147 réponses à ce sujet

[NuclearTech76]

GallowsPole wrote...

NuclearTech76 wrote...

I could look up the thread that proves you're talking out your arse but what good would it do. Reload Cancelling is an intended mechanic, it was known before ME3 was even designed and was put in intentionally.

Im sure you could. And it will be the link that says BW put it in intentionally, which is what I just said. You must fall into the same category of a staunch proponent. I can post that one of the devs didnt even want it in the game. I can also post that the 'bug' was discovered in Street Fighter II and today its called a 'feature'. So all they did was put in intentionally, an animation cancelling once called bug, called it a feature, and I get to listen to gamers like you that keep saying BW put it in intentionally. Really? They put it in intentionally? I didnt know that.

Now prove Im incorrect with an argument that doesnt state, BW put it in intentionally. We've already established that. 

Soooo basically you're saying you just want to complain about something that has been around a long time. Do you believe they couldn't fix the bug now if they wanted?

[GallowsPole]

TheKillerAngel wrote...

Derek Hollan taking a while to be convinced about having it in the game is not the same as him not wanting it in the game, because Corey Gaspur eventually won him over.

No. But its reasonable to infer that when he calls it unrealistic and seems unfair, there was certainly a debate over whether or not the mechanic should be implented. I mean, it certainly sounds to me, that Im not the only one that finds the mechanic cheap, even though BW intentionally implented it.

[GallowsPole]

NuclearTech76 wrote...

Soooo basically you're saying you just want to complain about something that has been around a long time. Do you believe they couldn't fix the bug now if they wanted?

Fix what? If its an intentional mechanic, there is nothing to fix correct? My argument is simply this. The mechanic is cheap, like running the pizza, like other things gamers exploit (yes I used the bad word) and what this topic is about.

Can they fix it? Sure. Will they? Probably not. Just because the devs intentionally put it in and called it a feature, doesnt detract from the point its a cheap ass mechanic. Again, if they said missile glitching was ok, you would be defending that, based on this argument over reload cancelling, that because BW calls it legit, HEY, all is good.

[NuclearTech76]

GallowsPole wrote...

Fix what? If its an intentional mechanic, there is nothing to fix correct? My argument is simply this. The mechanic is cheap, like running the pizza, like other things gamers exploit (yes I used the bad word) and what this topic is about.

Can they fix it? Sure. Will they? Probably not. Just because the devs intentionally put it in and called it a feature, doesnt detract from the point its a cheap ass mechanic. Again, if they said missile glitching was ok, you would be defending that, based on this argument over reload cancelling, that because BW calls it legit, HEY, all is good.

It's not an exploit if they designed it into the game. It's a mechanic available to anyone with decent skill. Do you consider right hand advantage a exploit as well?

[TheKillerAngel]

So having more skill and maximizing use of features in-game is cheap? Missile exploiting is a violation of the game's intended design so you CANNOT equate the two.

[GallowsPole]

Right hand advantage is a natural feeling mechanic. Think about it. If you were right handed, and standing behind a wall, its only natural to have virtually maximum cover and shoot. I can go with that when devs need to be able to virtualize this game for a flat screen.

OK. Pushing a button to cancel animation does not require skill. It required skill when it was first introduced, now its just a joke.

Im not equating missile glitching and reload cancelling. Im simply stating, that based on the arguments here. because BW calls reload cancelling a feature, you guys are ok with that and will continue to scream at me that BW put it in intentionally.

You would do the same, based on your reasoning here, that if BW made missile glitching a feature, much like they did with reload cancelling, you will say it takes skill to do and because BW calls it legit, hey, you guys will think its ok. But WTF......Because if BW called missile glitching a feature, it wouldnt be cheap to have unlimited missiles? Come on now.

[jezcrow]

Once had a lag-match in which the pickup/drop sounds bugged out and no sounds were made during drop-running. Was lovely. I wish they could change it like this in a patch.

WRT this and RC, neither is desirable, but if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Just use as required...

[ill_eyggro]

Run, Forrest, Run!

I don't know... sometimes I hate it and sometimes I'm grateful of it. Now I wait until someone get to the object before I grab it, since I don't know how to do the trick.

