The "Just Don't Use It" Fallacy.

[Leyoni]

Yes there might be players who don't have a lot time to play and also are not able or not willing to spend cash to close the gap.

Did you read any of the articles on DDO:EU that were posted to the forum? F2P typically entice less than 1% to pay for extras. Turbine is hoping for 7-12% with an average of $20 per player.

Initial response might beat the typical F2P by 700-1200% but that can't possibly continue long-term.

The real secret will be content. F2P players will not get access to every quest. After the initial free area(s) they will need to pay for content. Imagine paying for access to the Harbor, Marketplace, major house districts. And imagine not getting all of the quests but having to pay for them as well.

That is the real model that Turbine is introducing at some level. Explore all of Stormreach and its districts without being able to do most of the quests. This is why Turbine thinks it can beat the typical F2P.

All of this has nothing at all to do with the original thread.

[Leyoni]

Ah-ha! I see where we're missing each other. The reason that there is nothing in my post to indicate that DDO meets the third criteria is: I'm not trying to claim that!

What I am trying to claim, to follow your format, is:

1. There is a continuum of players from those that have nothing at all (just started) to those that have everything (ultimate power gamers).
2. That game design needs to accommodate all of these.
3. That game designs that fail to accommodate all of these must adapt or fail.
4. Players "just not using" things cannot save a game that is failing because of #3.

I'm not claiming (here, anyway) that there is a game balance problem in DDO. I'm just saying that, when someone *does* raise a balance problem (and they do so because their main concern is #3), "don't use it" isn't a valid counterpoint.

I think, generally speaking, folks who raise balance problems are doing so because they're worried about #3, *not* because they are worried about the impact to their direct player experience by using said item personally. (At the very least, I can say that whenever *I* do it, that's my motivation.)

There is no point in addressing the "just don't use it" response by players if you are not claiming that there is a game balance problem in DDO. If that claim were not at the heart of the OP then there would be no "just don't use it" replies coming from the gaming population.

I disagree that there is a game balance problem. That isn't to say that some things are not tilted one way or the other at the present time -- or have been tilted in the past. It is to say that DDO did not arrive full blown with every quirk worked out of it. I don't think any game ever arrives that way.

But, Turbine does take a look at things working as they intended as well as things working as they did not intend. And, as the game has matured adjustments have been made.

I think the game is seriously flawed because I can't use the same name as some other character. And, I know how to code so that I could. That doesn't mean Turbine has to do that.

Some players might think monk splashes or Tempest enhancements or WoP weapons cause a serious flaw. They may even know how to code to impliment their vision of solutions. That doesn't mean Turbine has to do that either.

Your post fails to prove that the game is not adapting and thus failing. And, contrary to your 4th point, the majority of players actually are "just not using" because the majority just don't have! But, more importantly, your 4th point only becomes valid if the game is failing -- a point you are not making. To quote you, "I'm not claiming (here, anyway) that there is a game balance problem in DDO."

For your OP to have any validity you must claim that there is a balance problem and then you must demonstrate that the game is failing as a result.

You have done neither.

[Angelus_dead]

There is no point in addressing the "just don't use it" response by players if you are not claiming that there is a game balance problem in DDO.

No, his post doesn't depend on alleging an existing imbalance in DDO. In fact, the topic doesn't necessarily even have to be about DDO at all. It could be about WOW, or TF2, or baseball, or even federal banking regulations.

The point is that if someone complains that a certain rule will have indirect negative effects on him, exhorting him to personally restrain from using it does not address his perceived problem.

Here's an example from the USA at the beginning of this year: junk mortgages. Personally restraining yourself from applying for a mortgage you can't afford will keep you out of bankruptcy, but it won't stop you from losing income due to an economic slowdown triggered by millions of people who did go bankrupt.

[quintuss]

Did you read any of the articles on DDO:EU that were posted to the forum? F2P typically entice less than 1% to pay for extras. Turbine is hoping for 7-12% with an average of $20 per player.

Initial response might beat the typical F2P by 700-1200% but that can't possibly continue long-term.

The real secret will be content. F2P players will not get access to every quest. After the initial free area(s) they will need to pay for content. Imagine paying for access to the Harbor, Marketplace, major house districts. And imagine not getting all of the quests but having to pay for them as well.

