518 réponses à ce sujet

[Ronin2006]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...

JosephShrike wrote...

Just because you preface something with "This isn't a personal attack" doesn't make it not a personal attack. I'd be like me saying "This isn't a personal attack, OP, but you're an idiot.". Still kind of one

Read my edited edited first post and see how this isn't a personal attack.  People like you need to gain a better understanding of the English language and what a personal attack actually entails.

You make a person responsible for all that ails DA 2 (in your opinion) whom happens to not even be the project leader. Perhaps you are the one who needs better understanding of some matters?

Unfortunately, with the way organisations and businesses are run, it is quite clear that Mike Laidlaw was one of the more senior members of the Bioware team, and it does appear as though a lot of what has occurred with the game has been a result of his ideas/vision.  Now yes, it is understandable that this does seem harsh or perhaps even to a degree unfair, but this is the way the business world works.  Many of the directional decisions of the series do appear to derive from his ideas, and ultimately he is the one who would be held responsible for their success/failings.  To deny it would be incredibly naive.

Also, the topic of the project leader has come up before and I am happy to alter the thread to accomodate this if it does seem true that Mike Laidlaw did not have a part in creating the controversies that have befallen Dragon Age 2.  I have actually stated numerous times during this thread that I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong on this issue.  However, the person in charge of the design of the game, does still appear to be none other than Mike Laidlaw.  If you can convince me otherwise, then I'd be happy to change/alter this thread.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 25 mars 2011 - 03:34 .

[Lumikki]

I think Bioware did fine job for time table they had.

Was game rushed? I think so, because there is way too many enviroment what was re-used. Also a few minor bugs are still in game. They did cut corners so much that players did notice it.

So, while some features got imroved, some did not. It is how ever just opinion, because it's based what person likes in games. So, in the end, I think DA2 is fine game, sure some mistakes and success, nothing is ever perfect.

How ever OP think Biowares current direction is wrong. I would ask why?

If it's just wrong because personal taste of games, then that's not really reason at all. If it's because simplifyed game design, that isn't much better reason. If it is based that people don't buy the game, because they don't like it. Then that's good reason. How ever, is DA2 selling fine?

Modifié par Lumikki, 25 mars 2011 - 03:54 .

[Scottish90000]

errant_knight wrote...

Since this doesn't seem to be going away, I'm going to repeat what I said on the same topic in another thread. This has all the earmarks of a lynch mob, and that's never a good thing. Let it go. Put down the pitch forks and torches. Put down the tar and feathers. This isn't helping at all.

I think it is helping and will help, actually.  Game companies won't bend to the will of one poster or one thread, but this game has triggered a TSUNAMI on Bioware's forums.  When people feel so strongly that many call for the heads of those they THINK are responsible, those that really are responsible (and their superiors) are going to take notice and start to think in the back of their minds "Maybe we didn't make the best decisions..."  The hope then is that they have enough of those thoughts that they decide to do things differently for Dragon Age 3.

When this game first came out, I was mad at a lot of these threads too.  And I still think some posters (*cough* BobSmith101 *cough*) have posted so much that they can't think of anything more constructive and have resorted to trolling.  But after my first playthrough, and a subsequent replay of DA:O, I came to the conclusion that Bioware did indeed cut corners and made a game that wasn't up to what we've come to expect.

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

Games aren't made by a single person.

The ultimate issue with DA2 was the majority of the fanbase.  They only played human, they wanted voice characters, they wanted more romances, they wanted a dialogue wheel etc etc. 

