calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299 
|
Post by calico on Jan 30, 2016 17:52:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 30, 2016 18:01:09 GMT
I'm just glad this shitshow will burst into flames around my birthday.
|
|
titsup
Strong in the Force
Posts: 819
|
Post by titsup on Jan 30, 2016 18:30:41 GMT
Wonderful straw man there. I haven't read this from anyone. I've arguments from people who believed they were promised a game that would function as both a great single player and Multiplayer experience and that is fair.
Games that launch with both a single player and Multiplayer experience carry with them the expectation that both will be quality experiences. Look at a game like the Tomb Raider reboot. The single player game was very good! The Multiplayer was poor and was criticized as being thrown together merely to add Multiplayer functionality to say it exists.
So far, there's been no indication this game will be anything more than an mmo with an offline mode bolted onto it. If that will be the case remains to be seen, but for all Port's preaching of transparency, they've done little to provide comfort to those hoping for a great single player experience that it will differ substantially from the Multiplayer version of the game.
They are right to be suspicious. Port has always stated that the Multiplayer will be worked out first with the single player to follow. One would think making the single player a wholly different experience would take substantial additional development time.
It was always billed as a successor to the series, a game that would offer a rewarding single player and Multiplayer experience. That's not easy for even triple a funded games (there are many many examples of this, the aforementioned Tomb Raider, Mass Effect 3, etc.). It takes a truly talented team to balance the fundamental differences between single and Multiplayer. There are different expectations from the audiences.
Anyway, back to Drocis. It's funny the other thread was closed pending moderation so he took it upon himself to passive aggressively attack those clamoring for single player love. He complained in the other thread that forum goers (I'm guessing those he argues against) create their own narrative while he creates their arguments for them before arguing against them.
Rune has every right to expect a quality single player experience and post his complaints on the forum. Drocis makes every attempt to negate Rune's opinion by casting him a manipulating facts that Rune never contests are not true. That way Drocis can insist he's being truthful by stating the uncontested, that the game was promised as both. Rune doesn't care about the Multiplayer and he has every right not to care. He wants the great single player game he was promised. Great Multiplayer and Single player experiences aren't mutually exclusive, but they are rare. Port has provided no evidence or comfort they are capable of providing both.
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 30, 2016 18:35:36 GMT
Wonderful straw man there. I haven't read this from anyone. I've arguments from people who believed they were promised a game that would function as both a great single player and Multiplayer experience and that is fair. Games that launch with both a single player and Multiplayer experience carry with them the expectation that both will be quality experiences. Look at a game like the Tomb Raider reboot. The single player game was very good! The Multiplayer was poor and was criticized as being thrown together merely to add Multiplayer functionality to say it exists. So far, there's been no indication this game will be anything more than an mmo with an offline mode bolted onto it. If that will be the case remains to be seen, but for all Port's preaching of transparency, they've done little to provide comfort to those hoping for a great single player experience that it will differ substantially from the Multiplayer version of the game. They are right to be suspicious. Port has always stated that the Multiplayer will be worked out first with the single player to follow. One would think making the single player a wholly different experience would take substantial additional development time. It was always billed as a successor to the series, a game that would offer a rewarding single player and Multiplayer experience. That's not easy for even triple a funded games (there are many many examples of this, the aforementioned Tomb Raider, Mass Effect 3, etc.). It takes a truly talented team to balance the fundamental differences between single and Multiplayer. There are different expectations from the audiences. Anyway, back to Drocis. It's funny the other thread was closed pending moderation so he took it upon himself to passive aggressively attack those clamoring for single player love. He complained in the other thread that forum goers (I'm guessing those he argues against) create their own narrative while he creates their arguments for them before arguing against them. Rune has every right to expect a quality single player experience and post his complaints on the forum. Drocis makes every attempt to negate Rune's opinion by casting him a manipulating facts that Rune never contests are not true. That way Drocis can insist he's being truthful by stating the uncontested, that the game was promised as both. Rune doesn't care about the Multiplayer and he has every right not to care. He wants the great single player game he was promised. Great Multiplayer and Single player experiences aren't mutually exclusive, but they are rare. Port has provided no evidence or comfort they are capable of providing both. So many he things he rails against in that thread he is guilty of. Calling out the community because they don't agree with him. I think Rune did a good job of countering there, I assume the Whales will squash him soon. |
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121 
|
Post by Caliya on Jan 30, 2016 19:38:52 GMT
Rune is always seen as "the bad guy" because he doesn't agree with every decision. Anyone who doesn't agree is "the bad guy."
