1251 replies to this topic

[Aerokii]

ShadowSpirit, on 24 September 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter who is right or wrong. "Perception is reality."

To be fair, perception is a localized and subjective reality, and I'd wager my reality is quite different from other posters.

At least, until the pills kick in.

[Kaijin]

MustrumRidcully, on 24 September 2013 - 12:27 AM, said:

People didn't argue "we want 3PV, but only without a split queue".

They argued "We don't want 3PV ,and we think even with splitting the queues between 3PV and 1PV, we would have problems since it splits the population and makes match-making harder.
In short, 3PV is a bad idea, no matter how you do it.

I only mentioned a split queue now because 3PV seems to be entrenched, but before it got put in, I was against it primarily with community warfare in mind. In order to have 1PV only players never going up against 3PV players, there would have to be two wars - One for each, and clearly there isn't the player base for that.

[Apoc1138]

Kaijin, on 24 September 2013 - 09:50 AM, said:

I only mentioned a split queue now because 3PV seems to be entrenched, but before it got put in, I was against it primarily with community warfare in mind. In order to have 1PV only players never going up against 3PV players, there would have to be two wars - One for each, and clearly there isn't the player base for that.

no there wouldn't, the outcome of 3PV and 1PV matches could still be used to update the global map, it would only be a concern for Merc unit battles, which is taken care of already as ALL 12v12 premade matches are already 1PV only

[DrxAbstract]

Nekki Basara, on 23 September 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

How is treating someone as if they are an inferior not insulting exactly?

Also read what HE said.

Well Nekki it might have something to do with perspective. Treating someone as 'inferior' is entirely different from insulting them - you assume it's the same thing because in your mind everyone should and will always have the same reaction to one as they do the other, and that reaction is to take offense, so there is no difference between them. Whether or not someone takes offense to something is entirely up to them, and one might offend someone whereas the other may not. So while you might think they're the same thing, they are not.

Does that make me responsible for their actions? Well put it another way, Nekki, are you responsible for the actions of others? That's a largely misunderstood concept, because in this day and age many people are all about making others do exactly that - having others take responsibility for their own actions or reactions. Many positions of authority have this kind of principle embedded in the ideology of that position. "He said something i dont like, dont agree with or made me so angry i smashed my keyboard - he should apologize/fix it/get fired!" The only person responsible for you is you.

So was i really insulting people or treating them in an inferior manner? Well that's not your call - it's mine, since i was the performing the action. Am i to be held responsible for how you react to it? As much as you would like that to be the case, i am not. If you feel like me telling you that your ability to read is insufficient is offensive... well... good luck with that.

As for who am i to tell them their feedback is wrong and they have no right to express themselves: Looking past that i was correcting the factual inaccuracy of one topic; The former is Riptor doing to me what he perceives me doing to them, so while i'm a miscreant for doing it, he's entirely able to without reserve, free of persecution (ironically) with the latter simply not being the situation.

To summarize: It's not alright for me to tell someone their information regarding a specific topic is inaccurate, but it's ok for others to tell me that im not allowed to do so. So they can post their opinions while i cannot.

Toodles.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 24 September 2013 - 12:02 PM.

[Nekki Basara]

.txt right here folks.

[Aerokii]

As a current reminder to all in this topic and directed at absolutely no one in particular- please remember that it's not always what you say, but how you say it.

This becomes very important when you realize that text lacks many of the contextual audio/visual cues you get from talking to someone in real life, and as such your tone and intent can be entirely lost if you're not very careful with how you type it.

Let's all just try to get along and discuss the inane topic that is metacritic user reviews.

[Riptor]

DrxAbstract, on 24 September 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

[color=#959595]To summarize: It's not alright for me to tell someone their information regarding a specific topic is inaccurate, but it's ok for others to tell me that im not allowed to do so. So they can post their opinions while i cannot.[/color]

You are allowed to correct people when they have wrong information

You are not allowed to be a belittling little smug twerk about it and expect to be taken serious.

You want people to listen to your points? Dont make yourselfe out to be an womans private parts cleaning supplement about it and perhaps people will not snap at you.

But i highly doubt you will change trying to be a smug arrogant nerfherder and instead go back to throwing around hipster words again as if you fear they will become mainstream to soon.

[Ghost_19Hz]

Riptor, on 24 September 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

You are allowed to correct people when they have wrong information

You are not allowed to be a belittling little smug twerk about it and expect to be taken serious.

You want people to listen to your points? Dont make yourselfe out to be an womans private parts cleaning supplement about it and perhaps people will not snap at you.

But i highly doubt you will change trying to be a smug arrogant nerfherder and instead go back to throwing around hipster words again as if you fear they will become mainstream to soon.

I've never seen twerk used as a noun in that way. Where are you from and what exactly does that mean when used in that context? Like he's a provocative dancer whom favors gyrations of the lower body?... but as insult?

[Gamgee]

No one here knows what humiliation is! Others being banned for simply telling them what was going to happen.Think of all the innocent people who have been banned simply because they had the guts to stand up to PGI and tell them this game is rubbish. To call them out on their ********!

Now I feel vindicated! I'm really enjoying watching this game go down in flames.

http://www.youtube.c...3C0PF7o#t=1m18s

Now no one cares about MWO, and there is a large group who want it to burn. They were your greatest fans, but you seen to them. Reap what you sow PGI. Reap. The lack of reviews is more indicative of what people other than the fans think than anything else. If only you hadn't lost our allegiance, you could have had us spreading the word and recommending this to everyone. But you'll never understand how to treat others with respect.

I'm enjoying this a lot.

Edited by Gamgee, 24 September 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[Listless Nomad]

Riptor, on 24 September 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

Test it ON the people?

