PROTIP: If you don't like the game in it's current state.......

[CMDR Bansidhe]

What is your point CMDR Bansidhe, do you find the entirely innocent OP's suggestion somehow unreasonable? Go away and come back and things may be more to your liking, kind of thing?

Does it really matter whether people decide to stay or go with sound logic? I'm not quite following.

If those people with a genuine concern for the incomplete condition of the game were to all leave then the only "feedback" on the forums would be along the lines of

"I undocked without insurance and died. Please make it so I get a warning if I don't have enough money"
"I boosted into the wall of a station and died, please make boost not work in the station"
"I got a mission to kill someone but can't find them please put a marker on my minimap"
"I picked up cargo but can't dock at the destination outpost so please make it so I can't be made to be out of pocket like this"

The devs would spend the next six months bogged down in inane minutiae, the like of which most serious gamers don't even spot because we just adjust our game play. In six months time the game would still be incomplete, the only difference would be that the parts that we DO currently have would just be dumbed down.

That, essentially, is my concern. Does that make sense to you?

 

[WalterHWhite]

> That, essentially, is my concern. Does that make sense to you?

Not really.

 

[CMDR Bansidhe]

> That, essentially, is my concern. Does that make sense to you?

Not really.

So which part are you struggling to understand?

 

[babelfisch]

The devs would spend the next six months bogged down in inane minutiae, the like of which most serious gamers don't even spot because we just adjust our game play. In six months time the game would still be incomplete, the only difference would be that the parts that we DO currently have would just be dumbed down.

That, essentially, is my concern. Does that make sense to you?

I dont think so. From what I know FDEV had the plan to continuously expand content from the very beginning. It's part of the business model. They need to generate profits and they dont do that by selling the game one time and then maintain the servers for free. So there will be paid expansions. They already stated that there will be free major updates with new content aswell. They need to do that in order to get payed. If they dont expand the game, the game will be dead and FDEV is aware of that.
So in my opinion its unnecessary to remind them that they should create new content.

 

[WalterHWhite]

> So which part are you struggling to understand?

- The idea that only people who don't like the game can offer constructive criticism
- The idea that people who are unhappy don't already have constructive criticism
- The bit where you say it's unfeasible for people to 'take a break'
- The idea that people who don't like the game should keep playing it
- The idea that people can still visit the forums while not playing the game and still have a good handle on the game (it's not going to be revolutionised in a day)

You seem stuck on the idea that we must play this continually whether we like to or not.

 

[CMDR Bansidhe]

I dont think so. From what I know FDEV had the plan to continuously expand content from the very beginning. It's part of the business model. They need to generate profits and they dont do that by selling the game one time and then maintain the servers for free. So there will be paid expansions. They already stated that there will be free major updates with new content aswell. They need to do that in order to get payed. If they dont expand the game, the game will be dead and FDEV is aware of that.
So in my opinion its unnecessary to remind them that they should create new content.

We aren't talking about expansions though, are we, we are talking about features the game is already described as having. That's largely the point. I'd like the game I have actually paid for first before we consider the expansions. Given the current state of the game I would imagine the entire year would be spent fleshing out the lack of content before they even so much as dream of charging us for new content. I'd like SOME content first, if it's all the same to you.

Which returns me to my point about not wanting the serious plaintiffs to leave the game. If they do that then only the sycophants remain. You know, the ones who think the product is perfect. If only their input is heard we should not be surprised if the developers believe them and feel they can charge for content that, by rights, we should already have.

"Yes-men" inevitably give the wrong advice.

 

[babelfisch]

We aren't talking about expansions though, are we, we are talking about features the game is already described as having. That's largely the point. I'd like the game I have actually paid for first before we consider the expansions. Given the current state of the game I would imagine the entire year would be spent fleshing out the lack of content before they even so much as dream of charging us for new content. I'd like SOME content first, if it's all the same to you.

Which returns me to my point about not wanting the serious plaintiffs to leave the game. If they do that then only the sycophants remain. You know, the ones who think the product is perfect. If only their input is heard we should not be surprised if the developers believe them and feel they can charge for content that, by rights, we should already have.

"Yes-men" inevitably give the wrong advice.

Ok, except from the features we get in february/march, what features do you miss?

