735 réponses à ce sujet

[Icinix]

Since the theme of the day is cleverbot...



I think Mike is actually on a tropical island somewhere, and that was an automated response to key words in Lucy's posts...

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
A conservative!  All hail the status quo!  (See, I'm not crazy)

When something works you don't completely change the formula. I wonder if you were a fan of Starcraft and if so what you thought of Starcraft2. Other than a new campaign and some new units the sequal is almost identical to the first. And it sold like crazy and everyone is loving it.

We don't know yet just how drastic the changes are from DA:O to DA][, but if it's a far enough departure it's a mistake. And while they'll grab a number of new buyers, they'll lose a lot of us that liked  DA:O. It's not a matter of status quo. Your whole application of that theory is out of whack. It's inaccurate because it only characterizes desires and completely misses the correct motivations.

[the_one_54321]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Considering the liberals are doing a great job of running the US into the ground, I suppose your analogy somewhat fits, since apply it the same way and they're simplifying the RPG genre to the point of pointlessness.

Right, lets just take the BS that one step further it needs to get the thread locked. Great job.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Considering the liberals are doing a great job of running the US into the ground, I suppose your analogy somewhat fits, since apply it the same way and they're simplifying the RPG genre to the point of pointlessness.

Political ideology has nothing to do with the labels as I have described them, and comparisons to modern parties are the very definition of irrelevant and off-topic.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
You've earned that title already, a couple times over now imo.

Yep, I recall making an issue of your casual condescension of opinions you disagree with.  Nothing seems to have changed.  I'm still a jerk, and you're still wrong.

Oh ok, well you were the one that brought up political movement labels in the first place. Just saying.

You're right, I am generally condescending to the stupid,I read on this forum on a daily basis, because the crap has gotten so deep lately, it gets kinda frustrating after awhile.

[Meltemph]

You're right, I am generally condescending to the stupid,I read on this forum on a daily basis, because the crap has gotten so deep lately, it gets kinda frustrating after awhile.

LMAO, coming from the person who can't go a single argument w/o ad hominem's? You are condescending because you have to be, it is the only thing you can rely on to handle criticism of your opinions.

[the_one_54321]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
You're right, I am generally condescending to the stupid,I read on this forum on a daily basis, because the crap has gotten so deep lately, it gets kinda frustrating after awhile.

You know what gets old just as quick? The people who post just to call others stupid. I'm not fond of the "streamlining" myself. And yeah, I view it as an issue of making the game more approachable for the twitch gaming crowd and the casual "I don't want to think too much" crowd. But I don't go around calling everyone names and implying that they're lacking in higher thinking processes whenever I hear something I don't like. Verbal violence is still violence. He who first resorts to violence is demonstrating that he has lost the argument.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 09 octobre 2010 - 06:44 .

[David Gaider]

the_one_54321 wrote...
When something works you don't completely change the formula. I wonder if you were a fan of Starcraft and if so what you thought of Starcraft2. Other than a new campaign and some new units the sequal is almost identical to the first. And it sold like crazy and everyone is loving it.

We don't know yet just how drastic the changes are from DA:O to DA][, but if it's a far enough departure it's a mistake. And while they'll grab a number of new buyers, they'll lose a lot of us that liked  DA:O. It's not a matter of status quo. Your whole application of that theory is out of whack. It's inaccurate because it only characterizes desires and completely misses the correct motivations.

Not to butt in here, but I don't think AngryPants was saying that there was a status quo. I think he's saying that "conservatives" favor the status quo-- they want the status quo to be maintained between DAO and DA2. We're not, obviously, and some people clearly don't like DA2 changing the formula. Whether it's ultimately a good idea or not remains to be seen, but naturally since the biggest fans of DAO liked it how it was and want more of the same and also happen to hang out on these forums a lot and be very interested in how Dragon Age develops as a series we'll hear a lot from them.

That doesn't change the fact that DA2 is changing the formula. We could have left it all the same, yes, and indeed Starcraft is an excellent game-- but we're not going that route. Like Mike said, whether we think the changes are that fundamental or not is irrelevant to some folks-- though their view is still largely conjecture and based primarily on their thoughts regarding specific features or RPG's in general, and thus we'll have to take it with a grain of salt. One can predict doom and gloom and a massive departure of dissatisfied fans with nobody to replace them... but I guess that's BioWare's risk to take, isn't it? :)

Modifié par David Gaider, 09 octobre 2010 - 06:47 .

