Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 08, 2022, 06:04:00 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  World of Warcraft  |  Topic: The Armory and tinfoil hats 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Armory and tinfoil hats  (Read 46538 times)
WayAbvPar
Moderator
Posts: 19247


Reply #105 on: April 12, 2007, 11:55:48 AM

The only thing I know about Xenia is that the FSM keeps trying to wipe it off the earth with giant tornadoes.

When speaking of the MMOG industry, the glass may be half full, but it's full of urine. HaemishM

Always wear clean underwear because you never know when a Tory Government is going to fuck you.- Ironwood

Libertarians make fun of everyone because they can't see beyond the event horizons of their own assholes Surlyboi
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #106 on: April 12, 2007, 01:17:59 PM

Zeus knows Lum's been flamed harder before, by people meaner than me.  He doesn't need any of you girls to hold his hand.  And when the hurt feelings of some poopsocker offended by Blizzard's April Fools joke start seeming like something worth giving a shit about, yeah, someone needs to tell you to wash the sand out.  Sorry.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Xanthippe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4779


Reply #107 on: April 12, 2007, 02:02:49 PM

The vitriol on this subject is astounding.  The fact is that if someone does something that you wouldn't choose to do, you assume the worst motives of the person involved. 

It's akin to the "well, if you don't have anything to hide, you won't object to us searching your residence then, will you?" argument.  Because only a criminal would not want to be searched, natch.

Choices are good things.  Choices work all sorts of ways, too.  As more than a few pointed out (between this thread and Lum's), many people state they'll "shun" (whatever the MMO equivalent is, anyway) people who opt out.  That's fine - that would be exercising your choice not to deal with whoever you don't want to deal with whyever you don't want to.  Freedom of association at play.

That epeen argument swings both ways when it comes to the Armory and opting out and all that, btw.  Many people have stated they use it to catch people lying about their equipment.  (Imo only someone worried about his little epeen would actually do that, but that's my own bias at play).

I thought Lum was more of a libertarian than a republican, anyway.  The stand he's taking on this seems to indicate so.

Choices are good things, not bad things.
MrHat
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7431

Out of the frying pan, into the fire.


Reply #108 on: April 12, 2007, 02:05:13 PM

It's akin to the "well, if you don't have anything to hide, you won't object to us searching your residence then, will you?" argument.  Because only a criminal would not want to be searched, natch.

Except you don't own anything.

I'd say it's more akin to your company searching your browser history on the work computer you use.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #109 on: April 12, 2007, 02:29:48 PM

Yes.  It's exactly like that.  At the moment, anyway.

And Xanth ?  You're getting a little carried away, I think.  Normally I enjoy your flights of fancy, but, er, Searching My Residence ?  Really ?

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Trouble
Terracotta Army
Posts: 689


Reply #110 on: April 12, 2007, 03:10:10 PM

What are the reasons for not wanting people to view your armory profile?
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #111 on: April 12, 2007, 03:16:12 PM

I thought Lum was more of a libertarian than a republican, anyway.

I'd love to vote libertarian. The only problem with that is that LP candidates tend to be completely insane.
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14970

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #112 on: April 12, 2007, 03:17:44 PM

What are the reasons for not wanting people to view your armory profile?

People might be mean to you. 

There's a list of a reasons, but most extend or relate to the above.

-Rasix
Furiously
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7198


WWW
Reply #113 on: April 12, 2007, 03:23:53 PM

What are the reasons for not wanting people to view your armory profile?

either:

1) I think I'm smarter then everyone and my spec is special.
2) I say I'm smarter then everyone and my spec is crap.
3) I talk about all my accomplishments but from my spec it's pretty obvious I have not done a single instance.
4) I feel the information should be private.
5) It interferes with my roll-playing ability.
6) But people could catch me lying about my character.

I can understand the #1 and #4 people.

Jayce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2647

Diluted Fool


Reply #114 on: April 12, 2007, 04:19:58 PM

I thought Lum was more of a libertarian than a republican, anyway.

I'd love to vote libertarian. The only problem with that is that LP candidates tend to be completely insane.

I couldn't help but notice that also.

Witty banter not included.
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4663


Reply #115 on: April 12, 2007, 06:04:39 PM

My favorite anti-Armory argument so far (might have been on Lums, maybe the WoW board, can't remember) is that a wife could take her husband's profile to the judge in a divorce case as evidence he wasn't paying attention to her  shocked  THAT should have been quoted in Lum's update...

