ED Doesn't care about player feedback.

[Skity]

ED is a phone game majority company, and have the mentally of running a phone game.
Which most phone games don't last a year, they get the money and go.
Screw the player feed backs, screw all recommendations and advice others give, they don't care as long as they get money

So if you want to continue throwing money at this company that gives absolutely no fuck towards their players, you money is wasted.
The whole point of cash charge is so that people like the game enough to charge. They want to support the game they like.
ED just threw all that and be like "Screw that, these dumass keep charging even if we treat them like dogs."

Go on a no-ET strike for a month, and if they agree to roll back then, that is a month of progress for players.
Good job ED, you doing us all proud.
Free us from this game, so we can all have a life without this addiction.
Let it dieee~ Let ittt dieee~~

[Zengeroff]

Players don't seem to care to exploit EDs game so why would they take your feedback seriously?

I wouldn't and don't.

[ionatwinkbottom]

I second this!

[Skity]

Because when people tell ED the exploit, this is what we get.
They don't give a damn about what we want as a solution, then, why should we behave?
Is like the parents are acting up and the kids are just following.

[Genie]

Players don't seem to care to exploit EDs game so why would they take your feedback seriously?

I wouldn't and don't.

They are the publisher not the player. Its the responsibility of the game developer to make sure that there are not easy exploits in the game that give an advantage to the player. Are you forgetting who is responsible for the exploit being on the server to begin with? This is a profoundly stupid thing to say. Why would they take player feedback? Because they are running a game. When ED censors threads of people who complain you think that is justified because SOME players exploit? I guess at this point when all the people who cared about changing the game have left, the only thing you can do is bend over

[Zengeroff]

They are the publisher not the player. Its the responsibility of the game developer to make sure that there are not easy exploits in the game that give an advantage to the player. Are you forgetting who is responsible for the exploit being on the server to begin with? This is a profoundly stupid thing to say. Why would they take player feedback? Because they are running a game. When ED censors threads of people who complain you think that is justified because SOME players exploit? I guess at this point when all the people who cared about changing the game have left, the only thing you can do is bend over

11/10 on the strawman.

[Genie]

11/10 on the strawman.

A strawman is misrepresenting someone's argument.. If you're referring to the question "When ED censors threads of people who complain you think that is justified because SOME players exploit?" is a question with a yes or no answer. If you think that something is irrelevant that does not mean it is a misrepresentation of your argument. As I never said "this is what you think" or "this is what you are trying to say". Don't really think arguing fallacies is the best idea when you don't even know what they mean.

[Zengeroff]

Uh, no.

I don't regard people who openly exploit in a game to be a playerbase worthy of the ear of a publisher. Herein lies the strawman.

ED puts the game out for the people who don't exploit it, not for people who do, so why would ED consider the opinions of people who openly cheat in their game?

Need a map next time?

[Genie]

Uh, no.

I don't regard people who openly exploit in a game to be a playerbase worthy of the ear of a publisher. Herein lies the strawman.

I think you forgot the part where you post where I've misrepresented your argument. Posting the point of your posts literally doesn't prove anything.
I understand your point, what I don't understand is where I've attempted to misrepresent your position, and you don't seem to know either since the only thing you can do is clarify your point and not just quote what I've said.
You don't know what a straw man is, even after I've explained it. Arguing with you over your own misuse of words is fruitless

[Zengeroff]

Here we go!

"They are the publisher not the player."

Non sequitur

"Its the responsibility of the game developer to make sure that there are not easy exploits in the game that give an advantage to the player."

Red herring to deflect from the issue. The issue is that the players broke the ToS.

"Are you forgetting who is responsible for the exploit being on the server to begin with?"

Another irrelevant red herring. Just because ED messed up, that doesn't give carte blanche to the player.

"Why would they take player feedback? Because they are running a game."

For players who don't violate their ToS.

"When ED censors threads of people who complain you think that is justified because SOME players exploit?"

There's a lot wrong with this one. ED can censor whomever they like on their platform. What I believe to be justified is irrelevant. I'm not ED.

