Out of touch? PLL

[Erzaa]

You mean the "far more popular mount" that had, lemme check, a whooping 2.11% higher acquisition rate. Yes, very popular...

Considering the participation of all content in the game except the MSQ gets progressively lower, it stands to reason that max rank Island Sanctuary wouldn't have improved when nothing else does. You can see that in the drop from Pagos to Hydatos. The fact they're only 5% off when the stats are heavily weighted in Island's favour is more an indictment on how much a flop that content was. And why sacrificing exploratory content for it was a bad idea.

What on Earth are you on about? Nowhere did I claim, or even tried to claim, Island Sanctuary was some massive success.

You brought up the statistics of the acquisition of the Island Mandragora mount, comparing it to participation in field content. You did this in an attempt to shut someone else down who's argument is that Eureka isn't all that popular. The essence of your argument hinges on the idea that acquiring an Island Sanctuary Rank 1 mount is somehow comparable to reaching Eureka Elemental Level 60. All I did, was call you out on using the two completely irrelevant to each other stats, making a false equivalency.

You essentially tried to pull a, statistics trump everything, completely ignoring how numbers don't tell the whole story. There's a reason the term "Lies, damn lies and statistics" exists.

It's really a simple concept, I don't know what you find difficult to comprehend. Island Mandragora mount is unlocked at Rank 1, Garlond GL-II is unlocked at Rank 10. The GL-II has a higher acquisition rate, ergo, more people achieved Rank 10 in IS than people who own the Island Mandragora. 10 is larger than 1, 23% is larger than 21%. The statistics you tried to provide to support your argument were wrong from the get go, ergo your whole argument falls apart.

I mentioned that more a rebuttal to you insinuating most people will finish the story of a given piece of content. They won't unless it's something they're already engaged with or it has a big enough incentive.

Mhm... So you replied to an argument I wasn't making. The point of what I said, is that people interact with content for a variety of reasons, and gave an example of why I participated. The point I'm making is that, participation of a certain content, doesn't make said content popular or loved, or fun, or interesting. Guess that went right over your head?

You right here are making an apple to oranges comparison. Reaching rank 20 in Island Sanctuary is entirely passive and requires zero effect from the player beyond slotting random things in a spreadsheet. Meanwhile, obtaining the Ozma mount necessitates cooperative play at an EX level with 24 other players where perma-death is a thing. The latter has a vastly higher demand, thus trying to stack it against max Rank IS is ridiculous. Not to mention, like I already said, Baldesion Arsenal is a separate piece of content within Eureka but isn't necessarily the main objective for participation. Most players were relic hunting or simply liked exploratory zone content. Hence why the redditor used max elemental rank over the Ozma mount.

I know I'm right. That's why I kept replying to your bad faith arguments. And achieving the maximum rank in Island Sanctuary is completely separate piece of content to buying a mount. The amount of effort required to acquire something or not, isn't even relevant, I don't know what point you're trying to make here. Nothing I said relates to the amount of effort required to achieve something. My entire argument is interpreting the statistics wrong.

No. you brought it up because it was more convenient for your argument.

Uhm... no? I brought it up for exactly the reason I said, because there's multiple Mandragora type mounts, and the Adenium mount is the final one, requiring Rank 20 and Felicitous Favours. Your post didn't specify which Mandragora mount you were referring to. In fact, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you were talking about Mandragoras that unlock far later, which would've actually given your argument more credence.

If you believe otherwise, well... that's a you issue and I'm frankly not in the least bit bothered what you believe.

"Island Mandragora" is literally one of the first set of mounts available and the easiest to obtain. Furthermore, you can't keep insisting these mounts are widely unpopular. This is the third time you've attempted to argue that point. The Island Mandragora is 2.11% lower than the Garlond GL mount you kept prattling about as being so much more popular. Neither is because nobody cared enough to even do IS despite it being literally designed as chill content for the average player.

What part of Rank 10 is higher than Rank 1 is hard for you to understand? More people got to Rank 10 in IS than your initial argument claims. I feel like a broken record at this point. Blathering on about none of them are popular, 2% higher, doesn't change the facts. You attempted to utilise statistics to shut down someone's argument, and you were factually, objectively wrong. I didn't post those stats. You did. Don't make arguments you can't support in the future.

I never said Eureka was necessarily good. You're assuming my position. I'm simply refuting the notion exploratory content on the whole was widely disliked when what data we have available suggests otherwise. Eureka was divisive but far from unpopular. Pagos is what really hurt the overall opinion. Meanwhile, Bozja is largely seen as a considerable improvement even if I also think it had issues.

You understand that you can't make a claim as to whether Eureka was liked or disliked based on statistics, like... at all?

Field content is tied to relic weapons and keeping the game active. It funnels players into it by design. And people are wont to do things they find unpleasurable because they have to, or because they want something badly enough. So, even on that front, you argument falls apart.

You don't toss up a bunch of numbers without any context behind them and claim victory. How many times have we heard engagement metrics from developers and then someone is rightfully quick to point out that, just because someone engages with something, doesn't mean they enjoy it? How many posts on the forums alone, have made fun of the Endwalker relics having the highest participation, but were not considered fun or engaging, because they were just bought with tomestones? But now, since the "statistics" you provided, suit your argument, they're suddenly proving that the content was widely liked? All your numbers showed, is that a good portion of the playerbase engaged with field content, that's it. Nothing more.

And so, to conclude this circus, here I am, a person who achieved Elemental Level 60 in Eureka, who also helped a friend a year later also achieve it, a person who's done the Anemos Relic, who's completed Bozja and two relics from it; and I am telling you right now... It wasn't enjoyable to me, at all. But I did it anyway. I'm in the metrics you posted, I'm one of those statistics you're so fond of. I dislike field content, I despise their very concept. And you know what? When the next field content arrives for Dawntrail, I'm going to do that too, and I'm going to hate every minute of it.