whoever when he hasn't.... He has merely expressed his opinions with a slightly advanced piece of language.

Also where is your evidence for poor foresight or lack of planning? ONE piece of evidence they didn't intentionally release on OP character to get money out of ppl whilst from the very beginning planning to nerf them once they got all the money they could? There isn't any way to prove it either way which is why the interpretation of their actions depends entirely on how much faith you have in them. If ppl's faith has been eroded by the repeated pattern of OP hero -> massive overnerf then it's perfectly reasonable to no longer go for the "friendly bumbling idiot" defence.

Oh.... your claim he outright lied.... when he did nothing of the sort actually IS defamatory... so that's deliciously ironic . Don't worry though... nowhere near close enough to getting you sued. Proving a genuine loss from an off hand post in a forum where you are anonymous would be tough!

ps..... if English isn't your first language... or you simply don't know what a metaphor is consider this a friendly piece of info and i'll remove that downvote.

Business is business. They advertise an op character. You use real money to buy hp. So you use those hp to buy covers. Then they nerf the character so that you have to pay more to invest in another character.

The main point is they sell hp only not covers. You have so many choice to use those hp but you bet on a poor investment.

This is the theory of running a casino.

This is a casino with an appearance of marvel comics , isnt it?

This is ridiculous. Of course it's not the same as a casino. Now suppose you buy HP and spend it on the 42 packs, then you're basically gambling. But I've never been to a casino where they ask you if you'd like to buy an Ace, and then after you pay, proceeds to change the value of that card, which is precisely what was done here. And just because nobody looks into these kind of things, doesn't make this less of a fraud.

Unknown

rednailz wrote:

philos wrote:

This is the silliest argument I've ever heard. You're being pedantic, and you know it. Of course he didn't buy a 2 Engine car, or whatever that metaphor represented, because it's impossible to buy it outright. You have to buy virtual currency before you can buy the car. But that's just a technicality. If you bought the currency to buy the cover, then clearly that's what you're buying, never mind what steps you have to take to get there. So if they reneged on their end, why the heck should you have to keep your end? If they don't care about your business, then you sure as heck shouldn't care for theirs.

Now if this is all in good faith, then pray tell, why aren't they offering you back the said currency? In my book, that's called thievery.

They are offering you back HP and ISO, not the money you used to buy them. The offer is for PR damage control, and could be hastely chalked up as a "promo", or compensation. Like me getting a couple bucks off my tab at dinner if my service sucked. I still ate the food and paid for it, but I'll get a few bucks off so I'll come back despite poor service.

I'd have to agree with the post you are argueing with....you bought the game currency. D3 didn't tell you what to spend it on.

They're not returning your HP and Iso, they're giving you some HP and Iso which isn't the same thing. It's not just a "service suck" kinda thing either (e.g. Where they give covers for messing up the end time of the tourney), it's basically being offered a steak for an x-amount of coupons you have to buy fwith real money, then switching a pork chop for it. Sure they can tell you that, you could've chosen to buy anything with that coupon, but we all know you only bought the coupons for the freaking steak.

Unknown

My question is what have people lost by the upcoming changes. The money is already spent. But you still have the covers you spent for. You still have all the prizes you earned from those covers. And most importantly you still can play the game as little or as much as you see fit. So what is lost? An advantage over other players? Theoretical future prizes won?

The money only flows one way in MPQ, there is no return on investment. Pretending that you have been robbed assumes you were going to get something tangible out of the game at some point, but it is a timesink, you gave them money because you wanted to keep spending your time here and they remain open 24/7 to meet your timesink needs. That has not changed at all. If anything I think MPQ is robbing itself by shining a little too bright a light on how little value their purchases actually hold.

rednailz

philos wrote:

rednailz wrote:

philos wrote:

This is the silliest argument I've ever heard. You're being pedantic, and you know it. Of course he didn't buy a 2 Engine car, or whatever that metaphor represented, because it's impossible to buy it outright. You have to buy virtual currency before you can buy the car. But that's just a technicality. If you bought the currency to buy the cover, then clearly that's what you're buying, never mind what steps you have to take to get there. So if they reneged on their end, why the heck should you have to keep your end? If they don't care about your business, then you sure as heck shouldn't care for theirs.

Now if this is all in good faith, then pray tell, why aren't they offering you back the said currency? In my book, that's called thievery.

They are offering you back HP and ISO, not the money you used to buy them. The offer is for PR damage control, and could be hastely chalked up as a "promo", or compensation. Like me getting a couple bucks off my tab at dinner if my service sucked. I still ate the food and paid for it, but I'll get a few bucks off so I'll come back despite poor service.