Bioware did a surprisingly good job with the combat though.  I was expecting it to be terrible, and aside from reducing difficulty on Normal and removing friendly fire almost completely (Due to the same forementioned people complaining Origins was too hard) they managed to strike an excellent balance between console and PC's, allowing console players to enjoy the game much more, and retaining and actually improving the tactical aspect of DA2. (It's a wee bit harder to cheese DA2 on Nightmare atleast, characters are less powerful overall)

Didn't help the game cut corners, with lazy level design (When you only have to design one big city for a game, why do you get lazy with surrounding areas by making them extremely modular and reuse them over and over?) Also, the side quests are very poorly designed, it's basically like the first Witcher in that regard where almost every side quest is a fetch quest of some sort. I think I'll attribute the shortcuts to the development time being barely over a year from Awakening. (Assuming they started with Origins ended, they still had a lot of people working on Awakening)

I hope they go bring back Origin stories and being able to play as any race in the next game.  

Also, wheres my damn toolset? 

 

Modifié par ITSSEXYTIME, 25 mars 2011 - 03:49 .

[ZombiePowered]

Scottish90000 wrote...

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

Regardless of your reasoning, you just stated support for a LYNCH MOB. You know, those things that hang people for no real reason other than that their angry about something and want to take it out on a person by killing them. Lynch mobs are never contructive and never on target. Lynch mobs are just a bunch of angry pissed off people with no direction other than irrational violence. Lynch mobs never help anything. If people want Bioware to listen to their ideas then they should eloquenty write them and make good points and criticisms and suggest ways things can be improved. A lynch mob is not the way to do it. It isn't, in fact, the way to do anything. Even though I disagree with every hater out there on the quality of DA2, Bioware should still listen to their points. Who knows, if they stopped trolling and held in-depth discussion about their concerns, something constructive might happen.

I would urge you once again to consider what it is to actually approve of a lynch mob. After all, saying a lynch mob is just a bunch of people who really care about something is saying that the lynch mobs in the southern US that hanged African-Americans just REALLY cared about their way of bigotry and senseless discrimination, and didn't want to see it erode in favor of human rights and equality. Please, use your brain before posting. This is disgusting and insulting.

Modifié par ZombiePowered, 25 mars 2011 - 03:56 .

[Scottish90000]

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

Regardless of your reasoning, you just stated support for a LYNCH MOB. You know, those things that hang people for no real reason other than that their angry about something and want to take it out on a person by killing them. Lynch mobs are never contructive and never on target. Lynch mobs are just a bunch of angry pissed off people with no direction other than irrational violence. Lynch mobs never help anything. If people want Bioware to listen to their ideas then they should eloquenty write them and make good points and criticisms and suggest ways things can be improved. A lynch mob is not the way to do it. It isn't, in fact, the way to do anything. Even though I disagree with every hater out there on the quality of DA2, Bioware should still listen to their points. Who knows, if they stopped trolling and held in-depth discussion about their concerns, something constructive might happen.

I would urge you once again to consider what it is to actually approve of a lynch mob. After all, saying a lynch mob is just a bunch of people who really care about something is saying that the lynch mobs in the south that hanged African-Americans just REALLY cared about their way of bigotry and senseless discrimination, and didn't want to see it erode in favor of human rights and equality. Please, use your brain before posting. This is disgusting and insulting.

Lighten up, Francis.  I only used the term because it was used by the previous poster to describe the situation.  I guess I should have put the term in quotes.  But in any case, if you find my post so disgusting and insulting, report it, don't derail a thread and cloak yourself in righteousness with a politically correct troll post.

Modifié par Scottish90000, 25 mars 2011 - 04:02 .

[_Aine_]

you know, the parallel's between conversations like this on the forum, and the story in DA2 are quite striking really.

So, let me get this right, Bioware is the Chantry and what? Mike Laidlaw is Anders? The forumites against the changes are the the templars and the ones who simply go with the flow and accept what they can't change (or like them alternately!) are the mages?

Well, I hope none of you complain too bitterly about the story line of DA2 because you are all doing a fine job of bringing it back to life here too.

