I find it hard to believe that the majority of players would be willing to waste a fireworks week on a practical joke that people would use like, once every two months. Yeah, I don't disbelieve that adding cats to fireworks is a suggestion that others have aside from you, but I am 95% certain they are a minority rather than a popular opinion.

If I wanted to make a funi haha meme troll team, I'd use some outdated farmable unit instead, or someone who was actually in the canon anime.

If I wanted specifically to get a meme unit, it would be better on like, a Myoboku trial event than a Fireworks week.

"People" as in "100 people out of the 10,000 that play this game", sure. Whatever you say boss, you do you. "People" may want it, but it's far from the "majority" and I have no reason to believe that more than 50%... no, more than 35% of players would genuinely want a fricking meme unit over someone more useful. If you feel like proving me wrong, then now's your chance boss. Show me the stats, show me some meaningful numbers before you brag about one lucky example.

Seriously, you can't be genuinely telling me that people WANT the gently caressing CATS in fireworks, all for a joke that wears off after 20 minutes that you're only going to use maybe once every 3 months. Look me in the eye and tell me with good faith that people would be willing to give up a chance at getting a legitimate character, who was actually in the Naruto anime, for a dumb joke that gets old faster than I can say "Daiske".

Yeah, of course they're going to give the worse choice. Because they pretty much amount to nothing more than a living embodiment of a very specific section of Freud's psycho*ytic theory. You being okay with this is only reinforcing their behavior even further than it has ever, ever needed to be. This horse was beaten dead long, long ago, and you should know that by now considering how long you've been around.

I'm very well aware of how little the majority means, but I did not intend to debate by the cramped constraints of Oasis's rules and behaviors when I started this discussion. I'm saying that I think this is how it should be theoretically, in a more ideal world. We may not be in that world necessarily, but pushing for progression to that state is never a bad thing. The viewpoint you're holding is incredibly cynical and completely counterproductive to practically any positive change that the community could try to push. It's a 100% understandable mindset considering this company's track record, but I still don't think that "this will never happen" is a viable reason to not only give up, but actively try to shut down others who want to enact positive progress.

Like, personally, I believe world peace is impossible to get because humankind is just too individualized to not get into fights over stuff. Does that make it pointless to try and create world peace? I dunno boss, it's still a good thing to reduce the overall amount of conflict in the world, even if it's never going to be completely gone. Either way, it feels like we're getting nowhere. Might be a good idea to just drop it and agree to disagree, but if you want to continue I'm all for it.

I think that's a rather vivid and over-the-top @nalogy for a browser game, but let's roll with that and go on your terms boss. If I'm the abused girlfriend who speaks out and tries to reform her boyfriend, then you're the abused girlfriend who does nothing, who has already been broken and just su.cks it up because she's happy that she has a boyfriend at all even if he's terrible. I could say the exact same thing to you – if you are willing to use such an extreme @nalogy to describe the devs, then why don't you just leave too?

No an@logy is necessarily perfect, but this @nalogy doesn't 100% mesh with the cir*stance because the relationship between an individual player and a company isn't in a vacuum. If we really want to make this accurate, then put the abusive boyfriend is in a polygamous relationship with 1000s of people, so that if some lucky girl actually DOES get him to change, it affects way more than just their relationship. It affects all the other ones too. Think of it like reforming a toxic family member. Not only do you have one less negative presence in your life, but the rest of your family doesn't have to deal with them anymore too.

Edit: Kinda hypocritical of me to bring up an equally vivid an@logy, huh? I'll add the disclaimer that this particular scenario isn't half as intense or important as the toxic family member example. I brought it up to make a parallel point regarding the mechanics of the dynamic, rather than the intensity.

Another great logic from Kharan-if you complain,better quit,so he can feel comfortable.

Khar*ways has great logic. Progression is wrong, giving up is right. Sounds like one hell of an achiever. His *ogy is also defeatist and insulting as that is his mentality. I would actually compare people who love the game and fight for it's progress while constantly failing to any successful person who actually knows that to succeed they had to fail more times than most people can suffer. Just because he is the first to come to mind take Lincoln for example. Lincoln’s failures were broad and numerous. He achieved the unique feat of leaving for a war a captain and returning a private (the lowest military rank). He next took failure in his stride during multiple failed business attempts. Undeterred, Lincoln marched into the political realm, where he launched several failed runs at political office before his ascendance to President which ultimately led to abolishment of slavery. As Kharan is likely to misunderstand that the story as my comparison between abolishing slavery and trying to improve a browser game I have to note that the example I took is about success and great changes coming through unrelenting will in spite of failure. You can just as easily take any known examples of success in spite of failure that affected the world like Einstein, Edison or Disney.