I'd have to agree with the post you are argueing with....you bought the game currency. D3 didn't tell you what to spend it on.

They're not returning your HP and Iso, they're giving you some HP and Iso which isn't the same thing. It's not just a "service suck" kinda thing either (e.g. Where they give covers for messing up the end time of the tourney), it's basically being offered a steak for an x-amount of coupons you have to buy fwith real money, then switching a pork chop for it. Sure they can tell you that, you could've chosen to buy anything with that coupon, but we all know you only bought the coupons for the freaking steak.

I like how you kept the continuity of the analogy so well and still made your point. I'm just being devlil's advocate for the sake of it, but I think you did improve on what I was getting at while putting your angle back in it.

Unknown

Cryptobrancus wrote:

My question is what have people lost by the upcoming changes. The money is already spent. But you still have the covers you spent for. You still have all the prizes you earned from those covers. And most importantly you still can play the game as little or as much as you see fit. So what is lost? An advantage over other players? Theoretical future prizes won?

The money only flows one way in MPQ, there is no return on investment. Pretending that you have been robbed assumes you were going to get something tangible out of the game at some point, but it is a timesink, you gave them money because you wanted to keep spending your time here and they remain open 24/7 to meet your timesink needs. That has not changed at all. If anything I think MPQ is robbing itself by shining a little too bright a light on how little value their purchases actually hold.

That's funny... I thought people bought covers that lead to a power with 4 turns of stun and 12 charged tiles.... do they get to keep that while all new covers are 5 charged tiles? No? Oh so they haven't got the thing they bought... they have an inferior thing with the same name. Also who says they ONLY got prizes cause of those covers. Plenty of ppl got top PvP and PvE placements without a usable 4Thor.

Also, I sincerely doubt anyone handed over their money to keep spending their time here because you don't have to pay for that... in fact i've never seen that as an option to pay for. Maybe... just MAYBE when they bought covers for a hero that works a certain way they were actually buying *drumroll* covers for a hero that works a certain way!!!!!!

I don't see why you get to tell someone who paid money what they were *really buying* because your interpretation after the fact is actually completely irrelevant.

Not that it is literally robbery anyway... not a criminal offence of any kind no matter what ppl say in their anger (fraud, robbery, whatever) BUT would you win in a civil case (based on balance of probabilities not beyond reasonable doubt as a burden of proof)? Probably depends where you live. In plenty of countries you have unmodifiable statutory rights so a EUAL is irrelevant because no matter what you put in a contract it still cannot change those rights. In the UK you just have to prove the company isn't being reasonable (and it is literally that open to interpretation. Judge says they don't feel the situation is reasonable and the company loses) and you'd win in small claims court... or more accurately the company needs to fail to prove it is reasonable since the person enforcing terms of a contract is responsible for proving those terms are reasonable.

Not that i'll be trying to get any money back because i'm of the opinion I could have foreseen this and gave my money anyway. Doesn't mean I should be enforcing that stance on other ppl cause they aren't me and therefore their circumstances are very different and if someone feels they deserve a refund and they get it GOOD. Rules are in place, they put their case forwards, rules are followed by the company that the actual cash transaction is with and a decision is made. I suspect Apple/Google would refund anyone who's cash purchase isn't that old and makes a coherent case. They care a LOT more about their customers than they care about a developer. Shame D3/Demiurge don't care a bit more about their own customers and display remotely similar behaviour.

Unknown

To many who have commented,

You're right,I guess you do buy the hp and not the covers directly.

It is just difficult to adjust to this change.
While D3 is not actually robbing us, we certainly aren't ending up with the product we bought intially. We can all agree on this.

Unknown

bonfire, I know I pushed a button, but going to ask you to take it one level deeper.

Maybe... just MAYBE when they bought covers for a hero that works a certain way they were actually buying *drumroll* covers for a hero that works a certain way!!!!!!

What does having covers for a certain hero that works a certain way get for you? Does that character just existing on your roster provide value for you? Is it just being able to play that character? Would you be just as happy in the sandbox with that character?

I am willing to suggest in the case of Thor people bought covers for her because she was clearly more powerful than the other available choices. So people bought power as a tool to beat other people with, because that is fun for them. If everything is balanced your fun shouldn't come at the expense of other people's fun which is why in a competitive environment overpowered or infinite combos must be addressed, to make sure those without the power combos still want to play the game. Do I think they took the nerf too far, yes. Do I think it will be less of a fun adrenaline rush to smite any enemy into dust, also yes. Will people still play with Thoress, I think so but we will see.