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14970

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #116 on: April 12, 2007, 06:06:16 PM

My favorite anti-Armory argument so far (might have been on Lums, maybe the WoW board, can't remember) is that a wife could take her husband's profile to the judge in a divorce case as evidence he wasn't paying attention to her  shocked  THAT should have been quoted in Lum's update...

EEK.  It doesn't have /played visible does it?  Or is there an easy formula for calculating neglect based on blues, purples, reputation, and honorable kills?

Edit: Now that I think about it, /played would be something I wouldn't be comfortable with if it was on the Armory.   
« Last Edit: April 12, 2007, 06:17:24 PM by Rasix »

-Rasix
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4663


Reply #117 on: April 12, 2007, 06:07:19 PM

  Or is there an easy formula for calculating neglect based on blues, purples, reputation, and honorable kills?

I think that was the implication.

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14970

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #118 on: April 12, 2007, 06:14:20 PM

"I swear your Honor, those blues came from easy group quests."

-Rasix
Miasma
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5283

Stopgap Measure


Reply #119 on: April 12, 2007, 06:53:45 PM

As a side question - when you look someone up in the armory and it says they have 21,000 honorable kills does that mean the person actually laid the killing blow on 21,000 people or that they were close enough to a death to earn HK 21,000 times?
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #120 on: April 12, 2007, 07:11:37 PM

I always thought there should be something special for world PVP kills when I played.  I never got into battlegrounds, but I liked killing people out in the world.

"Hey, I got five kills today."
"Yeah?"
"Yeah.  At five different points while out questing today, I ran down an alliance player within my level range and killed him one-on-one."
"Oh.  I got three hundred kills today."
"What?  You didn't actually fight and kill 300 people.  Even if they were all idiots, that would take all day."
"AOE + battleground, lol!!1!"

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Jayce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2647

Diluted Fool


Reply #121 on: April 12, 2007, 07:56:47 PM

As a side question - when you look someone up in the armory and it says they have 21,000 honorable kills does that mean the person actually laid the killing blow on 21,000 people or that they were close enough to a death to earn HK 21,000 times?

It's like xp - if you participate in PvP on a player target that's not gray to you (meaning you can even just heal the guy who's tanking him, lolz), then you get an HK.

Witty banter not included.
WayAbvPar
Moderator
Posts: 19247


Reply #122 on: April 13, 2007, 12:24:03 PM

I always thought there should be something special for world PVP kills when I played.  I never got into battlegrounds, but I liked killing people out in the world.

"Hey, I got five kills today."
"Yeah?"
"Yeah.  At five different points while out questing today, I ran down an alliance player within my level range and killed him one-on-one."
"Oh.  I got three hundred kills today."
"What?  You didn't actually fight and kill 300 people.  Even if they were all idiots, that would take all day."
"AOE + battleground, lol!!1!"

I agree. There should be separate category or something. I got my first solo kill of a level 70 the other night in a world kill (at level 68), and I want my props, dammit!

When speaking of the MMOG industry, the glass may be half full, but it's full of urine. HaemishM

Always wear clean underwear because you never know when a Tory Government is going to fuck you.- Ironwood

Libertarians make fun of everyone because they can't see beyond the event horizons of their own assholes Surlyboi
Lantyssa
Terracotta Army
Posts: 20848


Reply #123 on: April 13, 2007, 02:39:26 PM

I'd love to vote libertarian. The only problem with that is that LP candidates tend to be completely insane.
I couldn't help but notice that also.
I have screened a few.  They're either complete novices with no support and backing, or insane.  Certifiably.  Giving them power would scare me far more than the most evil, twisted, career politician.

Hahahaha!  I'm really good at this!
Xanthippe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4779


Reply #124 on: April 14, 2007, 10:06:02 AM

I thought Lum was more of a libertarian than a republican, anyway.

I'd love to vote libertarian. The only problem with that is that LP candidates tend to be completely insane.

Yep, I was speaking of principles rather than the party (hence the uses of the small "l" and "r" than the cap "L" and "R."
Xanthippe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4779


Reply #125 on: April 14, 2007, 10:12:06 AM

Yes.  It's exactly like that.  At the moment, anyway.

And Xanth ?  You're getting a little carried away, I think.  Normally I enjoy your flights of fancy, but, er, Searching My Residence ?  Really ?

You're right, the analogy was poor.  Browser history is more like it - except if an employer owns the computer then one has no privacy on that computer anyway.  Oh wait a minute....

Ok, I will grant that Blizzard can do whatever they please.  The issue here though is that the Armory is a new feature.  Had it always been in the game, then people would have no right to squawk, nor any expectation whatsoever with regard to an opt out feature.  But it's not been in the game.