I think yes, they cut corners. But i am also enjoying much of the game now that certain disappointments are known and out of the way and I found ways around caring much about them. It is interesting how much people seem to know about everyone's job descriptions at Bioware and how their business organization works. I don't know what or who prompted the changes, nor do I have any interest in pointing fingers over things that conflict with my own personal preferences on what I think makes a great game. Some changes worked well, in my opinion, and some did not. I think it is wise to remember that we all have made mistakes in life and there is danger in always having the need to find someone to demonize in order for your point to be valid...

Is what is happening our business really to get into THEIR business? Probably not. Incredibly interesting yes, our business....I don't think so.

Right or wrong, lynch mobs somehow always end up making themselves look far worse than their cause.

[B3taMaxxx]

UnstableMongoose wrote...
2. EA stuck their hand in the cookie jar.

 Eh hum, I suppose you would to if you purchased  the company. 

[ZombiePowered]

Scottish90000 wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

Regardless of your reasoning, you just stated support for a LYNCH MOB. You know, those things that hang people for no real reason other than that their angry about something and want to take it out on a person by killing them. Lynch mobs are never contructive and never on target. Lynch mobs are just a bunch of angry pissed off people with no direction other than irrational violence. Lynch mobs never help anything. If people want Bioware to listen to their ideas then they should eloquenty write them and make good points and criticisms and suggest ways things can be improved. A lynch mob is not the way to do it. It isn't, in fact, the way to do anything. Even though I disagree with every hater out there on the quality of DA2, Bioware should still listen to their points. Who knows, if they stopped trolling and held in-depth discussion about their concerns, something constructive might happen.

I would urge you once again to consider what it is to actually approve of a lynch mob. After all, saying a lynch mob is just a bunch of people who really care about something is saying that the lynch mobs in the south that hanged African-Americans just REALLY cared about their way of bigotry and senseless discrimination, and didn't want to see it erode in favor of human rights and equality. Please, use your brain before posting. This is disgusting and insulting.

Lighten up, Francis.

I'm merely pointing out that your support for a lynch mob as a vessel of positive change in anything is completely moot, as is demonstrated by every instance involving a lynch mob in history.

[Fymth]

From my point of view, I have not seen anything that would make him a bad designer.

But if it was up to the forum population: Mike would of been lynched a long time ago. This forum does not represent the players who like the game.

If it was up to the general population: Only a few minor complaints and the major complaint of too many recycled environment would most likely surface.

On a side note, I really hope they dont take alot of feedback from these forums as its infested with trolls.

[aksoileau]

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

[Fymth]

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

I agree 100%

[MrTijger]

Ronin2006 wrote...


Unfortunately, with the way organisations and businesses are run, it is quite clear that Mike Laidlaw was one of the more senior members of the Bioware team, and it does appear as though a lot of what has occurred with the game has been a result of his ideas/vision.  Now yes, it is understandable that this does seem harsh or perhaps even to a degree unfair, but this is the way the business world works.  Many of the directional decisions of the series do appear to derive from his ideas, and ultimately he is the one who would be held responsible for their success/failings.  To deny it would be incredibly naive.

Also, the topic of the project leader has come up before and I am happy to alter the thread to accomodate this if it does seem true that Mike Laidlaw did not have a part in creating the controversies that have befallen Dragon Age 2.  I have actually stated numerous times during this thread that I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong on this issue.  However, the person in charge of the design of the game, does still appear to be none other than Mike Laidlaw.  If you can convince me otherwise, then I'd be happy to change/alter this thread.

You know what, I have no intention or inclination to convince you, you state at the beginning of your reply "that Mike Laidlaw was one of the more senior members". So, hence, he is responsible for all that went wrong.
Not the other senior people, not the people above him, no, he is responsible.

You are the one that is naive, Mike Laidlaw may have a vision for Dragon Age (one you clearly disagree with) but he is not the decider nor is he the project leader with the final responsebility. This is not a one man show, this is a multi million dollar undertaking which is of high importance to the company and you do not run that without checks and balances and reporting what you are doing and how the end product will look.