The things you can buy and earn in the game only have value within the game. Thor will still have value within the game, though not as much as before, but a player's ability to continue playing the game will continue on as normal.

wirius

Again, people are being emotional, not rational. Let me translate what you're all saying.

"I was OP. I had power. I spent a ton of money to feel this way. Now I don't. Since I now feel foolish, taken advantage of, angry, etc., instead of accepting responsibility, I'm tinykitty perfect and D3 is the bad guy."

Guys, any lawyer is going to look at your like you're crazy. Normal people view this behavior as bizarre. You aren't entitled to jack, and the "illusion" of power you get from this game is merely that, an illusion. Honestly, if you're going crazy over this, get some evaluative help. Your priorities and sense of reality are all screwed up.

I spent $100 dollars to finish maxing out X-Force. If they nerf him tomorrow? "O.k., guess it had to be done." I spent a lot of money too, but you wouldn't see me crying on the forum, inventing a **** reality in which D3 is an immoral thief that took my candy. Welcome to adulthood people, in which you spend money and understand in an electronic game that things can change at any time. If you feel foolish because you spent money on this, FEEL FOOLISH. Stop trying to blame other people for your anger, your feeling foolish, or taken advantage of. Thats on you, and any crying to the contrary makes you look even worse.

Asmodai-o_O

Sentry bombing wasn't an exploit.

If you are unsatisfied then contact google or apple, people get refunds through them for far less - i.e. buying a pack and not getting their desired results. I haven't done it because I'm not dumb enough to waste my money on any freemium game, let alone bait and switch candy crush marvel edition, but I have seen proof of it done and know someone that routinely does it with all of the games they play on a 3-4 month cycle. You don't put the supercharged 6.2L Hemi SRT Hellcat V8 in your new Challenger and 3-4 months down the road Dodge says oh wait, 707 horses are just too many, we're knocking 400 off, lol sorry!. Complain and get your money back.

As far as nerfing, I've never been a fan of it in any game. If something is good just keep it good and make everything else better to compensate. With the color changing infinite combos, just change Mystiques' colors and leave the abilities alone. 4hor SHOULD be strong, mine is 2/2/2 and I don't complain about her beating me, why do the rest of you? So what if Rags drops a couple charged tiles, why destroy 4hor... just remake Rags right the first time. Will 4hor and Rags both be nerfed when, if, Gambit comes out?
When do Spidey, Falcon, Cage and Steve get nerfed because they drop shields which prevent damage and reduce health pack consumption and 1 damage hurts my feelings when I have to face them. I made the joke that XF nerf would happen after I got him to a point of usefulness, he's 5/2/2 via 3 greens purchased with in game HP rewards and I use him a lot, when can I expect his nerf? This community complains about the 2-4* barriers way too much, put in your time and build your roster properly. You too can have a real roster just like the top players, all for free *gasp*.

The change to Magneto is absurd, as if the 2* player base doesn't have enough frustration. It won't affect me, I rarely use mine these days, but it's unnecessary.

The community should get together and combat lazy devs by nerfing D3's profit margin.

Unknown

Cryptobrancus wrote:

bonfire, I know I pushed a button, but going to ask you to take it one level deeper.

Maybe... just MAYBE when they bought covers for a hero that works a certain way they were actually buying *drumroll* covers for a hero that works a certain way!!!!!!

What does having covers for a certain hero that works a certain way get for you? Does that character just existing on your roster provide value for you? Is it just being able to play that character? Would you be just as happy in the sandbox with that character?

I am willing to suggest in the case of Thor people bought covers for her because she was clearly more powerful than the other available choices. So people bought power as a tool to beat other people with, because that is fun for them. If everything is balanced your fun shouldn't come at the expense of other people's fun which is why in a competitive environment overpowered or infinite combos must be addressed, to make sure those without the power combos still want to play the game. Do I think they took the nerf too far, yes. Do I think it will be less of a fun adrenaline rush to smite any enemy into dust, also yes. Will people still play with Thoress, I think so but we will see.

The things you can buy and earn in the game only have value within the game. Thor will still have value within the game, though not as much as before, but a player's ability to continue playing the game will continue on as normal.

Or they bought her covers because they had Xforce and had all the top tier 3*s so she was the only avenue left for them to get any form of roster development until ANOTHER competitive 4* came out to aim for (which still hasn't happened). Why should you just accept the value of something you bought having it's value significantly reduced without the offer of a proper refund OR an appropriate level of compensation. Is it a customer's fault that that the hero has now been deemed too good and is getting nerfed? Is it the customer's fault that the nerf is so drastic given that there was no meaningful consultation?

