Entitled Gamers and Other Logical Fallacies

I think video was somehow lacking, it tries to paint supporters of developers as wrong. But yeah, opinions are opinions and gaming forums certainly lack of understanding how they work. I think major issue is emotions.

FD handles such issues well. They know what they want from game, where they design lies, and where they are flexible to change or reconsider. I trust them. I also trust them they wanted NPCs to be more challenging. Happy it is done finally now.
 
Oops, I should have expanded the second quote to "This isn't fun, I'm losing stuff a lot now." Being that the difficulty increase has left many, many players behind the curve. How many? No-one knows, because forum polls are terrible and prone to being pawed at by both the confused and the agenda-burdened.



The AI changes are indeed unto that magnitude though. That which was once Diffculty 1 is now Difficulty 2, rather than going from 2 to 1 to 2 again via auto-rotation and shortcomings. Do you see? The glimpse of the Promised Land of eternal death and bloody sacrifice of credits and salt to the Elder God R'E'Buigh-Skriin is the new world, not the former world which has passed away. Now we all walk through the valley in the shadow of death, which is an Engineered 'Conda bearing down on us for the heresy of carrying limpets :O

https://ferrebeekeeper.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/limpets-490_39686_1.jpg
You guys have caused so many problems I can't even. I just can't even
The AI is back to an beta/alpha level of AI , just with a few extra tricks.
It when from AI disabled to AI enabled
 
Saw this video, and i immediately though of this place, especially with all the recent arguing about 2.1

thoughts?

Only on how wrong you are and especially how ironic it is that you put up that video and assume everyone agrees with you on 2.1/1.6
 
Only on how wrong you are and especially how ironic it is that you put up that video and assume everyone agrees with you on 2.1/1.6

tbh i see more people complaining about the recent 2.1 changes (whether it be regarding the AI changes or the RNG, etc) then i see people actually praising it. There are certainly more threads being made about this subject then there are threads saying that everything is just fine and dandy.

Wrong about what exactly? That there is no arguing on this forum about the recent changes made about 2.1? That would be simply untrue since there is an obvious increase of discourse since the update went live.
 
I guess the YouTuber is an objectivist. In the Ayn Rand style. He seems obsessed with logic, yet his examples are cherry picked too and just point out obvious stupidity among emotional forum posters. No examples of logically correct critism of needy gamers. Someone could if they took the time propose a logical argument against his veiled message. He disires power to get the changes he wants, assuming he is himself correct, thats why he made a You Tube vid. His video is in fact 2 major logical falcacies. Ad nawseum.. He drones on in a monotone fashon, repeats his talking point cliches over and over. 2. He tries to impress us with his knowledge of logic and technobable. The teacher must be right falacy. The arguent style is just like the right wing cult leader Stephan Molynuex uses. Sound elequent, deliberately try to confuse your listerner, confuse fact with opinion etc. etc. It's this sort of kidnapped mind that makes forums toxic.
 
tbh i see more people complaining about the recent 2.1 changes (whether it be regarding the AI changes or the RNG, etc) then i see people actually praising it. There are certainly more threads being made about this subject then there are threads saying that everything is just fine and dandy.

Wrong about what exactly? That there is no arguing on this forum about the recent changes made about 2.1? That would be simply untrue since there is an obvious increase of discourse since the update went live.

Negativity bias.

People who enjoy something very rarely feel the need to say anything about it.

Those that feel short-changed, wronged or ignored are much more likely to speak up.

Doesn't discount what those people are saying, but does discount using relative number of posts as a litmus for the success of the update.
 
Why over a half?

Exactly half of people are at or below average intelligence - by the definition of an arithmetic mean.

What's the arithmetic mean of 1, 2, 3 and 1,000,000. How many of those 4 numbers are below that mean? And what is a median value?

Sorry. Being pedantic and picky. :)
 
Last edited:
...
How do you logic your way out of that situation? You can't. It's all sophistry and histrionics.

oh man! i've gotta get the dictionary out again :D (added a smily so people understand i'm just being 'tongue and cheek' )

the video had some interesting points (some i've tried to point out myself) ty for the vid :)
 
no one ever convinces anyone else of anything on the internet using truth! OP and vid creator must be new here, the internet is like politics, the only way you get anywhere is by lying, hyperbolizing, and venomously attacking anyone who moderately opposes your position, am I right?

Your completely wrong! Only a snake would think that venom would get them anywhere. You sir, must be a snake! Therefor everything you say should not be trusted.
 
It strikes me as a logical fallacy that developers who have a certain goal and dream for how they want their game to function, wish to make that game just so, should accept any input, except if their economical situation suggests they have the choice between that or closing the game.

