And I got my dragonite and astral tokens back, MULTIPLE TIMES OVER…
thank you.
2 Likes
Very well said. Thank you.
In the end, I think they exceeded our (extremely low) expectations, but totally failed to appease anyone on the edge of quitting the game.
This was always going to be about the psychology of the situation.
I’m most disappointed that they didn’t really apologise, pulling back from a true mea culpa by claiming this was the first such incident. It wasn’t. It was just the first one where there wasn’t any alternative to a roll-back.
1 Like
I think what I was asking for was totally reasonable. It would actually have returned to almost every player everything that they lost without any significant impact on the game’s economy. (The latter is why I did the comparative calculations.)
In a court of law, I have screenshots that would prove more than half of what I lost, and thousands of screenshots that would back up my reasoning for the rest.
Also, a correction: I adjusted Gem awards from 37 to 18.2, in line with what I thought the tribute percentages were. As described in Inf+2’s version 9.2 pre-release post, there was a bug that means I should have used a number closer to 34.
In Mathematics, we try to set bounds on things. I chose to estimate the likely losses of an active, end-game player, as a conservative upper bound. Then I pointed out that giving that to everyone would: satisfy those who did more; make happy those who were in the end-game; and thrill all other players. All without actually having a significant effect on the in-game economy.
How would you select a “reasonable” upper bound on what people lost?
1 Like
Thanks for your kind words.
As for being overly invested in a game, that is a problem that I definitely experience. Indeed, I had to quit Diablo III completely when they added extra equipment slots to followers, because inventory management was already causing me significant mental health issues.
Thing is, I’m not alone.
Many people absolutely DO invest emotionally in their games, in the same way that neurotypical people invest in communities.
This game is likely as big a part of my life as it is the lives of any of the developers. Of course, that’s unhealthy. But before I give up (as I gave up to bullies at school), I’m going to keep fighting for what I think is right – and that includes what others tell me about their own feelings for the game.
For now, my tiny action is to stop buying Campaign Passes. I’ve already paid $600+ for this game. Maybe I’d rather replace a frozen meal with a fresh bowl of noodles, for one day every 11 weeks. That certainly sounds more satisfying than chasing rewards I can obtain otherwise, with patience.
2 Likes
This would be fair, EXCEPT…
Many of us have been warning that something like this would happen, for a very long time. Not directly, I’ll admit. But we have been asking them to improve specific parts of their QA processes – often in great detail – and they seem to ignore it all.
So, I’m calling any pain amongst Inf+2 and 505 entirely self-inflicted.
They took the chance to ignore likely sources of trouble, and they rolled a 1.
1 Like
Thanks for doing the comparison!
I was burned out by the time I spent on my earlier calculations and posts.
I hope I helped increase what we got. I feel they maybe understood at least a part of the gist of the points I was trying to make. But honestly, who knows.
(Sirrian still doesn’t acknowledge that he got the calculations for the Amanithrax bungle wrong, back in 2019. Apparently, reading my formulae for that wouldn’t be a good use of his time. 
)
1 Like
Closing these threads.
2 Likes