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 30, 2016 19:40:24 GMT
Rune is always seen as "the bad guy" because he doesn't agree with every decision. Anyone who doesn't agree is "the bad guy." That thread was a clear attack on him, especially if you trace the link to after his post in the final wipe. |
|
|
|
Post by zincturtle on Jan 30, 2016 19:45:36 GMT
Personal attack moderation doesn't apply to BDF. He's too important.  And of course he does it, daily. I applaud rune for trying to hold back to the tide, but he's just gonna get wet and sad. |
|
titsup
Strong in the Force
Posts: 819
|
Post by titsup on Jan 30, 2016 19:45:44 GMT
Rune is always seen as "the bad guy" because he doesn't agree with every decision. Anyone who doesn't agree is "the bad guy." That thread was a clear attack on him, especially if you trace the link to after his post in the final wipe. Yeah, since the thread was moderated because of him, instead of again starting up the argument in that thread, he simply made another thread and linked to it. Unbelievable. |
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 30, 2016 19:47:13 GMT
That thread was a clear attack on him, especially if you trace the link to after his post in the final wipe. Yeah, since the thread was moderated because of him, instead of again starting up the argument in that thread, he simply made another thread and linked to it. Unbelievable. That would get an infraction to most. Apparently it is not a MMO now again. |
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 30, 2016 19:57:58 GMT
Rune is always seen as "the bad guy" because he doesn't agree with every decision. Anyone who doesn't agree is "the bad guy." A year ago Rune was a bit of a cock, though. He was barely a stone's throw away from BDF, just on the single-player side of the fence. Extremism is extremism, it matters not the message. So while I agree with his points, he was a fairly condescending flower when I was posting over there. |
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jan 30, 2016 21:18:09 GMT
Rune is always seen as "the bad guy" because he doesn't agree with every decision. Anyone who doesn't agree is "the bad guy." A year ago Rune was a bit of a cock, though. He was barely a stone's throw away from BDF, just on the single-player side of the fence. Extremism is extremism, it matters not the message. So while I agree with his points, he was a fairly condescending flower when I was posting over there. When I first joined the forums, Rune mostly supported my posts, but then he took a turn against them. And now he's posting stuff I'd agree with, because he's finally "seen the light" the hard way. Funny how that works - I was drummed out the same way they try to drum Rune out. And then when the shit hits the fan and they get sprayed, it was suddenly their idea the game has been fucked for a long time. I think the majority of them fight just for the sake of fighting. Nonsensical arguments until it affects them personally. I'm not trying to dis Rune by saying all that. I'm saying this as a general statement against anyone who turns against Port and joins our viewpoints. I'll say it again. It's usually just a matter of time. Some of us "get it" far earlier than others. |
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 31, 2016 0:34:09 GMT
Rune was on the enlightened path well and truly before the majority of us. I do believe he would of been around IM if not before.
I remember getting all riled up by his posts and launching into arguments with him with the fury of an Amber or Smack. It was through Runes constant dogging to his version of events that got me researching coz I wanted to shut him down. Thats when I realised that they had deliberately made a vague play at EVERYONE. It was a single/multi/mmo/sandbox/story driven/world pvp game. They tried to make a sweeping game for everyone and failed because of PoTs.
Like I have publicly apologised to Dewd, I did to Rune too. He wanted his in depth Ultima - not UO, didnt care for PvP not MMO features. And in the turkey chorus he was the one dependable fella holding up the flame for the single player. Something that alot of people, including myself (Pre Enlightenment), had forgotten all about.
