If you truly do not see what I meant, then I will illustrate.
I do not hold the OP to the same standards as I hold you, or that's how things would go: you are a Larian employee. I don't think you should be satisfied by "making logical sentences". You aren't a robot, and a big part of a public figure is managing the emotions of the masses.
OP throws an emotional tantrum (or alternatively, a rant), which you robotically rebuke at first (mostly fine except your comment about what is felt as moronic) and aknowledge only partly at second after some "harsh" comment which simultaneously attack OP's intelligence and strawman his position.
Had you "aknowledged" his point at first (then rebuked or showed how to alleviate the problems the OP felt), it *might* have gone differently. As you said, considering OP opening abrasive tone, it's a big if (I mostly agree with you, I'm just commenting because it's not the first time I see you doing that, I think you are generally very helpful, and I try to return the wagon by pointing something I consider a problem in how you adressed this thread). But reading your answer is extraordinary: you expect from the OP some human understanding (you shouldn't, especially not after attacking his intelligence) at some point while mostly exempting yourself from it (you yourself aknowledge only late that no game is perfect, but alas after attacking OP, and still being partially aggressive while doing so anyway). It should be the other way around.
The OP is complaining about how there is NO way to group heal/auto heal after a fight. Factually, it's wrong: you pointed to the hydro master spell (there's also the adept spell). You also add that auto-healing can be perceived as moronic and dumbing down the game as it removes consequences to badly managing a fight. But to be perfectly honest, Larian's game is guilty of exactly that (I'm fine with it): it's a game without much consequence when one doesn't optimally manage a fight: there are group heal spells that cost nothing in term of in game resource (no ingame time limit, no mana, etc...). All that you lose is time, which becomes the next contention point: you can't say that a game that makes you lose 15 seconds to group heals is more dumbed down that a game that makes you lose 3 minutes. At that point, you strawman the OP as someone who thinks incurring strategical penalty for badly managing a fight (not D:OS case) is moronic.
On top of it, you borrow OP's abrasive expression. Should you stoop to his level?
Who cares that "some" people think that auto-healing is moronic? Should I mention that some people think Larian Studio is the worse game studio?
Do you imply that all opinions are equally valid?
Yeah I've seen too the people complaining that the RPS game is rigged because of the absence of tie. It is precisely why it didn't escape me. It is immersion breaking (people perceive it's not a well simulated RPS > they don't think anymore they play a RPS game). But it's not that big of a deal, so people don't complain. Which is my point. This RPS rigging and the auto healing debate thing are both choices of comfort/abstraction vs immersion. It is the same principle. But a different balance. You should not argue on the principle.
"Pointing out that someone's continued abusive language and/or behaviour (when they are insulting the intelligence of others) does not exactly present their own intelligence / maturity in the best light is the least invasive way to address the matter." is actually irrelevant, for several reasons.
It's not addressing the matter at all, merely focusing on the (poor) form rather than content. If there is no content, that would be the primary issue. If you are really affected by words and tone and immature form, then engage in tone policing (I wouldn't do that personally but to each his own). But to mirror poor form is... poor form itself.
Not only would you be unsuitable at your position if you thought that people ranting are really making judgements about people (it shouldn't be taken at face value, nor be adressed logically at the surface level), but is your job convincing stupid people that they are stupid (if that's even doable)?
If you really think there's next to nothing to bring back an angry customer to your cause, then you are writing for the public (us). You are engaging in some form of PR. Attacking your customer intelligence, even if you are right, is just poor taste unless you are entertaining.
I think that, as far as the form is concerned, your statements are okayish. But you clearly were aggressive in your second post (you let yourself being affected by OP's abrasiveness). Your first post is okayish but honestly could have done way better (or just abstain). Nobody's perfect, but you can improve.
I did not say that you alienated directly some group of people (said anything about them).
I tried to say that when you take a side when it isn't even needed in the first place (in this case, SECONDARY developer choice), and while doing so poorly attack somebody on the other side (even if that person is poorly attacking others), and while you are yourself representative of a company, you WILL alienate people because they naturally tend to take sides.
Do not borrow any retarded comment about what's moronic in auto-healing or timesinks as it may make it appear that you might agree with it.
Last edited by Chrest; 23/04/16 11:03 PM.
