1251 replies to this topic

[Apoc1138]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

By that reasoning, PGI's intention is that people never know i'm a founder...

by that reasoning it's PGI's intention that nobody use 1st person mode at all

no, quite obviously not, primary means primary, it does not mean exclusive

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

Also, the definition of Primary is not 'First' - It's a synonym, the criteria of which depending on context. Using the actual definition of 'Primary':
1. of chief importance; principal = First Person.
2. earliest in time or order of development. = First Person.

yes, and "principal" means "first in order of importance; main:"... when I install the game and run it without modification, the "main" view mode that I am presented with is 3rd person... surely by making 3pv the default view they have elevated it to the position of chief importance?
that is certainly the way it appears to me

on 2., you have inserted the "of development" to suit your purpose, the ACTUAL definition of primary reads;
"earliest in time or order"

again, when you install the game, the earliest in time AND order of the view modes is 3rd person, so again, by both actual definitions of the word, the primary view mode in the current version of the game, is 3rd person

Edited by Apoc1138, 23 September 2013 - 10:35 AM.

[WarHippy]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

By that reasoning, PGI's intention is that people never know i'm a founder... There's a reason they're called 'Optional Settings'. There's also a reason why many of them can be toggled on the move - it's advantageous in some situations. That doesnt make them 'primary' nor does them starting in the 'on' position.

I don't really feel like getting into this right now, but I will comment on this part of your nonsense. What Apoc was describing was what the devs have made the primary or default game settings, and your rebuttal was to say that equates to PGI not showing you as a founder by default. Default game settings matter, vanity nonsense does not. The default/primary settings are often what a new player comes in contact with first, and gives them their critically important first impression of the game. People knowing who you are or if you are a founder is the most unimportant thing you could come up with. You're a founder. I'm a founder. Nobody cares.

[Wee Mad Hamish]

I don't know how anyone can rate this higher than 6/10... as fun as the deathmatch can be, it is still a game that has gone 'live' in an unfinished state. We're not talking about future expansions here, but core elements that make an online game an online game.

[Livewyr]

I care, WarHippy.

[Aerokii]

Livewyr, on 23 September 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

I care, WarHippy.

Well, cut it out.

[M0rpHeu5]

This game personaly gets a 7/10 but objectivly 4.5/10 max.

Edited by M0rpHeu5, 23 September 2013 - 12:07 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

Riptor, on 23 September 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

1. Lawyerspeak is convincing someone you meant something different while at the same time having the option of "i never said that" and be technically right about it.

Perhaps be a little more precise in your application instead of generally applying to everything said when you meant it to be more specific.

Quote

Did PGI actually said there would never be 3rd person in the game? No they did not by the letter of the word. Did they conveyed there would not be by the way they talked about it? Hell yes. If you cant see that then im afraid youre blind to the truth.

Really? Because everything they said pointed towards the possibility thereof.

Quote

2. Youre not? Then what are you doing here in the first place? Ah thats right... insulting people that dont like the things you like.

So where have i insulted someone specifically because they 'dont like what i like'? Point it out, please.

Quote

3. Not really. They where faced with claims of false advertisement. And those claims actually held merrit. With the inclusion of 12 vs 12 first person only view they kinda sorta kept their promise without actually really giving the people what they where promised. If that isnt pulling your head out of the sling and making away with founders money then i dont know what is.

Again, not really wanting to discuss their fouled implementation.

Quote

4. Boy do you have a superiority complex. You are here telling people how sad they are for not having your level of eloquence and reading comprehension when all you do is insult people. You do nothing else.. youre just insulting people who are of the opinion that PGI lied to them.

You are essentially ignoring everything i say that doesnt load your counter-argument cannon then call me the cherry picker. You say im insulting people en-masse because im better than them but then say it's because they dont like what i like...

