29 replies to this topic

[DaZur]

Okay… I get it. You are not happy with the state MW:O right now.

That said, must you high-jack every thread with a “The Devs are idi0ts and they should have listened to me” drivel?

Is it completely necessary to unceremoniously “educate” anyone who even hints at accepting the rose in spite of the thorns, that they are nothing but mooing cows being lead to slaughter?

Must anyone who dares to support the Devs be labeled as mindless fanboi lemmings?

Must every person who committed money to the Founders initiative be considered fiscal idi0ts?

Seriously… We get it. You’re not happy…

I’m not saying “If you don’t like it leave”… Far from it. I believe everyone has a right to be heard and truly believe most of you want to see MW:O succeed. That said, being boorish overbearing bullies who feel you have every right to demean and berate those of us who may not be as disenchanted as you, does nothing to lend any credibility to your arguments and if anything diminishes the ability of everyone to accept even a salient argument from you.

Have an opinion even a strong one... But remember it’s okay for “us” to having a different one. Dont' attack me for my opinions and I won't attack you for yours...

Fair deal?

Edited by DaZur, 01 November 2012 - 07:08 AM.

[DaZur]

Addendum:

I "choose" to play Lone Wolf style, am completely cognizant of the inherent deficit and do not "need" to be constantly reminded that MW:O is a team game and or harangued for not electing to use VoIP or join a group.

"My choice"... I don't complain about PUG'ing and I don't complain about PMs rolling...

I just want to play and have fun.

[Joseph Mallan]

Message received! Wanna join our group?

[CodeNameValtus]

This thread is now about ponies!

[DaZur]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Message received! Wanna join our group?

Oh you're a funny one... I'll kill you last.

CodeNameValtus, on 01 November 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

This thread is now about ponies!

No... No it's not. It's about rainbow cats but I hate to argue semantics.

[Joseph Mallan]

My job here is done!!!

See ya on the battlefield DaZur!

[SeaWolf2k]

DaZur, on 01 November 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

Addendum:

I "choose" to play Lone Wolf style, am completely cognizant of the inherent deficit and do not "need" to be constantly reminded that MW:O is a team game and or harangued for not electing to use VoIP or join a group.

"My choice"... I don't complain about PUG'ing and I don't complain about PMs rolling...

I just want to play and have fun.

Good on yah....... That is a great attitude and I wish more people shared it.... Feel free to play and enjoy the game anyway you like.... and I will see you Dirtside!!!

[Dmitri Valenov]

I too Lone Wolf it. Surprisingly, I do better than I thought I would. Especially once I discovered the glory of the Centurion -AL variant. That mech is just magical.

I actually enjoy the challenge of fighting a premade. it's great practice.

[LORD ORION]

DaZur, on 01 November 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

Okay… I get it. You are not happy with the state MW:O right now.

That said, must you high-jack every thread with a “The Devs are idi0ts and they should have listened to me” drivel?

Is it completely necessary to unceremoniously “educate” anyone who even hints at accepting the rose in spite of the thorns, that they are nothing but mooing cows being lead to slaughter?

Must anyone who dares to support the Devs be labeled as mindless fanboi lemmings?

Must every person who committed money to the Founders initiative be considered fiscal idi0ts?

Seriously… We get it. You’re not happy…

I’m not saying “If you don’t like it leave”… Far from it. I believe everyone has a right to be heard and truly believe most of you want to see MW:O succeed. That said, being boorish overbearing bullies who feel you have every right to demean and berate those of us who may not be as disenchanted as you, does nothing to lend any credibility to your arguments and if anything diminishes the ability of everyone to accept even a salient argument from you.

Have an opinion even a strong one... But remember it’s okay for “us” to having a different one. Dont' attack me for my opinions and I won't attack you for yours...

Fair deal?

The devs don't respect the players, so why defend them?

[BlackWidow]

As always, DaZur, your posts rise above the fray with clear thought and composed manner.

I, unfortunately, do not seem to share your tact and grace, and frequently get into shouting matches with naysayers. What they don't get (as you state here) is I'm not saying there aren't thorns but seem to be constantly fighting with them to tone down the misplaced rants and hyperbole and actual try to suggest and discuss what they don't like without making it seem as though:
A) they are speaking for the entire community (they are simply, not)
that just because they scream, insult and make ultimatums that it somehow makes their opinion fact and not mere conjecture.