That is the real model that Turbine is introducing at some level. Explore all of Stormreach and its districts without being able to do most of the quests. This is why Turbine thinks it can beat the typical F2P.

All of this has nothing at all to do with the original thread.

Yes, i did read through most of the stuff and indeed, the important thing for the survival of ddo will be new content on a regular basis.

I just think the goal for any MMO developer will have to be to keep the majority of players between those two extremes (Haves and Have nots) happy. It's normal, that those players on the fringe of the spectrum won't be the most happy ones.

The figures on page 22 of the ppt document linked by the OP are about mainaining fun in a gaming session and the alternation between tension/challenge and relaxing/easy gameplay is just something that has to be incorporated in the design of every quest.

The real trouble starts, when you set yourself the task to make every quest so that every player gravitates around the tension median which would be optimal. Luckily that is not really necessary in the case of DDO since there can be a lot of different quests with a lot of different levels of difficulty. If you make the rewards for really hard quests slightly better than the ones for easy quests, or create timesinks where hardcore players can grind for the top notch stuff, they will be happy, because they got challenging quests and are being rewarded for mastering it.
The shop provides means to make the task easier, because it gives players with less time the opportunity to close the gap beween them and the powergamers, thus making the spectrum turbine needs to do quests for a little smaller.

As of now there really are some issues that need fixing like shroud loot for example , but i don't think those are really gamebreaking because most quests are doable without wops or greensteel stuff and if turbine manages to create some really challenging (challenging, not broken like Cursed Ascension) quests once in a while even the powergamers will be happy.

So in short: If turbine manages to create enough content with varying difficultys, there will be no problem that would need solving via "just don't use that stuff".... which brings us back to the start of my post...why am i even writing this?... i think i need a coffee

[Worker1179]

I invited my friend to DDO recently. Our schedules never really matched up so he spent most of his time in pugs. He said he felt ill-equipped alot of the time, as in, other guys in the group all have shiny glowing weapons. Their armor looks legit, and they are yelling about cure wands. He was a guy whos played PnP for 18 yrs and was into EQ and WoW, so he has a decent understanding of how things work. I can understand where he was coming from. I've often been in groups and felt like I must have rolled terrible on every loot roll ever when I look around. He and to a lesser extent, myself, I think are "have nots". How will the store affect you (anyone), if there is some kind of equalizer of some type where i can buy myself into some decent equipment where i can actually be of value to a group of "haves"? Doesn't this add more players to the pool of useful group members?

[cforce]

Again, just as a reminder, this thread isn't about the Store. Depending on items and prices available, items on the store could narrow the balance gap, or they could widen it. And we can't discuss any of the actual items here -- this isn't a Beta forum.

This thread is a reminder that "Don't Use It" is not a productive counterargument to, "<thing> represents a Balance Problem".

[Leyoni]

No, his post doesn't depend on alleging an existing imbalance in DDO. In fact, the topic doesn't necessarily even have to be about DDO at all. It could be about WOW, or TF2, or baseball, or even federal banking regulations.

It does because of where it is located withing the forum. If it were in off-topic chat it could be about one of those. But in gameplay it has to be about DDO by definition.

[ahpook]

...

In a socialist or fascist world everyone and everything is controlled. In a free world it is not.

You seem to be using "controlled" where it wasn't intended. I would go with restrictions or rules. The free society is full of restrictions and rules. Decide that you want to go with out Food ever again (without dying), Or that you can have what ever you want with out paying. Or that you want to survive if a car going 100 MPH hits you. I don't want to derail with philosophical discussion, just pointing out that your analogy is not very applicable to the discussion at hand.

People do not need to be controlled in DDO. It will not make things better if they are.

Again assuming you are using Controlled in place of what I would call restricted or limited, this is a silly statement. Characters must be limited. We have mana bars and HP bars as way of limiting them. If there are no limitations you have what Cforce refered to the Easy button in his original post.

[Leyoni]

This thread is a reminder that "Don't Use It" is not a productive counterargument to, "<thing> represents a Balance Problem".

A point that you have failed to demonstrate.

But, at this point we are just going in circles aren't we. You claim that the thread isn't about game imbalance but about a player-based response to claims of game imbalance.

