Issue 19 is WIN, but no proliferation?

Just to mutate this topic further, it's Scarlet Shocker's fault, not mine. I gave an example which clearly refuted her point, but as people are wont to do she/he felt the need to argue with the EvilGeko.

This lizard can't run from a fight. Sadly, I've turned into this guy.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war...ssrebutter.htm

Aww, it's okay EG, I forgive you.

lol Happy to be of service.

"You got to dig it to dig it, you dig?"
Thelonious Monk

fixed, as they say.

Is that really what you got out of my post? nothing else?. your post postulates that the devs have been wrong and should listen to players. objectively true, but wat iw as trying tog et across is that the players say a large number of things, many of which would be unmitigated disasters for the game, and the signal to noise ratio is a great deal lower than you are claiming. Yes they have listened in the past to some ideas and made the game better, thats one reason we are occasionally happy, but the truth is that they are not designing by forum committee, they are fallible, as are the fans, but the kicker is that the fans generally (with some notable exceptions) do not have working knowledge of the industry. I would be of limited capacity to give advice to you about law, and you probably couldn't help me much in assembling a complex wire harness.We can give occasionally useful advice as to how their decisions could be made more fun, or more user friendly from an end user perspective, but people overstep that and begin to demand that the devs essentially take dictation of how to make the game and have rather large tantrums when their vision differs from the posters, then they have forgotten how these things work, and really arent helping make a productive dialogue with the devs.

Ultimately their careers and the continuation of the game are dependent on making sustainable decisions on the game, and while there is room for SOME collaboration between the players and the people who make them, reasonably we dont have their long term financial forecasts, we dont have their internal management nor interactions with ncsoft and we have a very limited understanding of the game, as a whole. our points are, at best layman's opinions. So to reiterate my point hoping second time is a charm here, the devs, while not infallible bear a great deal more responsibility for the game than we do, so they really do have to be more realistic about what can be done than we would have the required information to make a informed comment on.

and for a lighter point, you got proliferation more recently than i got a new free costume part (technically tails were an animated existing costume part, the slot was new, though, i concede) so get in line

I'm sorry, I see no evidence that they listened to a "bunch of PvE players" in regards to i13. I can't imagine the opinions of PvE players would honestly result in the system so unlike PvE that we currently have. Best I can tell, they must have consulted a group of rhesus monkeys.

i generally use GIMP. It works well and costs less than Photoshop.

This i agree with. The implementation is nothing a PvE player would have suggested. While they may have listened to some PvE players' complaints about getting ganked constantly on squishies the solution that was used is nothing most PvE players would've wanted.

Edit: To be honest i almost think the Devs saying "l2p or don't pvp" might've been a better solution. Not that i hate every single aspect of the i13 pvp changes, but the total package... bleh.

I honestly think the best solution to the PvP problems pre-i13 would have been simply removing the missions that force PvE players to go talk to the PvP contacts. No longer being forced to interact with PvP except when they explicitly chose to would have solved most of the complaints. (Remapping the Villain Accolades away from PvP badges would also have been necessary.)