1. I'm not going to discuss PGI's implementation because, as stated several times over in this very thread that you continue disregarding, i agree with what most people say in regard to that specific topic, therefor it does not warrant discussion whatsoever from me - Why would i discuss something i agree with? It doesnt 'suit my argument'? Lol... It's not even part of my argument. It's a completely different subject. Why in the name of zeus would i include a completely irrelevant topic in my argument? Why would you assume a person's position on one topic is the same for all of them? Why is it you cant differentiate between topics? I dont think you understand what discussion is if you think you're only allowed to participate if you're going to address every single topic. So... you're wrong.

2. Their feedback is incorrect if they cite PGI stating 3rd person would never happen. I've posted facts indicating they have not as well as specifically stating, and you completely ignore it every time, that is my only goal... pretty far from 'because i said so'. So... you're wrong... again.

3. It's a superiority complex to tell you you're exhibiting a lack of literary comprehension? You clearly ignore portions of my posts that invalidate virtually all your points... conveniently. How is that me declaring a vast intellect? Using a different vocabulary than others is insulting to you? Are you sure i'm the one with a complex here? Of course you are, because there's no way you're wrong, i mean you're perfect! I made the comment because you're displaying it, and you're one of the possibly 3 people I've said it to, so not exactly the masses you claim. Call it an insult if you want but the truth is the truth - if you consistently disregard, omit, ignore or simply just cant process what's written clear as day right before you, as you and they have been doing then that's what you get... Hint: I'm not PGI, so trust the conclusion.

[DrxAbstract]

Apoc1138, on 23 September 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

by that reasoning it's PGI's intention that nobody use 1st person mode at all

no, quite obviously not, primary means primary, it does not mean exclusive



yes, and "principal" means "first in order of importance; main:"... when I install the game and run it without modification, the "main" view mode that I am presented with is 3rd person... surely by making 3pv the default view they have elevated it to the position of chief importance?
that is certainly the way it appears to me

on 2., you have inserted the "of development" to suit your purpose, the ACTUAL definition of primary reads;
"earliest in time or order"

again, when you install the game, the earliest in time AND order of the view modes is 3rd person, so again, by both actual definitions of the word, the primary view mode in the current version of the game, is 3rd person

Really? I inserted it because it suited me... That's your conclusion? Maybe you should check again, since that's word for word what it said. I do like how your conclusion was that i edited it instead of perhaps that we're citing different sources... or the possibility that you are the one who edited it to suit your argument, which i didnt consider likely but, at the same time, you are calling me a liar.



Well... if someone is lying, i wonder who it is.

I said very clearly it's what PGI intends vs what they suggest - they are not the same thing. I also said, quite clearly, that to new players, 3rd may appear to be the primary view mode, however to everyone with more experience and those present pre-3rd person, it's not. By definition, 3rd person is not the primary view mode. By way of limited perspective, it is. Simple as that.

WarHippy:
Read the -entire- post. Then read the -entire- post again. The only thing i was disagreeing with was making "Default" and "Primary" mean the same thing, essentially... which has nothing to do with what you're saying. Using what features are on/off as an indication of their importance or PGI's intention was the entire point of the statement... get it now?

Nobody disagreed with the fact just about everything bad for new players starts in 'ON' mode or that their initial experience is critical.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 23 September 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[Lightfoot]

meh, Meta-Critic is like reading the forums. I wouldn't bother, myself.

I like MWO fine. The Mechs are too weak for Battletech. Heat/overheat is not the answer because it only addresses energy weapons and the three weapon types need to be balanced to be equal to each other.

Everything else is fine and I am looking forward to CW and more maps. Mechlab with a chat when you know what map you are dropping on would engage the players much more than you might think. Hopefully that is part of CW.

Enjoying MWO very much right now though. I give it a 9 for what there is of it right now.

[KharnZor]

My ignore list is growing.

[Archio]

Lightfoot, on 23 September 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

meh, Meta-Critic is like reading the forums. I wouldn't bother, myself.

I like MWO fine. The Mechs are too weak for Battletech. Heat/overheat is not the answer because it only addresses energy weapons and the three weapon types need to be balanced to be equal to each other.

Everything else is fine and I am looking forward to CW and more maps. Mechlab with a chat when you know what map you are dropping on would engage the players much more than you might think. Hopefully that is part of CW.

