I don’t care about “winning”. I’m literally just confused because “hc viable” is not meaningless to me. When a build has such label, it gives me the idea that it would survive most of the game’s content with minimal game knowledge and safety measures. Sure, the boolean nature doesn’t make sense, but the fact that it gives people a rough idea disproves its meaningless-ness. This is why I’m not convinced. How could something so meaningless give me an idea about something?
how many personal/subjective or "universally undefined"meanings are you applying there? because i count atleast 3
so, if when a build has a HC viable label, and we have 3 people in the room, the author and 2 players
the Author is the one slapping HC viable meaning on it
player 1 infers X meaning
player 2 infers Y meaning
after playing it player 1 and 2 applies Z meaning, because one of them died before lvl 50 and the other gave up struggling so much but didnt’ technically die just gave up before finishing, etc etc make up your own 310 scenarios all differing from the Author’s experience in multiple ways
“what is the meaning of HC viable” then ?
Essentially you’re arguing subjective labels are meaningless, correct? Because labels, if subjective, don’t serve their purpose?
“we” are arguing the issue/part of the issue is that HC viable is subjective “doesnt’ have a broad/community established/universal definition”
ergo, “meaningless”, slapping HC viable on doesn’t do its/“a” job proper to use because of the application/variable in application
once someone posted basically a glass build even by softcore standards here or on steam, couple HC players questioned its viability “naturally”
To you, the HC label would have been either a lie or meaningless as it applied neither of your 3 criteria, to the others it was enough to question its veracity, yet the author not only succeeded but felt “entitled” enough to post it and apply/imply X meaning to the label
This should obviously be a multifaceted “issue”, again subjectively how much a person is offended by variables or implied label meanings, simply because either the difference in inferred meaning, but also because at base there is no minor criteria agreed upon allowing all those/even more varied inferences.
So it might at best serve a subjective meaning, but even then the label/meaning might still “lie” or disappoint putting the meaning “all over the place”, “instructions unclear died to basic attack GG”
Gnomish, will you answer this question first with a yes or no please, before moving on to other points? I want us to be on the same page.
Edit: I read your reply like 3 times already, and it seems the answer is yes. But I want to be 100% sure, so I’ll wait for your answer first.
it’s a “yes”,
because of the massive variables described here
some subjectivity in labels might be fine “depending on the label” or how much it swings
eg “can be played drunk” or “kills celestial in 1min14secs”
the differences is in importance with this label, putting it closer to the warning triangle on a caustic bottle of chemicals or rather “its potential to to enjoy/have an enjoyable game experience or not”
ie “hc viable” will positively/negatively affect more players and to a larger extent than “can be played drunk” “kills celestial in 1min14secs but actually kills celestials in 1min25secs”
Therefor here being this much degree of subjective detracts from using it as label/being so widely varied subjectively adds/creates meaninglessness
Ahh, you’re now retracting the meaningless claim into a milder, “adds meaninglessness” claim. I think you see the problem now 
I’m eating so I’ll explain for Pally Blogger in a bit
i’m not, you’re inferring whatever you wish to stay in your hole 
the label is meaningless
why is it meaningless because it’s not established/defined
and it “must”/“should” be well defined because of the impact this label has, ie comparison to caustic chemical bottle vs novel “can be played drunk” label
one is ok being entirely left up in the air, the other not
It’s also not even subjective vs objective. Even if it’s objective criteria, it’s also how people map a range onto a threshold. Stuff like crit luck will affect how a HC build performs (ask the graveyard of HC characters in my save directory).
There’s some value in having the HC Viable label. It’s at least a sign that the builder thinks the build will be above their threshold. But the label lies a lot because everyone has different definitions of what they think it means.
And that’s ultimately the problem - we’re again mapping “label matches my expectations X% of the time” into a “meaningless” vs “meaningful” label.
Not to hammer the point, but you come across as wanting to win an argument here.
Adding nuance to a boolean meaningful/meaningless isn’t retracting a claim. We don’t live in math land where something is either a circle or isn’t a circle.
Toni this is still it:
the core issue is the lack of inherent meaning
but that gets added meaninglessness from having all those variables/allowing all the varied meanings because there is no base or pre-defined meaning
It not being defined creates more subjectivity which adds further meaninglessness to it
and either must then be resolved to remove that meaninglessness, and (part) of the subjective added meaninglessness could be removed by just changing the first and setting a clear defined interpretation
remove the first subjectivity/establish an objective goal and you reduce the following subjective inferred meanings, even if not all, further strengthening the first part/original intent and meaning
i think the best example to use for illustration is the old build myth of XYZ stat criteria
for ages there has been a “rule”/build criteria spread that build goal was 3k OA 3k DA “minimum”/all builds should have this and this is the way/stats you should build to have
Regardless of the degree of truth in this, it’s a clear goal, taking much of one’s personal interpretation out of it at the surface.
right now, “hc viable” is so undefined, so subjective, it doesn’t even have that shared surface inference, regardless of whether or not being 100% applicable/universally true later/under the surface
the degree of personal inferred meanings vs implied, subjective or not, just further adds to muddying the label, making it more meaningless, despite at surface level still being not having “a” meaning. Meaningless ontop of meaningless, one is bad enough as is, but it just gets worse/enhanced further when there is no base/core defined rule to begin with.