[OneMore1968]

The only problem it seems to create now is confusion; Everyone stands about waiting to see if someone is "skilled" enough to run with it.

Unfortunately, in PUGs on PC there is little, if any communication so it's hard to know whether to pick it up or leave it. I noticed before this became common practice that hardly anyone used to cover you. Now, they are all close in case you drop it, no doubt so they can demonstrate their skill in running with it. Which is quite funny.

[jezcrow]

Carlina wrote...

The only problem it seems to create now is confusion; Everyone stands about waiting to see if someone is "skilled" enough to run with it.

Unfortunately, in PUGs on PC there is little, if any communication so it's hard to know whether to pick it up or leave it. I noticed before this became common practice that hardly anyone used to cover you. Now, they are all close in case you drop it, no doubt so they can demonstrate their skill in running with it. Which is quite funny.

Let the host do it unless you are much closer to where it spawns.
Although, obviously it can make sense to predict where the second one may spawn and go there ahead of time.

[SilentStep79]

capn233 wrote...

Is it dishonorable to increase your team's chance of getting paid?

"Haulin' ass and gettin' paid."

yeah, anything to speed up the objective is appreciated by me.
to hell with the "noise".
appreciation factor increased exponentially if a PUG does this.

[Cassandra Saturn]

TheKillerAngel wrote...

So having more skill and maximizing use of features in-game is cheap? Missile exploiting is a violation of the game's intended design so you CANNOT equate the two.

*facepalm*
ma'am, the Missile Launcher Glitch would be considered out of its original design blueprints
but Bryan simply stated it is not considered missile glitching unless it goes beyond its limits set by the game.
he said you can equip yourself with 15 missile launchers with armor compartments. and anyone who went past the missile launcher limit of 15 would be considered glitching. that's why Bryan said so.

[NuclearTech76]

John Hackett wrote...

TheKillerAngel wrote...

So having more skill and maximizing use of features in-game is cheap? Missile exploiting is a violation of the game's intended design so you CANNOT equate the two.

*facepalm*
ma'am, the Missile Launcher Glitch would be considered out of its original design blueprints
but Bryan simply stated it is not considered missile glitching unless it goes beyond its limits set by the game.
he said you can equip yourself with 15 missile launchers with armor compartments. and anyone who went past the missile launcher limit of 15 would be considered glitching. that's why Bryan said so.

I would like to see that exact quote.

[Striker93175]

[Occurus]

GallowsPole wrote...

Istari Ipuosta wrote...

You don't really think pizza delivering on Rio from the box to the extraction is intended to be done by walking do you?

Walked it many times. To say its necessary to run with the pizza is like saying its necessary to use a harrier carrying TGI fully amped up to solo silver.

Even if you're able to do it without trouble do you seriously think walking the pizza as fast as you can and still get massive loss in bonus credits is not wrong?

[Blitzkrieg_33]

How did I know that I would jump to the last page of a running with the pizza discussion to find Gallows Pole arguing about reload cancelling.

Ahhh BSN, you never dissapoint.

On topic, I can't run with the pizza, but if someone can and makes the mission go by that much faster, I can put up with the annoying sound effects for 10-20 sec.

[GallowsPole]

I hope someone tests out running vs. walking to weigh the risk vs. reward. Probably find its minuscule.

I have yet to have someone refute me about reload cancelling. Simply calling me an idiot and BW intentionally put it in has nothing to do with what I say about it. So, you're right in one regard. Typical BSN.

[spudspot]

GallowsPole wrote...

I hope someone tests out running vs. walking to weigh the risk vs. reward. Probably find its minuscule.

I have yet to have someone refute me about reload cancelling.  Simply calling me an idiot and BW intentionally put it in has nothing to do with what I say about it. So, you're right in one regard. Typical BSN.

That's because you can't refute opinions. 

You find it cheap, nothing I can do about it. Or anybody else. 

NuclearTech76 wrote...

John Hackett wrote...

TheKillerAngel wrote...

So having more skill and maximizing use of features in-game is cheap? Missile exploiting is a violation of the game's intended design so you CANNOT equate the two.

*facepalm*
ma'am, the Missile Launcher Glitch would be considered out of its original design blueprints
but Bryan simply stated it is not considered missile glitching unless it goes beyond its limits set by the game.
he said you can equip yourself with 15 missile launchers with armor compartments. and anyone who went past the missile launcher limit of 15 would be considered glitching. that's why Bryan said so. 