Enjoying MWO very much right now though. I give it a 9 for what there is of it right now.

The content available currently is not befitting a "Live" game. I do not see it deserving anything more than a 7.

[Protection]

Ironically, the exaggerated 10s and exaggerated 0s have balanced out, putting the game at an appropriately deserved 5.3-5.4.

Which is about what it deserves. A semi-functional deathmatch robot shooter with a tedious grind, terrible new player experience, poorly designed interface, lack of game modes/lobbies, riddled with bugs, and grab deals popping out of every orifice.

5.3/10. That feels about right.

[Shumabot]

Gamgee, on 23 September 2013 - 12:17 AM, said:

Well here comes the inevitable iceberg. Good thing Star Citizen adopted me so I can watch the show from orbit. When I insisted others leave they said they would rather stay.

Until your space ship springs a leak and you suffocate in the vacuum. Who knows, by then there will be a new dream to jump on for the 12 months before reality comes crashing down.

[WarHippy]

Livewyr, on 23 September 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

I care, WarHippy.

<3

You shouldn't I'm not worth the effort.

[Riptor]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

Stuff

Im not going to bring up any of your points here because quite frankly its very tiresome for everyone else involved.

You jumped into this thread and told everyone how "disgusting" you feel everyone is that had the audacity to believe that PGI promised them things.

How utterly disgusting of people to quote PGI out of context and how bad their reading comprehension must be if they cant see the obvious.

But ofcourse YOU the shining example of superiority have gotten everything right, and now are belittling everyone who is not of your opinion that PGI did not promised anything at all.

It doesnt matter if you didnt wrote that you are superior to anyone, you are treating everyone who disagrees with you as someone inferior, simply by treating others as inferior you show that you think of yourselfe as superior to them.

Ill leave it to other people to deal with your little complex but let me give you some advice:Can the attitude. Youre doing your own arguments no favour by constantly claiming the high ground here, especialy if said high ground is build on sand.

Yes you are right if you stubbornly only look at the exact written letter. No you are wrong by saying that PGI did not pull wool over peoples eyes.

Whenever they talked about 3rd person view they where playing it down and/or talked about it in an way that suggested that they see it negatively. That all changed after they had their foundersmoney in the sack.

People feel rightfully tricked by this bait and switch, but ofcourse this bait and switch was pulled off in such a masterfull way that it covers PGIs legal *****. Aparantly the only thing PGI is good at nowadays.

But dont belittle people and tell them to take it when they clearly have ways to show how displeased they are with this company.. namely giving negative feedback (and despite what you say anything written on the forums is feedback when its about the game, you dont get to decide what is and what isnt based on your likings) and not supporting this product with their money.

And as i said before: no matter how belittling and disregarding you act: It wont change the fact that many people are very upset with PGI and want PGI to know this. You dont get to decide how they do it, you have absolutely no power here unlike these people that can infact give negative feedback and withold the money that they wanted to spend on this game.

See... thats the difference here. These negative voices can actually impact PGI... while you no matter how tongue twistingly you argue have absolute zero power to change a thing.

Nodding your head and bending over has never improved anything. Negative feedback has brought dictators down.

[DrxAbstract]

Riptor, on 23 September 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

Im not going to bring up any of your points here because quite frankly its very tiresome for everyone else involved.

You jumped into this thread and told everyone how "disgusting" you feel everyone is that had the audacity to believe that PGI promised them things.

How utterly disgusting of people to quote PGI out of context and how bad their reading comprehension must be if they cant see the obvious.

But ofcourse YOU the shining example of superiority have gotten everything right, and now are belittling everyone who is not of your opinion that PGI did not promised anything at all.

It doesnt matter if you didnt wrote that you are superior to anyone, you are treating everyone who disagrees with you as someone inferior, simply by treating others as inferior you show that you think of yourselfe as superior to them.

Ill leave it to other people to deal with your little complex but let me give you some advice:Can the attitude. Youre doing your own arguments no favour by constantly claiming the high ground here, especialy if said high ground is build on sand.

Yes you are right if you stubbornly only look at the exact written letter. No you are wrong by saying that PGI did not pull wool over peoples eyes.

