PSA: Hotfixing Paused Until The Lotus Eaters

[UpstatePunk]

5 hours ago, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

What are you talking about lol? You literally brought the idea of a peer review into this entire discussion. Nobody mentioned it before you, because you were the only one silly enough to try to bring a term you didn't fully understand into this to try to sound more intellectual. That backtracking was utterly atrocious. And it makes no sense.

And I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why a peer review is the problem here? You've now claimed that you weren't trying to bring it into the discussion (clearly a lie). So you must know, right?

Let's rewind to the actual quote that brought peer review into the discussion, shall we?

Quote

 Surely you have a peer-reviewed study or at the very least an evidence based reason for this, right?

It is clearly a question asking if you have a peer-reviewed study, or any other evidence to formulate your opinion. Your subsequent answers revealed that was not the case. You focus on it has been in error, but understandable considering you don't actually have any sort of evidence for any of your claims at all. So, you tried to pick what you thought was the "weakest" of my arguments, turn it into a straw-man fallacy by completely misrepresenting it. Then feigning the intellectual high ground. 

[-Runn_Jegu-]

Please DE add this to top priority bug fixes, it's been happening a huge amount since the Jade Shadows: Hotfix 36.0.8 update, ty

 

[(PSN)MYKK678]

7 hours ago, Yamazuki said:

https://www.warframe.com/news/the-lotus-eaters-coming-august

"Coming this August, The Lotus Eaters will feature a short Quest that acts as a prologue to the events of Warframe: 1999." -July 20, 2024.

Dev short merely has them repeating the same exact thing they've been saying this entire time.

I am still awaiting your source that stated any other patch but the one containing 1999 content was going to be significant in terms of content to play.

Wait for that all you like, I've already explained I never claimed how short or long any of it is. Another thing missed because you spend more time bashing the keyboard than reading. If you'd like to quote where I said anything about the length as a fact, feel free and I'll gladly address it.

So to be clear you think the short quest is the only thing coming in the update, there's absolutely nothing else. Got it. Now you make sense. You ignore details often. The thing that shut down all of your own points earlier in this thread had come back to bite you again once you started leeching off others points. Understood.

[(PSN)MYKK678]

2 hours ago, UpstatePunk said:

Let's rewind to the actual quote that brought peer review into the discussion, shall we?

It is clearly a question asking if you have a peer-reviewed study, or any other evidence to formulate your opinion. Your subsequent answers revealed that was not the case. You focus on it has been in error, but understandable considering you don't actually have any sort of evidence for any of your claims at all. So, you tried to pick what you thought was the "weakest" of my arguments, turn it into a straw-man fallacy by completely misrepresenting it. Then feigning the intellectual high ground. 

- Let's review the thing I just said I didn't bring into the conversation

- Quotes it

- Comes back with the single weirdest explanation one could imagine.

I'm sorry, do you think everyone asks for a peer review of all of their opinions lol? What are you talking about lol? Was any of that supposed to make sense? "I was just asking if you had a peer review" nobody ever asks that of anyone regarding opinions, it is not a normal thing to ask, ever lol.

I want to clarify something here before I address the upcoming point. I take Mental Health very seriously. Genuinely seriously.

There is something not right about you if you think asking someone for their peer reviews is normal. Something should be there but isn't. Something is missing. It's insane to think that's a normal question. If you want to keep the charade going of pretending you were genuinely asking that instead of us both knowing the truth, that you were attempting to sound far more intelligent than you are, then you're going to need help. That type of thing just doesn't come up in normal human conversations. And you're still there trying to defend its existence, hoping I'll forget that 1 reply ago you claimed you never brought peer reviews into the conversation.

Nobody can Diagnose anyone through online interactions which is why I'd never even attempt to, but if you want help with whatever has you thinking any of this was normal, PM me and let me know where abouts you live (not full address, just area, always keep your details safe) and I'll look into somewhere that can actually help you. But this is deranged behaviour, almost manic. Saying something, then claiming you never did even when everything is typed out, and then acting like something nobody ever asks in those situations is normal. Please feel free to go full-on Gen Z and throw in as many "Strawman" accusations as you like, I don't mind after this. But once you calm down, consider the offer I gave. Theres something deeply wrong there but it can be made better.

[UpstatePunk]

 

 

On 2024-08-15 at 4:01 PM, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

I'm sorry, do you think everyone asks for a peer review of all of their opinions lol?

