1080 réponses à ce sujet

[errant_knight]

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Modifié par errant_knight, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:16 .

[Aermas]

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Maybe we can turn this knowledge against them?

[errant_knight]

Aermas wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Maybe we can turn this knowledge against them?

No, I always play 'good.'  That's the forum equivalent of blood magic.

Modifié par errant_knight, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:20 .

[upsettingshorts]

MerinTB wrote...

http://www.microsoft.../games/flight/ - "Microsoft Flight" is a new PC game from Microsoft Game Studios.

I should have specified combat flight, though your diligence in finding a counterexample is noted.

MerinTB wrote...

Yeah, no game franchise is truly as dead as everyone likes to make them out to be.
Just because Wii's motion sensor games outsell FPS games like 5 to 1 sometimes doesn't make FPS games dead.
Because another game genre sells more doesn't make one that sells less dead.

It can make them mostly dead.

MerinTB wrote...

People said adventure games were dead nearly 20 years ago... and yet we still get stuff like Still Life 2.  Go figure.

Yeah but they're not exactly being churned out like they used to, are they?  

MerinTB wrote...

you dismiss, out of hand, all JRPGs I assume?

You assume correctly, sort of.  I've never played a JRPG I liked so I eventually just stopped looking at them.  I don't have a PS3, so that compounds the issue.  I don't deny there's probly a JRPG out there I'd like, though.

MerinTB wrote...

or do you mean "design your whole party yourself" RPGs?
NWN2 isn't that old yet.
Avernum 6 came out last year.
Silent Storm series had it's last game in 2005 so it's a bit older.
There are more...

It's not that I deny the games exist, I'm claiming that their attempts to emulate pen and paper style RPG sessions aren't really what PC and consoles are ideally suited for.  I don't think a pre-written world can or ought to reproduce the experience.  I didn't want to get into it because it's a really good way to get the thread completely derailed, especially with Sylvius about - we've been there before.

MerinTB wrote...

You want a "dead" sub-genre?  How about Bard's Tale style?  No one would make, let alone sell, a game like that anymore!
http://www.devilwhiskey.com/

I don't want any genres to be dead.  This isn't me happily digging party-based RPGs grave, but I do prefer many of the changes the critics of ME2 and DA:2 abhor.  So I'm not exactly going to fight against developments I support, either.

MerinTB wrote...

So, perhaps tone down "dead" and say instead "niche" or "not as popular as the best selling genres" or some such.

Text adventures aren't even dead.

That would be fair.  Effectively marginalized perhaps.

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss
people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group,
ignoring their differences, then try and make them look
irrational.

Who is doing this, may I ask?  I've used group labels before, in an attempt to improve the understanding on this forum move beyond "BDF" and "haters" but I did make note of the difference between folks preferring the standard of DAO and those who wanted to bring DA:2 back to something closer to BG2.  It certainly wasn't perfect, and I certainly never assumed after about a page of discussion realized that my labels apply to everyone.  Just covering my bases here.

To me, being right isn't nearly as important as being thoughtful.  I abandon my positions all the time, given the right circumstances - like a good argument or contradictory evidence - but I will ask that my views be understood and properly challenged before I do so.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:29 .

[Maria Caliban]

errant_knight wrote...

No, I always play 'good.'  That's the forum equivalent of blood magic.

Did you ever bring along Sten, Morrigan, Zevran, or Leliana? You can be good if you bring not-so-good types along and they do it for you.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:26 .

[Aermas]

errant_knight wrote...

Aermas wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Maybe we can turn this knowledge against them?

No, I always play 'good.'  That's the forum equivalent of blood magic.

But what's wrong with a little Maleficaring? I promise not to tell Wynne^_^

[MerinTB]

Maria Caliban wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

...see if you can argue his actual point instead?

I have no interest in arguing with him. I just wanted him to know that, yes, there's a time limit in chess.

Which has nothing to do with the price of tea in China, nor with my analogy - as from before -

MerinTB wrote...
I was making an analogy.
RPG vs. twitch games (or, for you, TBS vs RTS if you prefer)
AND
chess vs. basketball

One
requires thinking and decision making with (more or less) no time
limits, the other requires quick reactions (and maybe thinking /
decision making - basketball can be quite tactical.)

