1.10 Analyzation Debate...

[Nicodemus Phaulkon]

By posting this, I provide an area for people to cross pollenate ideas around the boards, get them in as many eyes as possible, and lists of reasons why it may or may not be according to what we have seen in the past.

All of which means nothing, because Blizzard is the one that's actually making the code. You and your ilk are neither MAKING those decisions, impacting on those decisions, or having anything resembling INPUT on those decisions. At best, you're trying to second-guess what might happen based on the release of information that Blizzard has declared "may or may not exist in the final release". This is nothing better or worse than a "things I'd like to see in 1.10" posted 2 years ago: wishlist, Santa Claus, hyperbole and whining.

I never claim this to provide facts. THEORIES, yes, FACTS, no (not yelling, emphasizing).

Complete Codswallop. You claimed the word FACTS and listed them in their entirety in your very first post of this thread. Limit your hypocrisy, please.

We are not second guessing, we are performing an analysis of what we are given.

You have NOTHING. Even the released screenies from Blizzard claim that these "may or may not be the final release". This is the EPITOME of second-guessing.

Artwork is an example, you can say "maybe it is better to approach it from this angle because it provides you with more contrast which is what fits more into the style of this set of your works."

Excellent example, as it completely undermines your point. Art is SUBJECTIVE and is offered criticism based on SUBJECTIVE means. Further, "Analyzing" of Art is not an attempt to apply the Scientific Method to its existence. It is opinion, nothing more or less. Code is NOT subjective. You are trying to analyze a concrete existence of a baseline of facts and data. Your flaw: YOU DON'T HAVE THE FACTS AND DATA. By attempting to analyze without said facts or data, you have indeed reduced your "analyzing" to opinion, alone. How can this possibly apply to what you're attempting here? "I FEEL that the supposed synergies offered by the Poison/Bone tree are attempting to make the viewer feel the angst of the teenage need for sexual release...". OBJECTIVE vs. SUBJECTIVE. Look them both up.

If you want a Subjective approach, refer to any of the HMIs here that keep whining about supposed changes that MAY crush their leet characters and stall their MF runs. THAT'S subjectivity.

Where the angle is views on the information provided, contrast is the effect these things could potentially have on the game, and the set of works is the core framework.

There has been no information provided which is concrete. Even Art exists in a reality that you can perceive, but the effects and changes of the 1.10 patch are ethereal. The effect it could have on the game is unknown and will continue to BE unknown until you've actually PLAYED the game and garnered the information. The core framework IS changeable, and not resolute. Unlike a body of artwork that now exists as a static form; CODE can be changed, altered, muted, commented out, rectified and made redundant. You don't even have your framework, now. You have no facts, you have no basis, you have no ability to form any analysis that makes sense.

If thought of things that "do not exist" or that we don't have complete information about is so worthless...then would you not also concur that the study of Religion or a God is pointless? I could thoroughly debate that you cannot prove that a God or entity exists, merely provide it as one of a series of possible answers to a question. Should you wish to debate that analysis of the partially known or the assumed existence is worthless, I welcome you to address all aspects of that, be it in relation to a mere game (which this is), or in relation to the core beliefs of any one person or persons.

Wow, that's quite the herring you've crafted there. Debating the possible changes that may occur in a patch for Diablo 2 is the moral equivalent to being able to prove or disprove the existence of the Almighty. Wow. What's the color of the sky in your world, Logic X? Drawing parallels between debating a World Faith and a game patch is something I would hesitate to make. I'm certain it made more than myself laugh out of the sheer blessed stupidity of it. I refer you to Suggestion # 5 on my "For Posterity, then..." post of this thread.

May the Analysis of information continue should people wish.

Correction: May the OPINION of POSSIBLE information continue. Certainly everyone posting on the various speculative threads seem to concur. I look forward to 1.10. I look forward to playing the game and finding the toys and discovering the changes and chatting about them, then. I further look forward to all the then-released, actual data and true information that shall make the speculative postings rendered moot, silly, wasteful and generally mocked.

You seem to be an involved individual, Logic X. It's a shame that you can't employ that energy and desire towards something meaningful and lasting. But! I shall take your invitation to simply ignore this thread to heart... I've presented my thoughts on the matter, certainly. Despite your intentions and rules to the contrary, and your megalomaniacal need to be the crux of this "meeting of the minds" between several forums of people... this thread remains among the "d00d! 1.10 roxors/suxxors!! 1337 1tams!" lump at the bottom of the forum barrel.

Adieu.