I don't think AI should be allowed, ever, and that people should not rely on it. I do not care, you get better at speaking other languages by practicing it, not by using crutches. AI is bad for your mental health and mental strength, and it weakens the mind and thoughts. You should think for yourself, and use your own words.

Future generations will be mentally weak if we keep this up. Already we see the effects of it on the minds of adults.

If you don't speak English well, there are tools OTHER THAN AI to help you translate in an emergency. But I learned more about speaking English by actual practice than by relying on these as a constant crutch.

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It is a research tool.
Just don't copy and paste.
I can remember when people thought word processor programs was cheating. Oh and no spell checkers either.

you should actually do some research on what AI does and how insidious it really is before you call it a "just a research tool."

tomofhyrule wrote: »

It's because each dungeon is an instance, and the goal is to get that server space back.

Yes, people run dungeons solo and then the timer doesn't trigger, but I think that's an edge case that was not considered when the timer was implemented. But in general, the original idea was that people would run the dungeon and get out so the instance could be freed, and not have one person AFK in the instance holding it open for eternity.

Finn made a post on the PTS forum talking about how more smaller instances actually make performance worse for the overall game, so the idea is that one person is not able to essentially hold the game's performance hostage. I'm sure they could increase the timer, but the exact thing they don't want is for one person to make a permanent instance of an empty dungeon (times hundreds of players) which would start to degrade performance over the whole game.

Which makes zero sense. 4 people run a dungeon, 3 leave at the end, remaining player gets a timer. 1 person runs a dungeon, still spins up a new instance, and you can remain there indefinitely.

The timer makes no sense. Perhaps it is just their way to push players out of an instance at the end to get them to do other activities. You don't even get a timer after the last boss if you go in solo... which if it was a way to free up server resources one would think you would.

How it's currently designed makes zero sense. 500 people could port into the same dungeon solo and spin up 500 unique instances of that dungeon. The timer serves zero purpose when it only activates when you initially go in grouped.

It is a research tool.
Just don't copy and paste.
I can remember when people thought word processor programs was cheating. Oh and no spell checkers either.

Oh, how is it insidious?
It has no original thought yet, it relies on data it has learned from previously posted data, mostly from the Internet and pieces it together.
But I understand, harder for old people to accept change.

PoveusRonin wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

I imagine it's an instantiation cost on a shared resource in their data center for each dungeon. In layperson terms, these instances are probably not always on and only created when a team queues into a dungeon. This costs money to spin up and maintain so closing it when the dungeon is complete is a garbage clean up activity that saves zos money.

It is very normal.

As I mentioned earlier, the same people can walk into the same dungeon solo and have unlimited time to explore. They are also making solo versions of dungeons that will have these extra instances loaded up. So the time limit does not make sense in this instance.

I did think and wonder though, does the instance keep the full group tied to it until it closes? If so, that could be why they want it to shut down so quick. A person could not queue for a fresh version of the same instance if their player ID was tied to it and another player was exploring.

I don't know about that being the case. As soon as someone drops group they can't go back to that same dungeon on their own. It opens a new one right away. They can only return by traveling to the player in the dungeon. So seems like that proves the dungeon is only open to the last player and then only for a few short seconds.
Also, it doesn't really matter, because only a tiny fraction of players group for dungeons. The fastest pop is for daily just to get the bonus xp. There is no incentive at all for "Specific Dungeon" or "Vet dungeon" if you are trying to grind out a dungeon set that you want. ESO says "Best of luck to you" "Have fun sitting for 30 -60 trying to get a specific vet dungeon"..

DenverRalphy wrote: »

TheMajority wrote: »

I don't think AI should be allowed, ever, and that people should not rely on it. I do not care, you get better at speaking other languages by practicing it, not by using crutches. AI is bad for your mental health and mental strength, and it weakens the mind and thoughts. You should think for yourself, and use your own words.

Future generations will be mentally weak if we keep this up. Already we see the effects of it on the minds of adults.

The same was said about calculators and personal computers.

Yeah, except calculators aren't causing people to become mentally ill.

ETA: And actually, calculator use excessively discourages you from memorizing math skills, so yes, it creates mental weakness.

Is lag a problem in those modes? If not, there is no need. Vengeance was created to address the Cyro lag first and foremost, to which it largely succeeds.

It's comical how ingrained in the human psyche witch-hunting is.

FurryCandyHearts wrote: »

i wonder if they'll give out free name change tokens to people, esp those on more that one platform with characters of same names...???????

If there are forced name changes, they will either give free tokens or ask you to give the character a new name when you log in. That’s currently how it works if players are forced to change names already due to something like a name that break ToS.

The main question though is how many people would be okay with doing that. RP-focused players may have had these names for years, so being forced to change them (especially if the conflict was from someone who played for a week and then left permanently) would be akin to forcing them out of the game, and many would take it as such.
I myself have a minimum of 6 pages of backstory for each of my characters - they are each incredibly important to me; I spent ages agonizing over their name and fashion and getting them perfect. It would be a heartbreaking if I had to change them after pouring so much time into them… especially since the benefits to having crossplay do nothing for my personal playstyle, so it feels like I’m losing so much and gaining nothing.