Wanted to circle back and again highlight how disappointed I am in all of the unpolled content coming through.
And
To touch on the point of "spite" voting. I find it frustrating that when players vote 'no' to PvP content it is considered to be spiteful.
How drab.
The point of a poll is to gauge the community's desire for content to enter the game. If people don't want PvP content in the game, of course, they will vote no. I fail to understand why this is considered spite and their voices should not be taken into consideration. It's simply the dynamic of voting.
If you want people to vote 'yes' - convince them and educate them that they should be voting yes to PvP content. Too often I see people ragging on or being toxic to players who dislike PvP, if anything you're alienating them further. Unfortunate as some may feel it, just because a portion of the community dislikes PvP shouldn't exclude them from having a say when it does have an effect on their gameplay should they choose to explore content in the wilderness.
The counters to that so often expounded: "Well, they don't have to go into the wilderness. The point of the wilderness is that it is dangerous. Etc..." You all know and have stated them. This in itself, I feel, is a fallacy. People who want to use the content in the wildly who aren't PKers and dislike PvP content are, indeed, affected by decisions like this. So many wilderness updates go uncontested, now, because of the idea of spite. Why is it spiteful if I want the content 'I' use to be more catered to my gameplay? Is it then not spiteful that 'you' want it catered to yours?
If anything, it's spiteful to not include a portion of the community's voice simply because another portion of the population is upset their content doesn't prove as popular to other players. It intentionally damages that population's voice for the sake of another's.
If the game needs to evolve, let it, but don't force people out of the discussion.
17-Jul-2020 21:43:17