Whenever they talked about 3rd person view they where playing it down and/or talked about it in an way that suggested that they see it negatively. That all changed after they had their foundersmoney in the sack.

People feel rightfully tricked by this bait and switch, but ofcourse this bait and switch was pulled off in such a masterfull way that it covers PGIs legal *****. Aparantly the only thing PGI is good at nowadays.

But dont belittle people and tell them to take it when they clearly have ways to show how displeased they are with this company.. namely giving negative feedback (and despite what you say anything written on the forums is feedback when its about the game, you dont get to decide what is and what isnt based on your likings) and not supporting this product with their money.

And as i said before: no matter how belittling and disregarding you act: It wont change the fact that many people are very upset with PGI and want PGI to know this. You dont get to decide how they do it, you have absolutely no power here unlike these people that can infact give negative feedback and withold the money that they wanted to spend on this game.

See... thats the difference here. These negative voices can actually impact PGI... while you no matter how tongue twistingly you argue have absolute zero power to change a thing.

Nodding your head and bending over has never improved anything. Negative feedback has brought dictators down.

So... i jumped into the thread and said i was disgusted people felt they were promised something? Quote please. Because that hasnt been the topic of my posts in the slightest. Again, PGI's broken 'promises' is another topic entirely.

Do you ever post anything that is remotely true when citing other people's words? Nothing else you've said hasnt been said before and the same applies: You're wrong, lying or simply doesnt apply to me.

[Riptor]

DrxAbstract, on 23 September 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

Quote please.

So you want quotes where you treat people as inferiors... k

Quote

[color=#959595]Backpeddling... god i wish people would use phrases correctly.[/color]

Quote

[color=#959595]What was i thinking, that's how you ended up this way in the first place [/color]

Quote

[color=#959595]If you knew how to read[/color]

Now admittedly i think after going through your post history the one guy that claimed hes disgusted at people and using other nonchalant words to describe the amount of people who disagree with him was aparantly someone else. I got your name mixed up with him and for that i want to apologize. The reason i got you two mixed up however was that you where using the same dismissive tone that he used when dealing with people that dont agree with you.

What im not apologizing for thought is calling you out on your haughty taughty way of treating people in this thread and dismissing their complains simply by saying "Well that is not what they wrote" and completly ignoring "that is what they ment"

As i pointed out before, from a law standpoind PGI is untouchable, from a morale standpoint of view they played their customers like suckers and said customers have every right to claim foul play. Thought you have no right to claim that because pgi never wrote themselves into a corner those people should just shut up and take it.

[DrxAbstract]

Riptor, on 23 September 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

So you want quotes where you treat people as inferiors... k









Now admittedly i think after going through your post history the one guy that claimed hes disgusted at people and using other nonchalant words to describe the amount of people who disagree with him was aparantly someone else. I got your name mixed up with him and for that i want to apologize. The reason i got you two mixed up however was that you where using the same dismissive tone that he used when dealing with people that dont agree with you.

What im not apologizing for thought is calling you out on your haughty taughty way of treating people in this thread and dismissing their complains simply by saying "Well that is not what they wrote" and completly ignoring "that is what they ment"

As i pointed out before, from a law standpoind PGI is untouchable, from a morale standpoint of view they played their customers like suckers and said customers have every right to claim foul play. Thought you have no right to claim that because pgi never wrote themselves into a corner those people should just shut up and take it.

Umm... read what i said. I asked for a quote where i said i was disgusted by people talking about broken promises, not where i was treating them in an inferior manner, which i think you confused with insulting them - not the same. While you're at it quote where i told people they were wrong about anything other than PGI's statements concerning 3rd person's happening or not. I could save you the trouble by telling you they dont exist, but go ahead if you want. I didnt tell people they couldnt post 'feedback'. I criticized those posting nonconstructive or false feedback like "game sucks, total pay to win", but where did i tell them they couldnt post?

[Nekki Basara]

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

Also read what HE said.

[Miekael]

I wonder what the metacritic average would have been had PGI actually put in the separate queues for 1st/3rd person.