sbs is a company who needs money to create CoE and with rash words others skim the company is simply losing money that is needed to create CoE and we might already miss some features we all would love to have at the release of CoE as this is basically the consequence of using words with negative meaning even if the intention was no offense meant.

This forum is simply their showroom and it is totally in sbs and our interest that new players do not trip over unfavorable words or (at least partly) false statements as some players will skip the game just because these words are mentioned in association with CoE and to criticize something does not mean you have to damage the company and this way editing/deleting such posts sound reasonable.

Of course they are trying to make some money as they have to pay bills but I guess they would have got more money if they simply added the old and new items you can get out of the calendar to the store but they instead tried to create something interesting and fitting to the lore and RL season…sadly this might have been their last try to do something like this.

Lets not turn this into another lootbox argument, people. Keep it on track or make a new topic.

I've also put in official complaints as I've seen under handed conduct that herds the supporters of this game into a realm of "acceptable speech", seemingly solely for the purpose of saving SBS or the Admins some stress. This is NOT what moderation is, and no one should accept this.

The forum has always felt a bit pointless, but after the TOTALLY UNNECESSARY edits, locks and deletes started to ramp up to narrow people into a pen of acceptable speech, it's started to feel even more pointless, and even juvenile. The perceived intent behind this conduct is not to keep the community civil, it's to control what speech is visible and interactable to the public. Let's face it, if there was a civil discussion on the lootboxes (or anything else for that matter), that would be "moderated" and locked from the public. Same goes for many posts on Reddit.

What does this all mean for us, as the fans? It means admins and moderators get to subtly hang your pledge and account over your head as an unspoken threat; Your account doesn't feel safe and secure under this guidance. It means that the people who continue the talking points and the people who try to herd people (especially newcomers or skeptics) into areas of acceptable [and predictable] speech get propped up, given privileges others don't. It means you - as a paying fan and believer of a dream - aren't allowed access to opposing view points (many of which can be debunked if you let us at 'em). It means you're scoffed at and treated with derision for challenging those with privileges, because from the Admins perspectives, asking for open, civil speech in controversial areas is 'crazy' and can't be trusted. Finally, it means the game you loved and supported years ago (of which had a community and forum that can only be described as a shining city on a hill among millions of cess pools) is changing, and changing for the worse. The good old days are now OFFICIALLY the good old days.

Why has this happened? Why are the studio and the Admins seemingly so jaded and cynical these days? How can loot box events go UNCHALLENGED by anyone at the studio? How can they ask us to pay $90+ a pop for ANYTHING without creating even a tiny bit of content for us to enjoy? And how has many of those within the community become indoctrinated into relentless apologetics, when we should all be on the same side, even if it means beung critical of content and conduct..? We can only speculate. But my theory is that this is all natural human nature - common mistakes even good people fall into during the process - except not a single person in the team or admin clique along the chain has stopped and said "yo maybe you're wrong on this". If anything, it seems to be the opposite, and they're all in total agreement that they're nailing this, and everything (bad conduct, bad choices) can be justified if you explain it slowly enough to the rabble.

The reason I see the admin edit was made regarding loot boxes being compared to the calendars is really simple.

A year or so ago Caspian had some meetings with investors and publishing companies seeking funding for CoE. He made this impassioned post about why sbs would forge its own path and be true to its vision for the game. He said to a company they all wanted to have an online store selling items beyond just sparks or to add loot boxes. Because he and the rest of the folks at sbs felt this violated their vision they decided to remain solely a KS project and rely on donations and their own online (prelaunch) store to generate revenue to keep the doors open. Even if this meant delays and a slower production process they felt their vision was worth the risk.

Even the perception the calendars are being seeing as loot boxes flies in the face of that very public post. If the comment was allowed to stand someone would have eventually linked Caspians post and made it look like he went back on his very passionate words and started WWIII on discord or the forums.

So instead as Caspian I believe said in discord that wasn’t their intent with the calendars so since he said it wasn’t their purpose or intent comparing them to loot boxes is misinformation.

I don’t really buy the argument but the studio has to protect their product.

Once more though this highlights the need for a community manager to actually handle press releases and public perception of the company. The current setup leaves sbs appearing tone deaf, and amateurish when it comes to marketing.

The above is my opinion and does not reflect that of my county, duchy or kingdom. It is not meant to offend or start a flame war. It is simply my opinion and perception of how sbs has handled the entire mess. And yes it is a giant steaming mess that once more happened because no one is taking a step back and asking “is this really a good idea”?

Honestly since this website does not have a functional dev tracker or useful search function it is a challenge to know what the devs said when sometimes. This is of course exaggerated by staff apparently deciding to post under our names now via an admin edit? Thanks for that point out there Marovec that makes it even worse.

Posted By Drudge at 08:27 AM - Thu Dec 05 2019

Utterly wrong

I must have missed where Serp said that. Also, I have only responded to others claims.

And it is not utterly wrong. It is valid and sound. You are criticizing loot boxes, therefore you must follow the definition of loot boxes that are criticized. Or if you have a new argument against loot boxes, then I'm sure the wiki would love to have your new argument against them added to it. And if you are expecting to get something other than what was promised, then you are wrong. It's that simple. Don't expect something specific when all that is promised is something random and unknown.

This seems to be on topic for this thread:

Caspian ☁Last Tuesday at 12:38 AM

Chronicles of Elyria is a crowdfunded game currently. The goals and ambitions of the game still create too much risk for most publishers and investors. But that's something we're working to change.

