Vhailorx wrote: Astrp3: No apology necessary. I have no idea what McG's opinion of ayn rand might be. But i know that the argument he or she was making sounded very objectivist. So i attempted to illustrate the flaws in the argument with humor. As with most attempted humor, ymmv. I certainly cannot say that have never made a snarky or sarcastic post, but i do try to keep such things light hearted, rather than mean. Alas, tone doesn't always translate well in text. With respect to new players getting essential characters, you seem to be forgetting about clearance levels. I dont think the 4* prog rewards show up until CL7. So new players can't easily get 4* essentials until they hit rank 32, right? How long does that take (seriously, i have no idea since i was a 4* player when CLs went live)? That means that new players have to rely on bonus heroes and lucky vault pulls to get vintage essential 4* covers for quite some time until they can even begin ti collect them via prog rewards. I dont think that is a very good development for the game.
Vhailorx wrote: With respect to new players getting essential characters, you seem to be forgetting about clearance levels. I dont think the 4* prog rewards show up until CL7. So new players can't easily get 4* essentials until they hit rank 32, right? How long does that take (seriously, i have no idea since i was a 4* player when CLs went live)? That means that new players have to rely on bonus heroes and lucky vault pulls to get vintage essential 4* covers for quite some time until they can even begin ti collect them via prog rewards. I dont think that is a very good development for the game.
Jexman wrote: Have the developers ever responded with any completeness to our questions? We have a simple question: why not add a legendary token for 20CP that only gives vaulted 4 stars and "classic" 5 stars? Saying they're going to "study" this is worthless: we want to know why this isn't an option. Acting like politicians and saying blah blah blah instead of honestly explaining how this affects their long term plans (including how they're going to make money off of us) is disappointing, after 3+ years of playing
nickaraxnos wrote: Jexman wrote: Have the developers ever responded with any completeness to our questions? We have a simple question: why not add a legendary token for 20CP that only gives vaulted 4 stars and "classic" 5 stars? Saying they're going to "study" this is worthless: we want to know why this isn't an option. Acting like politicians and saying blah blah blah instead of honestly explaining how this affects their long term plans (including how they're going to make money off of us) is disappointing, after 3+ years of playing This. That's what's the most frustrating of all things. No need of debating if the vaulting is good or not, if we need to get angry in behalf of others. Both sides have their reasonable arguments. By why on earth someone doesn't answer that question. Easy fix, almost everyone is happy
New McG wrote: Vhailorx wrote: Astrp3: No apology necessary. I have no idea what McG's opinion of ayn rand might be. But i know that the argument he or she was making sounded very objectivist. So i attempted to illustrate the flaws in the argument with humor. As with most attempted humor, ymmv. I certainly cannot say that have never made a snarky or sarcastic post, but i do try to keep such things light hearted, rather than mean. Alas, tone doesn't always translate well in text. With respect to new players getting essential characters, you seem to be forgetting about clearance levels. I dont think the 4* prog rewards show up until CL7. So new players can't easily get 4* essentials until they hit rank 32, right? How long does that take (seriously, i have no idea since i was a 4* player when CLs went live)? That means that new players have to rely on bonus heroes and lucky vault pulls to get vintage essential 4* covers for quite some time until they can even begin ti collect them via prog rewards. I dont think that is a very good development for the game. I laughed out loud hard enough to startle the blind dog I'm watching at the moment at the Ayn Rand thing, if that tells you anything. What I was referring to was the "oh, but what of the children?" vibe that politicians trot out on a constant basis, and how this theoretical new player argument reeks of it. We aren't talking about "giving a voice to the voiceless" of an oppressed class over a vital social issue. We're talking about a group made up entirely of people playing a match-3 game on their phones, tablets, or computers. (God help me, I almost didn't mention the Steam people. That was close.) That's why the hysteria involved is so over the top. I've seen plenty of other giant flaps along these lines in other formats. World of Warcraft had a big uproar when they changed some core system in the game, and a VERY vocal portion of the player base had a hissy fit, Blizzard basically said "trust us, we know what we're doing" and it turns out, hey, they did. Magic the Gathering made some sweeping changes ages ago that also had huge uproar, but they ended up being better for the game in the long run, and wouldn't have stayed implemented if the most vocal group had gotten their way. These kinds of things evolve, and the most die-hard in the middle of it will be the most opposed, because they like what's there, and don't want something