Haplo wrote:
Sweeney wrote:
"Forced fairness" which is evidently how you are perceiving this, is not what I am promoting, and I have given you no reason to believe so.
You don't get what you're saying even to yourself:
Sweeney wrote:
... only that I personally (and some others) would be appreciative if they found a way BY CHOICE (capitalization for emphasis)
to reward those who support the game early on without giving them exclusive items ...
You are indeed promoting 'forced fairness' - by proxy. It's not a perception, it's a fact. You are asking (regardless of how politely you are doing it) a company to change their policy so that what you think is fair and just will take priority over and replace whatever was already in place. Because *you (and some others)* don't like it. Therefore, you are asking someone else to enact and enforce a particular policy *for you* regardless of other's feelings.
No matter how deferential or 'in earnest' you are portraying the request, the fact remains that by asking in the public forum you are by default attempting to influence a concept to your preference over others. Nothing wrong with doing it, but you can't disassociate yourself from the truth either.
By all means, plead your case to your hearts content. Maybe you will win some support somewhere. Just don't proclaim your case is something other than what it is.
It is no different than if I would say hey, I want a custom power set for $150 donation. I think anyone who donates at least $150 should get a custom power set that nobody else can ever have. That would be me requesting them to enact and enforce a particular policy *for me*. Which if they enacted would then be forced upon everyone.
So yes, everything we've discussed is very much related to the conversation. I guess I am so invested in this conversation because I was like you about 25 years ago. Probably a bit more extreme about things though. Kudos for your congeniality.
Best of luck with your mission. I honestly hope that for your own sake, you do not succeed.
Take Care
Oh, no, I already passed my more extreme phase and burned out.
I guess I did so a bit sooner than some do- I'm rather active on forums,
and people tend to be...well...I imagine you know.
Again, I stand by what I said. Nothing is being forced, nor is force being advocated.
If they want to offer exclusives, it is their freedom to do so, no matter how I feel about it.
Now, if I tried to make a law that made that illegal, that would be advocating "forced" fairness.
As for the playerbase, lots of people are going to be for exclusive items, lots of people are going to be against,
lots of people are going to have mixed views and feelings on the matter, and lots simply won't care either way.
It's not the player's choice how they ultimately end up doing things, and they can't appease everybody.
I brought up my concerns. I made my views on the matter known. I said my piece.
In the theoretical scenario they understood & agreed and decided to not offer exclusive items,
(and believe me, I'm not fooling myself, pretty much zero chance of that happening) it would not be "forced" fairness,
it would be fairness of their own volition by their own choice because they saw validity in what I was saying.
Of course, we could do this whole long winded "yes, no, yes, no" all week if they let us,
so how about we end it here?
Because that's all this is.
A back and forth of "Yes, it is" and "No, it isn't"
or "Yuh huh" and "Nuh uh"
Not exactly the most eloquent debate we could be having.