Makes it sound like PGI are evil scientists XD

Aperture science anyone?

I think we can all agree that PGI does what they must because they can.

[Kaijin]

Apoc1138, on 24 September 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

no there wouldn't, the outcome of 3PV and 1PV matches could still be used to update the global map, it would only be a concern for Merc unit battles, which is taken care of already as ALL 12v12 premade matches are already 1PV only

So anyone who wants to play as House forces is SOL? Only Mercs are allowed to play without 3PV?

[Jin Ma]

actual reviews are coming in.

http://www.metacriti...hwarrior-online

Edited by Jin Ma, 24 September 2013 - 02:32 PM.

[Guido]

And they aren't great reviews. A 68 and a 60, being the only two reviews in a week. Kinda falls in line with what the user reviews have lined up, at a 5.5.

Edited by Guido, 24 September 2013 - 02:57 PM.

[Nekki Basara]

Gamingtrend gave it a 77. All of those reviews are noted from being more generous than on average review sources too.

[DrxAbstract]

Riptor, on 24 September 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

You are allowed to correct people when they have wrong information

You are not allowed to be a belittling little smug twerk about it and expect to be taken serious.

So i'm allowed to do what i want as long as it's within the boundaries of your perceived morally acceptable behavior. Interesting...

After making a statement like that concerning how to be taken seriously; with all the name calling you've done in quite possibly every post you've made towards me, how well do you think your point is going to be received if one were to follow your logic.

Quote

You want people to listen to your points? Dont make yourselfe out to be an womans private parts cleaning supplement about it and perhaps people will not snap at you.

I really dont care what people do or say as long as it's done with actual facts and not their own perceived sense of facts.

Quote

But i highly doubt you will change trying to be a smug arrogant nerfherder and instead go back to throwing around hipster words again as if you fear they will become mainstream to soon.

Your opinion is noted. Will you change your hair cut? Someone might find it offensive.

P.S. The words in my vocabulary come from before you and your notions of society existed. Consider that the next time you associate labels.

[Moromillas]

ShadowSpirit, on 24 September 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

I *thought* I was a condescending jerk. "Lesser person", "if these individuals just vanished one day" .... I don't know what's worse. Twisting reality to pontificate a false premise or thinking your perception is the only way to view the world.

The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter who is right or wrong. "Perception is reality." PGI created this mess by either trying to keep people happy by saying what they wanted to hear or talking about things they were not prepared to deliver on. To come here and blame the community for this mess or critique people who feel slighted, in my not so humble opinion, is a deflection and an attempt to steer the discussion away from the fact that this game isn't what was, hrm I dare not say promised ... "discussed in great detail and length in various podcasts and on these very forums and is lacking many of the aforementioned features contained therein" and I don't see any indication things are going to get any better. I hope things do improve. I'm dumped hundreds of bucks into this game and I want to see it succeed but I've got the feeling that many early adopters who wanted a rich environment with simulation and strategy elements are going to be sorely disappointed.

Damn ... now I'm posting walls of text. Argh.

Wheh? If someone were to kill someone else for money. Better example: If someone were to put their {Richard Cameron} in a baby's mouth. Yes, I'm going to think they're disgusting, and poor excuses for human beings. No, there's no twisting going on, I'm not overreacting, I think it's sick and terrible. If someone does something abhorrent and disgusting, yes I will think poorly of them and have no dissonance about their inferiority.

I do think they messed up on the communication side. I think they should have held radio silence about everything, just like every other development company. That way there wouldn't be any crazy rants with "You lairs! You promised a pony!"

Ah, hype and expectation. If players were to have incredibly large, bloated, or fantastic expectations of the game, that's unfortunate. In that situation, there will always be some disappointment regardless of the outcome.

Edited by Moromillas, 24 September 2013 - 07:26 PM.

[Nekki Basara]

Getting people to pony up cash for a new MW game totally sight-unseen would probably not have worked as well as suggesting things which may or may not ever happen.

[Belorion]

Its nice to see the positive ratings outweighing the negative.

[Indak]

Gamgee, on 24 September 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

No one here knows what humiliation is! Others being banned for simply telling them what was going to happen.Think of all the innocent people who have been banned simply because they had the guts to stand up to PGI and tell them this game is rubbish. To call them out on their ********!

Now I feel vindicated! I'm really enjoying watching this game go down in flames.

http://www.youtube.c...3C0PF7o#t=1m18s

Now no one cares about MWO, and there is a large group who want it to burn. They were your greatest fans, but you seen to them. Reap what you sow PGI. Reap. The lack of reviews is more indicative of what people other than the fans think than anything else. If only you hadn't lost our allegiance, you could have had us spreading the word and recommending this to everyone. But you'll never understand how to treat others with respect.

I'm enjoying this a lot.

Going down in flames huh? Funny how I never seem to have trouble dropping into a match, with different people every match. We'll have the fire extinguishers ready to put out the flames.

In the meantime, let me hold the door open for you, so it doesn't smack your *** on the way out. We'll enjoy the silence.

[Franchi]

Belorion, on 24 September 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

Its nice to see the positive ratings outweighing the negative.

Here is a little something I made the day after The_Garth dropped this little bombshell https://twitter.com/...109139310522368


Its a bit out of date, but you can see a current count by checking these two pages.
For UN-moderated numbers
http://www.metacriti...ne/user-reviews
For moderated numbers
http://www.metacriti...hwarrior-online



Of the 3 "Professional" reviews currently in. not one of them score MWO at their own average.
for details consult:
http://www.metacriti...er?filter=games
http://www.metacriti...nd?filter=games
http://www.metacriti...rs?filter=games


Such is the life of a sub-par game.

Edited by Franchi, 24 September 2013 - 09:10 PM.