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...

When something works you don't completely change the formula. I wonder if you were a fan of Starcraft and if so what you thought of Starcraft2. Other than a new campaign and some new units the sequal is almost identical to the first.And it sold like crazy and everyone is loving it.

I'm not disputing that some people feel that way.  That's why I didn't go on to say which labelled ideology was right or wrong.  The belief as summarized by "when something works you don't completely change the formula" could almost be used to describe the notion of conservatism.  That doesn't mean that I think everyone who wants DA:2 to be like DA:O is a Republican or a Tory - as some have implied - just that their preference for the status quo means that they are conservatives by definition.  Their preferences are as valid as anyone elses, and I just wanted to come up with terms to describe that carried more weight and accuracy - as David Gaider mentioned - than "trolls" and "fanboys."

I don't play Starcraft or 2, but I can answer your question a bit.  Just because I self-identify as a liberal on the issue
of DA:2's development and Bioware games in general does not mean I always feel that way about all games. 

the_one_54321 wrote...

Wedon't know yet just how drastic the changes are from DA:O to DA][, but if it's a far enough departure it's a mistake.

Not to a radical.  Or indeed, a "faithful" radical.

the_one_54321 wrote...

And while they'll grab a number of new buyers, they'll lose a lot of us that liked  DA:O. It's not a matter of status quo. Your whole application of that theory is out of whack. It's inaccurate because it only characterizes desires and completely misses the correct motivations.

I don't see what your point is here.  Is your motivation based on your own preferences or your expectations on how such changes will effect sales? In any case, I do claim that the theory serves to categorize desires and nothing more though I still would like to see you elaborate.

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Oh ok, well you were the one that brought up political movement labels in the first place. Just saying.

You're right, I am generally condescending to the stupid,I read on this forum on a daily basis, because the crap has gotten so deep lately, it gets kinda frustrating after awhile.

They're not necessarily political, that is just the context they are most often used in.  You can be "liberal" with the salad dressing or a "conservative" driver.  

On the note of being condescending due to frustration, I think that's fair.  Understand that when I'm a jerk - well, most of the time - it is also out of frustration.   However, just as the fact that not everyone I'm a jerk towards deserves it - all people who disagree with you are not stupid.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 octobre 2010 - 06:50 .

[the_one_54321]

David Gaider wrote...
One can predict doom and gloom and a massive departure of dissatisfied fans with nobody to replace them... but I guess that's BioWare's risk to take, isn't it?

I'm still not predicting anything, as I've said more than once before. Mike has sworn up and down about the combat and mechanical features of the game retaining everything that I was in DA:O that I want to see again. I've... well I wouldn't say "defended" but I've spoken up about how the new dialog system and voice acting doesn't really make a difference to me. The game controls are what matter. The game controls are what dictate the way a game plays. The rest I can manage within my own head if need be.
Anyway, point being that I still don't really have any decent idea what to expect because you guys have given very very little in the way of concrete information on how the game will play. I've heard a lot of promises and we'll see how those play out.
And angryshorts over there did specifically link the stauts quo to his "conservative" labeling when responding to Lucy. Which is all kinds of bogus. I am not against step forwards. I'm against steps to the side. The mechanics worked. If I wanted a differently structured game I could go find it from other developers, as I've said before as well.

[upsettingshorts]

David Gaider wrote...

Not to butt in here, but I don't think AngryPants was saying that there was a status quo. I think he's saying that "conservatives" favor the status quo-- they want the status quo to be maintained between DAO and DA2.

Essentially, yes.

If this were the Mass Effect 3 boards, the status quo would be Mass Effect 2.

the_one_54321 wrote...

And angryshorts over there did specifically link the stauts quo to his "conservative" labeling when responding to Lucy. Which is all kinds of bogus. I am not against step forwards. I'm against steps to the side. The mechanics worked. If I wanted a differently structured game I could go find it from other developers, as I've said before as well.

It's not bogus at all.  Lucy said she wanted another game that was just like Dragon Age: Origins.  That fits my definition of conservative as it requests a continuation of the status quo.

In terms of what I bolded:  You say tomato, I say tomato.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 octobre 2010 - 06:54 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

the_one_54321 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
You're right, I am generally condescending to the stupid,I read on this forum on a daily basis, because the crap has gotten so deep lately, it gets kinda frustrating after awhile.

