0:02 I hate having my YouTube feed pop up
0:04 with a thumbnail of a creator coming at
0:06 another creator. It's classic drama
0:08 farming. I really don't want to do that
0:09 because I'd rather be someone who can
0:11 have fun, teach people, and entertain
0:14 people. But this one time, and please be
0:16 the last time for several years, I am
0:18 not restraining myself. I want to speak
0:20 up against Tobo. Here's the thing. I
0:21 believe that when you have a conflict
0:23 with someone, especially as a person on
0:26 social media, first freaking step, you
0:28 don't go making a video or post online.
0:30 you settle it in call with that person.
0:32 So I have already tried to deconlict
0:35 with Tobo not once not twice but three
0:37 times and two of the three occurring
0:40 while live streaming. Every call what I
0:42 advise him has always been the same. I
0:44 respect his criticisms. I even cite some
0:46 of his criticisms but I have never once
0:49 accepted his way of conveying them.
0:50 Constantly he will try to justify that
0:52 his ways are the most suitable to get
0:54 his message across. To which the
0:56 question also becomes what does he want
0:58 people to agree with? For a lot of
1:00 people, your first and perhaps also
1:02 second contact with Tobo is one of these
1:04 two videos. And for a lot of new players
1:07 of Enfield, it's this video. This is the
1:09 longest video that Tobro has ever done.
1:11 He scripts and edits his videos, which
1:12 is something I would praise him for. I
1:14 think he articulated several problems of
1:16 the game very well. From the tutorial to
1:18 the story, I say the same things in my
1:20 personal reviews. Now, the number one
1:23 gripe I have is Toro's implanted
1:24 perspective about the technical test
1:26 combat. Let me explain to you what
1:27 happened in the technical test, which
1:31 was 2 years ago. This was the first ever
1:33 live test where I might say that less
1:36 than 1,000 or even 500 people in the
1:38 global space got to try the story and
1:41 the world extremely barebones. I don't
1:42 think a single person has a good thing
1:44 to say about it, but that could be
1:46 expected. Technical test is not there to
1:49 have a fleshed out world or story. is to
1:51 test the core concepts of the game. The
1:53 combat has one characteristic that is so
1:54 distinctly different from not only the
1:57 current game, but also any other big
1:59 gacha game titles out there. You have
2:01 the ability to control the range or the
2:04 area of the skills and ultimate. It's
2:06 very Xenolade Chronicles-esque and it
2:08 sounds really cool. I thought that the
2:10 combat was fun when I also got to try
2:12 the technical test. It gives a feeling
2:14 of strategy and closer to ark knights
2:16 just like how using someone's skill has
2:18 a corresponding range. You can also slow
2:20 down the combat, allowing you more time
2:23 to think of your actions. Seeming like a
2:25 prime example of strategy, hero believes
2:27 that this combat would have been
2:28 exceptional if it were the actual
2:30 version of the game, stating that it
2:32 would have been more strategy based and
2:34 less actionoriented, making it more
2:36 engaging, especially for people who
2:38 wants complexity, more thinking to their
2:40 game. His latest video brings up this
2:42 technical test throughout and is
2:43 concluded by the end. This is not his
2:45 first rodeo or sending this message.
2:47 It's not only including the very first
2:49 big video he made, but for six videos in
2:52 a row across the entire year. I don't
2:53 really want to encourage people to go
2:55 there and watch them all, but if you
2:56 really want to see the narrative he's
2:59 constructed every 2 months, you're going
3:01 to realize that he had harp on this very
3:04 same thing. Every video is a new
3:07 iteration, a new script, a reskin of him
3:09 trying to prove to people that the
3:11 supposed initial vision of the game
3:12 would have been the best way for the
3:14 game to launch. A lot of people who
3:16 watch the videos have in a way
3:17 sympathize with this messaging and feel
3:19 a sense of the game not knowing what
3:21 it's doing or what it could have been.