Modifié par MrTijger, 25 mars 2011 - 04:12 .

[Vajraja]

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

Statistically you can't say that the people who are disappointed in the game are a failiure. Don't try and make up figures to support your cause. if the forums and everything we have seen is a representative sample it seems to be 50:50. So if we extrapolate it to a million in sales, 500k for 500k against. Needless to say we can't make those distinctions.

What is clear is that there are a LOT of people with serious misgivings about the game and EA/Bioware needs to be made aware of it.

[MrTijger]

Vajraja wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

Statistically you can't say that the people who are disappointed in the game are a failiure. Don't try and make up figures to support your cause. if the forums and everything we have seen is a representative sample it seems to be 50:50. So if we extrapolate it to a million in sales, 500k for 500k against. Needless to say we can't make those distinctions.

What is clear is that there are a LOT of people with serious misgivings about the game and EA/Bioware needs to be made aware of it.

Yeah, but guess what, personalized attack posts on members of the design team arent going to win you any support .

[Scottish90000]

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

Regardless of your reasoning, you just stated support for a LYNCH MOB. You know, those things that hang people for no real reason other than that their angry about something and want to take it out on a person by killing them. Lynch mobs are never contructive and never on target. Lynch mobs are just a bunch of angry pissed off people with no direction other than irrational violence. Lynch mobs never help anything. If people want Bioware to listen to their ideas then they should eloquenty write them and make good points and criticisms and suggest ways things can be improved. A lynch mob is not the way to do it. It isn't, in fact, the way to do anything. Even though I disagree with every hater out there on the quality of DA2, Bioware should still listen to their points. Who knows, if they stopped trolling and held in-depth discussion about their concerns, something constructive might happen.

I would urge you once again to consider what it is to actually approve of a lynch mob. After all, saying a lynch mob is just a bunch of people who really care about something is saying that the lynch mobs in the south that hanged African-Americans just REALLY cared about their way of bigotry and senseless discrimination, and didn't want to see it erode in favor of human rights and equality. Please, use your brain before posting. This is disgusting and insulting.

Lighten up, Francis.

I'm merely pointing out that your support for a lynch mob as a vessel of positive change in anything is completely moot, as is demonstrated by every instance involving a lynch mob in history.

If you are serious, you are way too hung up on the term.  If you actually read my post, you would know that the original use of the term in a previous post was highly exaggerated, and my use of the term was tongue-in-cheek.

[Scottish90000]

MrTijger wrote...

Vajraja wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

Statistically you can't say that the people who are disappointed in the game are a failiure. Don't try and make up figures to support your cause. if the forums and everything we have seen is a representative sample it seems to be 50:50. So if we extrapolate it to a million in sales, 500k for 500k against. Needless to say we can't make those distinctions.

What is clear is that there are a LOT of people with serious misgivings about the game and EA/Bioware needs to be made aware of it.

Yeah, but guess what, personalized attack posts on members of the design team arent going to win you any support .

Who made a personalized attack?  Did someone say he's ugly, a bad father, or a philanderer?

Questioning his job performance is not a personalized attack.

[Ronin2006]

MrTijger wrote...

Ronin2006 wrote...


Unfortunately, with the way organisations and businesses are run, it is quite clear that Mike Laidlaw was one of the more senior members of the Bioware team, and it does appear as though a lot of what has occurred with the game has been a result of his ideas/vision.  Now yes, it is understandable that this does seem harsh or perhaps even to a degree unfair, but this is the way the business world works.  Many of the directional decisions of the series do appear to derive from his ideas, and ultimately he is the one who would be held responsible for their success/failings.  To deny it would be incredibly naive.

Also, the topic of the project leader has come up before and I am happy to alter the thread to accomodate this if it does seem true that Mike Laidlaw did not have a part in creating the controversies that have befallen Dragon Age 2.  I have actually stated numerous times during this thread that I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong on this issue.  However, the person in charge of the design of the game, does still appear to be none other than Mike Laidlaw.  If you can convince me otherwise, then I'd be happy to change/alter this thread.

