The Wilderness Guardians - OSRS Clan - PvP, PvM and More - OSRS Mobile Clans

[18:20] <@His_Lordship> omf gguys this gideo is going to blow your mind
[18:20] <@His_Lordship> my research is boss
[18:20] <@His_Lordship> proves without a doubt that osrs is better for new players
[18:20] <@Mojohaza1> :o
[18:20] <%Josheh> idgaf about new players
[18:21] <@His_Lordship> i also address that
[18:21] <@His_Lordship> and why you should care
[18:21] <%Josheh> srry
[18:21] <%Josheh> but you aren't an expert :/
[18:22] * Vanzant is now known as Vanzant|Afk
[18:22] <%Josheh> if you could get one of your friends addicted to runescape and then film a doco on them for the next 9 months, then I would really care about this "research"
[18:22] <%Josheh> I know I sound like a dick but you're just doing superficial interviews
[18:23] <%Josheh> brb
[18:25] <+Buzz> Gene, give me a shoutout in your vid? :)
[18:26] * frostydapker ([email protected]) has joined #wg_lobby
[18:26] <%Robbiebot> 05Welcome,6 Initiate Guardian frostydapker05 to12 #wg_lobby05.
[18:26] * Robbiebot sets mode: +v frostydapker
[18:26] <+frostydapker> whatsup fellas?
[18:26] <%Josheh> hey frostydapker
[18:26] <+Buzz> Just playing some xbox :P
[18:26] <%Josheh> just doing some slayer, you?
[18:31] <@His_Lordship> I address the lack of time investment too
[18:32] <@His_Lordship> 45 minute playthroughs are valid because that's enough time for a player to decide if they'll continue or not
[18:32] * FHFFKTYOTYOTO ([email protected]) has joined #wg_lobby
[18:32] <@His_Lordship> You don't need to chronicle someone for nine months. The point is not to get opinion on everything, but to see which game is instantly more attractive
[18:32] * FHFFKTYOTYOTO ([email protected]) Quit (Excess Flood)
[18:33] <%Josheh> proof pls
[18:33] <%Josheh> of these claims
[18:34] <%Josheh> but to see which game is instantly more attractive
[18:35] <@His_Lordship> yeah, the video
[18:35] <@His_Lordship> what do you think i've been talking about?
[18:35] <Mami_Tomoei> mojohaza1 did u give traplordwill an interview?
[18:35] <%Josheh>  proves without a doubt that osrs is better for new players
[18:35] <@His_Lordship> yes
[18:36] <%Josheh> thats ridiculous to say
[18:36] <@His_Lordship> what's the point in chronicling someone for nine months if they quit after 45 minutes
[18:36] <@His_Lordship> The first 45 minutes buys you the next 5 hours which buys you the next 2 weeks etc.
[18:36] <%Josheh> says who?
[18:37] <@His_Lordship> Says basic logic
[18:37] <%Josheh> no.
[18:37] <@His_Lordship> The most important thing is to keep them there for 45 minutes
[18:37] <@His_Lordship> If they have a bad first impression they will not continue on. There is no second chance for most people
[18:37] <@His_Lordship> This is the internet. You decide if you like a youtube video in the first 30 seconds usually
[18:37] <@His_Lordship> even if it's 20 minutes long
[18:38] <%Josheh> pls stop using generalisations without evidence
[18:38] <%Josheh> you opinion is not the general opinion
[18:38] <%Josheh> your*
[18:38] <@His_Lordship> and as a musician my openings are the most important parts to write. if i don't keep their attention at the start they can't latch on later
[18:39] <@His_Lordship> This doesn't need evidence. It's actually really simple. I don't have to find evidence for you that cows produce milk
[18:39] <@His_Lordship> If you think I'm wrong what do you think is the correct way of assessing the new player experience?
[18:39] <%Josheh> ...
[18:39] <@His_Lordship> Why should 9 months matter more?
[18:39] <%Josheh> I didnt say it does
[18:39] <%Josheh> I just said I'd be interested in that
[18:40] <@His_Lordship> (02:22:35) <%Josheh> if you could get one of your friends addicted to runescape and then film a doco on them for the next 9 months, then I would really care about this "research"
[18:40] <%Josheh> i  would really care
[18:40] <@His_Lordship> Fair enough
[18:40] <@His_Lordship> So why is my research inadequate at 45 minutes?
[18:40] <%Josheh> you need to understand
[18:40] <%Josheh> for research to be confirmed it must be questioned
[18:41] <@His_Lordship> You've questioned it and I explained that 45 minutes is absolutely enough to go off
[18:41] <%Josheh> you cannot give results and say "you dont need to know how I got them or any factors related to it"
[18:41] <%Josheh> you did not explain that 45 minutes is enough to go off.
[18:41] <@His_Lordship> The new player experience won't happen 2 weeks down the line if the first 45 minutes suck
[18:41] * Vincey is now known as vincey|BNC
[18:41] <@His_Lordship> Well you're questioning without even seeing my research
[18:41] <%Josheh> you said that "simple logic dictates this", you did no provide any proof of this. You provided your own person opinions.
[18:42] <%Josheh> Thats the whole point of research; to be questioned.
[18:42] <@His_Lordship> That's proven time and again in any time-based artform
[18:42] <%Josheh> ^ give me the proof then.......
[18:42] <@His_Lordship> If you're bored with the first 2 minutes of a 90-minute youtube video you won't continue
[18:42] * ``Nolan|AFK|BBL`` is now known as ``Nolan|Sleep``
[18:42] <%Josheh> legit all Im asking for is proof of your 45 minute statments.
[18:42] <@His_Lordship> I don't have to. It's just human nature
[18:42] <+Zemus> good bye
[18:42] * +Zemus ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: )
[18:42] <@His_Lordship> It's like me having to prove that people laugh when something is funny
