Dynamic Adjustment
From the other thread before Kyno closed it: CG_SBCrumb wrote: » As we mentioned in the Q&A, we don't do any manual changing of odds in general. Additionally, we don't modify the drop rates of cha...
Forum Discussion
"Reyalp;c-1879525" wrote:"leef;c-1879522" wrote:
what's the goal here?
If they were going to admit to using such a system, they would have by now. If you still believe they're using such a system, you're not going to believe they aren't no matter what they say.
Believe what you want to believe, personally i'd pick the option that enrages me the most so i can get more and more upset every time i get bad drops. Works like a charm, really enjoyable.
The semantics of their response said 'manual'. A dynamic algorithm is anything but manual, especially when it's based on machine learning.
Since they can just flat out lie without consequenses, i don't see why you want to argue sementics here.
A game that takes money from people should be transparent in how it does so. If an algorithm dynamically changes drop rates to induce you in to playing longer or spending money then it prays on gambling.
Transparancy on such a system would definately not benefit the game, or the players for that matter.
It's not about whether you agree or disagree with it - however it certainly puts the 'RNG' arguement to bed as that doesn't exist in a game that dynamically adapts to the situation based on trained data
So what is it about? A hypothetical discussion about RNG not excisting under the assumption that they're using such a system? What purpose would that serve?