Nothing can convince you that claims are meaningless -- requiring proof -- so that the player-based response is moot, neither appropriate nor inappropriate. If the claims are true then that must be shown to be the case. Efforts thus far only illustrate that Turbine has a robust system of varying difficulties and challenges and that it responds to unintended problems by addressing exploits.

At an individual, personal player level "don't use it" is not only an effective solution but, in the case of exploits, required by the EULA. At Turbine's level it doesn't apply.

Resolution of genuinely imbalancing situations rest with Turbine. Because they have historically responded by making changes when they deemed them appropriate AND because the game, like D&D itself, is constantly undergoing revision and the introduction of new material there is no demonstrable validity to claims of imbalance.

Thus, "just don't use it" is not only a productive (and EULA driven) answer. It is also the only one that we as individual players can apply if we honestly believe something is imbalanced.

Thus, I repeat my self and the impact of this is that you will repeat yourself. It keeps the wheels rolling but does nothing to further the conversation.

To further the conversation you must prove that DDO is broken due to imbalance thus making the "just don't use it" reply inappropriate. Since you cannot do this your conclusion is flawed since "just don't use it" is, in fact, the only answer to situations that you perceive as imbalanced and broken but cannot show to be.

It is a personal problem (thinking something is imbalanced) that requires a personal solution (just don't use it).

[cforce]

I'm sorry, I guess I'm at a loss, Leyoni. I'm really trying to reconcile the points you're making with what I'm trying to argue, but I really can't make any sense of it! Specifically:

There is no point in addressing the "just don't use it" response by players if you are not claiming that there is a game balance problem in DDO. If that claim were not at the heart of the OP then there would be no "just don't use it" replies coming from the gaming population.

I really can't understand your point here, at all. "If that claim were not at the heart of the OP then there would be no "just don't use it" replies coming from the gaming population?" There are none of those replies coming to my OP, because I didn't claim anything was out of balance in the OP. If I take this statement literally, you're saying you're correct in inferring something I didn't claim in my OP because my influence traveled backwards through time and caused people to post "just don't use it" replies in other threads. Clearly this wasn't your intent, but I can't begin to figure out what you meant, here.

I disagree that there is a game balance problem.

OK -- but who do you disagree with? I'm not claiming there is one -- I'm just trying to give some pointers to guide more effective dialogue when people *are* arguing about balance.

I think the game is seriously flawed because I can't use the same name as some other character. And, I know how to code so that I could. That doesn't mean Turbine has to do that.

Non-sequitur? What does this have to do with game balance?

Some players might think monk splashes or Tempest enhancements or WoP weapons cause a serious flaw. They may even know how to code to impliment their vision of solutions. That doesn't mean Turbine has to do that either.

Yes, this is a truism. In fact, Turbine doesn't have to do anything that would make the game better. I fail to see why Turbine's free will is relevant? What are you getting at?

Your post fails to prove that the game is not adapting and thus failing.

Er, yep. Never tried to prove it in the first place, in fact. I still feel like you're reading a different post than the one I made!

And, contrary to your 4th point, the majority of players actually are "just not using" because the majority just don't have!

OK, I actually understand your point here, but disagree. Most past balance discussions *have* revolved around things that most players have easy access to. (Tempest line, Wall of Fire, etc.) I would agree that, "almost no-one has that, so it doesn't represent a major problem" is a valid argument in specific cases, but I think those cases are less common.

But, more importantly, your 4th point only becomes valid if the game is failing -- a point you are not making. To quote you, "I'm not claiming (here, anyway) that there is a game balance problem in DDO."

Yep...

For your OP to have any validity you must claim that there is a balance problem and then you must demonstrate that the game is failing as a result.

Nope -- this conclusion doesn't follow. If I say, "If all Romans are liars, and all Romans are men, then all men are liars," my logic is wrong, even when all Romans *aren't* liars.

My argument is that, if a balance problem exists, "just don't use it" is not a logically sound counterpoint. A useful counterpoint would be something like the one you use above, "the use will be so rare that the impact will be minimal". "Just don't use it", on the other hand, would not address any *real* balance problem, and as such, isn't a useful counterpoint.

[cforce]

But, at this point we are just going in circles aren't we.

I can agree with this conclusion .

