Itemization

Wow.. condescending much?
And, no, there is nothing about posting in the bug forums that is linked to any sort of dev replies 'in kind' or otherwise.

Also, please refrain from back-handed accusations of agendas, accusation, etc.

Additionally, I am starting to find your hypocrisy exceptionally wearing. Don't sling insults, accusations and inuendo on one hand and then claim others are doing the same and condemn them on the other.

Since beta I have documented and posted problems with itemization. I provided examples, consquences and past precedents.

I compiled a list of outstanding issues right before beta ended with what we knew (and mostly didn't know) about the resolutions.
There has been ZERO feedback about itemization, on any level, from the dev(s) in charge of it. The ONLY change was to make Mastercrafted fabled gear WORSE.
And yet I remain civil and mostly constructive on the official forums.

You, however, seem to be going out of your way to provoke people. I will refrain from posting my speculations of your reasons, but speculations are all I have, because you have, repeatedly, refused to answer questions about what your purpose and goals are.

 

OMG!!! What will become of the very NICE guild!!!
Aranara Anarana Home Decorate and Role Play Guild Antonia Bayle server | Page 2 | EverQuest 2 Forums

Maybe I should start a GOFUNDME

Ok, carry on.

 

This escalated fast.

 

That's your opinion. That's fair. I don't believe in conspiracy theories without hard evidence.

 

Except that's not just opinion, it's fact.
And you can reply to me too if you like, but I won't see it.

 

I suppose a few days in the official forums and a few more here might seem fast to some.
But, you have, consistently, refused to answer questions, so there is no longer any point in posing more to you.
Unless you change your demonstrated behavior, you will not answer questions or reply in a constructive manner. Unless that changes, I will cease to engage with you.

 

I responded to you in a professional manner. Am I a dev? No. Are you are dev? No. You admit that we are both engaging in speculation. I agreed that you have valid points and it was best addressed through established channels. What more do you expect of me?

 

No attention is the only effective way to deal with this particular type.

I commend you. Your longsuffering patience is a prime example of my assertion that you, and most others here, are more polite and have better manners than I do.

Not once have you used the words 'liar' or 'retard'.

 

When I'm speculating about where DBG is *going*, I'm just having fun. For example, I've been speculating that DBG is moving to mostly eliminate the crafting game.

When I see folks on the OF venting frustrations about RNG related problems and calling for fixes, I might take a minute and lay out why I believe they're wasting their time.

Like you noted, all you need to do is reflect on past behavior. Bugs broken mechanics are *usually* addressed quickly, but questions about design decisions are almost always ignored - completely.

So, my hypothesis atm, based on how crafting and itemization are being handled, is that they're working toward a p2w raiding game with a deco game component. What we've got this year is a bunch of useless filler intended to get people "acclimated" to a new reality.

A bunch of customers will get ticked off and leave, but that's fine with Longdale. She expected them to leave anyway and this way she pulled some money out of them first.

That's my theory.

Regarding any other "conspiracy theories", yeah, I look at what they say and what they do. Currently, anyone who believes customer welfare is a priority is drinking some seriously potent kool-aid.

 

I am not claiming to be a better authority than you nor am I questioning your credentials. Can your claims withstand scrutiny (evidentiary levels) from a layman's perspective?

I won't litigate the merits of your article, your journalistic privilege, or your editorial decision making. I will be careful with this point. There are statements that I can make but I won't.

Experience potions have been sold before EQ2 was released (expansion claims on EQ1).

I don't think the threshold of upgrading spells is prohibitively high since you can acquire upgrades through diverse in-game avenues such as in-game drops, trade-skill, spell training (with timer reducers offered in game), in-game market/broker, in-game events (Dragon Attack), and/or waiting for expansion upgrades.

I don't have the demographic data but individuals below the age of majority are few and far between. Adults can govern themselves with regard to marketplace purchases. Yes, there may be a sliver of people who are not of sound mind to make purchases.

Edit: For individuals who fall under not of sound mind or a minor who abuses a parent's credit card, many companies (not even talking about credit card protections) have policies to reimburse after an investigation (likely a one-off).

 

Awwe. I feel bad for this guy. He's a strange one, but he's just trying to make friends and have fun.

 

I have done at length research on the Dragon AA ward bug, it has not received any dev feedback. Not a peek nor a boo.

The combined amount of likes for both class archetypes of Priest(6 likes) and Mage(3 likes) that have been reported is 9 likes. I don't know what their internal threshold is, but there it is.

Priest Feedback:
Dragon AA "Reprieve" not providing correct ward regeneration | EverQuest 2 Forums

Coercer Feedback:
Coercer:AAXP:Dragon:Scaled Protection - Not regenerating correctly | EverQuest 2 Forums

Combined Testing:
Dragon AA Line Self Ward Bug Testing | EverQuest 2 Forums

 

I don't want this to devolve into a political discussion. That's another rabbit hole.

There have been several initiatives by various governments (state, federal, foreign) to regulate loot boxes specifically. And legislative proposals seem aimed and narrowly tailored to protect minors. This is a recent example by a U.S. Senate Republican:

U.S. Regulation of Loot Boxes Heats Up with Announcement of New Legislation

U.S. Regulation of Loot Boxes Heats Up with Announcement of New Legislation

I am setting the parameters of an acceptable argument in relation to current law while stating that Daybreak's in-game alternatives may be adequate enough not to cross the threshold of "manipulative design" (which itself is a debatable concept). My references are not personal attacks but legally applicable criteria (contract law).

 

Just to be clear: You're addressing whether or not the cash shop in EQ2 has taken definitive turn into P2W territory, not whether loot boxes break United States law or not, correct?

Since there seems to be some disingenuous attempts at redirection going on in the 'rebuttals'.

 

For a "good defense", I am doing both. I am stating that Daybreak offers enough adequate in-game alternatives (e.g. in-game xp bonus events, spell upgrade routes mentioned above) that it doesn't cross into "manipulative design" (which is a concept that is debatable and remains to be defined). But even if Daybreak crosses that threshold, I am also stating, per Feldon's statement (my mention of protected classes of minors and mentally ill in contract law), that such "practices" are not against U.S. law.

From the article:

U.S. Regulation of Loot Boxes Heats Up with Announcement of New Legislation

And before you say the law's language proves that my opinions are wrong (this is not passed legislation), the bill's protections are only triggered on minors.