How about this?
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
05-04-2011, 08:36 AM
Originally Posted by
Continued from above...
Which solution, in the long-term, serves the
1.) Change (or nerf, if necessary) a power, ability, item, or series of such, to pursue a level of balance that is as optimal as can be reasonably achieved?
Acknowledging that change can be unpleasant, but, in the aftermath, adaptation occurs and the end result can be positive.
2.) Completely overhauling the system, whether through blanket reductions in effectiveness or blanket modifications of effects of powers, abilities, items, or series of such; whether through the proposed -25% alteration, or some elsewise-determined conditional?
If change is bad, does that not make Option #2 the greater of two evils?
In any case, I do appreciate the willingness to dialogue on the issue, as there have been far too many voices on
sides of the Community that have merely tried to shout down those that prefer a different aspect of the game, and that only serves to divide the Community and leaves the Devs on their own, unable or unwilling to listen to feedback that might benefit everyone, at the risk of inciting the negativity that appears, sadly, all-too-often on these Forums.
Very insightfull arguments, all. And you asked the 64 dollar question at the end that I'm sure I, or even Cryptic, doesn't have the answer to.
These NERFs/CHANGES seem to happen over here alot. If we take new FaW as an example, appearently, Cryptic thought that FaW was underpowered and there was a reason (probably more than just the spam we all talk about here) for it to be "upped" in the fashion that they did. Due to the complexity of FaW and the 4000 items it affects, time will be needed for any CHANGE to it's processes back, down, or whatever they plan to do with it now. That allows for use and the playerbase to get used to it and it becomes the new status quo. Then, months later, a new status quo is introduced and more rage/quit, more complaining, more etc etc etc happens, all on the exact same issue. How many times have we seen just FaW incur CHANGES now? Same for klings.
As for SWG, there seems to be a point that the masses will no longer accept CHANGE or a point in which CHANGE means that the game you subscribed to is no longer the game your playing. As with the history of SWG, that should be a concern to any developer now. Just how much a game developer can get away with seems to be personal decision with every player. One will adapt, the next will quit over the same exact thing.
I don't have the "answer" but if they continue as has became the normal, Cryptic does run a risk. Best case senario is to have "us" come up with something, along with "them", and try to get a consensus. That seems a very hard thing to do with any game and the players.
On another note, as you sound like you played SWG for a bit yourself, SOE/Sony computer systems have been hacked. They currently have ALL their games down as well as all the forums and have been down for a few days. It appears that their entire database has been stolen, names, addresses, emails, DoB, passwords, etc and even some credit card numbers from 2007 that they have found so far compromised. There has been suit filed in Federal Court for regress against Sony already and it is seeking "class" status for damages associated with the "hack". If they had your info, it might be wise to keep an eye on your credit ratings, etc. I'm also going to be canceling the cards I used with SOE and re-issuing them. They have a press release out and you can find it at the station for what info they have made public so far.