1. I have corrected the e-mail settings so that outgoing e-mails from these forums should be sent now. If you tried to Register or Reset your Password, please try again!
    Dismiss Notice

Baby Bovoch 90% Shrink "Unintended" After 3 Years

Discussion in 'EverQuest II General Discussion' started by Feldon, Apr 17, 2020.

  1. LuranEQ2

    LuranEQ2 Member

    Nice save from the gaslighting accusations! I'm not sure it's wise to even post that your devs are so incompetent and oblivious toward their own game that something they designed three years ago is fundamentally broken and not once did any of them ever check it, or notice it...

    And then given that everyone's had three years to see it working the way it did, why you wouldn't "fix" it in whatever way necessary to preserve the way it's been working rather than what you "expected" three years ago if it doesn't actually matter. Because it's a cosmetic effect.

    But that's just me... :rolleyes:

    The sooner everyone turns that subscription off and removes that credit card, the sooner Kander will be out on his useless ass. Hop to, people, hop to... :p
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 4
  2. Castegyre

    Castegyre Active Member

    These people are completely incompetent at conning people. If they didn't have their ever shrinking 'captive' audience they wouldn't have an audience at all.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  3. Fuli

    Fuli Well-Known Member

    I had high hopes Jen Chan would clean things up. But nope, business as usual for Kander.

    Oh well.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  4. Mermut

    Mermut Well-Known Member

    Another 'clue' that the shrink is intended for the character... you can hide the pet portion of the buff...
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 8
  5. LuranEQ2

    LuranEQ2 Member

    I would also hazard a guess given that the flavor text on the item is independent of the actual things it does from a code standpoint, if the goal was to shrink the summoned pet there'd be no need to mention that in the description, either.

    This **** sandwich tastes like ****. We're just not supposed to call it one...
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  6. Zynt

    Zynt Active Member

    Is he Benito there, too? I haven't seen him post and I probably don't want to either. I actually know way more about 1 than I ever have 2. I've got a mound of laurels to rest on for EQ1.
     
  7. Nawtey

    Nawtey Member

    Wait.

    Wait.

    They buggered up Overseer on EQ1 too? Hahahahahahhahahahaha! NOW I understand why Bug-ito was back posting today. He's been holding up the EQ1 system as how great EQ2's will be and instead they gave it the EQ2 treatment!!!

    Oh, this is too precious. His little brain must be primed to EXPLODE!!
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. Endymion

    Endymion Active Member

    I tried finding a copy of the prenerf spell to see what you might be talking about when you refer to the hand-written description in your post. If you mean what it looks like on this Wiki page: Spotted Baby Bovoch (Spell)

    That's actually programmatically generated. Most EQ2 spell effect descriptions are generated based on the spell effect, whether the numerical effect is positive / negative, etc. So I can see this actually being a bug where they attached the shrink to the wrong spell. Still sucks to fix it after all of these years though. :p
     
    • Informative Informative x 7
  9. Zynt

    Zynt Active Member

    The Overseer system there offers a currency where you can buy certain items and it also offers collection items. They exponentially increased the amount of currency items cost as well as made the collection items heirloom. They did both of those w/o mentioning it at all. This was after a multitude of people spent $$ on DBC to max out the potential of the collections especially.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Nawtey

    Nawtey Member

    So DBG's week could be summed up as:

    [​IMG]
     
    • Winner Winner x 6
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Fendhar

    Fendhar Member

    Yes he is :)
    If you want to see his cerebral diarrhea, just follow this link: https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?search/14356431/
    I was tempted to call him out for trying the same stunts on the EQ forums that he already tried on EQ2 - but well - he won't profit from it because that would require him to be at last as thick as two short planks.

    Yeah!
    Once I got to know I was like "oh f..k", seeing what they did with that on EQ2 already. In the past EQ folks at least got the EQ2 crowd as guinea pigs for such stuff and if it was truly bad it never made it into EQ. This time though ...