I would like to see that exact quote.

Just ignore him, he typically doesn't have the slightest clue what he is talking about. In this particular case it's actually quite obvious.

That quote of course doesn't exist.

Modifié par spudspot, 28 janvier 2013 - 04:33 .

[Cassandra Saturn]

NuclearTech76 wrote...

John Hackett wrote...

TheKillerAngel wrote...

So having more skill and maximizing use of features in-game is cheap? Missile exploiting is a violation of the game's intended design so you CANNOT equate the two.

*facepalm*
ma'am, the Missile Launcher Glitch would be considered out of its original design blueprints
but Bryan simply stated it is not considered missile glitching unless it goes beyond its limits set by the game.
he said you can equip yourself with 15 missile launchers with armor compartments. and anyone who went past the missile launcher limit of 15 would be considered glitching. that's why Bryan said so.

I would like to see that exact quote.

edit:
i would rather not link it now as far i know about it. apparently here was NDA about it.

Modifié par John Hackett, 28 janvier 2013 - 04:37 .

[spudspot]

John Hackett wrote...

found it...

*snip*

If I were you, I'd find a link for that ASAP or remove my post. 

Bryan doesn't like being misquoted. Not at all.

Modifié par spudspot, 28 janvier 2013 - 04:35 .

[GallowsPole]

[quote]spudspot wrote...

[quote]GallowsPole wrote...

I hope someone tests out running vs. walking to weigh the risk vs. reward. Probably find its minuscule.

I have yet to have someone refute me about reload cancelling.  Simply calling me an idiot and BW intentionally put it in has nothing to do with what I say about it. So, you're right in one regard. Typical BSN.[/quote]

That's because you can't refute opinions. 

You find it cheap, nothing I can do about it. Or anybody else. 


Just ignore him, he typically doesn't have the slightest clue what he is talking about. In this particular case it's actually quite obvious.

That quote of course doesn't exist.[/quote]

[/quote]

Ah. One of my favorite people. So it is an opinion that the mechanic was an unintentional bug found in the late 80's which BW calls a 'feature' in 2012? So, people really arent defending an unintentional bug? I mean feature?

Yes. Im clueless.


Will now wait for the obligatory, "But BW put it in intentionally!". Oh brother.

Modifié par GallowsPole, 28 janvier 2013 - 04:38 .

[Blitzkrieg_33]

GallowsPole wrote...

Ah. One of my favorite people. So it is an opinion that the mechanic was an unintentional bug found in the late 80's which BW calls a 'feature' in 2012? So, people really arent defending an unintentional bug? I mean feature?

Yes. Im clueless.


Will now wait for the obligatory, "But BW put it in intentionally!". Oh brother.

Do we need to break out the dictionary again Gallows? Remember what happened to your sig the last time...

[GallowsPole]

Blitzkrieg_33 wrote...

GallowsPole wrote...

Ah. One of my favorite people. So it is an opinion that the mechanic was an unintentional bug found in the late 80's which BW calls a 'feature' in 2012? So, people really arent defending an unintentional bug? I mean feature?

Yes. Im clueless.


Will now wait for the obligatory, "But BW put it in intentionally!". Oh brother.

Do we need to break out the dictionary again Gallows? Remember what happened to your sig the last time...

I havent called it an exploit....:innocent:

[spudspot]

GallowsPole wrote...

Ah. One of my favorite people. So it is an opinion that the mechanic was an unintentional bug found in the late 80's which BW calls a 'feature' in 2012?  So, people really arent defending an unintentional bug? I mean feature?

Yes. Im clueless.


Will now wait for the obligatory, "But BW put it in intentionally!". Oh brother.

By your logic, you'd have to call penicillin an 'accident' instead of 'medicine'. 

So yeah, it's an opinion. Glad I'm among your favourites though. 

[Blitzkrieg_33]

GallowsPole wrote...

I havent called it an exploit....:innocent:

But you did call it a bug.

The game in the 80's with the feature by accident = bug

Games nowadays that intentionally implement the feature in the game = not a bug

I keep getting dragged into this! How did I even find this! <_<