Adding an option to play old instance without stats clamped would just solve everything

A lot of people are upset, irritated, bummed, pick your adjective about the stat clamp. Most are bothered by having something taken away an argument that has not be argued around as it can not be countered because the reality is we had something it was taken. Some argue about it being good for "insert reason." some argue it was brilliant for "insert reason." There will neve be middle ground because one side is upset something was taken and the other is not and is very insistent those upset agree with them.


The reality goes like this:
Paid for game, joined game and paid for game based on game being a certain way. Game is what they paid for and enjoyed for years and years. Suddenly one of the things they loved about the game is taken. Obviously people rightfully get upset.


Where it gets weird:
The people apparently loving the sat clamp's arguments running the range from "hey little trooper it's not so bad having it taken, buck up" to "why cant you think about anyone but yourself" to "you never owned anything so ha ha ha why can't you understand anything." Perhaps they are somehow missing the point.



It makes you wonder; if I made twenty cookies, some little kid wanted one, I gave it to him, and then ripped it away when the kid went to take a bite saying it's mine you never had contractual ownership... would they laugh at the crying little kid and then explain to the kid how awesome I am and that it was never the kids anyway? Heck in this scenario the kid never even paid so they would probably really lay into the kid.

I am GOD, this thread is now irrelevant and locked in......

Points score
3 gifs (3)
1 cookie analogy (1.5)
Total score = 4.5

Thank you.

Short form: You're a hypocrite

Long form: I'm just more honest about what I'm saying.

And I wouldn't report anything anybody says about me.... I don't really get offended...

And I don't really care what somebody who mostly posts stupid things has to say...... See?... I didn't call you stupid.




But, in all honesty...
I really don't want to offend... They really just are meant to be humorous comebacks... but: They are comebacks.

Just don't pretend that what you do isn't a form of insult... or suck up to those who insult your current focus of derision... and that I'm not coming back from that.

^^See? Ya got somebody choosing to completely miss the point... again.... and ironically posting exactly what was said would be the post of someone not quite getting it.


How are you not supposed to make fun of that??

because the analogy was stupid.

He was implying that it was like "pretending to give a child a cookie, then snatching it back".

It is not like that at all, because there are no children here, if there are then there is an expectation that the implications of said contract be explained to the child, if that childs parents were actually doing their job by reading the contract they're agreeing their child or themselves on behalf of the child be bound by.

if you do not have that parental consent then you are NOT supposed to play and therefore you should not even be playing in the first place let alone have a feeling that your "rights have been breached".

His analogy was nonsense, he thought he was being smart, he was not.

THE AGE OF THE PERSON HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL POINT OF THE ANALOGY

Everyone here is a child. Dude, it's a superhero video game. The child is a metaphor for the child in all our hearts and the cookie is a metaphor for an individual's enjoyment of the game.

Just trying to help

yes it does, because he's creating a falsely inspired emotive reaction from the other person reading his post that a greater degree of sympathy is warranted when it isn't.

He's using a "child" as the premise of his analogy because he wants to portray a degree of vulnerability that doesn't otherwise exist.

He's likens it to a child being stripped of a reward for that reason, because if he were to liken it to an adult the sympathy gained would be demonstrably lower than that of a child who would obviously not have the understanding to know what sort of contract they're entering in to.

Whenever you liken anything to a situation involving children you're attempting to illicit a certain type of reaction.

The contract however clearly states what it states including that you have to be over 18 years old or have a parent that is, understand it for you, there's reasons for that, not exclusively limited to, but of course certainly for the purposes surrounding the likes of this argument where someone wants to argue the terms of what they agreed to and use the premise that "but OMG I'm just a child" to get around it.

Some of us more than others...

When did you start playing? Was it when PVP rock/paper/scissors format existed or after that changed? Was it before or after marks of victory were a universal currency? Was it during the clip years/advanced mechanics/stats revamp?

This game has had its fair share of system changes over the years…it shouldn’t be a surprise that it’s moving in a direction similar to other leading games.

At the end of the day, it’s all a matter of adjusting.

LOL that doesn't really make it any better, let's replace the term with "adult then" and I'd suggest it was silly for the adult to assume they could eat a cookie they never owned

The reality is, people often get upset about having TOS shoved in their face because it's embarrasing.

1. They probably never read it;
2. It dawns on them that Daybreak hold all the power, and;
3. They realise that no matter how upset they are, they can't legally complain about it.

Which actually leads me to another silly part of Alpha's post

Ironically I think there's far more motivation from the "clamp opponent" crowd to shut down and stifle any happiness about the clamp because it makes their desire to reversion of change less likely.

If any group needs more people vocally on their side, it's clamp opponents, not the other way around.

I personally think they're the ones desperate to illicit a response of outrage and the more people that can convince to be outraged the better it is for their agenda

Meh, the TOS isn't really a factor. All an individual can do is walk away. Sometimes large scale player feedback can change things, but really I think what players do in game is the biggest factor for change. If everyone chases the new feats and uses the Omnibus, a few forum threads won't mater. Look how long the cash cap lasted. People just need to vent when they don't like something. Green names would be on it if it was an open concept at this point.

Curious which leading games you're referring to?

1) People still complain about the loss of PvP

2) Not all changes have the same impact. Advance Mechanics might have been a bad idea...
But, even, badly implemented.. It didn't take away the very purpose of the progression of your character.. or make years of progression seem instantly meaningless.



Some change is more tolerable than others.



A restaurant says they're out of cantaloupe for your fruit salad, so they're changing your order to have extra melon... Tolerable.
They replace it with a cactus?... Not tolerable.



And somebody tell Proxy that No... We don't actually eat anything in the game.