 

[ScottGust]

So, you buy a defective car and you call to your local car salesman to complain about a low quality product. He then answers you that there is going to be a fix in a year or so. In the meantime go buy another car, use the bus or just walk more. This would be an excellent moment to think of your PROTIP. Way to go

U should have read about the cars defects before running out and buying one...informed consumers never suffer regret.

 

[CMDR Bansidhe]

> So which part are you struggling to understand?

- The idea that only people who don't like the game can offer constructive criticism - didn't say that
- The idea that people who are unhappy don't already have constructive criticism - didn't say that
- The bit where you say it's unfeasible for people to 'take a break' - I said "shouldn't have to" not "aren't capable of".
- The idea that people who don't like the game should keep playing it - they've paid for it, why should they not play it? I'd stop if they were offering refunds.
- The idea that people can still visit the forums while not playing the game and still have a good handle on the game (it's not going to be revolutionised in a day) - though, in reality, it would be more likely that they would spend their time on the fora of the games they were actually playing at that time and not on the forum of some bitter disappointment that failed to deliver. Can't remember the last time I was on the Total War forum.

You seem stuck on the idea that we must play this continually whether we like to or not. - again just putting words in my mouth

No, you are just demonstrating very poor English comprehension skills, misinterpreting what has been stated, inventing stuff that hasn't and then formulating an argument based on those errors. That's probably why you had so much trouble understanding.

 

[WalterHWhite]

> No, you are just demonstrating very poor English comprehension skills, misinterpreting what has been stated, inventing stuff that hasn't and then formulating an argument based on those errors. That's probably why you had so much trouble understanding.

See the original post in this thread. My 1st response in this thread was to that. Afterwards came you and youre reply to me. I think you're on the wrong thread.

I fail to see what you're getting at other than complaining about an incomplete game. I've already said you can take legal advice if you think you've been missold something. Other than that, it seems like rambling about "content", a very vague word that was used originally in my industry (web marketing) that now has an evermore opaque meaning.

 

[SuBSynk]

*snip* I'd like the game I have actually paid for first before we consider the expansions. I'd like SOME content first, if it's all the same to you.

Ohh come on now seriously, no content?

It is pretty obvious there is a lot of content in this game and fair enough many features need fleshing out but we have dates for 1.1 and 1.2, try not being so overly dramatic.

Using wording like "sycophants" and "yes-men" is pretty silly, some of us just understand that modern games of this scope are always a work in progress and are patient enough to enjoy the ride rather than feel the need to attack the game/devs when they are obviously very busy doing all sorts of things to improve the experience & in the order that they think is best.

 

[CMDR Bansidhe]

> No, you are just demonstrating very poor English comprehension skills, misinterpreting what has been stated, inventing stuff that hasn't and then formulating an argument based on those errors. That's probably why you had so much trouble understanding.

See the original post in this thread. My 1st response in this thread was to that. Afterwards came you. I think you're on the wrong thread.

Except, as can be seen in black and white on this very page, I am actually responding to a conversation where you addressed me. Directly. By name. Have you forgotten that already?

Just scroll up a bit. Post #79 - you ask me directly what my point is.
I respond to you in post #81 where I tell you what my point is and ask if you can understand
You respond in post #82 to say that No, you don't understand
I ask you in post #83 which part you need clarification on
You tell me which parts you need clarification on in post 85
I point out the required clarifications in post #89
Then in post #90 you claim that you have been responding to the OP instead.

That is, as I have just demonstrated, completely untrue. It's all there for anyone who can follow the conversation.

You addressed me. I responded. You responded. I responded to your response. Then you claim you were talking to someone else. That's just deliberate falsehood.

 

[Phaaded]

Ill conceived moans do indeed suck, condescending and holier-than-though preaching about how we should use the forum suck even more.

Amen!

Seriously OP,

 

[WalterHWhite]

Jeezo, you are ever so slightly -retentive aren't you.

You'll see that I posted in post #57 and you replied to me. I posted in reply to the OP. Since then it's been you talking about "house analogies", "flawed opinions", "incomplete game" and whatnot.

Stuff that is off-topic to the original post I might add. This is the topic I'm sticking with.

Also most of your posts have a condescending quip about them. Good for you if you think you're a beacon of logical thinking, but let me add some context for you: You're off-topic.