    I think it was handled like it was so they could get rid of the liabilities that come with stored station cash.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Tkia

    Tkia Active Member

    Given current reactions I would say it's preferable to admit to the incompetence we already know about than to continue to lie through your teeth to us in such a transparent manner.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  13. Fuli

    Fuli Well-Known Member

    EQ1, has up to this point mostly been insulated from cash shop mechanics and p2w.

    Well, those eq1 folks haven't seen anything yet. Could it be that DBG has finally reached the bottom of the diminishing marginal returns curve for eq2? Has the property been pretty much harvested?

    If so, the eq1 folks may be in for a double treat from both DPG and Burrito.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 7
  14. Nawtey

    Nawtey Member

    I bet somehow Burrito will turn this into a flattening the cash shop curve scenario, while Sigrdrifa re-dons the garb of a white knight as points out how much better EQ2 is getting. Ok, probably not the second part since she/they still seemed annoyed with some things.

    If they determine EQ2 has pretty much reached the strip-mine limit, how long before they move resources over to continue the clear cutting on EQ1, and turn the lights off?
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. Zynt

    Zynt Active Member

    EQ1 doesn't really "need" the cash shop as much since they have a very healthy TLE population. If they continue with those every year they're good. Also, they have a very healthy population otherwise and they are doing the smart thing and continuing to merge servers. I know that sounds like an oxymoron but healthy is a relative term. I have toons on the Selos (last TLE), whatever The Nameless is now, which is where I started and played since launch, and FV which is a free trade server and has been around for years and years. Last Thursday when I logged into FV there were three GC channels, and the 1st two both had their limit of 400 people in them.

    That being said, the cash shop is definitely being used more but things are generally cheaper there. I can insta-finish a 12hr Overseer mission for like 85 cents. Maybe less.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Fuli

    Fuli Well-Known Member

    Welp, I'm skeptical. You might very well be right, however, if DBG is market harvesting properties (and I believe they are), then many of the things you mentioned are not important.

    My suspicion (100% pure speculation) is that Longdale was given a profit objective for her franchise and she chose to harvest the crap out of eq2 first, hoping she could make the portfolio work while protecting her beloved EQ1 from Nawtey's strip mining metaphor.

    Be interesting to see what happens with EQ1 going forward.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  17. JimmyBananas

    JimmyBananas Guest

    It always drove me NUTS when developers went back and "fixed" (and by fixed, I mean ruined) things that weren't actually problems, rather than dealing with the copious amounts of current, actual issues that often sat unaddressed for months. WoW did this kind of crap all the time. I remember reporting a glaring helmet typo, and my raid boots that allowed my feet to clip through the bottom of them. It was, I'd say, six months before they fixed the typo. I quit before they ever fixed my reverse-sandals.

    Every patch, however, was filled with nerfs to the in-game toys (make a silly noise once every 24 hours. Wow, fun!), or the farts of some NPC from three expansions ago would smell 2% less pungent, or some obscure quest would have its dialogue fixed long after anyone cared about it anymore.

    Crazy how certain games have these problems, and then over on FFXIV, I reported the new gear from the latest patch having a graphical issue and it's already been fixed.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Feldon

    Feldon Administrator Staff Member

    While I wonder if Dreamweaver realizes the **** show he's inherited, it's also pretty obvious that letting 1 user dominate a forum is unwise and extremely off-putting to others. Especially when that person readily admits they don't even play EQ2.

    If Benito, by proxy, has the right to antagonize users until they get themselves banned and close any thread he likes by raising non-sequitur red herring nonsense until there is no choice but to close it, what conclusion is anyone supposed to draw except that Benito is in co-charge of the forum? By the continued permissiveness, Dreamweaver has in essence handed Benito co-moderator rights.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2020
    • Agree Agree x 5
  19. Feldon

    Feldon Administrator Staff Member

    Who doesn't know how their own game works? These guys:

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Alarra

    Alarra Active Member

    I think you learnt this lesson too.
     

Share This Page