if the above is true, how can
also be true?
What gives?
9 Likes
Instance limit and taking action against an account for exploitation are two different things.
11 Likes
“Never want to” doesn’t mean they won’t. Just means they try not to but It occasionally will happen when needed
4 Likes
If they truly never wanted to, they never would. It’s pretty simple.
“Take action” means, in this case, muting or banning someone - taking direct, targeted action against a specific account.
2 Likes
Not at all. Think of all the things in life that you’d never want to do but end up doing
1 Like
Those two things are completely different, thats what gives. This is also why Blizzard reps are reluctant to post anything. Every single word they post will eventually be taken out of context and used as ammunition against them.
2 Likes
The major difference is that I don’t have TOTAL and COMPLETE control over those things.
Exactly. Taking action, suspension/ban, is not something they want to do to a legitimate player. However, making changes to the game that affect legitimate players is something that happens with pretty much every change put into the game. Hopefully the OP can understand the difference.
1 Like
they’re both posts by the same person in regards to the same thing so I fail to see what point you are attempting to make.
Some you do. Me too. I never want to go to work again. But to better me and mine I’ll go to better my family.
I have complete control of several things that I’d never want to do but it’s just not realistic all the time to side step them all.
1 Like
not sure why you are so hellbent on twisting this away from the point, Blizzard has complete and total control over how they choose to change or not change the game so we can stop pretending like they had no choice introducing nonsense.
I haven’t twisted anything. I’m helping you realize that just because they don’t want to do it doesn’t mean they never will. I’m sorry you are having trouble grasping it but nowhere in your OP did you make a legitimate point. They didn’t lie to you on this matter.
3 Likes
But they are not about the same thing. The first quote is about actioning a legitimate player (suspension/ban) the second is about the effect a game change has on players. All game changes have a potential or actual effect on legitimate players, Blizzard was just commenting about how few legitimate players were affected.
2 Likes
okay lets pretend they aren’t about the same thing then and move to your second point.
You honestly believe it has effected only a “small handful” of players as they claim? out of the millions playing? They may as well have just gone all the way and say it effects nobody
I believe they are the only ones that have the data to say how many it impacts. I also believe that it is a behavoir they probably felt was getting out of hand. So the change inconveniences botters (another impediment) and helps mitigate excessive dungeon spamming, Win/Win in their book.
1 Like
You sort of have.
The point is that Blizzard has the option not to take action against legitimate players, yet implement a change they acknowledge hurts legitimate players. This is OBVIOUSLY different than “I don’t want to go to work, but I have to.” Blizzard does not have to implement the instance cap; they do not have to hurt legitimate players.
Which is exactly what my point covers
NOT WANTING =/= WILL NEVER DO
This seems to confuse the op. Like hes trying to say they are lying when they are just saying they try to avoid it. Obviously they feel that it wasnt possible to avoid in this situation and while it does suck that nonbot players got hurt, the argument of “they said they wouldnt blah blah” really has no play here
2 Likes
They absolutely are not. One is talking about accidentally suspending innocent player accounts, the other is talking about changing a game mechanic.
so you are just saying they are incredibly out of touch, I agree.
They knew this would do little to nothing to combat botting while also effecting part of their player base. terrible choice Blizz