No, but I do expect somebody masquerading as a person that claims to value objective truth, that make demands like 

Quote

 Can I have a look at the survey you did with new players? Nobody here could possibly be silly enough to come in here and try to definitively claim "Craft Timers kill the game for new players" unless they've done the appropriate work to have this locked in as a fact. I'm interested in seeing the data.

To also have data that backs their claim that 

Quote

Forums: 2 WEEKS IS TOO LONG WHY WOULD YOU NEED THIS IT DOESNT MAKE ANY SENSE WHY NO BUG FIXES WHY AM I NOT GETTING WHAT I WANT RIGHT NOW I HAVE SO MANY ASSUMPTIONS WITH LITTLE TO NO FACTS WAAAAAH!!!!!!

It may not have been the intention, but this thread sure did work out as a great way to highlight as many ungrateful players as possible. Keep voluntarily adding yourselves to that list folks, it'll help determine who's opinion to take seriously in future threads.

So, if you don't provide any data for your assertions you cannot demand data for others. Any claim made without data can be dismissed without data.

 

My first response was to somebody who presumably wanted to compare data and dig into the truth of the matter. In such a discussion a peer-reviewed study is among the strongest types of data. You got confused, mightily, by a simple question asking if you had any data (in the form of a peer-reviewed study) to support your claim (you didn't) you then claimed I tried to 

Quote

Theres a massive issue with you trying to apply a peer review to any of this

I did not try to apply a peer review, I asked if you had any data. As you have no data to review, you have opinions which cannot be peer-reviewed. The only one struggling with this is you. 

 

On 2024-08-15 at 4:01 PM, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

If you want to keep the charade going of pretending you were genuinely asking that instead of us both knowing the truth That type of thing just doesn't come up in normal human conversations. And you're still there trying to defend its existence, hoping I'll forget that 1 reply ago you claimed you never brought peer reviews into the conversation.

I am starting to doubt you have any grasp of truth, or possibly even objective reality. Reading comprehension is not your strength is it? As I pointed out in the response where I laid out my quote it is very clearly a question and not an implication. I never denied that I was the source of the peer review discussion. If I did, please quote it. I said I never used peer-review in the way you tried to say I did. I even gave you quotes that clearly reinforced that. (See how data works?)

The only person feigning intelligence is you. Everything I have said is consistent and backed by data. You give summaries of the discussion so you can cut out context and ignore points that are too hard for you to argue, I give quotes both of what I have said and the points you made. Your responses have avoided interacting with the arguments presented (presumably because  you just don't actually understand it) so you latched on to peer-review to try and derail the conversation. Very manipulative behavior, not something that intelligent people need to do. You then launch into this frankly sad attempt to sound compassionate, while trying change the subject to your very insightful psychoanalysis which definitely wasn't more projection from you. 

On 2024-08-15 at 4:01 PM, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

 Theres something deeply wrong there but it can be made better.

I agree your behavior certainly isn't normal. Claiming that I said things that I didn't is very odd, ignoring quotes and eschewing valid arguments to hyperfocus on some perceived mistake is deeply disturbing behavior. I have my mental health well in hand, friend. You need to work on yours, though. For the record my location is at your mom's house. 

On 2024-08-15 at 4:01 PM, (PSN)MYKK678 said:

Please feel free to go full-on Gen Z and throw in as many "Strawman" accusations as you like, I don't mind after this. But once you calm down, consider the offer I gave. Theres something deeply wrong there but it can be made better.

I didn't know that pointing out objective truths was going "full-on Gen Z." Stop making strawman fallacies and I'll stop pointing them out. Try arguing an actual point for once. 

Edited August 17 by UpstatePunk
removed redundant word

[Stafelund]

34 minutes ago, UpstatePunk said:

 I didn't know that pointing out objective truths was going "full-on Gen Z." Stop making strawman fallacies and I'll stop pointing them out. Try arguing an actual point for once. 

If anything, the guy is exhibiting Gen Z/Gen Alpha behavior. He seems like the person who would be discussed in this video:

He may not throw out Gen Z and Gen Alpha slangs all day but he sure behaves like one 🤣

Also, he likely has oppositional defiant disorder, he's not the only one but he takes the cake. You can see him argue for the sake of arguing, that is if he's not trolling. If he is, then the forum mods would need to put him on a leash for disruptive behavior.