I like differences of opinion, it makes the world more interesting
I WANT open discussion, it allows us to learn from and teach others
I DON'T want slander, hyperbole and threats. It does nothing but frighten, confuse and enrage everyone else.

This is not political mudslinging. This is a game, people. A game we *all* want.

Dmitri Valenov, on 01 November 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

I too Lone Wolf it. Surprisingly, I do better than I thought I would. Especially once I discovered the glory of the Centurion -AL variant. That mech is just magical.

I actually enjoy the challenge of fighting a premade. it's great practice.

What is your build if you don't mind me asking? If you'd rather not post, you could PM me.

Thanks!

[Khan Warlock Kell]

People should be free to choose to play this game in the manner of thier choosing, But this is a team based game. If you accept that playing in ways not intended will impact on your success in the game, The i think the game remains fun. However if you think that the game owes you something just for playing it then your experience of the game suffers.

Hopefully in the not too distant future the MM changes will help out those who dont want to fight team battles. and not long after that community warfare should arrive. keeping those who want a more intense team game happy too.

[eudaimonean]

Okay… I get it. You are happy with the state MW:O right now.

That said, must you high-jack every thread analyzing structural flaws in the game (and pointing out the long-standing community agitation about those flaws) with indignant rage?

Is it completely necessary to unceremoniously "dismiss" anyone who isn't as credulously enraptured with the game as some variant of leech or ingrate (or even, as you put it "negative nancys"?)

Must anyone who dares to avoid cash-distorted playing fields be labelled as a "lazy freeloader"?

Must every person who has a critique of haphazardly constructed game systems be considered a "bitter whiner"?

Seriously... We get it. You're not happy with criticism...

Honestly, this is what I see in every critique thread, both pre-and post-open beta:
A bunch of people assuming the critic is a troll.
A bunch of people assuming that the critic must not like the game because he's too lazy to grind, or too poor to pay, so we should just ignore him/her anyway.
A bunch of people calling the critic a whiner.
A bunch of people taking for granted that since the consensus (on the MW:O boards) is positive, the critic must simply be ignoring all the "brilliant" counter-arguments that thread interlocutors have presented.
A bunch of people tossing out logical non-sequitors or straw men, such as "PGI needs to make money somehow" or "well it's not as bad as WoT" or "There are games where you pay $15 a month!"

So, let me just say, it's very easy to see when people you disagree with "go personal," but people generally have a blind spot to similar behavior from their own side. And given the natural skew of this board...

Edited by eudaimonean, 01 November 2012 - 09:07 AM.

[DaZur]

BlackWidow, on 01 November 2012 - 08:51 AM, said:

A) they are speaking for the entire community (they are simply, not)
that just because they scream, insult and make ultimatums that it somehow makes their opinion fact and not mere conjecture.

Sadly the recent capitulation by the Devs (or at least the impression of doing so) only strengthened the resolve of those who actually believe that their ininteligible rants, screaming fits of rage and disjoined point of issue actually was the driving catalyst in influencing the Devs recent changes...

Squeaky wheel gets the grease.... Has always been the case since the creation of wheel and a decision to stick and axle in it.

Edited by DaZur, 01 November 2012 - 09:52 AM.

[eudaimonean]

DaZur, on 01 November 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Sadly the recent compilation by the Devs (or at least the impression of doing so) only strengthened the resolve of those who actually believe that their ininteligible rants, screaming fits of rage and disjoined point of issue actually was the driving catalyst in influencing the Devs recent changes...

Squeaky wheel gets the grease.... Has always been the case since the creation of wheel and a decision to stick and axle in it.

Characterizing critics as people with "ininteligible (sic) rants, screaming fits of rage, and disjoined (sic) point of issue" is not exactly a sterling example of high-minded civil discourse. So again: right back at you on the whole "don't personally attack people" thing.

[DaZur]

eudaimonean, on 01 November 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

Okay… I get it. You are happy with the state MW:O right now.

So, let me just say, it's very easy to see when people you disagree with "go personal," but people generally have a blind spot to similar behavior from their own side. And given the natural skew of this board...

Point taken... And I agree there are an equal share of zealots who choose to attempt to "shut down" any contrarian opinion.

In reality it boils down the approach, the tone and the intent...

Original posts regardless of which polarity you subscribe to should stand on their own merit and invoke rational discussion. It's the ones that begin with "PGI is intentionally bending us over and they don't care and anyone who supports them are asshats" or the "PGI are savants and should be worshiped with scented candles and anyone who takes umbrage with them are elitists and are not properly drinking the Kool-Aid" that cause the "equal and opposite reaction" responses that ultimately boil down to petty name calling and demanding prattle.

