Why not change course?

[Ath192]

Once something is implemented, it's easier to maintain it than to try and do something completely new since it's already generating "value" as long as it exists. That's why when something is a controversial or bad feature, the best idea is to just keep it alive and work on other things. What is kind of a haunting problem is that they had a huge population explosion and felt that adding wards would help somehow when there's going to be far more demand than what is available from the effort.

I can see that but that’s where the fault lies. The perception that it is generating value for the game when it is actually degrading the value of the game and causing bad PR.

To what extent this is occurring is debatable, however, if anything can be drawn from this is that this is decreasing the games value and not enhancing it. It is a sunk cost fallacy.

sunk-cost fallacy
noun
the phenomenon whereby a person is reluctant to abandon a strategy or course of action because they have invested heavily in it, even when it is clear that abandonment would be more beneficial.
"the sunk-cost fallacy creeps into a lot of major financial decisions"