In the meantime, our community pledges their support via the purchase of promotional items, etc. in order to fund the development of the game. So what people get when they buy something in our online store is "the continued development of the game." For which we, and others in the community, are continuously grateful.

If that doesn't make sense to you, or isn't what you're here for, then I urge you again not to buy anything from our online store. It's intended just for those that want to fund the development of Chronicles of Elyria

In addition to not projecting your own random expectations onto what they sell, if your intentions are not to fund the development of the game, then please don't buy any.

What is invalid and unsound is the argument that the advent calendars are criticized loot boxes. Which means that talking point does not belong in this thread at all. Since it was misinformation that was incorrectly asserted to be true, and thus acceptable to be deleted by moderators

Oh, i just noticed that you haven't bought anything, yet you are complaining about buying things. wow. you are not even talking from experience, no wonder.

Even though, once more this isn't about the calendars, I will add this about the "misinformation" thing:

Disagreement is not misinformation.

People have opposing views on what constitutes a "loot box" - we see it all over the place, not just here.

Stating that you are unhappy because you think SBS is selling a loot box isn't "misinformation", it's a difference of opinion.

The reason I didn't approve of that edit, under the reasoning of misinformation, was that SBS presented their view as the absolute fact, when, in reality, it's debatable.

Disagree? Fine. Caspian had his response, and I found it fairly reasonable even if I didn't agree.

However, it wasn't "fact". It was their side if the story.

Posted By Marovec at 10:25 AM - Thu Dec 05 2019

Even though, once more this isn't about the calendars, I will add this about the "misinformation" thing:

Disagreement is not misinformation.

People have opposing views on what constitutes a "loot box" - we see it all over the place, not just here.

Stating that you are unhappy because you think SBS is selling a loot box isn't "misinformation", it's a difference of opinion.

The reason I didn't approve of that edit, under the reasoning of misinformation, was that SBS presented their view as the absolute fact, when, in reality, it's debatable.

Disagree? Fine. Caspian had his response, and I found it fairly reasonable even if I didn't agree.

However, it wasn't "fact". It was their side if the story.

This is likely the underlying reason why Drudge's comments were asserting false information:

https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/34341/longest-night-locked#post379685

"You can debate the perceived value of the loot boxes but you cannot debate what they are."

https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/34341/longest-night-locked?page=2#post379808

"Study after study has shown that if you lure people in with a great deal {including free} at the start, you will hook more of them on the loot box concept."

He asserts the advent calendars are gambling, which they are not. They also do not have the characteristics of criticized loot boxes. His comments truly were factual misinformation.

The line seems to be drawn by moderators at the asserting part. If he had merely stated his opinion, then it would have been ok. However, he crossed the line into "cannot [be] debated"

@Avastar

Virtual every single person on the internet, let alone just these forums, makes statements like that.

If not properly couching an opinion in the appropriate language to ensure that everyone understands it is an opinion is grounds for an edit, you might as well just remove every thread here.

Bottom line, he stated an opinion, provided what he viewed as evidence to support that opinion, and was modded for "misinformation".

While I can't argue against the fact that this is their forum to do with as they will, it's a shaky foundation to base a justification on.

Again, I see no value in debating the "officially sanctioned definition of lootboxes" with you. As I mentioned, everyone has their own views of what constitutes a "lootbox" - that isn't what this is about.

It's about the precedent of calling dissenting opinion "misinformation".

EDIT:

For example, your line here:

"If he had merely stated his opinion, then it would have been ok."

Would it? Is that a fact? Or is that your opinion? You stated it pretty definitively. Should your post be modded because you presented opinion as fact?

Posted By Drudge at 10:50 AM - Thu Dec 05 2019

Unbelievable.

currently we are discussing what is and is not appropriate to be deleted by moderators. the specific topic just happens to be your past incorrect factual assertions which were misinformation and not opinion.

Posted By Marovec at 10:51 AM - Thu Dec 05 2019

For example, your line here:

"If he had merely stated his opinion, then it would have been ok."

Would it? Is that a fact? Or is that your opinion? You stated it pretty definitively. Should your post be modded because you presented opinion as fact?

I agree with you. Moderation should not occur for simply stating an opinion, even when that opinion does or does not have true factual support. However, an opinion is stating "what I believe", "what I think might be", "what might be," which should not be moderated.

While asserting something to be true is stating "what is," which can be moderated.

There is an important distinction.

Yes, i was asserting factual information that can be moderated, versus mere opinion. Thank you for providing a good example. Now, if the moderators believe in their opinion that my assertion is false, then they could moderate it.

But...your statement wasn't "factual information"...it was opinion, that was fairly obvious in context, just like Drudge's.

Anyway, I feel like we are destined to keep talking past each other, like two ships in the night, lost to the darkness that is the perpetual forum war.

I'll just leave it at, "I disagree with you."

:P

Posted By Marovec at 11:23 AM - Thu Dec 05 2019

But...your statement wasn't "factual information"...it was opinion, that was fairly obvious in context, just like Drudge's.

Anyway, I feel like we are destined to keep talking past each other, like two ships in the night, lost to the darkness that is the perpetual forum war.

I'll just leave it at, "I disagree with you."

:P

If you aren't seeking understanding, then I will agree to let your ship float away in darkness. If you are seeking understanding, then don't say lines like, lets us agree to disagree.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/factual

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/information

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/opinion