But, let me make one last attempt at understanding your argument. Are you claiming that, since there never *has* been any real balance problem in DDO, "just don't use it" has historically been a valid response, simply because everyone who has ever argued something was imbalanced was wrong at a Turbine/game-wide level, and instead should only try to rectify the issue only in their personal experience?

[Leyoni]

You seem to be using "controlled" where it wasn't intended.

No, I'm using it exactly as it was intended.

The OP states that "just don't use it" isn't sufficient to address game imbalance. Ignore that he doesn't claim that there is a game imbalance. Ignore also that if there is no game imbalance then "just don't use it" has no meaning since there is nothing to apply it to.

The choices are "just don't use it" or "control". Control means removing the choice from players.

As the game now stands players can choose to do all of the things that have been suggested as imbalancing: solo Reaver with a caster, build monk splashes, use WoP or vorpals. If they feel that creates an imbalance then they are free to not do those things.

Control means removing those options.

Some of the things are flat out in error. For example, the problem with monk splashes is not the splash -- it is the use of stacking dodge items to bump AC thus allowing the synergy of TWF and monk WIS bonus an unintended (perhaps) advantage over S&B builds.

The solution is not in control but in freedom. By introducing more options those that are currently viewed as out of balance will be brought back into balance. New and improved armor and shields, particularly sets like we've seen on Korthos, is a better solution than nerfing monk splashes.

Is there a present tilt in favor of some things -- IMO yes. But, that does not mean we should impose control. It means we should let the game continue to develop and introduce new items that will change the direction of the tilt.

Doing this is what keeps the "Haves" in OP's post from growing bored with the game. And the prospect of achieving "Have" status is what keeps the rest of us from being frustrated.

OP made some good observations regarding game design. But his premise and his conclusion are flawed. As are those who have responded suggesting tighter restrictions on players.

[Leyoni]

I can agree with this conclusion .

But, let me make one last attempt at understanding your argument. Are you claiming that, since there never *has* been any real balance problem in DDO, "just don't use it" has historically been a valid response, simply because everyone who has ever argued something was imbalanced was wrong at a Turbine/game-wide level, and instead should only try to rectify the issue only in their personal experience?

I am saying that when DDO has been out of balance due to exploit that Turbine has fixed the problem. And, I'm saying that because DDO is an evolving world -- just like D&D -- that temporary imbalances during a particular module do not mean a long-term imbalance for the game.

Thus, if the "DDO is imbalanced" argument relates to either of these issues then it is a pointless argument to which there is no other reply than "just don't use it."

If you can find an example of core-level design error that dooms the game to failure then I'll agree that "just don't use it" does not apply. However, no issue ever raised here in the forums fits that category. They all fit either the "exploit" or the "at this moment" type and to those types of balance issues the only workable solution is for us to take individual responsiblity.

In the case of exploits it means not using them per the EULA. In the case of temporary imbalances it is a matter of personal choice. If the imbalance bothers us then we ought not to use it. If it does not bother us then we should be free to use it. The entire issue will be resolved in the future as the game continues to grow.

[Leyoni]

If I say, "If all Romans are liars, and all Romans are men, then all men are liars," my logic is wrong, even when all Romans *aren't* liars.

Whether all Romans are liars or not, this fails because you need to state that all men are Romans for the logic to be valid. If you stated, "all Romans are liars and all men are Romans thus all men are liars" you would have a more concise argument.

However, your example leaves it clear that all men are not Romans thus your conclusion is false. It requires no effort to prove either of the premises.

Applicable to the discussion, you make the claim that "just don't use" isn't a legitimate reply to "the game is imbalanced". You don't show either of these to be legitimate. You directly claim the game is not imbalanced. You fail to see that the only reasoned response to the irrational and unsubstantiated claim that it is imbalanced is to tell people to take personal responsibility.

Your premises fail and therefore your conclusions fail.

[cforce]

If you can find an example of core-level design error that dooms the game to failure then I'll agree that "just don't use it" does not apply. However, no issue ever raised here in the forums fits that category. They all fit either the "exploit" or the "at this moment" type and to those types of balance issues the only workable solution is for us to take individual responsiblity.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. First of all, I wouldn't personally ever refer to an exploit as a 'balance issue', although I understand that line has been seen as blurry in the past. But, to pick a historical example, using the 10% speed boost from Tempest is not something anyone could have ever called an "exploit"!

