|
beejay posted:I have never heard “free things are bad because there’s too many of them” before. Quite an interesting take. I've heard it a bunch in recent years and always from gamers. It's hilarious given when looked at in the context of modern video game retail practices.
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 06:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
I don’t mind the HOTS system. I played about 700 hours of Dota 2 and didn’t really play all that many heroes all things considered. New heroes are difficult. I dislike HOTS’s kind of thing they’re doing where new heroes are brutally overpowered more often than not but I think in general it is a positive evolution of the MOBA genre. I think my favourite gameplay change is how health orbs become available to all after a few seconds. I think it has really improved the laning phase.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
 thank god
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 07:28
|
|
|
I see Varian is 50% in Gems this week. He always seems OP to me (when on opposing teams). Is it a good idea to spend gems on heroes? And is Varian worth it? Edit: Actually I have 960 gems - a 1 month stimpack is 1000. Is there a way aside from IRL money to get 40 gems? That seems a better use for them. kaesarsosei fucked around with this message at 10:32 on Oct 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 09:57
|
|
|
Only way to get gems that I know of is to level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 13:45
|
|
|
kaesarsosei posted:I see Varian is 50% in Gems this week. He always seems OP to me (when on opposing teams). Is it a good idea to spend gems on heroes? And is Varian worth it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
beejay posted:I have never heard "free things are bad because there's too many of them" before. Quite an interesting take. The Paradox of Choice is probably a thing. It doesn't affect everyone universally, but for me I definitely struggle to make a decision when faced with an overwhelming number of options. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
It's like going to a cheesecake factory and seeing the 12 page book of a menu vs going to a restaurant with a limited menu. Studies show people are more satisfied with their choice with the smaller menu because they don't second guess it and feel more confident they made the right choice. Many people are like that, which is why I brought it up when talking about a limited roster. I think the true crime in hots is that heroes take too long to unlock. Those 20 hero bundles should be easier to get and heroes cost too much, imo. Everyone's different though so there's definitely merit to them all being free, too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
So either I'm going to ask for an ARAM queue or the return of the hero bundles. Which do y'all think is better?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
Demote NA to minor region
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Kith posted:So either I'm going to ask for an ARAM queue or the return of the hero bundles. Which do y'all think is better? bundles
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Kith posted:So either I'm going to ask for an ARAM queue or the return of the hero bundles. Which do y'all think is better? Between those two options? Bundles
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:25
|
|
|
Yeah after thinking about it I realized that there isn't much of a contest between the two. Bundles it is!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Would it be possible to ask for an ARAM bundle? It's like buying a lootbox with only heroes in it, but they're all random! It costs $20 and has no dupe protection, yaaay!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
All Heroes are free, and the free rotation is instead Heroes with extra XP gains to incentivize people to play them
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Dire Human posted:All Heroes are free, and the free rotation is instead Heroes with extra XP gains to incentivize people to play them This would make me ridiculously happy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Dire Human posted:All Heroes are free, and the free rotation is instead Heroes with extra XP gains to incentivize people to play them I am 100% behind this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Yeah that would be amazing. They could then move mounts onto gold instead of heroes, and they can let skins be the scummy thing that might cost you money or force you to grind shards. They could even let some mounts have both gold and shard costs in some cases. This would also mean that they don't have an incentive to constantly pump out new heroes since they wouldn't be a big source of income anymore. Instead skins, mounts, voice packs, and stimpacks (and the loot chests they drop in) would be where people spent money, assuming they spent money at all. I think that would be way fairer. Ort posted:It's like going to a cheesecake factory and seeing the 12 page book of a menu vs going to a restaurant with a limited menu. Studies show people are more satisfied with their choice with the smaller menu because they don't second guess it and feel more confident they made the right choice. The issue with the menu analogy is that eating at Cheesecake Factory isn't free. People hesitate there because they are worrying about getting their money's worth. There is a real cost associated with choosing. Mostly financially, but also in opportunity, as once you have eaten, you will be unable to eat there again for some time since you will no longer be hungry. And maybe you don't live nearby, or there are always long lines, etc. A game that has a big roster of characters is completely different. And while I don't doubt that even this could cause problems for some people, I really don't think game companies should be designing around such a rare mental issue. A person might perceive having so many characters to be a big problem for them, but that is purely their perception since there is actually no real cost to choosing some characters over others. The only thing they might waste is their time, but they could have a bad time playing literally any character, and also how are they choosing to play this particular game vs others to begin with? There are tons of games they could choose to play. It isn't a really good fit for the phenomena, which itself has been challenged anyway. Decision Fatigue and Analysis Paralysis are also different from The Paradox of Choice as well. Decision Fatigue seems to mostly be a thing that affects people whose lifestyle tends to have them making many large decisions very frequently. Analysis Paralysis seems very similar to the Paradox of choice, but seems to more generally be about people overthinking things which causes them to waste massive amounts of time when trying to decide. It isn't about decision anxiety, but rather describes situations in which the process of analyzing a decision ends up preventing the decision from being made, or ends up taking so long that the resulting choice was now somehow worth less than it would have been if it had been made sooner. Basically taking so long to make a choice that you make things worse in some way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
Dietrich posted:The Paradox of Choice is probably a thing. It doesn't affect everyone universally, but for me I definitely struggle to make a decision when faced with an overwhelming number of options. Well thank god everyone has to pay or grind then to help save those poor people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