Yes, all the arguments presented can be, and often are, logical fallacies, but they are also, sometimes true. Sometimes, both are true.

Example:

If I understand the idea behind ED right, for example, it was the original design idea, that fleeing combat was supposed to be an integral part of surviving the ED universe. AI pilots were however not up to the task for a very long time, so players got used to PvE victory being possible most of the time. When this was finally corrected, player response was predictable: Many suddenly think it is too hard, especially since many have reached high ranking without facing proper AI pilots and now find themselves facing a suddenly ramped up AI. Basically, people have been thrown into a much harder environment without the benefit of scaling up the difficulty through progression.

(One solution to this, btw, is asking FD to reset your combat ranking to Harmless, something they do. Then you can work your way up through the difficulties and actually catch up.. only a suggestion that is possible to try, not saying people Should do this.)

Anyway, this caused people complaining about the sudden increase in difficulty, of course. We all know the replies from various other players, from "git gud" to "entitlement". The truth is that FD basically shouldn't have put the rank system in, if they had plans to change combat difficulty, until they actually changed it. Had that been the case, people would now all be "Harmless" and leveling, nobody facing killer elites until they were ready. At least, that is one possible way to see it.

Another way to see it, is that people have been accustomed to what they had, are expecting to be as successful in AI combat as they were and are complaining to have the game changed, so it becomes Elite: Not quite Dangerous again. This could be said to show some feeling of Entitlement to play the game they feel they paid for and enjoyed, which they feel have now been taken away from them. This in itself does not make entitlement bad or even an accusation. It is just a description of a feeling among those that are now struggling and quitting.

So, you see, both are true.. from a certain point of view.

The video at the beginning of this post is in itself a type of logical fallacy, as it tells you never to accept some sorts of arguments because they are always logical fallacies, which in itself is not always true. It also instructs its viewers correctly in how some terms can be abused, but also makes it sound like the complainers are always right. I say, make it sound like, because that is not what the video is actually saying, but there certainly are a lot of people who will understand it that way. Basically, the narrative, while good, is not clear enough, at least in my own opinion, which I expect people to disagree with.

Yes, do question dev decisions, always. It just helps to do it in a respectful and constructive way. Try avoiding "GAH! RAGEQUIT!" type of posts and do avoid oversimplifying what you are saying, as it can be misunderstood.

"I feel that it takes way too long time to find materials, because I would like to do other stuff than driving around looking for Arsenic for a week." is way more constructive and likely to be listened to, than "They ruined the game! Stupid RNG drops!" While they both convey the same meaning, I'm quite sure one of them would elicit more nasty responses from the community, than the other.

Also, telling the devs that they should scrap entirely the system they have in place, in favor of something else.. as if that is ever likely to happen. Instead... "The current system for finding materials, especially the rare ones, take too long. Could we please have slightly better drop rates?"... I'd say have a way better chance of affecting the game.

Yeah, yeah... I'm telling everyone what to do and how to do it, being a superior wiseguy. Sorry... I just wanted to share my thoughts on the matter. And completely apart from what I make it look like, it is just my opinion and could be 100% wrong.


tl;dr.. not my problem
 
Last edited:
Completely agree. People haven't always been the most diplomatic, but the conversation does tend to go:

"This sucks, it's impossible."
"Try this"
"I don't want to change. I shouldn't have to."

I don't think that's the case, for a couple of individuals who are repeat offenders on the forums maybe.
I tend to read, albeit thru the angst, and screaming and ranting,
'this sucks it's impossible!'
'try this'
'i am doing I am doing I am doing...!' and lead into frustrated rantings.
I believe a lot of people are genuinely trying, hence the rants, but the condescension from many of the more experienced players is rancid.
You might have the skill, the knowledge and the experience (which often carries over from more 'hardcore' gaming experiences such as the DCS series or Eve Online) but that doesn't necessarily make you a good teacher. Passing that information on is a skill and profession of its own.

I am crap at combat, I struggle with the npcs as it is, but my experience in Eve Online leads me to learn how to travel and how to evade and how understand ship loadouts, strengths and weaknesses. As it is I mainly explore and occasionally do rares or smuggling runs. Combat for me isn't necessarily fun. But other things are. As is the case for subset of ED players.

Threads about how stupid people are and levels of intelligence amongst the community (the measurement of 'intelligence' being a subjective and loaded experience confined to society and culture) are not exactly conducive for bringing people together.
 
Last edited:
Fixed your post. :D Because that is what you wanted to come across. Thank you for your deep insight. I could not have existed without. :eek:
"My own opinion is always more valid, superior and right than other people opinions"

Cheers Cmdr's
Want me to quote some of your recent posts where you do exactly what you just accused them of doing? Hypocrite.
 
Back
Top Bottom