 

[SuBSynk]

Except, as can be seen in black and white on this very page, I am actually responding to a conversation where you addressed me. Directly. By name. Have you forgotten that already?

Just scroll up a bit. Post #79 - you ask me directly what my point is.
I respond to you in post #81 where I tell you what my point is and ask if you can understand
You respond in post #82 to say that No, you don't understand
I ask you in post #83 which part you need clarification on
You tell me which parts you need clarification on in post 85
I point out the required clarifications in post #89
Then in post #90 you claim that you have been responding to the OP instead.

That is, as I have just demonstrated, completely untrue. It's all there for anyone who can follow the conversation.

You addressed me. I responded. You responded. I responded to your response. Then you claim you were talking to someone else. That's just deliberate falsehood.

You seem to miss out the fact that you originally quoted WalterHWhite #60... Therefore you started the back and forth not him.

Edit ninja'd

 

[CMDR Bansidhe]

Ohh come on now seriously, no content?

It is pretty obvious there is a lot of content in this game and fair enough many features need fleshing out but we have dates for 1.1 and 1.2, try not being so overly dramatic.

Using wording like "sycophants" and "yes-men" is pretty silly, some of us just understand that modern games of this scope are always a work in progress and are patient enough to enjoy the ride rather than feel the need to attack the game/devs when they are obviously very busy doing all sorts of things to improve the experience & in the order that they think is best.

I have NEVER attacked the devs. Retract that.

I have said that the product is incomplete and heavily lacking in content. Yes there are some NPCs I can shoot and when I am done I can go shoot them again. And again. And again. 400 billion systems and every single one of them has nothing more than level 5 wolves from Elwyn Forest, plus the occasional appearance of Hogger.

There is also a difference between an evolving game and releasing something part-finished. To continue the WoW analogy - it has evolved and been expanded over the years but it was a complete game when it shipped. It didn't advertise 5-man player dungeons on the website only for there to be a note on the door to the Deadmines that said "Gone for development. Back in a month or six. In the meantime why don't one of you call yourself Edwin van Cleef and run around shouting ArrggH at your mates." Blizzard didn't tell us to use our imagination. They added new things to a complete game they didn't have to in-fill an incomplete one.

 

[babelfisch]

Since we now play who quoted who we could aswell play the good old dont flip flop the flip flopped decisions game.

But still I would rather like to hear what advertised features are missing in commander bansidhes opinion.

 

[zuadao]

another good topic for the average moron.

PROTIP: if you dont like ppl trying to improve the game in the forums... come back in 6 months

 

[babelfisch]

another good topic for the average moron.

PROTIP: if you dont like ppl trying to improve the game in the forums... come back in 6 months

PROTIP: if you cant see the difference between ppl hating the game and ppl trying to improve the game in the forums... how about just read the op?

 

[SuBSynk]

I have NEVER attacked the devs. Retract that.

I have said that the product is incomplete and heavily lacking in content. Yes there are some NPCs I can shoot and when I am done I can go shoot them again. And again. And again. 400 billion systems and every single one of them has nothing more than level 5 wolves from Elwyn Forest, plus the occasional appearance of Hogger.

There is also a difference between an evolving game and releasing something part-finished. To continue the WoW analogy - it has evolved and been expanded over the years but it was a complete game when it shipped. It didn't advertise 5-man player dungeons on the website only for there to be a note on the door to the Deadmines that said "Gone for development. Back in a month or six. In the meantime why don't one of you call yourself Edwin van Cleef and run around shouting ArrggH at your mates." Blizzard didn't tell us to use our imagination. They added new things to a complete game they didn't have to in-fill an incomplete one.

Quite honestly your posting in itself undermines the obvious huge efforts the devs have and continue to put into the game, even this post is an attack on their efforts and quite absurd. If you have to resort to the "ive got no imagination" argument and see no content in the game i honestly feel sorry for you, we don't all lose our imagination when we reach 40+ you know

The fact that you cannot seem to grasp that games of this scope are a product that have ongoing development and are never finished is either testament to your lack of modern gaming experience or that you have some kind of axe to grind with the devs as this is common amongst all games i have played for the past 5+ years and in fact the dev's for this game seem far more busy and have released more fixes in a shorter time frame than any in my memory.