And as for what that hero gets you..... well that will vary from person to person but anyone spending money to get those covers obviously saw a VALUE to them.... roughly equal to (or more than) the value of the money they put into it... otherwise why spend the money?

As for your balance argument is it only ppl who bought 4Thor who can use her? Can't earn her? Must have imagined earning comfortably more covers than it takes to max her for rewards.... so is it getting your fun at someone else's expense or is it making progress through a game, progressing your roster and getting an advantage from that progress?

If you genuinely believe the devs are doing this purely to achieve balance and ensuring fun shouldn't come at everyone else's expense then why isn't XForce getting nerfed? He already represents a massive advantage over anyone who doesn't have him... his covers are purchasable (and looking at some rosters are obviously being purchased) AND after 4Thor gets nerfed it further magnifies the advantage he gives. It's also UNBELIEVABLY obvious how relatively powerful he is now (so they can't have missed it) and that it will be more-so when the only hero at his level takes a BIG damage hit. He has also been around for longer than 4Thor and is much more widely used so plenty of time to analyze him.

I don't see how you defend actions based on the high minded principal of seeking balance when there isn't the evidence to back it up.

Unknown

I guess you are right, because they didn't do anything to x-force no one else should have been changed, because if you can't fix everything you shouldn't change anything. And everything anyone earns or buys should maintain its value forever, just like in real life.

The developers have complete control over their game. They can shut everything down tomorrow if they decided to and then all of our investments would really be gone. They changed her, yes I think too much but they have every right to do it. We have every right to complain, and gripe but they don't owe us anything for it. They are out to keep the game profitable so they have jobs and we can keep playing. I don't know the answer to why they made each change they did but saying there should never be changes I just don't agree with.

NorthernPolarity

bonfire01 wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

bonfire, I know I pushed a button, but going to ask you to take it one level deeper.

Maybe... just MAYBE when they bought covers for a hero that works a certain way they were actually buying *drumroll* covers for a hero that works a certain way!!!!!!

What does having covers for a certain hero that works a certain way get for you? Does that character just existing on your roster provide value for you? Is it just being able to play that character? Would you be just as happy in the sandbox with that character?

I am willing to suggest in the case of Thor people bought covers for her because she was clearly more powerful than the other available choices. So people bought power as a tool to beat other people with, because that is fun for them. If everything is balanced your fun shouldn't come at the expense of other people's fun which is why in a competitive environment overpowered or infinite combos must be addressed, to make sure those without the power combos still want to play the game. Do I think they took the nerf too far, yes. Do I think it will be less of a fun adrenaline rush to smite any enemy into dust, also yes. Will people still play with Thoress, I think so but we will see.

The things you can buy and earn in the game only have value within the game. Thor will still have value within the game, though not as much as before, but a player's ability to continue playing the game will continue on as normal.

Or they bought her covers because they had Xforce and had all the top tier 3*s so she was the only avenue left for them to get any form of roster development until ANOTHER competitive 4* came out to aim for (which still hasn't happened). Why should you just accept the value of something you bought having it's value significantly reduced without the offer of a proper refund OR an appropriate level of compensation. Is it a customer's fault that that the hero has now been deemed too good and is getting nerfed? Is it the customer's fault that the nerf is so drastic given that there was no meaningful consultation?

And as for what that hero gets you..... well that will vary from person to person but anyone spending money to get those covers obviously saw a VALUE to them.... roughly equal to (or more than) the value of the money they put into it... otherwise why spend the money?

As for your balance argument is it only ppl who bought 4Thor who can use her? Can't earn her? Must have imagined earning comfortably more covers than it takes to max her for rewards.... so is it getting your fun at someone else's expense or is it making progress through a game, progressing your roster and getting an advantage from that progress?

If you genuinely believe the devs are doing this purely to achieve balance and ensuring fun shouldn't come at everyone else's expense then why isn't XForce getting nerfed? He already represents a massive advantage over anyone who doesn't have him... his covers are purchasable (and looking at some rosters are obviously being purchased) AND after 4Thor gets nerfed it further magnifies the advantage he gives. It's also UNBELIEVABLY obvious how relatively powerful he is now (so they can't have missed it) and that it will be more-so when the only hero at his level takes a BIG damage hit. He has also been around for longer than 4Thor and is much more widely used so plenty of time to analyze him.

I don't see how you defend actions based on the high minded principal of seeking balance when there isn't the evidence to back it up.

I don't quite follow, if they aren't seeking balance then what ARE they doing these changes for? Demiurge's actions to me paints a picture of developers being out of touch with their game, but not one of malicious cash-grabbiness (which I think is what you're getting at, since there isn't any other obvious reason why they'd do this).