Personally, I wouldn't opt out, but then personally, I've never used it.  I'm not sure I fully understand why someone wouldn't want to be in it.  However, as a customer relations move, Blizzard should consider that some people may want to opt out -- particularly since they have been vociferous about it -- and allow them to.

If that causes the Armory to be worthless, then so be it.  If a few people opting out makes it worthless - maybe it isn't so invaluable anyway.
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2451


Reply #126 on: April 14, 2007, 01:46:37 PM

Why Blizzard spent effort to enable this - My guess is that blizzard CMs noticed that outing someone's bullshit/bullshitting by noting their spec/character makeup was an effective way of reducing the noise that those exaggerated claims tend to generate.  The only way to improve on that capability would be to put that power into the hands of the playerbase, and let the players monitor eachother.

If that was the purpose, it seems like it's been pretty effective.
Calantus
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2389


Reply #127 on: April 14, 2007, 09:48:22 PM

However, as a customer relations move, Blizzard should consider that some people may want to opt out -- particularly since they have been vociferous about it -- and allow them to.

Well, Blizzard is listening to the arguably larger portion of their playerbase who likes that armory has no opt-out feature. The fact that the opt-outers are so loud shouldn't mean anything because we've said many times here that pandering to the loudest denominator is not the best thing. Also, no offence, but americans can be a bit... weird when it comes to their perceived rights. I think the whole issue is just a storm in a teacup, really.
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2525


Reply #128 on: April 14, 2007, 10:16:16 PM

Why Blizzard spent effort to enable this - My guess is that blizzard CMs noticed that outing someone's bullshit/bullshitting by noting their spec/character makeup was an effective way of reducing the noise that those exaggerated claims tend to generate.  The only way to improve on that capability would be to put that power into the hands of the playerbase, and let the players monitor eachother.

Effective way of reducing the noise?  Flames are happening as much as before, only now they include potshots at specs and gear.  Are you saying that the WoW forums are suddenly quality reading?
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2451


Reply #129 on: April 15, 2007, 08:24:40 AM

Are you saying that the WoW forums are suddenly quality reading?

lol, ah, no.  Armory reduces the ability that people had to bullshit about their spec/stats as a way of defending some outrageous claim, and (probably more important for Blizz CMs) removes the need for the CMs to lookup that players' stats (because the playerbase does it for free).
Numtini
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7675


Reply #130 on: April 15, 2007, 11:15:36 AM

I think this was actually a positive PR move. And the reason I feel that way is that Blizzard has consistently shown that they "get it" and has not acted like a weasely gaming company. Similar to banning people without a lot of fuss or the anti-cheat scan, they have shown that they understand the difference between whining twits and real complaints.

Same reason they probably won't and certainly shouldn't charge for it. I suspect that whatever SOE brings in on the $3 to use their features is outweighed by the ill will it generates. It may be the job of all corporations to separate customers from their money, but you make a lot more money in the long term if the customer doesn't feel like they were worked over when you do so.

If you can read this, you're on a board populated by misogynist assholes.
Xanthippe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4779


Reply #131 on: April 15, 2007, 01:26:53 PM

However, as a customer relations move, Blizzard should consider that some people may want to opt out -- particularly since they have been vociferous about it -- and allow them to.

Well, Blizzard is listening to the arguably larger portion of their playerbase who likes that armory has no opt-out feature. The fact that the opt-outers are so loud shouldn't mean anything because we've said many times here that pandering to the loudest denominator is not the best thing. Also, no offence, but americans can be a bit... weird when it comes to their perceived rights. I think the whole issue is just a storm in a teacup, really.

No offense taken.  Non-Americans can be a bit cavalier when it comes to surrendering their rights.

Americans don't perceive rights to be something they are given, but rather something they are born with.  So to my American point of view, that other people don't believe that their right to liberty is endowed rather than given is what is strange. 

Calantus
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2389


Reply #132 on: April 15, 2007, 01:52:34 PM

I think most people in western countries have a similar view, but there's just something emboldening (over and above just having your rights written down) about having an actual bill of rights because it creates some ambiguity people like to leverage. You sometimes hear Aussie kids saying they have this and that right and you can just tell em that it's not written down anywhere that they actually have them. Everything is specifically covered (or not covered) by its own law and that's that, if it's not covered then tough, write to your government representative about the issue and in the mean time STFU.

That's why it's a little weird for me to see people going on about rights in areas the law doesn't explicitly cover.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #133 on: April 15, 2007, 03:18:06 PM

No offense taken.  Non-Americans can be a bit cavalier when it comes to surrendering their rights.

