And I explained why your example was wrong.
Yes, a courthouse is accessible without a ramp. And adding a ramp would make it more accessible to people in a wheelchair.
But none of these things would affect the odds of winning your court case. But that’s what people are talking about here.
“Accessibility” relates to the difficulty of getting into the position to attempt the content. The difficulty of the content itself already has a name - “difficulty”.
But this is not the definition that people use. This is not the definition of accessible in any universe. Sorry you failed English.
No, you explained why my example doesn’t fit your limited world view. I literally just gave you an actual Mage Tower example you literally ignored.
AKA : Mage Tower, Demon Hunters vs Warriors for Xylem.
But in Mage Tower, “lack of ramp” does. And actually yes, you can be convicted as a no-show. So having the ramp there for a wheelchair means you could win your court case, vs being declared guilty while you’re still trying to crawl up the stairs.
No, that’s just your definition. Since you know, you’ve been rebutted by other people about it.
Actually, it’s documented in just about every dictionary.
Again, this is a useless argument, and I am the OP. I trust that since you view yourself quite highly, you can take the time to read the post. I am not advocating for a nerf…
They should just make it available year-round. Then 99% of the people complaining it’s too hard will immediately drop it. They’ll add it to their list of many other things they’ll just put off “for a later date”.
The hysteria over this (and it’s nothing less than hysteria, and quite ridiculous) is solely because of the limited time factor. It’s like the brutosaur madness all over again, where plenty of people didn’t care about the brutosaur at all… until it was being removed.
No, this is the dictionary definition of accessible. What you are talking about is difficulty, which is a different word, with an entirely different meaning.
If the actual issue is that it’s too hard, then just say that. Stop using the word “accessible” because you’re too afraid to say it’s too hard for you.
Or it’s because of actual issues with the account, like the aforementionned example of Havoc vs Arms in Xylem’s intermission, where Havoc takes in double the damage each tick, giving them much less time to navigate from bubble to bubble, while having less sustained damage than Arms and less precision in their movement.
There are very legitimate problems with this content and denying they exist is also “hysteria” as you put it.
No, the issue is that some specs have it harder, quite arbitrarily, than others on the same fight with no good reason as to why.
For a player playing only the spec for which its harder, it can be quite the accessiblity issue.
Mage Tower has always had peculiarities for spec vs spec. Always.
Not as glaring as literally having half the time to live to do the same mechanic. And unlike the previous iteration, gear can’t come in and pad this away.
My god, seriously? Still on this? Regardless of whatever imaginary dictionary you’re referencing, being “approachable”,
does imply ease. Someone being approachable means it’s less daunting, and thus easier to approach. I’ve already stated that you can use the term easy if it pleases you. If someone else intends to use the term accessible, that’s their prerogative. You both are aware of the implications, so what does it matter for you to enforce your strict vernacular on someone else?
That is one of the complaints, and it would tie in to the criticism of the difficulty being higher than expected based on prior experience. Given that Mage Tower wasn’t as “rare” in availability previously (do correct me if I’m mistaken), it would seem a much harsher experience when both time and skill constraints are implemented in conjunction. I would agree that a majority of complaints would dissipate given enough time to overcome the new skill requirements, but I think it’s rather condescending and unfair to think that most would drop it before given it honest attempts.
Because by using the term “accessible”, people are trying to imply that the reason they are failing is something beyond their control.
This is why it’s acceptable to use the term “accessible” when it comes to group content, because group content can very well be inaccessible if you aren’t in position to find a group to complete that content with.
Likewise, if the mage tower required some form of attunement that was not possible for some players to complete (eg if it required AOTC from SoD or something to even attempt it) then we could talk about lack of accessibility.
But using the term makes no sense when applied to a solo challenge with no prerequisites.
If you asked people without mentioning the words “mage tower” a few months ago, “Would you hurl yourself for hundreds of attempts at a difficult solo encounter in order to get a recolor of the Tomb of Sargeras gear (which, please note, is still readily available in-game)?”
Pretty sure that would be an overwhelming “no”.
The people complaining about the mage tower don’t want the rewards, and they don’t want to do it for the challenge. They’re just freaking out because it’s only available for a few weeks… THIS TIME (and will then come around again, but that never seems to come up…).
Or again, as you keep ignoring : because it’s massively unbalanced and unfair. Not just “well this spec struggles a bit more because their slow is 50% instead of 60%”, not actual “Why does this tick for 1500 on my 6.5k health pool when it ticks for 750 for this other class that doesn’t have less defensives or healing than I do in the phase this happens ?”.
Making the tower permanent doesn’t magically make Havoc DH be a fair and balanced experience compared to Arms Warrior. It has nothing to do with the kit.
To be fair, Mage Tower was rather highly anticipated, though at the time, I don’t think most, if any, expected hundreds of attempts. PTR guides were written and indicated a moderate challenge, as with expectations from legion-era completions (with item level increments). You would probably be right that the answer would indeed be “no” if asked that question. The issue I’m bringing attention to is the fact that there is a mismatch between what the question was, and what it should be, and the resultant fallout, and more important letting the flaming continue without guidance or clarifications. It was a design, implementation, and communication mishandling in my opinion, but has been left, and still, to fester.
I’d agree that the challenge aspect has clearly went out of the window, but I would say the rewards are part of the fear of missing out. Just about every thread that criticizes the time constraint do indeed mention that it would come up… after a quarter - half a year, for a period of a week. That is… a steep constraint for many.
I’m sorry, but nothing about the word accessible assigns any form of culpability outside of the way it is used. Instead of what you and I think is acceptable, I’m just going to conclude this by quoting… Cambridge. Is Cambridge satisfactory? Do let me know if they aren’t.
accessible
adjective
UK /əkˈsesəbl/ US
able to be easily got or used
We good? I do hope we’re good. I really don’t want to carry this asinine argument on.
You’re right. But it removes that demon that’s gotten into so many peoples’ heads that they HAVE TO DO THIS NOW even they though don’t even care about the challenge OR the reward.
Yes, but frankly, it should both be fixed IRT complete balance lunacies and made permanent because there’s no reason this needs to be limited availability.
Yes, that is what accessible means.
But what you are talking about is not that.
I am sorry your grasp of the English language is so poor.
Intelligent rebuttal.
In Legion?
So this is all because of wowhead writing guides to inflate their click count?
(I’m being serious, here. The extent to which so many people have COMPLETELY FREAKED OUT over rewards they don’t even want is ridiculous.)