You know what, I have no intention or inclination to convince you, you state at the beginning of your reply "that Mike Laidlaw was one of the more senior members". So, hence, he is responsible for all that went wrong.
Not the other senior people, not the people above him, no, he is responsible.

You are the one that is naive, Mike Laidlaw may have a vision for Dragon Age (one you clearly disagree with) but he is not the decider nor is he the project leader with the final responsebility. This is not a one man show, this is a multi million dollar undertaking which is of high importance to the company and you do not run that without checks and balances and reporting what you are doing and how the end product will look.

What I am alluding to is that generally there is somebody who oversees that design of the game, the direction it takes and who will be ultimately tasked with ensuring that the game is a success.  I have already stated my reasons for my opinion being that the man given this task was Mike Laidlaw.  I have also stated that I am happy to be proven wrong on this, and if it is somebody else (like the project leader - Mark Durrah was his name right?) then they are the one responsible for this game and should be made the subject of the thread.  I am happy to acknowledge this, because I certainly don't want people criticising the wrong person.

If it was actually Mark Darrah who was responsible, and Mike Laidlaw was simply acting under instructions, then I wholeheartedly believe that it is not Mike Laidlaw's fault and Mark Darrah should be the topic of this thread.

Modifié par Ronin2006, 25 mars 2011 - 04:26 .

[Fymth]

Vajraja wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

Statistically you can't say that the people who are disappointed in the game are a failiure. Don't try and make up figures to support your cause. if the forums and everything we have seen is a representative sample it seems to be 50:50. So if we extrapolate it to a million in sales, 500k for 500k against. Needless to say we can't make those distinctions.

What is clear is that there are a LOT of people with serious misgivings about the game and EA/Bioware needs to be made aware of it.

The numbers he used was a way to express himself and not statistic. He said,like I did,  that the people who enjoyed the game do not come to these forums and if they do. My guess is they will not come back after the first time seeing its full of trolls, non-constructive complaints, etc. 

The people on this forum do not represents the majority

And I would like to know were YOU pulled these numbers. From all the complaint/troll thread I see it is obviously not 50/50

[aksoileau]

The forums are a terrible sample for statistics, the vocal minority includes both the bioware zealots and haters. It's too polarized so I stand by my comparison.

Modifié par aksoileau, 25 mars 2011 - 04:28 .

[bluewolv1970]

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

well actually since every standardized reveiw source (metacritic, etc.) has this rated as bioware's lowest rated game ever I think your statement is false...

[MCPOWill]

 Personally I think the only thing that was the problem with DA2 is the fact that Q&A team didn't catch on to the game breaking glitches and import bugs. Seriously, if you have such features test them!. 
Also, the only other problem I had with DA2 was the recycled maps, granted, yes there was more variety than ME1 recycled maps (though that isn't a tough feat). Also no isometric camera for the PC version . And if you consider time and data consumption that it would've taken for DA2, they wouldn't have made the deadline probably and would've released DA2 near ME3 and ToR, which IS bad for for business, so that is the easy solution right? The problem I have with that is, that isn't what I expect from a Bioware game. 
I'd hate to have been the person who would have had to make this decision, probably Laidlaw since he was LD for DA2. It's a tough decision - sell yourself short with a polished product against you other products and AAA titles OR release a less polished product with immensely high sales and fix the bugs after release. Tough call ...like many of the decisions in Dragon Age, no?
To get on topic though, as a LD for DA2, Laidlaw did many impressive things, if we are to commend or blame him for the mass majority of features in the game. The character developement was unparalelled to any other video game due to the structure of the game. Mechanically, naratively, and writing wise, DA2 is right up there with its fellow BW games.  So it isn't a problem of Laidlaw professional performance, in which he did quite well all things considered (which is rather a lie since none of us other than those that work at Bioware or EA know precisely everything that went in the creation of DA2). If the LD for a video game is the equivalent of a Director of film or play, the Author of a book, or the Ringmaster of the circus, than it stands that Laidlaw did well I'd say. Yes there are things that would've made the game better given time. But time was the enemy of this game. It's true another game designer made done better with the game, but it's more likely that another would have done worse. And that is my 2 cents in a wall of text.