3:24 This is the core issue I have. How do
3:25 you watching those videos know that the
3:27 technical test was better than the
3:29 current game's launch? You never played
3:31 the technical test. Your only basis is
3:33 actually playing what it is now. You
3:35 can't go saying, "I've tasted apples but
3:37 never tasted oranges." And therefore,
3:39 oranges is better than apples or apples
3:41 is better than oranges. How does that
3:43 work? But there's also a sizable
3:45 proportion that will say, "I've tasted
3:48 apples and I've seen oranges. Therefore,
3:51 oranges are better than apples." That
3:54 doesn't make sense. But speaking, this
3:55 isn't just about how people are
3:56 comparing the technical tests using
3:58 Toro's videos against the current
4:00 Nfield. This is also like how people are
4:03 comparing Enfield to any big gacha game
4:05 titles. Some are using the words of
4:07 their favorite content creators as they
4:09 green or red light to play the game
4:11 rather than making decisions themselves.
4:13 In any case, I've explained why the
4:15 realtoric in much of his videos is
4:17 flawed. You have no basis to prove what
4:18 he says, unfortunately, making you
4:20 inclined to believe him since he's the
4:22 only guy speaking out loud. Any
4:24 criticism he makes of the current game.
4:26 If you played it and feel the same,
4:28 sure, those are fair, but not the
4:30 hypotheticals of what could have been
4:32 being brought up. I never made a video
4:34 about the technical test. I don't feel
4:36 right to do so because I had nothing
4:39 good to say. I finished it feeling that
4:41 was not a game for me. If I don't enjoy
4:43 it, why bother inviting negative
4:46 sentiments? But for this video, I'm
4:47 actually going to tell you what I think
4:51 of the technical test combat. It's fun
4:54 for a day, perhaps a week, a month, but
4:57 it's just not going to last. The base
4:59 building aspect is a big time sync for
5:01 people even right now. Not exactly a
5:03 necessitated time sync since you can use
5:06 others blueprints, but a lot of you are
5:08 choosing to not use others blueprints
5:10 and genuinely wanting to build your own.
5:11 Now imagine pairing the base with the
5:14 technical test suppose strategic
5:15 variant. The combat is going to take
5:18 more time when every skill needs you to
5:21 decide a rage in one combat. That's
5:23 perfectly fine. 10 and include a hard
5:27 boss. Okay. Now take that this is a live
5:29 service game. The likes where you have
5:32 to play for months, a year, 5 years
5:35 even. For every battle that you've
5:36 experienced in Enfield currently, from
5:39 the mobs to the dungeons to the bosses,
5:42 you add about 25 or 50% more of your
5:45 spend time, the time sync is going to
5:47 become much worse than the factory.
5:50 You're repetitively in a range deciding
5:52 screen in your daily dungeons with your
5:55 same favorite team against the same
5:57 enemies. Perhaps the sight of a new
5:58 combat style would have intrigued you
6:01 early. Finally, a non hoyo open world
6:03 type of combat, but the time for you to
6:06 become bored of it is so much faster.
6:08 Imagine that combat against triagalos or
6:11 marble eglamore. Many of you will be
6:13 pulling your hairs out if you had to
6:15 constantly play in that slowdown manner.
6:17 This is not to say that the technical
6:19 test variant does not work, but I don't
6:21 think it works in a game you play
6:23 regularly. It works so well in premium
6:25 titles. The one-time purchases where the
6:27 amount of game time you have to spend is
6:30 fixed and known. You know the game play.
6:32 You paid for the amount of play time
6:34 that have level and enemy designs
6:36 created so that you don't get bored. It
6:38 can work in specific life service games
6:40 where rather than a semi-open world
6:42 concept, it launches new stages in
6:44 patches so that it's designed in a way
6:47 that your time sync is segmented in
6:49 blocks. This is a very simple way for me
6:51 to explain to you that in my
6:53 perspective, the technical test combat
6:55 would have been terrible for the game.
6:56 For those who think that the current
6:58 combat is bad, I'm telling you that the
7:00 technical test would have actually been
7:04 worse in my view. But I ask this again,
7:05 how do you prove that what I just said
7:08 is true? You never played the technical
7:10 test. How do you know what it really
7:12 feels for yourself? If you are someone
7:14 who formulated your assessment of
7:17 Enfield using Toro's videos to then say
7:19 Enfield is terrible and to the extent
7:21 that you haven't even played the game,
7:23 why let someone dictate your thinking?