Edited August 17 by Stafelund

[UpstatePunk]

2 minutes ago, Stafelund said:

If anything, the guy is exhibiting Gen Z/Gen Alpha behavior. He seems like the person who would be discussed in this video:

He may not throw out Gen Z and Gen Alpha slangs all day but he sure behaves like one 🤣

 My Gen Z children don't behave as badly as this petulant man-baby. 

[(PSN)MYKK678]

38 minutes ago, UpstatePunk said:

 

 

No, but I do expect somebody masquerading as a person that claims to value objective truth, that make demands like 

To also have data that backs their claim that 

So, if you don't provide any data for your assertions you cannot demand data for others. Any claim made without data can be dismissed without data.

 

My first response was to somebody who presumably wanted to compare data and dig into the truth of the matter. In such a discussion a peer-reviewed study is among the strongest types of data. You got confused, mightily, by a simple question asking if you had any data (in the form of a peer-reviewed study) to support your claim (you didn't) you then claimed I tried to 

I did not try to apply a peer review, I asked if you had any data. As you have no data to review, you have opinions which cannot be peer-reviewed. The only one struggling with this is you. 

 

I am starting to doubt you have any grasp of truth, or possibly even objective reality. Reading comprehension is not your strength is it? As I pointed out in the response where I laid out my quote it is very clearly a question and not an implication. I never denied that I was the source of the peer review discussion. If I did, please quote it. I said I never used peer-review in the way you tried to say I did. I even gave you quotes that clearly reinforced that. (See how data works?)

The only person feigning intelligence is you. Everything I have said is consistent and backed by data. You give summaries of the discussion so you can cut out context and ignore points that are too hard for you to argue, I give quotes both of what I have said and the points you made. Your responses have avoided interacting with the arguments presented (presumably because  you just don't actually understand it) so you latched on to peer-review to try and derail the conversation. Very manipulative behavior, not something that intelligent people need to do. You then launch into this frankly sad attempt to sound compassionate, while trying change the subject to your very insightful psychoanalysis which definitely wasn't more projection from you. 

I agree your behavior certainly isn't normal. Claiming that I said things that I didn't is very odd, ignoring quotes and eschewing valid arguments to hyperfocus on some perceived mistake is deeply disturbing behavior. I have my mental health well in hand, friend. You need to work on yours, though. For the record my location is at your mom's house. 

I didn't know that pointing out objective truths was going "full-on Gen Z." Stop making strawman fallacies and I'll stop pointing them out. Try arguing an actual point for once. 

My apologies but as long as you keep this charade going, you'll have to be considered a vulnerable individual. And I'm not in the business of picking on people with Mental Health issues who need genuine help. Disagreements are one thing, but that would be pure cruelty. Feel free to drop the charade but until then, we're done here. I'm sure your post was very interesting but I won't be engaging this charade further. The offer of help still stands too on the off chance it isn't a charade and you truly are this unwell.

[-AncientWarrior-]

On 2024-08-08 at 8:01 PM, Circle_of_Psi said:

While I don't disagree with the sentiment either, folks who have been here long enough will know that this is the common trope for DE, leave game-breaking bugs for years or stopping hotfixs cuz they want to "Focus" on the update and sure more focus does mean less bugs right?, well, look at all the bugs still in-game that has to be fixed.

Considering they don't know how to release updates in a timely manner and always go "Opps" when they realize they can't do a update on the actual date it was suppose to come out, then you'll get used to it, while also keep giving players the radio silence treatment, thinking it's gonna hype them up.

But hey, that's just how it rolls

This describes DE's lackluster attitude towards fixing the game since I started .. you're dead right for some reason only they know its like they put on the blindfold and say "nothing wrong, nothing to see here, move along .. but don't forget to buy your tickets to Tennoncant .. to find out more of nothing "

[Circle_of_Psi]

27 minutes ago, -AncientWarrior- said:

This describes DE's lackluster attitude towards fixing the game since I started .. you're dead right for some reason only they know its like they put on the blindfold and say "nothing wrong, nothing to see here, move along .. but don't forget to buy your tickets to Tennoncant .. to find out more of nothing "

Kinda forgot this topic existed

But eh, I can see your point here, tho to be fair, it is alot better then most games out there