[18:42] <@His_Lordship> It's just how it is
[18:42] <%Josheh> dont say its human natures, thats a cop out, where is the proof its human nature?
[18:42] <%Josheh> o god
[18:43] <%Josheh> im glad you didn't pick a science degree l0l
[18:43] <%Josheh> "this drug works because I say it does
[18:43] <@His_Lordship> What you're saying then is that it is entirely possible that a person would continue playing after not enjoying the first 45 minutes
[18:43] <@His_Lordship> That's the possibility you're giving me
[18:43] <%Josheh> i did not say that
[18:43] <%Josheh> I said
[18:44] <@His_Lordship> Look, I have no science degree but I have done critical research units at university that count for something
[18:44] <%Josheh> "prove to me that people decide if they like something within 45 minutes, that 45 minutes becomes a 2 day investment, then a 2 week investmen"
[18:44] <@His_Lordship> Here are the two possibilities, and you can't really dispute this
[18:45] <@His_Lordship> First the possibility that a player will always decide to keep playing in 45 minutes. And the second possibility, that a player will NOT always decide in the first 45 minutes
[18:45] <@His_Lordship> I've asserted the first based on something I take to be such common knowledge
[18:46] <@His_Lordship> from my critical studies unit I am told that you don't need to cite what you consider to be common knowledge
[18:46] <@His_Lordship> So what you seem to be disputing is whether or not it is common knowledge
[18:46] <%Josheh> common knowledge does not equal truth and fact
[18:46] <@His_Lordship> And that is where we're disagreed. I'll think about it. But deep down I think you agree with me that the first 45 minutes matter more than any other point in determining a new player's continuation
[18:47] <@His_Lordship> I don't need to cite it because it is also common knowledge that first opinions are usually the strongest
[18:47] <@His_Lordship> I'm arguing it as common knowledge, not fact.
[18:47] <%Josheh> .......
[18:48] <@His_Lordship> If I said anywhere I'm stating it as fact I apologise, but I meant common knowledge
[18:48] <%Josheh> you are acting like common knowledge is fact though! wtf?!?
[18:48] <@His_Lordship> I don't need to argue logic in common knowledge
[18:48] <%Josheh> you do.
[18:48] <%Josheh> if you want to post research.
[18:48] * ``Nolan|Sleep`` ([email protected]) has left #wg_lobby
[18:49] <%Josheh> the burden of proof is on your, not me.
[18:49] <%Josheh> you*
[18:49] <@His_Lordship> Nobody has scientifically proven that music distorts the normal flow of time
[18:49] <%Josheh> stop making assumptions please.
[18:49] <@His_Lordship> But every human on the planet knows it does
[18:49] <%Josheh> does every human on the planet?
[18:49] <@His_Lordship> The perception of the normal flow*
[18:49] <%Josheh> lets keep generalising :)
[18:49] <@His_Lordship> OK now you're being a dick to me
[18:50] <@His_Lordship> It's gone past objectivity
[18:50] * His_Lordship is now known as Lordy|AFK
[18:50] <+Flames> rip
[18:50] <%Josheh> no, you're trying to post research and then Im questioning your methods/research and you give me broad generalisations and give me "you should already know this" statements
[18:52] <%Josheh> We can continue this discussion on the thread you post.
[18:52] <@Lordy|AFK> Yes. I've read more journal articles than you. There are always things every researcher has to take for granted that a reader would know.
[18:52] <@Lordy|AFK> I read a feminism article recently about someone interviewing women on sexual assault
[18:52] <@Lordy|AFK> The researcher didn't prove they were women, she didn't even check
[18:53] <@Lordy|AFK> So go take your nitpicking bullshit and stuff it up your ass
[18:53] <%Josheh> "you question my results and concrete statements? fuck you!"
[18:54] <@Lordy|AFK> I argued logically and you replied immaturely
[18:54] <%Josheh> No i did not.
[18:54] <@Lordy|AFK> I take no issue with the fact you're being the devil's advocate, only that you're being really cunty about it with me
[18:54] <%Josheh> you ignored every thing I said, you kept saying broad statements and gave me fucking "logic" as proof of things? thats bullshit.
[18:55] <%Josheh> and now you're attacking me, when all I did was question the integrity of your research.
[18:55] <@Lordy|AFK> What you did is different to how you did it
[18:55] <@Lordy|AFK> I was prepared to have that debate but you were acting like a self-righteous littl prick
[18:55] * @Lordy|AFK ([email protected]) Quit (Client exited)
[18:56] <%Josheh> wowe, doesn't even let me rebuttle.
[18:56] <Mami_Tomoei> L
[18:56] <@Mojohaza1> u prick Josheh
[18:56] <+Ms_Teatime> josh, i know u didnt get enough sleep but omg
[18:56] <+Ms_Teatime> thats allot to read
[18:56] <+Ms_Teatime> ;_;
[18:56] <@Mojohaza1> i tl;dr's it
[18:56] <@Mojohaza1> tl;dr's*
[18:57] <@Mojohaza1> tl;dr'd*
[18:57] <%Josheh> gtfo, if your research cannot handle fundamental questions about the quality of it then you should not be acting like your results are 100% truth not to be questioned.
[18:57] <%Josheh> and when i ask questions you give me anwers like "it is known"!
[18:58] <+Ms_Teatime> the truth is just a lie frabicated to make us think that its the truth lol im just joking :p u guys take rs way too serious :D
[18:58] <%Josheh> I never attacked him, i attacked his research, he couldnt handle that so he started attacking me :/

