Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Class spell lists and pact magic are back!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9119445" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Ah yes, the nonsense of you admitting the own flaws in your reasoning and me pointing it out. No need to look into that, or to answer what sort of data you would need, or proving your own points in any meaningful way. Just keep repeating that my arguments are worthless and I don't understand or am unwilling to engage. That's the way to prove your point.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, okay, I hear you. You want me to explain how the survey works. You want me to show</p><p></p><p>1) How simple is it for the participants to tell WoTC their answers to the following questions. </p><p>a) Do you like this proposal enough to put it into the game. </p><p>b) Do you like this proposal, but would like it improved.</p><p>c) Do you want it thrown out</p><p></p><p>Now, how simple is it? As simple as clicking on the options in the survey. They even provide a comment box that is very simple to use to clarify your answers or give reasoning. That is how simple it is. </p><p></p><p>See, cause, and follow along here, if I like something, like a lot, I click this option that says "very satisfied". That communicates that I like the proposal a lot. And if I like it, but not that much, I click "satisfied". If I don't like it? If I'm looking at it and I'm like, "no, this isn't that good" then I click "disatisfied". And, and this is the tricky part, if I hate it? If I want it to burn in a fire? I click "very disatisfied". And then, I often put comments to clarify, in that convenient little comment box.</p><p></p><p>Now, how could WoTC POSSIBLY use that data? Well, see, they take my answers, and they compare them with tens of thousands of other answers. And if they get a result that is vastly in love with the idea.... they keep it and plan on putting it in the game. If they get a result that isn't that good, but it isn't a dumpster fire, then they will probably look at improving it, because more than half the people liked it, maybe liked it alot, but it just isn't where they want that number to be. And if something scored only about 50/50? They toss it. </p><p></p><p>Because, you see, they have this entire, complete, really popular game. Its kind of a big deal. And, if the worst thing they can do is fall back on their already incredibly popular and successful game... that's still good for them. </p><p></p><p>So, that's question one. I just showed you the entire process. Let's look at question two. </p><p></p><p>2) Show that they don't need the text box. </p><p></p><p>Oh, I already answered this. But, you see, when they run the answers of "Very satisfied", "Satisfied", "Dissatisfied" and "Very Dissatisfied" into their data processing program, that collates all the data, it gives them a percentage. And that percentage is how they determine how well liked the proposal was. And they could go just off that. But many people like myself give more nuanced answers in the text boxes, so since they graduated high school and realize nuance exists, they find referencing those comments to be useful at narrowing down WHY something was popular or unpopular. After all, if a Barbarian ability was popular because it didn't rely on Rage, and they change it to make it rely on Rage, that would make it less popular. </p><p></p><p>There is actually a whole science behind this sort of thing. And, I know, I know that I didn't really provide something like "well how does my individual vote move that percentage line" or "how do we know for certain that WoTC isn't lying about their data and their entire data processing center is just a gerbil in a terrarium" And the truth is, we don't know for certain. WoTC could be making decisions based on using a Ouiji board to contact the ghost of Dave Arneson and I'd have no way of knowing. But, you see, the process I've laid out is exactly what WoTC has said it is, exactly how they have reported their own data, exactly how they have claimed to use that data, and since I don't want to go to jail for breaking and entering and my spy drones can't fly across the country, I really have only two options. </p><p></p><p>I can believe them and that they know what they are doing or I can insist that I KNOW they are either lying or incompetent, and actually they aren't going to succeed at this project of theirs because I read the survey once and I can't believe people can actually understand how to fill it out.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 9119445, member: 6801228"] Ah yes, the nonsense of you admitting the own flaws in your reasoning and me pointing it out. No need to look into that, or to answer what sort of data you would need, or proving your own points in any meaningful way. Just keep repeating that my arguments are worthless and I don't understand or am unwilling to engage. That's the way to prove your point. Ok, okay, I hear you. You want me to explain how the survey works. You want me to show 1) How simple is it for the participants to tell WoTC their answers to the following questions. a) Do you like this proposal enough to put it into the game. b) Do you like this proposal, but would like it improved. c) Do you want it thrown out Now, how simple is it? As simple as clicking on the options in the survey. They even provide a comment box that is very simple to use to clarify your answers or give reasoning. That is how simple it is. See, cause, and follow along here, if I like something, like a lot, I click this option that says "very satisfied". That communicates that I like the proposal a lot. And if I like it, but not that much, I click "satisfied". If I don't like it? If I'm looking at it and I'm like, "no, this isn't that good" then I click "disatisfied". And, and this is the tricky part, if I hate it? If I want it to burn in a fire? I click "very disatisfied". And then, I often put comments to clarify, in that convenient little comment box. Now, how could WoTC POSSIBLY use that data? Well, see, they take my answers, and they compare them with tens of thousands of other answers. And if they get a result that is vastly in love with the idea.... they keep it and plan on putting it in the game. If they get a result that isn't that good, but it isn't a dumpster fire, then they will probably look at improving it, because more than half the people liked it, maybe liked it alot, but it just isn't where they want that number to be. And if something scored only about 50/50? They toss it. Because, you see, they have this entire, complete, really popular game. Its kind of a big deal. And, if the worst thing they can do is fall back on their already incredibly popular and successful game... that's still good for them. So, that's question one. I just showed you the entire process. Let's look at question two. 2) Show that they don't need the text box. Oh, I already answered this. But, you see, when they run the answers of "Very satisfied", "Satisfied", "Dissatisfied" and "Very Dissatisfied" into their data processing program, that collates all the data, it gives them a percentage. And that percentage is how they determine how well liked the proposal was. And they could go just off that. But many people like myself give more nuanced answers in the text boxes, so since they graduated high school and realize nuance exists, they find referencing those comments to be useful at narrowing down WHY something was popular or unpopular. After all, if a Barbarian ability was popular because it didn't rely on Rage, and they change it to make it rely on Rage, that would make it less popular. There is actually a whole science behind this sort of thing. And, I know, I know that I didn't really provide something like "well how does my individual vote move that percentage line" or "how do we know for certain that WoTC isn't lying about their data and their entire data processing center is just a gerbil in a terrarium" And the truth is, we don't know for certain. WoTC could be making decisions based on using a Ouiji board to contact the ghost of Dave Arneson and I'd have no way of knowing. But, you see, the process I've laid out is exactly what WoTC has said it is, exactly how they have reported their own data, exactly how they have claimed to use that data, and since I don't want to go to jail for breaking and entering and my spy drones can't fly across the country, I really have only two options. I can believe them and that they know what they are doing or I can insist that I KNOW they are either lying or incompetent, and actually they aren't going to succeed at this project of theirs because I read the survey once and I can't believe people can actually understand how to fill it out. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Class spell lists and pact magic are back!
Top