Could probably be done without damaging things too much. Might require a bit of rework on the framing so they could make it so certain aspects are public while others are private. Keeping specific details only available to yourself. Perhaps allow the addon to collect data from every individual and store it in a databank without taking their name. Would allow them to create methods of comparing yourself to the general public. Lots of work would need to be done, question really is. Would the benefit outweight the cost.
I think the game should be made for everyone. Putting punishments for wanting to play the game is bad for everyone, not just the âeliteâ that you so despise.
Sorry Ralph people will NOT play the way you want and you can not force them to.
I swear you are the most Elitist and Entitled player I have ever seen. You spend most of your time either kissing the backside of the company or you sit and try to humiliate the players. With your demands and conspiracy theories.
4 Likes
Did ion really say this ? Give proof or itâs a tangent.
I donât know. That would depend on how much the general public used dps addons.
For instance if Blizzard had something like recount be part of the standard UI then everyone would have access to it, but i am willing to bet a good portion of casuals donât even use something like it and even for a good portion of those that have it they might not use it nearly to itâs full potential like looking at the bar graphs and breaking things down.
Certainly i know many people donât even understand why it is important to have in the first place, donât understand the information that can be gleaned with it not just for the player themselves but from the history of seeing other players.
For instance i got into arena skrim with Vangaurds while i just happened to be on my Ret Paladin and that was fantastic because i could then make a comparison of how i played to him and his dps to my own right after i got out of that match (obviously his gear was better and i can take that into account), it was quite eye opening. So in cases like that something like Recount can be invaluable to improve play but clearly there are a lot of folks that donât or wonât use it for something like that.
Hereâs the thing of trying to objectify fun, their really isnât a reliable measure of sorts to measure fun. Fun is just a feeling, and feelings can be practically whatever you want them to be. Which is why we say Fun is subjective, cause what you feel is subjective. If were gonna say reviews are a measurement of fun, reviews are there to take an objective look at the game and tell you about the stuff that is in there while giving their informed opinions that informs your decision on whether or not you should buy it. They can say itâs fun, but itâs ultimately up to you to decide if itâs fun for you.
And what does actually fun actually mean? Itâs entertain, pleasure, enjoyment, amusement, gratifcation, and so on. What your saying here by saying âi find this funâ, your saying that you find it entertaining or it amuses you, or you think itâs enjoyable.
Retail and Classic are perfect examples for this. Classic leans more to the RPG side of things with exploration and itâs main game to be the leveling with itâs more thoughtful but simple approach to enemies and such. While limited in scope in terms of content, and pretty janky in places and dated.Retail is more action oriented, with the endgame as plentiful and it has a more direct but also complicated approach to things while being polished (for the most part).
Both games have their fans, and both games have people who find the game fun, and both games have people who find it boring.
This is a bit of an off topic tagent of another game, but i did played Fallout 3 years ago, and while it was a good game, i found it to be boring honestly. Iâm sure the RPG elements in there are excellent as all hell, but the gunplay in there was jank and you have to rely on essentially an auto aim, pause game, roll dice mechanic, (or V.A.T.S) which⌠thatâs fine for Fallout because it did came from itâs top down roots, but i much rather aim myself. Hereâs the issue though, If i shoot somebody in the head, i donât want them to just take double damage or whatever, i want them to be insta killed, cause we all know, if you headshot somebody, they die in games. And it would make sense if itâs ghouls or creatures, but iâm also talking about humans and they just donât seem to care about it. This is the problem that Bethesda games have really, if you shoot somebody in the head, they donât die. Though unlike your problem Ralph, i can solve my problem by installing a mod that allows me to do just that. (Cause singleplayer games. 
)
I understand in RPGâs their needs to be reasons why you canât insta kill people at level 1 and thatâs honestly fine in Skyrim, i can imagine the nords or elves in that game being mega buffed to where an arrow to the head doesnât even bother them⌠or they have magical⌠head shielding powers, i donât know. But in Fallout? an RPG with Guns? Shotguns, rifles, and machineguns? Aka modern day ballistic weapons that fire much faster which will travel further and more bullets at a time then an bow and arrow? you have to build a golden gate of suspension to disbelief that humans can survive being shot in the head. 
Not to mention it breaks immersion there, so thatâs not exciting.
While Fallout 4 still has this problem (though again, modded it out), in terms of the enjoyment i get out of it, it was more of my speed, even if the RPG elements were very dumbed down. (and thankfully, mods exist to help with that problem. Heck i can mod my protag to make him/her shut the heck up.)