Unknown

Cryptobrancus wrote:

They are out to keep the game profitable so they have jobs and we can keep playing.

Indeed, and that what doesn't make sense to me in those changes. Let's consider that whales make for a sizable amount of D3's revenues (it's the case with other F2P so it's a small stretch). Let's also consider that the recent nerf of 4Thor is especially affecting the whales and tends to make them quite cranky, especially given the very cavalier attitude of the devs. In other terms, D3 just pissed off their major source of revenue. Not a good move in my book.

I imagine they very smartly use the sales as a buffer for the nerf, given that :
- usually a sales means a burst in revenue followed by an attrition for a while of standard revenue because of the saturation of the buyer's market
- in present case the sale will guarantee them a good revenue and will give some time for the angry players to calm down and maybe in a few month they'll go back to spending ingame again. In the end there might very well be a zero difference with a normal sale situation
- the sale is conveniently starting before all players are aware about the nerf, in order to maximize the amount of possible sales
But I fear they misread the amount of outrage. I for one am switching to F2P for good and it would take and inordinate amount of convincing to sway me back. And I don't know for you but I observed a drop in activity both in my alliance and in the different events I participated in recently.

So did they flog the donkey too much or will the poor beast get back up and continue walking ?
Time will tell.

Arondite

bonfire01 wrote:

Your inability to recognize a metaphor is absolutely stellar... 10/10.

It is unreasonable to assume a statement that could be the poster's honest belief is metaphor rather than the poster's belief.

"What D3 is doing is complete and utter robbery" does not equal claiming they have taken part in the crimnal act of robbery but is likening their actions to that of committing robbery.. If I say after the nerf Spiderman is a pile of **** i'm not exactly saying he is a brown smelly heap.... just likening him to it. In fact add "like" in between "is" and "complete" and you make it a simile instead and you get the meaning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor

Every grade schooler knows what a metaphor is. Most are also taught that you look for a metaphor where the parallels of the analogy are not within the realm of possibility.

Allow me to simplify what I've said.

In Spider-Man = Poop, metaphorical speech is apparent as it is impossible Spider-Man is actually poop. It is so impossible, actually, that anyone saying it could not sincerely believe it. It must, therefore, be metaphorical to say so.

In Nerfs = Robbery, metaphorical speech is not apparent, as it is possible the speaker may truly believe that some property has been stolen from him in such a way that violates the law. He would be mistaken, of course, but it is entirely possible for him to believe as much. Given there is no intonation to go by on a text-based forum, interpreting the statement literally is more reasonable than to assume metaphor unless outright stated otherwise - particularly due to the emotional state of most individuals weighing in on the topic (read: context).

On the other hand YOU said the guy has defamed D3/whoever when he hasn't.... He has merely expressed his opinions with a slightly advanced piece of language.

Brush up on the definition of defamation. His statements could be damaging to D3's character - this is the definition of the word. "Speaking in such a way that is potentially damaging to one's good name or reputation."

Further, metaphorical speech isn't even slightly advanced - it is learned and employed by children. Pataphors are advanced. Allegories and parables are advanced. Metaphors are a sentence long exercise in the basics of writing.

Also where is your evidence for poor foresight or lack of planning? ONE piece of evidence they didn't intentionally release on OP character to get money out of ppl whilst from the very beginning planning to nerf them once they got all the money they could? There isn't any way to prove it either way which is why the interpretation of their actions depends entirely on how much faith you have in them. If ppl's faith has been eroded by the repeated pattern of OP hero -> massive overnerf then it's perfectly reasonable to no longer go for the "friendly bumbling idiot" defence.

I'll not be arguing this point, seeing as I never said these are the results of poor planning or poor foresight - I said that one could make a case for it. It is not my position to defend.

Oh.... your claim he outright lied.... when he did nothing of the sort actually IS defamatory... so that's deliciously ironic . Don't worry though... nowhere near close enough to getting you sued. Proving a genuine loss from an off hand post in a forum where you are anonymous would be tough!

I know I'm in no danger of being sued, particularly because I never said he outright lied. Please, read a bit more efficiently. The fact that my post contained "outright lie" does not mean that I said "you [being the individual I have quoted] have outright lied!" If you're going to attempt to debate someone, at least don't leave yourself open to corrections such as these that could've been avoided by merely reading the post in it's entirety.

ps..... if English isn't your first language... or you simply don't know what a metaphor is consider this a friendly piece of info and i'll remove that downvote.

Your post can be considered anything but friendly, and it was far from educational.

_RiO_

Arondite wrote:

it is impossible Spider-Man is actually poop.

I don't know man, ... have you actually read Slott's Spiderverse?