You know what gets old just as quick? The people who post just to call others stupid. I'm not fond of the "streamlining" myself. And yeah, I view it as an issue of making the game more approachable for the twitch gaming crowd and the casual "I don't want to think too much" crowd. But I don't go around calling everyone names and implying that they're lacking in higher thinking processes whenever I hear something I don't like. Verbal violence is still violence. He who first resorts to violence is demonstrating that he has lost the argument.

No you rather play the poltically correct card, rather than just call things how they are. Me, I don't do that, I rather just call things as I see them.

[the_one_54321]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
No you rather play the poltically correct card, rather than just call things how they are. Me, I don't do that, I rather just call things as I see them.

Wow, you have no  idea who you're talking to, if that's what you think. Ask anyone around here that is actually familiar with me if I'm the "politically correct" type. I'm just able to slow down and have a normal discussion when it's appropriate. When you start off things with mud slinging all that happens is everyone gets dirty. You can be honest without always being a pain in the neck.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

the_one_54321 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
No you rather play the poltically correct card, rather than just call things how they are. Me, I don't do that, I rather just call things as I see them.

Wow, you have no  idea who you're talking to, if that's what you think. Ask anyone around here that is actually familiar with me if I'm the "politically correct" type. I'm just able to slow down and have a normal discussion when it's appropriate. When you start off things with mud slinging all that happens is everyone gets dirty. You can be honest without always being a pain in the neck.

No doubt, I agree, its just difficult when you know where a person's view point stands from previous posts, and all they're really doing in pushing an agenda in the first place.

[David Gaider]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
No you rather play the poltically correct card, rather than just call things how they are. Me, I don't do that, I rather just call things as I see them.

"I'm just telling it like it is" is sort of the classic defense by rude people of their behavior, isn't it?

I'd sooner say that if you can't make your observations in a polite manner, you shouldn't make them. So let's all stop this back-and-forth and keep things on topic please... or excuse yourself from the table. This is our house, remember, and you're all guests, so please act like it.

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
It's not bogus at all.  Lucy said she wanted another game that was just like Dragon Age: Origins.  That fits my definition of conservative as it requests a continuation of the status quo.

In terms of what I bolded:  You say tomato, I say tomato.

Oh, you're playing the Sylvius card and creating arbitrary labels to suit your uses? Well yes, if you define "status quo" as creating a game with the same type of mechanical interactions, then we want to maintain the status quo.
But if you use status quo to mean the existing state of affairs, as it's normally used, then no we don't want that. We want progress and story advancement, and new or improved features for the game. We just don't want the defining traits of the game to be changed.

[upsettingshorts]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
No doubt, I agree, its just difficult when you know where a person's view point stands from previous posts, and all they're really doing in pushing an agenda in the first place.

Everyone is pushing an agenda.

[Meltemph]

You are polite... Jinstar takes that as meaning PCness, because Jinstar "tells it like it is". Obviously, Jinstar, works well with others.

[Ortaya Alevli]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
It's not bogus at all.  Lucy said she wanted another game that was just like Dragon Age: Origins.  That fits my definition of conservative as it requests a continuation of the status quo.

In terms of what I bolded:  You say tomato, I say tomato.

Oh, you're playing the Sylvius card and creating arbitrary labels to suit your uses? Well yes, if you define "status quo" as creating a game with the same type of mechanical interactions, then we want to maintain the status quo.
But if you use status quo to mean the existing state of affairs, as it's normally used, then no we don't want that. We want progress and story advancement, and new or improved features for the game. We just don't want the defining traits of the game to be changed.

Then you're not a conservative. Is there a problem?

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Oh, you're playing the Sylvius card and creating arbitrary labels to suit your uses?

Not really no.  I just thought the idea when applied on another board to a different game was amusing and yet applicable here as well.

the_one_54321 wrote...
Well yes, if you define "status quo" as creating a game with the same type of mechanical interactions, then we want to maintain the status quo.
But if you use status quo to mean the existing state of affairs, as it's normally used, then no we don't want that.

I personally think you're splitting the hair mighty thin with that one.  If you don't mind minor changes, what's wrong with simply calling yourself a centrist, then?  Someone who falls between "my" labels of conservative and liberal, just as I claim most people actually are.  However, while Lucy is free to re-enter this thread and elaborate as to precisely what changes she would welcome, the content of her post that I quoted and cited as conservative will remain by definition - well, conservative.  

No nefarious purpose behind it at all.  My agenda is simply for people to try and put a little thought into what people want other than calling them bad names.

the_one_54321 wrote...
We want progress and story advancement, and new or improved features for the game. We just don't want the defining traits of the game to be changed.