7:25 To me, Tobro has done perhaps the most
7:27 damage to the Enfield community than
7:29 anyone else for inciting the perspective
7:31 that the developers lost their vision or
7:33 have no backbone to support their own
7:36 passion. Who are any of us to judge what
7:38 is the actual intended vision of the
7:40 game? Tests are called test for a
7:42 reason. They test it and they go by what
7:44 they believe will fulfill their vision.
7:46 I said this at the start of the video
7:48 and I say it again. Enfield right now is
7:50 not flawless. I might even say it's got
7:53 a lot of flaws. But despite that, it's a
7:55 very enjoyable game for many. Whether
7:57 those flaws can fix itself is what we
7:59 are paying attention to for those of us
8:02 choosing to stay. I can't guarantee I'm
8:03 going to be a longtime player for a year
8:06 or more, but I know I'm happy to see
8:07 what they are going to do in the coming
8:09 patches. When describing the state of
8:11 combat, does the current combat really
8:13 have no strategy at all? It's a big
8:15 ongoing debate, but I've made another
8:17 review video that touches on that. If
8:19 you want to hear it, I invite you to
8:21 watch that whenever. Also, you can watch
8:22 the 2-hour session where I converse with
8:24 Tobro about one of his inflammatory
8:26 videos. Link is in the description.
8:28 You'll understand my disappointment with
8:31 how he has broken so many things he said
8:34 he would and wouldn't do. Don't go yet.
8:35 I'm closing out this video. Time and
8:38 time again, he says that he wants the
8:40 best for Enfield, wanting the game to
8:42 succeed. But why does his actions not
8:44 sync with his words? He goes on about
8:46 how a game for the masses isn't good.
8:49 But is it just a game that isn't for him
8:51 that isn't good? He wants the game his
8:53 way and made six different attempts to
8:55 find new followers of his idea that
8:57 perhaps was never going there to begin
8:59 with. Now that the game is out, there is
9:01 no way he goes back to the same plot.
9:04 Like as if he cannot get over his ex. I
9:06 don't know what to say if he runs it for
9:07 the seventh time. There's definitely a
9:09 divide between me and Toro, but I don't
9:11 want a divide for you guys watching
9:13 where you choose whose site to agree
9:16 with. In fact, just don't take sides.
9:17 You have the autonomy to think for
9:20 yourself. I end with the quote from his
9:22 first video. A game for everyone is a
9:24 game for no one. To bro, who I know
9:26 you're watching, have you thought that
9:28 you're doing all this for yourself
9:29 instead of for the game or the
9:32 community? A game not for you does not
9:34 mean it's not a game for a lot of other
9:37 people. That's all I can say.
9:39 >> What are you trying to do? What is your
9:40 main objective? Just
9:41 >> I didn't say that though. Hang on. No,
9:42 that's a misrepresentation of what I
9:44 said. I didn't say the game's going to
9:46 [ __ ] I said I'm disappointed in the
9:47 direction. I said disappointed in this decision.
9:48 decision.
9:50 >> I didn't say I said my passion for the
9:52 game remains the same. I said I'm still
9:53 looking forward to Enfield. I said I
9:55 still be there no matter what. I said
9:56 I'm still going to make all the content
9:58 I was intending to make before. I had I
9:59 didn't say the game's going to [ __ ]
10:02 That's a miser.
10:04 >> Does it come to this point of they have
10:07 to follow what your dodge is in order
10:08 for them to be doing it right?
10:10 >> No, they don't. They don't have to
10:16 >> I have no intention of becoming a drama
10:18 CC. I just,
10:20 you know, I play the YouTube game a
10:25 it it happens to be that the three
10:27 videos I've made about Enfield so far
10:30 have been have like had this tone to
10:33 them. This this is not a tone that I
10:34 intend to like carry through all of my
10:37 Enfield videos if it's if that's of any
10:39 comfort. And that's never that's never
10:40 been my intention. That's just kind of
10:42 how it's played out. [laughter]
10:44 >> You can see it here, but it's not meant
10:45 to be said here. This is meant to be sit
10:47 on your own space when you came.
10:49 >> Yeah, I know. But like just if it's of