Hardcore viable = I built something that doesn’t get one tapped and thus can hit the escape key before dying.
Also, since player X has had thousands of hours of playtime…they can hit the escape key because they see a possible situation evolving where they could die…
Sarcasm aside, describing this term is futile because not everyone approaches the game in the same fashion…or have the same solutions to dealing with obstacles the game throws at you.
Seems like a weird discussion. I build everything HC viable because, well I am playing HC. But I bet a lot of players will look at my builds and be like “lol wut!?”
@Pally_Blogger, hold on a sec as I’m gonna reply to my friend here first.
Alright, then.
To recap, you said,
You’re claiming here that because the label is not well-defined, it therefore doesn’t serve its purpose. And because it doesn’t serve its purpose, it is meaningless.
The problem here is that labels can be ill-defined but still serve a purpose. A simple example would be labelling one’s self as “hardworking” in their resume. Ill-defined for sure, and absolutely vague, but serves the purpose of selling something to or convincing the employee.
So yeah, this,
“the label has no purpose” - why does the label have no purpose?, it(the label) is not well-defined = the HC viable label is meaningless
doesn’t hold valid anymore. In your A → B - > C, B is false. Lemme read your new replies in a sec.
Keep your projections to yourself, Pally. I’m not comfortable debating with people that project their insecurities on others. Feel free to stop responding to this thread.
i used purpose because that was a word you chose in your semantics/definition meanings
but the intent still holds up/switching to “purpose” illustrates the original part does work.
problematic, subjective
“can”
this was not the argument, the argument was it’s not defined nor has a shared meaning to use/rely on, the argument was the label doesn’t have that so the purpose of using it diminishes or “becomes meaningless”, or leaving the “can”/“variable interpretation” out of it
it is not?
the label is there to inform, but the information has no definition or established meaning, therefor meaningless and the label now no longer serves its purpose/meaning to inform or convey X to the player;
it is just letters in a string that may or may not aswell be random depending on the reader
Isn’t this just an assumption? The label could be there for whatever reason, be it to sell, to set expectations, to entice inquiries, and perhaps to inform, whether the information is highly accurate or not.
Isn’t “uninformative” the correct word you all want to say instead of “meaningless”?
[^Edited “misleading” into “uninformative” after the reply below, wrong wording, my bad]
Edit: Similar to my resume example, I could make a build and label it “cute” or “fluffy” as Maya did. Would that be meaningless? No. Would that give quality information? Absolutely not. If you said “uninformative” instead, I would’ve definitely agreed with you.
you’re obviously just wanting to argue because
“this is still to inform”
inform to illicit X outcome is still “there to inform”, what/“the contents” of what it’s there to inform about might differ depending on what the desired goal/outcome of it is, but it’s still there to inform something
no, because “misleading” would then again depend on the requirement
if it had a set defined meaning and didn’t hold up to that, it could be misleading
but since it doesn’t have a set meaning, and is entirely subjective, “what accounts for misleading” is now also entirely, and extremely broadly, subjective, aka what’s misleading to player 1 might not be to player 2 despite them having totally different experiences from eachtoher or even from author
absolutely, that’s why they’re “funny” or “wasted” depending on who is there.
Because neither of those words mean anything either in the context of GD/build etc, the difference is just they have less significance or degree of importance on the game/player is vastly difference.
And funnily enough i already covered that in “can be played drunk” label comparison
more things than one can be meaningless, but the impact can be much different, therefor weight of meaningless can (potentially) matter, so ascribing the purpose of the label or its use differently then equally valid, aka not wanting to use a label that’s not defined well because of the importance and variables having more meaning there thus the label should not be in meaningless territory
All communication is “to inform”, friend. I thought it was already automatic that “to inform” in the
“the label is there to inform”
that you said meant to inform something concrete about the build. Lemme rephrase my argument then.
the label is there to inform
Aren’t you just assuming that the label is there to inform something concrete about the build? The label could be there for whatever reason, be it to sell, to set expectations, to entice inquiries, and perhaps to inform something concrete about the build, whether the information is highly accurate or not.
Similar to my resume example, I could make a build and label it “cute” or “fluffy” as Maya did. Would that be meaningless? No. Would that give quality information? Absolutely not. If you said “uninformative” instead, I would’ve definitely agreed with you.
Isn’t “uninformative” the correct word you all want to say instead of “meaningless”?
i just realized you’re trying to argue for reasons to use it “in spite of ones opinion the label is meaningless”, not whether or not the label is meaningless
no
again, 4th? time
the label is itself meaningless because it has no defined meaning
it means green to some, it means blue to others it means coffee to a third, and it means LOTR should have been a 30h movie to me - these differences existing makes it meaningless as there is no established “floor” for us to stand on, so nothing specific is conveyed. What i think, you think or they think might not be conveyed, it’s little more than a meaningless random string of letters…
you wanting to use or argue advocating using it regardless of that doesn’t change the above
Oh crap, are we not in the same page after all? Wait I think we are. I’mma back read a few
*not wanting to use something because it’s meaningless, and being meaningless from having no established meaning/definition, is more than plenty fine reason one might want not to use it.