definitely tl;dr

can i get a tl;dr pls?

it looked interesting... but I want a TL;DR

Brain underdeveloped, cannot process details of argument.

Was reading it as it happened :L

too long ; tried to read

tl;dr, both games suck :).

stopped at "gideo" line 1

This conversation still pisses me off.
I don't need to explain my assertion that some things in any piece of academic research have to be taken for granted.
If I was writing an essay on Beethoven I don't have to prove he wrote nine symphonies.
We have to accept it as common knowledge.
I don't have to go to archives and pull out manuscripts and get them carbon-dated.

Why is this in HOR under public view? Well, unless, it is a joke.

It happened in a public channel

Ah I see. So it happens to be in public chat between 2 members. Hmm sounds like a household debate of the moment on a street, videoed and broadcast to an even a wider non-member audience. Not sure if it deserves billboard publicity status but if you guys are comfortable with that idea, well, so be it then.

HoR is not a billboard :>

Haha you're right, I've underestimated it. With more than 10,000 posts championed by all the public views on them, its more than a billboard.

HoR is the most prestigious forum on the internet.

Quote from: His Lordship on March 04, 2014, 03:06:25 PM
This conversation still pisses me off.
I don't need to explain my assertion that some things in any piece of academic research have to be taken for granted.
If I was writing an essay on Beethoven I don't have to prove he wrote nine symphonies.
We have to accept it as common knowledge.
I don't have to go to archives and pull out manuscripts and get them carbon-dated.

:fp: mfw you think thats academic research

kk Ill put something srs; you do have to prove everything you say, especially in academic research.

With regards to either game capturing the attention:

The graphics of RS3 will grab you (if they grab you at all) the fastest, but the complexity of it will make you question your first impression...

RS2 (07) has a simplicity that allows people to play it as they expect from a browser game, but the game itself is too big to be just a browser game and people do expect better graphics from what is a game that is similar in size (hours of gameplay) as its competitors like WoW and LoL are...


Factor is also that most people tend to judge based on first impressions:

"A woman will decide in the first minute of meeting you if she's going to sleep with you." is actually false. The fact is that they often decide in the first minute NOT to sleep with you, or stay open to the idea. Similarly, RuneScape can be rejected within the first minute, but if it isn't it's got to come up with some massive enticement to keep playing...

