to think the game is rigged is valid but to assert that it is rigged without proof isnt, just like it isn’t logical to say that it isn’t rigged if you cant prove it but you certainly can argue against the opposition.
no? then you must be emotionally dead.
i dont disagree, but rigging could come in the form of reward or frustration. im not a psychologist but if certain emotions cause someone to spend money then there could be incentive to implement a certain apparatus.
arguments for and against are both valid until proven otherwise.
There’s a flaw in this line of reasoning, and I’d like to illustrate it with an example. I am going to make the claim that I am in fact NOT a human typing this, but actually an extremely gifted duck using my beak to type.
Now, you cannot PROVE that this is false. And yet, the logical thing to do is to assume that I am a person and not, in fact, a very clever duck.
There are a million different assumptions we all must make in our daily life in order to function. So many of them on facts that cannot be DEFINITIVELY proven, yet to accept anything other than the null hypothesis without evidence would be absurd.
When somebody makes a claim and there is insufficient evidence to support it, the only logical thing to do is to act as if the null is true.
assumptions are not facts, there is no flaw in my logic but that doesn’t mean I don’t make decisions based on assumptions, but i certainly wouldn’t pass my assumptions of as fact if I couldn’t prove them. would you? because thats what is happening here, from both sides.
That’s nice of you to say. How’d you know? At any rate, what I meant is philosophically, it’s impossible to know anything with total certainty. I don’t know that Hearthstone isn’t rigged in the way you say it is. I also don’t know that there’s a yet-to-be discovered teapot orbiting Mars, but it’s unlikely.
Also, it’s worth noting that I’m not Madmax; there’s no need to give me any snark.
Well, if I accused you personally of asserting it’s definitely rigged, I apologize.
Because you asked me if I knew without a doubt that Hearthstone’s not rigged. I don’t. I can only say that it’s unlikely Hearthstone is rigged because if it were it’s extremely unlikely that websites, like HSReplay, would not have demonstrated this.
I believe certainty is unattainable, and instead everything falls on a spectrum of likelihood. ‘I think, therefore I am,’ akin to what you’re saying, might make sense. Unfortunately, beyond that you are, everything external, only more-than-likely exists or is true.
I meant to imply previously that I can agree with that.
But, back to Hearthstone and rigging. It’s not been proven to be rigged, and it isn’t possible to prove that it isn’t, only that it might be unlikely. I believe it is unlikely to be rigged because no data-recording websites, like HSReplay, have demonstrated it to be rigged, which they would be able to do quite easily if it were.
So, I am essentially agnostic, and leaning toward Hearthstone not being rigged. But, it can be.
Alright, I’m going to quote Descartes here to prove a point. Now, his comment is specifically about moral certainty, but it is relevant to illuminating why I object to your position. “Moral certainty is certainty which is sufficient to regulate our behaviour, or which measures up to the certainty we have on matters relating to the conduct of life which we never normally doubt, though we know that it is possible, absolutely speaking, that they may be false.”
On a related note, the definition of truth I find best is “that which comports to reality as adjudicated by predictive power.”
So, from this clarification of what is meant by certainty and what is meant by truth, do you understand why it is reasonable to assert that the matchmaking is not rigged, but to assert that it IS rigged is not reasonable? Despite my numerous attempts, nobody in the “rigged” camp has EVER managed to provide me a clear-enough idea of what the rigging would entail that I could even MAKE useful predictions, let alone test them.
You are trying to use very unhelpful and impractical interpretations of truth and certainty to generate a false equivalence fallacy. The fact stands that, so far, none of the data aggregate or analysis sites have noticed ANY signs of foul play in Hearthstone’s MMR system. That by itself doesn’t eliminate the possibility for rigging, but it is ALWAYS correct to accept the model with the best predictive power until a model with better predictive power is presented.
All of this is why it is CURRENTLY correct to assert that Hearthstone is not rigged and not the other way around. For all we know, gravity could stop working tomorrow, but it would be insanity to act as if you expect gravity to stop working tomorrow.
If you want I can link you to the patent. But here is a simple article explaining their patent and its purpose pcgamer dot com/activision-wins-patent-that-uses-matchmaking-to-make-you-want-to-buy-stuff/
Opening line In short, it’s an idea to engender envy at teammates’ or opponents’ gear through the matchmaking algorithm itself
That’s nice of you to say. How’d you know? At any rate, what I meant is philosophically, it’s impossible to know anything with total certainty. I don’t know that Hearthstone isn’t rigged in the way you say it is. I also don’t know that there’s a yet-to-be discovered teapot orbiting Mars, but it’s unlikely.