And your definition of what a defining trait of the game is will be different  than mine, or Sylvius', or David Gaiders... the list goes on.  That's partly why I created the labels.  A reactionary would say that defining CRPG traits were missing from DA:O.  A radical would say there's a lot that you could change about DA:O before its defining traits would be altered.  See my point?

[Lucy Glitter]

Oh gosh everyone shut up and stop acting like you are the sole intellectual being on the planet. IT'S NOT COOL OKAY. OKAY?! ALRIGHT?! COMPREHEJHFOUIRJ.

La de doodly. I am so irritated with all this smart buttery I went a little funny! What can I say? One can only take so much self absorbed bullfrog in one day. Also, this labelling of fans is really pushing it. Take all that mumbo jumbo to a blog, please. It's not very fun. I don't particularly feel like elaborating for the millionth time on why I do not like the million different changed to the franchise. Also, please stop talking about me. It makes my ears burn.

David Gaider wrote...

I'd sooner say that if you can't make your observations in a polite manner, you shouldn't make them. So let's all stop this back-and-forth and keep things on topic please... or excuse yourself from the table. This is our house, remember, and you're all guests, so please act like it.

Um nummies! Gaider writing! *chomp chomp chomp*

Best dinner party EVER!

Modifié par Lucy_Glitter, 09 octobre 2010 - 07:10 .

[upsettingshorts]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...
Then you're not a conservative. Is there a problem?

Yeah, but it's my fault. I shouldn't have labeled liberals as "want DA:2 to be more like ME2." It was too precise and was inevitably going to result in these kinds of objections. However, in my defense I thought that simply saying anything broader would have made the label effectively meaningless.

I mean, "welcomes some change to DA:O mechanics" or some other similar statement mean to me? What about to the_one_54321? I expect the answers would be very different so the line has to be drawn somewhere. Just the choice of ME2 as that line seems to be problematic.

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Oh gosh everyone shut up and stop acting like you are the sole being on the planet. IT'S NOT COOL OKAY.
OKAY?! ALRIGHT?! COMPREHEJHFOUIRJ.

La de doodly. I am so irritated with all this smart buttery I went a little funny! What can I say? One can only take so much self absorbed bullfrog in one day. Also, this labelling of fans is really pushing it. Take all that mumbo jumbo to a blog, please. It's not very fun.

This kinda nonsense is fun for me, but then I find rhetoric fascinating.  For my part I think stuff like the Varric fan thread is pushing it and blog fodder though I still poke my head in there from time to time.  It takes all sorts, does it not?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 09 octobre 2010 - 07:13 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Meltemph wrote...

You are polite... Jinstar takes that as meaning PCness, because Jinstar "tells it like it is". Obviously, Jinstar, works well with others.

I do actually, quite well at that. I'm not quite the **** when you're on my good side, or wanting to see a genre I love changed and streamlined to hell and beyond.

[David Gaider]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...
Um nummies! Gaider writing! *chomp chomp chomp*

I was using that. <_<

[Ortaya Alevli]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Oh gosh everyone shut up and stop acting like you are the sole being on the planet. IT'S NOT COOL OKAY. OKAY?! ALRIGHT?! COMPREHEJHFOUIRJ.

La de doodly. I am so irritated with all this smart buttery I went a little funny! What can I say? One can only take so much self absorbed bullfrog in one day. Also, this labelling of fans is really pushing it. Take all that mumbo jumbo to a blog, please. It's not very fun.

David Gaider wrote...

I'd sooner say that if you can't make your observations in a polite manner, you shouldn't make them. So let's all stop this back-and-forth and keep things on topic please... or excuse yourself from the table. This is our house, remember, and you're all guests, so please act like it.

Um nummies! Gaider writing! *chomp chomp chomp*

Best dinner party EVER!

Deep Roads is not for the faint of heart.

[Meltemph]

I'm not quite the **** when you're on my good side

Oh... How wonderful, you sound like a peach. >.>

Sometimes I wonder if you just like a flare for the dramatic.

or wanting to see a genre I love changed and streamlined to hell and beyond

Who exactly suggested this, assuming you mean stripped down? Now some people may be fine with the changes, but I see nothing being "stripped down". Perhaps a change in direction, but that would be about it.

Nothing we have seen so far suggest stripping down of anything.

Modifié par Meltemph, 09 octobre 2010 - 07:13 .