But i digress my Fallout rant here: My point is that some people find things i like are fun, some people find things i donât like are fun, and vice versa with some people find things i dislike/like boring. One of my friends play LoL, which those kinds of games doesnât interest me. Meanwhile i play Cities Skylines and iâm gonna bet their not into those kinds of games either. And i would imagine neither of us here would find each other thing interesting. Unless itâs Skyrim on the PC with mods.
You can deny it all you want Ralph and try to make fun objective⌠but the reality is itâs still subjective.
2 Likes
I too am a Ralph.
Ralph has ran out of actual things to antagonize people over, so he has to invent new things so he can keep spamming these threads.
1 Like
Oh so there is no proof this occurred ,Ralph is the ultimate tangentor ,expect for my sis 
All a sudden I just had an image of everyone getting up and going
I am Ralphicus
1 Like
Wrong, everyone (even you) on the forums wants to the game to be the way they want it.
I honestly feel sorry for anyone who realises they are on the same side of Ralph.
3 Likes
But OP, my mom printed out my DPS meter data and put it on the fridge, what am i gonna tell my mom if I canât top meters, I wonât get to go to my favorite CiCiâs!
A DPS meter that shows 2 bars: your DPS and the average DPS among the other damage dealers would at least let you know whether or not you need to improve your gameplay relative to other people in the group without having any of those negative social effects. Too bad they wonât implement it.
Unfortunately it can be reasoned out that actually balancing all the classes/specs would achieve exactly what they envision without creating this bandaid restriction where they think they can get away without balancing all the classes/specs. It just doesnât make sense because they need to balance everything for this covenant restriction idea to pan out anyway, and I argue that if they are able to achieve balance then they wonât need to force these restrictions in the first place. If all classes/specs/covenants are balanced then nobody has a reason to exclude someone (edit: based on their choices). Iâd rather they focus on balance rather than implement useless features that let you preview covenants just so they can restrict swapping them.
No it wouldnât, removing information isnât the same as making something better. Without things like being able to gauge damage, you can not determine why you are constantly failing at things. Is your group wiping non stop due to a lack of healing, a lack of DPS or just bad luck? Without the proper information, you have no way to know what you need to fix to over come the problem.
This information is just a tool to help players understand what is going on. The problem isnât the tool, it is with how some people are using it. You have groups on each extreme, those that demand perfection and kick anyone not in the top 90% range. And then those who have no god damn clue what they are doing, have horrible builds, completely wrong gearing and expect others to just accept them into their group.
There is a reason after classic they made it easier and easier to change your spec and talents. Messing around with different things is fun. Being confined to the same thing forever isnât.
This is a terrible design choice.
I donât really want to engage with this thread, but jebus, based on that, Iâm glad youâre not in game design.
The best games of the recent generation have been the ones that did the exact opposite of this - Breath of the Wild in particular was a massive hit among casual and hardcore players alike. Endless potential for experimentation, playstyle, and even tailored difficulty.
If that is truly what WoWâs devs are thinking, I have to wonder if they arenât living back in 2004.
Do not call that garbage of a Zelda game a good game. Bring back the OG. I really hope that trash isnât the future of Zelda. Why on earth they would want to turn Zelda into some puke game like minecraft /rageâŚ
Honestly, itâs not my favorite either, but youâd have to be crazy to call it âtrashâ. Easily the best implementation of an open world Iâve ever seen in a game, and Iâve been fairly meh on open worlds for years - got my fill with GTA.
Itâs probably the closest thing there is to the OG, as well, unless your idea of the OG is Ocarina onward? I love me some Ocarina - itâs still the one game I consistently go back to, despite it aging increasingly like milk, but BotW is the closest the series has ever come to emulating the original.
Either way, the sheer amount of player expression that game allows, and how massively popular that game was, is incredibly telling - and is my point. Heck, since you mentioned it, the ridiculous popularity of MineCraft should clue you in as well, regardless of your opinion towards it.
People want to be creative, and tailor their experiences toward themselves.
Naw, nothing like any of the Zelda games. Your weapon didnât bust a bunch you didnât have to keep crafting your stuff. Yeah you might lose it to a hand or something in the Original Zelda but no. It wouldnât just bust. Itâs nothing like the old NES, or SNES games, or even the new ones like breath of the wild and such. I just donât see how this game was anything like Zelda at all. It was more Zelda trying to get in on the Minecraft love and losing some of its more original devout fans in the process.