Oh fuck off.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #134 on: April 15, 2007, 03:26:06 PM

No offense taken.  Non-Americans can be a bit cavalier when it comes to surrendering their rights.

Americans don't perceive rights to be something they are given, but rather something they are born with.  So to my American point of view, that other people don't believe that their right to liberty is endowed rather than given is what is strange.


"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #135 on: April 15, 2007, 03:39:32 PM

No offense taken.  Non-Americans can be a bit cavalier when it comes to surrendering their rights.

Oh fuck off.


To be honest William Wallace was more roundhead than cavalier.
Jayce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2647

Diluted Fool


Reply #136 on: April 15, 2007, 06:23:08 PM

Americans don't perceive rights to be something they are given, but rather something they are born with.  So to my American point of view, that other people don't believe that their right to liberty is endowed rather than given is what is strange. 

I suppose this thread could go all political easily, but sorry, you don't speak for all Americans, Xanth.

IMO "born with rights" sounds good, fires up the kids and is alot harder of a political football to throw when necessary, but I've come to beleive that nothing in this life is guaranteed.

Witty banter not included.
Samwise
Moderator
Posts: 18787

sentient yeast infection


WWW
Reply #137 on: April 15, 2007, 06:43:59 PM

I think this was actually a positive PR move. And the reason I feel that way is that Blizzard has consistently shown that they "get it" and has not acted like a weasely gaming company. Similar to banning people without a lot of fuss or the anti-cheat scan, they have shown that they understand the difference between whining twits and real complaints.

Yes.

Both Blizzard and SOE occasionally provoke frothing rage from their customers.  But people tend to rag on SOE and praise Blizzard not just because SOE is SOE and Blizzard is Blizzard.  It's because SOE provokes rage by behaving in a duplicituous turd-burgling fashion, and Blizzard provokes rage by being direct and occasionally funny.  Even someone who wasn't wronged directly will probably find SOE's tactics distasteful.  The same is generally not true of Blizzard.

"I have not actually recommended many games, and I'll go on the record here saying my track record is probably best in the industry." - schild
Valmorian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1163


Reply #138 on: April 16, 2007, 09:37:42 AM

Americans don't perceive rights to be something they are given, but rather something they are born with.  So to my American point of view, that other people don't believe that their right to liberty is endowed rather than given is what is strange. 

That's cute.  Equating an opt-out of having the character data Blizzard has with civil rights?  Yeah, I'd say that's a bizarre idea of a "right".

Xanthippe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4779


Reply #139 on: April 16, 2007, 12:51:35 PM

Americans don't perceive rights to be something they are given, but rather something they are born with.  So to my American point of view, that other people don't believe that their right to liberty is endowed rather than given is what is strange. 

That's cute.  Equating an opt-out of having the character data Blizzard has with civil rights?  Yeah, I'd say that's a bizarre idea of a "right".

Don't take this out of context, please.  I was responding to a specific comment made about Americans, which had little to nothing to do with WoW.  I was responding snarkily to snark.  Besides, I love it when Ironwood talks dirty to me.

To bring it back on topic - I haven't read the official threads, and I don't know if anyone has claimed any sort of right to opt out of the Armory.  My position is that giving customers choices is a good thing.  Basically, originally I was agreeing with Lum that Blizzard is doing a dumb thing when they belittle their customers.

While I don't understand why a person would want to opt out, I also don't understand why that would inflame someone else to the point of vitriol that I saw on this thread and Lum's thread.  I don't get, and won't, I'm sure, so nobody should bother trying to explain further.  Doesn't really matter to me, because any effect the Armory has is negligible to my game experience.  I just don't care.

To bring another dimension to this, two years from launch, I have noticed that the CMs are more antagonistic toward customers on the boards in general.  This April Fools joke is indicative of that.  I've noticed that the CMs are acting like they are doing us all a favor by providing us their service (whatever service that is - I don't know, I quit reading the official boards for the most part), rather than recognizing the favor we provide them by way of a monthly fee.

Game companies (with the exception of Cryptic) become adversarial with their customers over time, or at least many do.  Familiarity breeds contempt and all that.  "We don't need you as much as you need us."  Etc.

It doesn't endear me to the company, or make me want to continue supporting them. The game they are providing had better be the best damned game out there.  Which they can do - for a time - until something better comes along, and it always does.   It's too bad that they get fat and lazy - because that can be their downfall as well.

(This can and does happen in plenty of businesses besides games - restaurants, music, literature, et al.)
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  World of Warcraft  |  Topic: The Armory and tinfoil hats  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC