Dec 9, 2015, 7:49 PM

@bored said:

It's not agitation, its lack of equivocation

Let me try to be more specific if you don't mind.

There's a lot of 'oh well good staffing can make anything work' in this thread, and on this forum in general, but I think that's BS. The sort of thing @Ganymede is suggesting is a) not actually different from how MU* have always worked and b) fundamentally terrible, as the history of this stuff tells us.

Aside from personal experience, if reading these forums can demonstrate anything it's that there's absolutely no 'how MU* have always worked'. We've seen so many different approaches by games - some of which failed spectacularly - there's no way to realistically stick any label on them all and call it a day.

In this case I'd argue you would have a hard time showing either that every MU* has tried to engage in favoritism (for instance, RfK seems to have gone to extremes to avoid exactly that, and was actually criticized for it at times) or that history tells us they've always failed - since even say Firan lasted for many years and engaged hundreds of players. If only every game failed like that!

I think the debate of whether games should be run for fairness or for fun is a far more interesting one than whether Gany is a tyrannical despot, you know? ... I mean obviously she is, but she's our tyrannical despot. πŸ™‚