Long and short both sides reap what they sow... There is not one point being made on this forum that could not be made with a salient statement and a rational demeanor.

Edited by DaZur, 01 November 2012 - 09:40 AM.

[DaZur]

eudaimonean, on 01 November 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

Characterizing critics as people with "ininteligible (sic) rants, screaming fits of rage, and disjoined (sic) point of issue" is not exactly a sterling example of high-minded civil discourse. So again: right back at you on the whole "don't personally attack people" thing.

This is not "characterizing critics" This is characterizing a minority that are / were unable to state an opinion that even remotely resembled rational discussion. Big difference between being a reasoned critic and being a bloviating fool.

Seriously are you going to argue that there are / were not extremists who are / were incapable of making a rational point without it sounding like they were inflicted with tourettes? Yes, I'm am generalizing to make a factual point. By PGI giving the impression they were influenced by the copious amounts of rage threads it did nothing but give perceived precedence that in order to invoke change all someone has to do is scream like a mad-mad and foam at the mouth.

Edited by DaZur, 01 November 2012 - 09:45 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

Extreme opinions are bad, no matter which extreme ("side") they come from.

[Agent of Change]

eudaimonean, on 01 November 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

Characterizing critics as people with "ininteligible (sic) rants, screaming fits of rage, and disjoined (sic) point of issue" is not exactly a sterling example of high-minded civil discourse. So again: right back at you on the whole "don't personally attack people" thing.

I agree with DaZur actually, he may have painted with a broader brush than intended by not being more specific but his point sadly stands IMO. not all critics are as he described but I guarantee you that you would not have to look long to find a barely legible poorly composed rant full of any combination of accusations, conspiracy theories, threats, insults, or demands. (and lets be clear you will find those on either side of just about any issue here)

Trying to avoid those type of posts will lead to a more civil discourse which is far more conducive to producing ideas for the game and working out the core issue with the game, than the internet equivalent of screaming at each other which many of these threads degenerate into.

That said I am not completely happy with where the game is, I am not entirely happy with some of the planned changes, I do however like the game alot and will continue playing it with hope in my heart that the game will become what we were promised.

[Axeman1]

Forced team based games will always fall to the way-side. That said, this is forum, the game has problems, you shouldn't be surprised if people hi-jack threads to focus on the issues.

[BlackWidow]

eudaimonean, on 01 November 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

Characterizing critics as people with "ininteligible (sic) rants, screaming fits of rage, and disjoined (sic) point of issue" is not exactly a sterling example of high-minded civil discourse. So again: right back at you on the whole "don't personally attack people" thing.

Hi. Please do not misquote me or mis-infer what I was saying. I made NO comments, suggestions or indications that I was talking about critics of the game in specific or in general. I was attempting to have a conversation with Dazur about the *way* in which people choose to voice their critiques. Not the criticisms presented NOR the critics themselves.

I do not believe this was Dazur is trying either. And if you *really really really* need me to I can dig up posts that ARE in fact,
barely intelligible, fits of rage and often disjointed forms of discussion. Whether you choose to see him "characterizing" these people for their behavior is up to you. But, please don't attempt to turn this around and blame the poster because he happened to witness the behavior as an excuse to ignore or deflect the behavior in question.

To reiterate: Please don't attempt to make this personal against anyone by actually trying to equate the "observation" of bad behavior as equal in temper to the actual behavior (again, not people, but rather their posted behavior) that is the center of this discussion.

Otherwise, please continue the conversation as we are all trying to make things better here.

DaZur, on 01 November 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

This is not "characterizing critics" This is characterizing a minority that are / were unable to state an opinion that even remotely resembled rational discussion. Big difference between being a reasoned critic and being a bloviating fool.

Seriously are you going to argue that there are / were not extremists who are / were incapable of making a rational point without it sounding like they were inflicted with tourettes? Yes, I'm am generalizing to make a factual point. By PGI giving the impression they were influenced by the copious amounts of rage threads it did nothing but give perceived precedence that in order to invoke change all someone has to do is scream like a mad-mad and foam at the mouth.

Hey, DaZur....do me a HUGE favor from now on please.....

Please sign all of your future posts with DaZur (and BlackWidow).

Really, it will save me a lot of typing.