It should also probably be stated that assuming Paradox of Choice is "real", it still is just an expression of an anxiety disorder, and should be treated as such. As a result, it would be laughable to suggest games should have fewer options to aid people suffering from this rare form of anxiety disorder. There are plenty of other anxiety issues that can also make playing games, even specifically HotS, difficult.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Well, calling it an anxiety disorder or a mental issue is a bit silly. It's fine to say that it can be an issue for some people, but I don't think it's entirely valid as a justification for this business model. Buying a character in HOTS is just as much of an issue and even more important of a decision than just playing a wrong character for a match in DOTA 2, because you're permanently stuck with the character you bought and sometimes it gets nerfed into the ground, screwing over the player in the process without any recourse. How is that not an issue that would affect people predisposed to this type of behaviour?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Zwiebel posted:Well, calling it an anxiety disorder or a mental issue is a bit silly. The Paradox of Choice is literally describing an anxiety issue. It is a mental problem. If someone is legitimately made uncomfortable by being presented with options, to the point that they willingly avoid having options, then they have a mental issue. It helps if you let go of the negative connotation that mental health issues, such as anxiety, have in our society. It isn't a big deal to call it what it is if you accept that millions of people are affected in someway by these kinds of issues. But a fully healthy person should not be having some kind of negative emotional response when presented with options in a video game. But you do bring up an excellent point about how gating the characters behind a paywall of some sort doesn't actually remove the choice. Unless the person in question actively avoids unlocking characters. It also goes to show why the stance of "too many options", in this context, is irrational. Like I mentioned before, what about the decision of which free to play game to play? If someone is having an hangup at the character select screen, then they have some stuff they need to work through, and any therapist worth a drat would probably point out the inconsistency in their own behavior to help them realize that their anxiety is not rooted in any legitimate concern. They would all ask them what they think will happen if they choose the wrong character, and then follow up with what would happen if they played a different game instead, to try to narrow down where the anxiety was coming from. Source: Me being recently diagnosed with anxiety and having mental health professionals ask these exact kinds of questions to help work through the crap. ToastyPotato fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Oct 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:But a fully healthy person should not be having some kind of negative emotional response when presented with options in a video game. the negative emotional response is just "i don't like this", and normal healthy people are allowed to have that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Kerrzhe posted:the negative emotional response is just "i don't like this", and normal healthy people are allowed to have that. That is not the specific negative emotional response I am talking about if people are going to bring up stuff like The Paradox of Choice. Not liking something is literally not the same thing as saying "I actually have difficulty making choices when presented with too many options and here is scientific term for my problem."
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
I don't like making decisions but I also don't like people making decisions for me. I'm an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Regardless of rationale, ‘restrict my choices (indeed, restrict everyone’s choices!) because I am bad at decision making’ is poor form, given some people then end up restricted who don’t have that issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:Regardless of rationale, ‘restrict my choices (indeed, restrict everyone’s choices!) because I am bad at decision making’ is poor form, given some people then end up restricted who don’t have that issue. Agreed, but I think it is clear we live in a pretty selfish world, so tons of people see absolutely nothing wrong with the suggestion, which is probably why I have seen it be made for years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
Schneider Inside Her posted:I don’t mind the HOTS system. I played about 700 hours of Dota 2 and didn’t really play all that many heroes all things considered. New heroes are difficult. Locking heroes behind an insane grind or real money and then making the newest heroes be broken is a 'positive evolution of the moba genre' or do you mean hots in general
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
I mean its turbo disingenuous to go 'they make new heroes OP so they can charge money for them' when almost all the reworks for 2000 gold characters have also been massive power buffs
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I mean its turbo disingenuous to go 'they make new heroes OP so they can charge money for them' when almost all the reworks for 2000 gold characters have also been massive power buffs It overall feels more like anything that comes their way lately is coming out too strong yes, but new characters especially so, since the thing is before their reworks Raynor was in the dumps forever and Azmo was mostly meme pick-y, so huge power buffs weren't entirely unwarranted to get them back up to speed after being rear end for so long, but then you get things like Mephisto and Mal'ganis who are broke as a joke and then plopped down behind 15k -> 10k price tags, which for just how busted they feel, comes off kind of rotten.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I mean its turbo disingenuous to go 'they make new heroes OP so they can charge money for them' when almost all the reworks for 2000 gold characters have also been massive power buffs
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
 good matchmaking
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
That doesn't look so bad, does it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
Charles Bukowski posted:That doesn't look so bad, does it? I mean one of the teams was three plats, a silver and a diamond whereas the other was three plats a silver and a GM edit: I shouldn't complain because we somehow won
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
SirSamVimes posted:I mean one of the teams was three plats, a silver and a diamond whereas the other was three plats a silver and a GM I'm glad they lost because it's always GMs I see abusing the matchmaking trying to get easy wins
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
SirSamVimes posted:I mean one of the teams was three plats, a silver and a diamond whereas the other was three plats a silver and a GM Aren't those two pros on the left?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
Orthodox Rabbit posted:I'm glad they lost because it's always GMs I see abusing the matchmaking trying to get easy wins Or maybe it's just them wanting to play with their friends? Because two of those in a party are people in a team, both on their main account. Lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
We are in the Pro Goon clan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
lucifirius posted:Aren't those two pros on the left?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 07:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
Dietrich posted:The Paradox of Choice is probably a thing. It doesn't affect everyone universally, but for me I definitely struggle to make a decision when faced with an overwhelming number of options. That argument is about shopping choices and the anxiety of missed opportunities, so I don't think it applies in the hypothetical situation because the heroes would be free and already owned by you. If anything, the paradox should present itself in the current model because you have to choose which heroes to purchase from an ever-growing roster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2018 09:57
|
|