The analogy is true for my purposes. 

Going absolutely strictly by the "chess tournament" rules, there is no real "twitch" reaction in chess.  Your speed of play is not dependent on your opponent's.  Clocks were introduced in tournaments to give them structure so they could be regulated and maintained in a reasonable manner, not because chess is about quick reactions.
It's like poker tournaments.  You can sit around a money game for as long as the players keep playing (and have money), or you can go to a tournament that needs to have a set ending window and therefore they introduce artificial constraints on the game vis a vis rounds and increasing bet sizes and blinds and such.

Which is much further than needed to go - the fact that chess tournaments are timed has NOTHING to do with my argument, the analogy, nor the discussion it was part of.

You, Maria Caliban, flew in, picked one thing out of a discussion, and chose to belittle it.  You claimed I was wrong because chessmaster is a title.
I was just using it to mean someone really good at chess -
chess master - a chess player of great skill

I'm not continuing defending myself past this point - it's already a derailment of a derailment.

But I think it's extremely bad form to come in, pull something out of context, infer ignorance whether justified or not because you do not care to examine the context, and try to be a patronizing, pedantic instigator.


---


Time for me to take a big break form the forum.

Modifié par MerinTB, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:28 .

[Maria Caliban]

Mertin: I have no idea what you're talking about. I haven't followed your argument with UP at all. I have no context for what you're saying other than basketball is twitch gaming while chess is not.

I was pointing out was that there's a time limit in chess. Not everyone knows this. I assumed this might be the case and figured the information might be of use to you.

I'm not arguing with you because I don't even know what this argument is.

But here it is: Basketball is twitch gaming. Chess is not.

You've won now Mertin! I have conceded your point. Go you.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:37 .

[Meltemph]

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Might have something to do with the people who typically disagree, do so quite aggressively(and more or less the same for people who agree, but I would venture to guess the motive is different).  Then you have the people who claim the game is not their cup of tea, but still show a rather remarkable continued interest(to me) in a game they have lost interest in.  And since, the people who are fine/happy with the changes may be just as attached to their own opinions as the people who "hate and loath" the changes.

I dunno really.  I don't really get the... seemingly(to me) heavy attachment to having the game be what one envisions.  If I thought DA2 was going to be at the minimum, a disappointment, I wouldn't be wasting my time, I guess I would call it, making my voice heard(after a certain point anywho).  

Some of the arguments almost seem like crusade like, to me, either as to why Bioware is doing the right or wrong thing.  I stick around forums like this though, honestly, because I find the dedication to a specific type of game type interesting, for the most part(Coming from someone who would be fine with either direction most of these arguments are about) simply because I don't feel strongly about issues like this.

Modifié par Meltemph, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[Aermas]

Can we stop arguing about not arguing?

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

Can we stop arguing about not arguing?

I object.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Aermas wrote...

Can we stop arguing about not arguing?

Well they both have their merits.  Personally not arguing can lead to stagnation of public affairs while arguing can lead to nothing getting done in public affairs.  I think we should have a proper blend in order for this thread to round out in a nice cycle.

[Aermas]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Can we stop arguing about not arguing?

I object.

You can't "object" you must "verb"

[Onyx Jaguar]

I disagree with this assessment on language rules. Why should one admit themselves to such protocol when they have no say on the protocol and also because that protocol is only a courtesy and not a law punishable by imprisonment or fine.

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

You can't "object" you must "verb"

See definitions 11 and 12.  In case you're serious.

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

I disagree with this assessment on
language rules. Why should one admit themselves to such protocol when
they have no say on the protocol and also because that protocol is only a
courtesy and not a law punishable by imprisonment or fine.

/blinks
//goes to make coffee

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:38 .

[Aermas]

No I'm not serious, I just wanted to keep arguing, & now you've ruined it : )

[AlanC9]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Who is doing this, may I ask?  I've used group labels before, in an attempt to improve the understanding on this forum move beyond "BDF" and "haters" but I did make note of the difference between folks preferring the standard of DAO and those who wanted to bring DA:2 back to something closer to BG2.  It certainly wasn't perfect, and I certainly never assumed after about a page of discussion realized that my labels apply to everyone.  Just covering my bases here.