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 31, 2016 0:54:29 GMT
Well....BDF is continuing his personal tantrum all by himself and trying to convince anyone who will listen that he is right.
|
|
|
|
Post by zincturtle on Jan 31, 2016 0:59:01 GMT
Well....BDF is continuing his personal tantrum all by himself and trying to convince anyone who will listen that he is right. So, pretty much the same as every other day for the past year, on the official forums?  |
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 31, 2016 2:06:27 GMT
Only just saw this thread now, no need for me to have posted the link in the other! All said here |
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 31, 2016 2:41:14 GMT
He wanted his in depth Ultima - not UO, didnt care for PvP not MMO features. And in the turkey chorus he was the one dependable fella holding up the flame for the single player. Something that alot of people, including myself (Pre Enlightenment), had forgotten all about. Just as BDF is harping, though, SotA was always meant as a multi-player experience, too. That's the problem all along, as we continue to discuss; the expectations weren't just set poorly, but the entire basis of the game doesn't make sense. You can't have an MMO and a single-player game at the same time, they're contradictory. Even an open-ended co-op/selective multi-player game doesn't work - it's gotta' start and end, and it has to do it well the whole way through. So while I get he fought for a more meaningful single player experience, as BDF fights for his shitty POTs and I fought for more meaningful combat and balanced PvP, he still went the route of "this doesn't affect single player so fuck you", no different than BDF's "that isn't meaningful for multi-player, so shut up." |
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 31, 2016 2:50:38 GMT
So while I get he fought for a more meaningful single player experience, as BDF fights for his shitty POTs and I fought for more meaningful combat and balanced PvP, he still went the route of "this doesn't affect single player so fuck you", no different than BDF's "that isn't meaningful for multi-player, so shut up." I can imagine that as soon as the direction of the game moved towards MMO, rather than SP with Co-op, a line was crossed for some. I feel it is a little different as BDF is fighting for a game that never should have been and Rune is fighting for a game which many backed in kickstart and should be. |
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 31, 2016 3:16:15 GMT
He wanted his in depth Ultima - not UO, didnt care for PvP not MMO features. And in the turkey chorus he was the one dependable fella holding up the flame for the single player. Something that alot of people, including myself (Pre Enlightenment), had forgotten all about. Just as BDF is harping, though, SotA was always meant as a multi-player experience, too. That's the problem all along, as we continue to discuss; the expectations weren't just set poorly, but the entire basis of the game doesn't make sense. You can't have an MMO and a single-player game at the same time, they're contradictory. Even an open-ended co-op/selective multi-player game doesn't work - it's gotta' start and end, and it has to do it well the whole way through. So while I get he fought for a more meaningful single player experience, as BDF fights for his shitty POTs and I fought for more meaningful combat and balanced PvP, he still went the route of "this doesn't affect single player so fuck you", no different than BDF's "that isn't meaningful for multi-player, so shut up." There is nothin in this game that makes an interesting single player experience though. Should of just coppied Darksouls and added bit of MMO |
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 31, 2016 4:13:21 GMT
He wanted his in depth Ultima - not UO, didnt care for PvP not MMO features. And in the turkey chorus he was the one dependable fella holding up the flame for the single player. Something that alot of people, including myself (Pre Enlightenment), had forgotten all about. Just as BDF is harping, though, SotA was always meant as a multi-player experience, too. That's the problem all along, as we continue to discuss; the expectations weren't just set poorly, but the entire basis of the game doesn't make sense. You can't have an MMO and a single-player game at the same time, they're contradictory. Even an open-ended co-op/selective multi-player game doesn't work - it's gotta' start and end, and it has to do it well the whole way through. So while I get he fought for a more meaningful single player experience, as BDF fights for his shitty POTs and I fought for more meaningful combat and balanced PvP, he still went the route of "this doesn't affect single player so fuck you", no different than BDF's "that isn't meaningful for multi-player, so shut up." Did your more meaningful PVP include forcing everyone to play? That was the only time I saw him even care. I've seen him post about playing online as well. So there must be something wrong here. |
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 31, 2016 4:52:06 GMT
It was a year ago. I knew then SotA wasn't going to be a PvP oriented game, but I criticized a ton of the combat both as mechanics and PvP. I did comment on PvP being meaningful and getting people involved, but not forcing it; I had a more pressing matter of getting rid of card combat, and very early on gave up on PvP being fun. I also just wanted a fun single player in the end.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jan 31, 2016 13:38:48 GMT
I feel it is a little different as BDF is fighting for a game that never should have been and Rune is fighting for a game which many backed in kickstart and should be. Could you elaborate what you mean? I don't understand this standpoint because I thought they promised both. The Kickstarter campaign said, The way I read that: More than anything, they seem to be saying they were creating an MMO with telling a story similar to Ultimas IV-VII. No word about the single player experience, other than the story, as far as I can see. Further: And here is the kicker (to me) - look at the exact terminology: Which does not mean they were putting effort into SP. What they were selling was an MMO experience that could be played as a SP (online or offline). Not trying to lawyer them, or say they had to stick to those exact words. But that is what people read in order to invest. So can you help me understand why you see it the opposite? |
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 31, 2016 13:57:31 GMT
I have a problem with the definition of MMO. One of those M's stands for Massive. Also, not once did they actually mention the MMO term until later. Also it assume certain software server/client setup.
