Ranger Archive
Thread: Ranger skill point analysis
Phenix1050 wrote:
DaveG wrote:
(There you go, this was an example of qualified negativity.)
and that makes all the difference.
Listen, getting slapped in the face and saying "thank you" is not my style. In a situation like that, you can point to a specific incident and say that it was bad. You can judge it negaively. That's not the problem. The problem is when you take that slap in the face and start saying "nobody likes me, everybody hates me, i'll never have a friend, etc.". It's that absolute (and unqualified negativity which is completely useless for getting change accomplished. A yes-man who never says something is wrong is useless as well. But given a choice between an overly negative person and an overly positive person, I'll take positivity, because while they both may accomplish nothing, the positive person at least has a good attitude. Whiny people get hard to listen to...fast.
In the end, we must all use our judgement. Are there things wrong with Ranger? Of course...but everybody knows that. There's no need to re-hash it. and when we turn our broken skills into wildly outlandish statements like " the devs don't care what we think" and stuff like that...well, we start to sound like a lot of the kids on the Jedi forum. Not my idea of role models. Nobody is saying critisism is bad. Looking at the game in an open-minded manner often neccesitates a bit of negative reaction. Such as "this system is foolish" or "this skill was broken in the last patch, please fix it." You can look at this game and go "from their history, SOE is likely going to have us wait for our fixes. That's a whole lot different than saying "the devs don't care about us, they're never going to fix us.
Absolutes are rarely (if ever) right. So yes, being positive can be bad. But if a person can objectively look at the situation and see the problems, positivity is more effective. I'd rather work with a guy who can see the problems and says "together, we can fix this" than work with a guy who sees all the good things but still says "we're doomed, we'll never fix it."
Thats's what I meant by Negativity is the antithesis of productivity.
I think Obi-wan got it right: "Only the Sith deal in absolutes."
Anyway back to topic: IMHO, Given that the devs are only doing bugs fixes, I think that we should just concentrate on getting them to fix our bugs. (Owen has set up an "issues" thread for this too).
DaveG wrote:
Okay, so Jedi get more attention because they're one of the largest populations. Wasn't Jedi meant to be one of the rarest and most hard-to-get professions? "Things that make ya go HMMMMmmmmmmm".
Anyway back to topic: IMHO, Given that the devs are only doing bugs fixes, I think that we should just concentrate on getting them to fix our bugs. (Owen has set up an "issues" thread for this too).
Without a hard cap (which is a very bad idea for something that pulls a large number of people to the game), it's almost impossible to have a system for Jedi that will keep the numbers low and still be fun (note: this is a game so the fun part is actually fairly important). In the end, I think the Devs thought about it and ended up trying to make things fun for the majority of people and worry slightly less about continuity. While it causes some continuity problems, every character in this game is meant to be one of the elite. In the movies, a significant portion of the "elites" (i.e. major plot characters) were Force sensitive (knowingly or unknowingly). I think the Devs and LucasArts decided to make it slightly easier and more fun to get what most people wanted--it keeps people happier.