Both games grab your attention, but neither grabs your curiosity unless you're in your 30s and longing for the day of 8-bit games with midi sound...

Quote from: Mojohaza1 on March 04, 2014, 05:22:00 PM
HoR is the most prestigious forum on the internet.

posted by public person too =D

Woah (: Such argument very debate much research.

Quote from: Josheh on March 04, 2014, 06:44:42 PM
:fp: mfw you think thats academic research

kk Ill put something srs; you do have to prove everything you say, especially in academic research.

No. You. DON'T!!!!!!!
Have you written a thesis?
I've written two.

You guys suck. Too long, still read slowly. And I'm the most ADHD reader ever. :P

If Lordy has called this an experiment/survey/test or something else, this would have been all different. The other problem with this maybe is experimenter's bias, I had to search it up but this is a good starting explanation...http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer-expectancy_effect

You're both right.

Gene, yes it's common sense that first impressions are important and a factor in deciding on continuing with something, and yes you don't need to justify/validate/prove common sense, I could tell you the sky is blue, and not need to provide proof.  However, when you decided to quantify a 'first impression' as being the decisive 45 minutes:

[18:37] <@His_Lordship> The most important thing is to keep them there for 45 minutes

That's where you would have (would have = assuming you wanted to enter this into a journal of behaviour or some shit) needed to back up the claim that 45 minutes is the definition of a first impression.  Why did you not do 30 minutes? Why not an hour? Why not 2?  What is the length of a 'first impression'?  At this point if I told you the sky was blue falling into the light wavelength of about 600-650nm, this is where there would need to be some evidence, as I have quantified the 'blue-ness' of the sky, just like you quantified the length of a first impression.


Josh, it's not a fucking peer reviewed journal Gene has made, sometimes you are allowed to accept things at face value and also make your own judgements on them.

I'd judge 45 minutes as probably a sufficient amount of time to form a first impression.

If I wanted to be a REAL thundercunt I could have mentioned the small sample size, lack of statistical analysis and any other bias that may or may not be present.  But at the end of the day, it's a video about a game, not a piece of academic research that doctors and experts are going to use to base all their future assumptions/theories on.

Brb, going back to lecturing in a Science.

Quote from: Owen on March 05, 2014, 01:14:45 AM
You're both right.

Gene, yes it's common sense that first impressions are important and a factor in deciding on continuing with something, and yes you don't need to justify/validate/prove common sense, I could tell you the sky is blue, and not need to provide proof.  However, when you decided to quantify a 'first impression' as being the decisive 45 minutes:

[18:37] <@His_Lordship> The most important thing is to keep them there for 45 minutes

That's where you would have (would have = assuming you wanted to enter this into a journal of behaviour or some shit) needed to back up the claim that 45 minutes is the definition of a first impression.  Why did you not do 30 minutes? Why not an hour? Why not 2?  What is the length of a 'first impression'?  At this point if I told you the sky was blue falling into the light wavelength of about 600-650nm, this is where there would need to be some evidence, as I have quantified the 'blue-ness' of the sky, just like you quantified the length of a first impression.


Josh, it's not a fucking peer reviewed journal Gene has made, sometimes you are allowed to accept things at face value and also make your own judgements on them.

I'd judge 45 minutes as probably a sufficient amount of time to form a first impression.

If I wanted to be a REAL thundercunt I could have mentioned the small sample size, lack of statistical analysis and any other bias that may or may not be present.  But at the end of the day, it's a video about a game, not a piece of academic research that doctors and experts are going to use to base all their future assumptions/theories on.

Brb, going back to lecturing in a Science.

Quote[18:42] <+Zemus> good bye
[18:42] * +Zemus ([email protected]) Quit (Quit: )

:-)

:owen:

But really. I had something similar drafted, didn't get the chance to post it at school. Both aren't wrong when Gene's isn't REALLY doing "academic research," and Josh saying he needs to back up his claims. Of course he could have made this more scientific (by method or whatever), but he's not a scientist. I don't think everyone will discredit him because of that though.

That draft is actually gone now, but basically I said this would have all been different if Gene labeled this as an experiment/project/test/survey. This argument would have never happened, and not worth arguing it's "validity" at all. (No offense to either one of you, just saying hypothetically.)

It's just asking what 6 random people think. So just treat it as that, cause that's what it is. I don't think Josh is taking away from that anyway. Let's get back to helping RS survive. ##