Their first designs of the server/client SotA software were smaller instances running off a player's PC. That is not an MMO.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jan 31, 2016 14:24:09 GMT
not once did they actually mention the MMO term until later Well, I quoted directly from Kickstarter, and it says Multiplayer (not single player). About the "massive" part: (from Tarsilion) They didn't say MMO at first because they wanted a decentralized architecture, which never would have made it "massive." Once they changed to a central server, this distinction makes less sense. |
|
|
|
Post by zincturtle on Jan 31, 2016 15:38:03 GMT
Yeah, hard to believe anyone thinks peer-to-peer is a good idea for persistent multiplayer games. Even before they tried it, all the networking/latency reasons why it wouldn't work, never mind the whole "never trust the client" thing was enumerated on the forums. But they were certain it would work. Hey look, it didn't work. Meh.
A real eye opener when the pie hits the road. (pie in the sky... rubber meets the road... no?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Feb 4, 2016 3:41:36 GMT
It was just yesterday, I think, BDF tells us that he has and never trolls. Then today: "But yeah, you're probably right, there's no real way to tell. BTW, what was the point of this thread again? I want to stay on topic." WarmCat said "What's the current reason for you not being happy now, Rune?" BDF said: " " "I don't know what you're talking about Rune. Someone asked you a question and I made a smiley face." Cock-holsters like BDF make me feel like I need to fire up my blog and redouble my efforts to call total an utter asshats like him out. Rufus D'Assclown has also chimed in with racial slurs supported by that would be clown Budner: "I don't believe j-e-w-s are banned from the forums any more than complainers." Seriously Portalarium, this is what made the InsaneMembrane. You don't want to resurrect him do you? |
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Feb 4, 2016 3:44:31 GMT
It was just yesterday, I think, BDF tells us that he has and never trolls. Then today: "But yeah, you're probably right, there's no real way to tell. BTW, what was the point of this thread again? I want to stay on topic." WarmCat said "What's the current reason for you not being happy now, Rune?" BDF said: " " "I don't know what you're talking about Rune. Someone asked you a question and I made a smiley face." Cock-holsters like BDF make me feel like I need to fire up my blog and redouble my efforts to call total an utter asshats like him out. Rufus D'Assclown has also chimed in with racial slurs supported by that would be clown Budner: "I don't believe j-e-w-s are banned from the forums any more than complainers." Seriously Portalarium, this is what made the InsaneMembrane. You don't want to resurrect him do you? Man, you should. It's ridiculous, a racial slur, trolling etc. This is that friendly community. |
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Feb 4, 2016 3:46:02 GMT
If shit like that is reported properly and it is not removed by the moderation staff, I will find a way to make a formal complaint about that forum. I promise you.
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Feb 4, 2016 3:59:18 GMT
Anyone reports that thread and it will get locked, they will have in effect silenced the information.
|
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Feb 4, 2016 4:00:50 GMT
So Junior Moderator Mystic was good at policing his own topic, he didn't lock it to clean up the trolling, and kept it open?
Wonder what the difference here is?
Ohhhhhh the poster isn't a fucking ball licking Whale.
|
|
And of course he does it, daily.