"I guess at this point when all the people who cared about changing the game have left, the only thing you can do is bend over"

They clearly didn't care about it to begin with or they wouldn't have tanked the economy.

All of this coalesced into one giant counter argument that I wasn't even arguing. Thus, strawman.

This is about the error of the player. Not the error of ED.

I'm aware that ED messed up monumentally but that STILL doesn't mean you aren't responsible for breaking the ToS.

What you're doing is known as Tu Quoque. Instead of engaging with valid criticism you're trying to deflect it onto something else.

[Genie]

"The issue is that the players broke the ToS."
Unfortunately that is not the main point of what I was responding to, and is not even the topic of the issue of this thread.
I was responding to the idea that because players exploit the game, ED should in turn disregard feedback from the playerbase. That has nothing to do with upholding the TOS
The TOS does not state that your feedback is irrelevant if you violate the TOS.

Here we go!

All of this coalesced into one giant counter argument that I wasn't even arguing. Thus, strawman.

Unfortunately a strawman is literally claiming someone is arguing something they're not. It is quite literally taking someones position and misrepresenting it. It is not the idea that you believe their counterargument is irrelevant, or has nothing to do with you said. Like I said irrelevancy is not inherently a strawman. Just because I am arguing something that you believe may or may not have validity to the context of the discussion does not mean that I'm literally claiming you are saying something that you aren't. Thank you for proving my point about your misuse of logical fallacies.

[Zengeroff]

You weren't responding to any points I made. You were having an imaginary argument with yourself and injecting me into it.

It's incredibly easy to have a one sided argument.

Again, Tu Quoque. G'day.

[Genie]

You weren't responding to any points I made. You were having an imaginary argument with yourself and injecting me into it.

It's incredibly easy to have a one sided argument.

Again, Tu Quoque. G'day.

Still not a strawman, and still no strawman to be found : ). Gday to you too!!

[Zengeroff]

You arguing toward me against a position I don't hold is a strawman.

That is the strawman. Your entire argument was against a position I don't hold lol you were either arguing with yourself like a crazy person or were attempting to shoehorn me into your argument.

Can't see the forest for the trees, eh?

[Genie]

A strawman is literally taking someones position and REPRESENTING IT in a way that is different than what was said. I acknowledged your point, so how can I be using a straw man if I have yet to actually change the point of what you've said?
You even said that all of these things came together into a counter argument that you weren't making, that is not remaking someones position to be something else. If you don't think the points are relevant to the discussion that is different than me taking your position and misrepresenting your argument.
You unabashedly continue to support my idea that you do not understand the logical fallacy you are using.
Irrelevancy = / = Strawman.
You have not, and can not prove that I've taken your position and claimed it was something it wasn't : )

You arguing toward me against a position I don't hold is a strawman.

But did I claim that you hold the position????

[Skity]

Just as a salt to the wound, I am extremely mad about ED's decision. Because, I did not sell any item nor did I run BHT during that day coz I had the mentality of rollback.
With me doing that, I am being extremely punished for this. RNG Spaera pouches, RNG dragon eggs.
And with ED not removing the gold, the economy will be ruined after the 7 day ban. (Hell the economy is still ruined)

I, also, have take acknowledge that ED prob did not have a save to roll back on. (Hey you ED fanboy, you know who I am talking about)
Meanwhile, players are at fault for abusing the economy, there are no doubt in mind that ED have screwed up hard this time.
There will be no fix to this, unless they want to spend a week to track the gold. (Which I doubt)

We will just have to see after a few months. Should be long enough to tell if game going to die or economy goes back to normal.
(Still on no Eye-Credit/Total strike, even though I am convinced by many people to buy the VIP before patch. This killed it)

I have also read someone else's comment on another post. (Sorry I forgot your name)
1) ED did not back up a save. (their fault)
2) GM did not check post-update. (their fault)
3) ED did not test update pre-launch. (their fault)
4) Takes 4-5hours for a response, which prolongs the inflation. (their fault) (faq off with your "If player didn't abuse it, it won't be a problem". We live in the real world, get real. If police can arrive as the murderer about to strike, no killing done)