different, no matter how minimal. (I mean, some people found a way to complain when they basically locked out the prologue in the game. THE PROLOGUE!!! The thing people aspire to slog through to get to the ACTUAL GAME and never look back!) There's no winning for D3/Demiurge with any change. They could offer players a free 4* of their choice at the completion of every event for every player, and the same people who right now are saying "what about the new guys" would be screaming "Oh, so now someone who's played for 4 months will have the same roster I've worked 2 and a half years for? What a waste of my time this has been!" People who has spent a lot of time and money on something have their idea of what a game should be, and when something doesn't fit within that view, they get mad. Then they accuse the developers of sinister plots to steal their money from them, etc.There's an easy solution to this, or any other "fun" pursuit that gets anyone so emotional: Take a break. If the game has you this angry or annoyed, just take some time away from it. I did exactly that on two different occasions. They are the reason I'm at day 920ish and not "whatever 1-3 days after launch is at this point" on the resupply, and they're the only reason I can still play it now. I can tell you the exact reason I took my last break, which lasted for about 5-6 months: Civil War. When they announced that there were 4 characters launching in a 3 week span, it made me mad because it was such a ramping up of releases, so I told my alliance I was jumping out for a while, and just DID IT. I didn't yell on the forum, as therapeutic as it may have felt, because I knew it wasn't going to change anything. The game had become something beyond the "fun little distraction" that this kind of game should be, and after I figured that out, not playing for a while made all the sense in the world. I came back after a chunk of time, had a bunch of characters I was missing, (and still am quite behind on, seeing how poorly the Winter Soldier DDQ is going for me today.) but when I came back, it felt like a fun game again. I realize it's hard to walk away from such a time and/or money investment, but the point is, if you take a short break, this will be here when you come back. You may play catch-up for a while, but if it isn't fun, then you're doing it wrong. It's a matching game, and nobody, including the devs, intends for playing this to be your whole life. Do what it takes to make it fun again, and maybe it's a week off, maybe a month, maybe half a year. (That's what it took me.) I think there's a lot of people whose overly emotional response to this maybe points toward needing something else to occupy their time, at least for a little while.
astrp3 wrote: I can't speak for McG or anyone else, but a large part of the reason I sometimes rush to the "defense" of D3 is the sheer volume/frequency of complaints (the phrase "you'd complain if they hanged you with a new rope" seems tailor made for us), the tendency to go category-12 ape-poo about every change (OK, I'm exaggerating here myself - it's really only category 10), and posts filled with exaggerated claims that go far beyond the evidence ("virtually the entire player base sees through the blatant cash grab and has expressed their displeasure", "basic logic makes it clear that the developers are lying", etc.), condescension and insults, contradictory claims ("the devs are clueless dolts who don't know what they're doing/the devs are Machiavellian liars and cash-grabbers who know exactly what they're doing"), chicken-little pronouncements, and sarcasm. Yes, there have been calm and reasoned arguments as well, but they seem far too rare to me (though maybe that's just confirmation bias).
kyo28 wrote: The bottom line is that I'm slowly losing interest in the game. This is not a thinly veiled threat or exageration. Just where I'm standing now: I used to be a very active PS4 gamer. Then I found MPQ and played both but over the past year, thanks to cool additions like champ rewards and such, started spending more time on MPQ than on my PS4. Basically MPQ moved from a simple "pass time game" to one of my main games ... and thus I spent more money on it. But with recent changes, I feel my interest is shifting back to my PS4 and away from MPQ. For the first time in long, I've preordered a PS4 game again and since this week, I no longer try to maximize MPQ game time but instead MPQ is the 'time filler' it started out to be and needs to take a backseat to my PS4-gaming. And that, to me, is telling. It's a sign that shows that MPQ is moving in the wrong direction, at least for a gamer like me. Others may feel different but that's how I feel. The devs can do with that what they want and perhaps these changes bring in more cash than before, thus meaning they can afford to lose me as an active player. So be it then, our relationship will then go back from being white-hot to ice cold. No cynicism, no hate, just stating where my preference is shifting to. D3's loss will be Sony & co's gain. That the way the world works. Maybe over time my love for MPQ will blossom again, but it won't be right now and certainly not with the latest changes. Kinda matches with what OneLastGambit wrote: I'm moving away from the game because it's not a lot of fun for me anymore. Maybe that's healthy that I move over to other games and enjoy those to the fullest.