This might have something to do with what Gaider said a few pages back:

It's not as bad as some make it out to be, but with any change you're
going to encounter the most opposition (or, at least, trepidation)
amongst those who are most invested in having everything remain exactly
the same.

I find the statement mostly notable for its banality

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

No I'm not serious, I just wanted to keep arguing, & now you've ruined it : )

I find it impossible to tell when you're being pedantic or just pulling people's legs.  I think it's time for you to start using emotes, as much as I try to avoid relying on them myself. 

(Theres something for you to dispute)

AlanC9 wrote...

This might have something to do with what Gaider said a few pages back:

I'm pretty sure by "some people" he was talking about people who make no bones about their hostility towards the direction of DA:2, not some vague collection of everyone who dislikes it.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:42 .

[Aermas]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Aermas wrote...

No I'm not serious, I just wanted to keep arguing, & now you've ruined it : )

I find it impossible to tell when you're being pedantic or just pulling people's legs.  I think it's time for you to start using emotes, as much as I try to avoid relying on them myself. 

(Theres something for you to dispute)

AlanC9 wrote...

This might have something to do with what Gaider said a few pages back:

I'm pretty sure by "some people" he was talking about people who make no bones about their hostility towards the direction of DA:2, not some vague collection of everyone who dislikes it.

Yes, even in real life people have trouble reading by intent, I will try to use more emotes then, but there isn't really any angry ones & that's what I would use the most...

[Maria Caliban]

What is a BDF?

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...
Yes, even in real life people have trouble reading by intent, I will try to use more emotes then, but there isn't really any angry ones & that's what I would use the most...

Hmm... angry:  <_< seems closest.  It looks more like scorn than rage, though.

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is a BDF?

"Bioware Defense Force" -> a term used to dismiss people who favor Bioware's design decisions as sycophantic apologists.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:47 .

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is a BDF?

"bioware defense force" if i understand it right.

edit: curses, ninja'ed

Modifié par tmp7704, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:47 .

[Meltemph]

Maria Caliban wrote...

What is a BDF?

Best Damn Friend of course!  

Or I guess it could mean bioware defense force, but I highly doubt that!  I won't shave my beard tomorrow if a person meant it as "Best Damn Friend".  

[Maria Caliban]

Someone ought to do a story where BDF has relations with the company. And I don't mean the employees, I mean BioWare itself.

*adds to list*

[errant_knight]

Meltemph wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

It's a lot easier to dismiss people, or invalidate their opinions, if you lump them into a group, ignoring their differences, then try and make them look irrational.

Might have something to do with the people who typically disagree, do so quite aggressively(and more or less the same for people who agree, but I would venture to guess the motive is different).  Then you have the people who claim the game is not their cup of tea, but still show a rather remarkable continued interest(to me) in a game they have lost interest in.  And since, the people who are fine/happy with the changes and may be just as attached to their own opinions as the people who "hate and loath" the changes.

I dunno really.  I don't really get the... seemingly(to me) heavy attachment to having the game be what one envisions.  If I thought DA2 was going to be at the minimum, a disappointment, I wouldn't be, wasting my time, I guess I would call it, making my voice heard(after a certain point anywho).  

Some of the arguments almost seem like crusade like, to me, either as to why Bioware is doing the right or wrong thing.  I stick around forums like this though, honestly, because I find the dedication to a specific type of game type interesting, for the most part(Coming from someone who would be fine with either direction most of these arguments are about) simply because I don't feel strongly about issues like this.

Well, personally, I care because I've never played a game that I enjoyed  (and still enjoy) as much as I enjoyed Deagon Age, and was hoping to play a game that was so entirely what I enjoy more than once. And I know from experience with playing other games with similar styles to DA2, that I don't enjoy those as much. So for me, this is a real loss. I can also tell you why I'm still considering buying the game--the writers and the cameos. That's pretty much it, and since games cost close to eighty dollars in Canada, I go back and forth on whether that's enough. I keep hoping that read something here that will make me feel better about it, or get me excited for the game, but every new announcement just removes another aspect of the game that was a direct part of my enjoyment. I'm the 'never say die' type, so I keep hoping that something will change, or I'll hear something that I'll think is good news, but so far the cameos are pretty much it on that front. But you never know. Something good might happen.