[aksoileau]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

aksoileau wrote...

Sorry, but the vocal minority shouldn't have the power of how games are made. For the 10,000 of you, there is 1,000,000 who enjoyed it. The majority doesn't see the game as a failure.

well actually since every standardized reveiw source (metacritic, etc.) has this rated as bioware's lowest rated game ever I think your statement is false...

Only the vocal minority uses metacritic?  As for the critic reviews, i dont see a 79 as a failure.

[ZombiePowered]

Scottish90000 wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

ZombiePowered wrote...

Scottish90000 wrote...

Therefore, I approve of the lynch mob.  The reason the lynch mob exists is because people REALLY care and they don't want to see the erosion of one of the few game companies that for many years has stood for quality, exceptional games.

Regardless of your reasoning, you just stated support for a LYNCH MOB. You know, those things that hang people for no real reason other than that their angry about something and want to take it out on a person by killing them. Lynch mobs are never contructive and never on target. Lynch mobs are just a bunch of angry pissed off people with no direction other than irrational violence. Lynch mobs never help anything. If people want Bioware to listen to their ideas then they should eloquenty write them and make good points and criticisms and suggest ways things can be improved. A lynch mob is not the way to do it. It isn't, in fact, the way to do anything. Even though I disagree with every hater out there on the quality of DA2, Bioware should still listen to their points. Who knows, if they stopped trolling and held in-depth discussion about their concerns, something constructive might happen.

I would urge you once again to consider what it is to actually approve of a lynch mob. After all, saying a lynch mob is just a bunch of people who really care about something is saying that the lynch mobs in the south that hanged African-Americans just REALLY cared about their way of bigotry and senseless discrimination, and didn't want to see it erode in favor of human rights and equality. Please, use your brain before posting. This is disgusting and insulting.

Lighten up, Francis.

I'm merely pointing out that your support for a lynch mob as a vessel of positive change in anything is completely moot, as is demonstrated by every instance involving a lynch mob in history.

If you are serious, you are way too hung up on the term.  If you actually read my post, you would know that the original use of the term in a previous post was highly exaggerated, and my use of the term was tongue-in-cheek.

Language has power, and that term is certainly imbued with a huge degree of meaning, none of it positive. If you want anything in this thread to be positive, I would suggest staying far clear of terms that bring up nothing but images of senseless violence, no matter how "exaggerated" they are. I would also suggest not posting in a thread about how Mike Laidlaw should be fired because a few people want blood since Bioware didn't make Dragon Age: Origins 2. I would suggest making a new thread where you debate the direction the series is taking. If you want Bioware to pay attention, constructive discussion is the way to go.

[RaenImrahl]

ZombiePowered wrote...

Language has power, and that term is certainly imbued with a huge degree of meaning, none of it positive. If you want anything in this thread to be positive, I would suggest staying far clear of terms that bring up nothing but images of senseless violence, no matter how "exaggerated" they are. I would also suggest not posting in a thread about how Mike Laidlaw should be fired because a few people want blood since Bioware didn't make Dragon Age: Origins 2. I would suggest making a new thread where you debate the direction the series is taking. If you want Bioware to pay attention, constructive discussion is the way to go.

Well said.  I tried to make a similar point earlier.  However, I fear your words are wasted here... Ronin's little definintion-parsing masturbatory theater will continue until his ire is spent.

Thanks for speaking up for the right thing, though.

Modifié par RaenImrahl, 25 mars 2011 - 04:34 .