So yes, it's the "at this moment" type of problem that I'm talking about. Hopefully Turbine continues to identify and rectify balance problems, and all problems in the future continue to be "at this moment" problems. That being said, when people are raising balance issues in the forums, they are doing it because they're hoping to provide feedback to the development team!

If you're coming at it from the standpoint, "Turbine will correctly identify and fix all balance issues without any player input", and as such, players should only worry about their own immediate play impact -- I would agree with your logic, but disagree with the premise that players providing feedback on what is *currently* out of balance in the game isn't valued by Turbine.

[Thanimal]

Whether all Romans are liars or not, this fails because you need to state that all men are Romans for the logic to be valid.

<Buries head in hand>. The fact that the statements in quotes are incorrect logic was directly stated by cforce and was his entire point. The whole thread is about people using incorrect logic and this was intended as an example of incorrect logic and why it's worth talking about logic even if you don't agree with the premises. Here's cforce's quote again, with emphasis added by me:

If I say, "If all Romans are liars, and all Romans are men, then all men are liars," my logic is wrong, even when all Romans *aren't* liars.

[cforce]

Whether all Romans are liars or not, this fails because you need to state that all men are Romans for the logic to be valid. If you stated, "all Romans are liars and all men are Romans thus all men are liars" you would have a more concise argument.

However, your example leaves it clear that all men are not Romans thus your conclusion is false. It requires no effort to prove either of the premises.

Applicable to the discussion, you make the claim that "just don't use" isn't a legitimate reply to "the game is imbalanced". You don't show either of these to be legitimate. You directly claim the game is not imbalanced. You fail to see that the only reasoned response to the irrational and unsubstantiated claim that it is imbalanced is to tell people to take personal responsibility.

Your premises fail and therefore your conclusions fail.

This is perhaps diving to far into esoterica, but this simply isn't how deductive reasoning and logical proof work. The argument,

1. A implies B
2. C implies B
3. Therefore, A implies C

is always a faulty argument, even when A or C is false. I'm not sure how much simpler I can make it, but if you don't agree with this, then we're doomed to fail to find common ground.

[Angelus_dead]

If you can find an example of core-level design error that dooms the game to failure then I'll agree that "just don't use it" does not apply. However, no issue ever raised here in the forums fits that category.

That is classically fallacious reasoning. It is the Nirvana fallacy, inverted.

Simply because a particular problem won't lead to total and complete destruction doesn't mean it's not worth thinking about. Alternatively, just because things could be worse doesn't mean they're already perfect.

[I_Bob]

Well one way to help broaden the range of challenges available in the game is to modify some of the proposed changes a bit.

The Store is here to stay, and you can self impose limits on that, much like Perma death players do for other things in the game. One can choose to run without using the store to access any gameplay affecting item whlie questing. (It would still be used to change hair colors, buy character slots, etc.)

The second main change - dungeon scaling, has not feature to toggle so there is no choice at present. Right now it scales the quests based on party size alone with some adjustment for normal, hard or elite. Unfortunately, that also means that you can no longer adjust the challenge effectively by trying to shortman quests, since the dungeon self nerfs when you do.

One way to handle that, would be to scale Normal settings as they propose. Remove any scaling from Elite (maintaining current challenge settings) and split the difference with Hard, putting in a lessened scaling effect. This broadens the spectrum a bit with a lot of overlap and allows the haves to continue to challenge themselves by running elite runs with fewer players if they want a greater challenge for completion.

I agree with this, good suggestion. "Oblivion" did scaling and I think it greatly lessened the experience. Elite should be elite. If it scales down, it's no longer elite, much less challenge. There then becomes not much difference in levels, so what's the point? If the dungeon is not challenging, the game becomes a bore pretty fast. There's still a great deal of satisfaction in beating the Abbot while not much, if any, in the Reaver.

[Grond]

I beat VoD on a regular basis without a Monk splash "Tanking". My S&B Tank does just fine against him as do the many Warforged aggro magnets. The concept of "One way to beat X" is the primary reason people feel theres no challenge in the game. Expand your horizons, try different ways to complete your objectives.

Well said, Impaqt. Unfortunately, the crowd you're talking to seems more likely to claim the game is flawed because it doesn't meet their view than broaden their horizons.