Game News More Fallout 3 drama

[Sammael]

What the fuck is going on here? What happened to the REAL Rex Exitium?!? You know, the rude, dev-hating conspiracy theorist?

 

[Nicolai]

susan ate him

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Actually, it does. You aren't a paying customer here.

So, first, my opinion doesn't have any merit because I'm not a part of the staff. Now, it doesn't have merit because I'm not a paying customer. Which is it?

Also, are you part of the staff? Don't think so, so why are you getting to determine whose opinion matters, and why are you suggesting that opinions are only accepted by fiscal incentive or when made by those that belong to the staff? Are you a staff member or the mouthpiece of the staff?

If you don't like it, you get to leave.

I was under the impression that that kind of comment was what you and others around here disliked the most about developers who did not cared for your suggestions. If my impression is correct, its very funny you're telling me that.

And you're being a drama queen. I will not stop visiting the site and posting on the forums simply because I disliked a certain attitude shown by one staff member. I doubt you'd do the same either.

I also think the Codex would've worked out just what type of news site they want to be by now. Angsty, independent etc... Throw whatever words you like in. So far, all I've seen in this thread is Rex and a comment by Saint elsewhere that VD could've been a *little* less dramatic.

So it would seem that one of the staff members, other than Exitium, implied he believed Vault Dweller's wording could've been more contained. Given Exitium is part of the staff, and that you think that somehow gives his opinion more relevance and power than mine, take it.

VD hasn't been chewed out.

Again, what does this matter to my opinion? You're implying I'm wrong, or that I have no right to give my opinion, because he still holds his place in the staff and no action, disciplinary or otherwise, has been made?

If you want a say in the direction of the Codex, get active, join the staff and start putting out your own point of view.

That's a inane argument which I didn't expect you'd make. Not only am I entitled to make it wheter I'm part of it or not, but you're making two pretty poor assumptions. The first is that I would be attempting to make suggestions that would change the direction of the Codex (in regards to their attitude), which is not the case, as my point (again) was that I felt one comment was out of line.

The second is that you still believe I would have to be part of the staff in order to point something which I would perceive to be wrong, which is as dumb as saying that the next time my car breaks down, that I shouldn't complain to the mechanic, but rather, should instead take a mechanic degree, go work to the same workshop he is working in, and only then point out the problems with his work. This particular assumption is not only a flawed point of view with an anecdotal basis, it also creates a terrible precendent in regards to opinion-making and opinion-giving which the site's frequent posters and staff have expressed dislike in the past.

In the meantime, if what VD said was a problem for the Codex reputation, somehow I don't think he'd still be on the staff.

Because we all know that if someone is not punished, they're doing the right thing. Riiiiight.

Bethesda are being stupid too, though that of course all depends on personal opinion. Personally though, "We can't comment on any specific detail" and "there'll be goggles and isometric gameplay is so over-rated" don't quite match up. As far as I'm concerned, someone over at Bethesda is full of shit and so far its the PR man who's story doesn't quite fit with what's coming out.

Do you qualify a concept as a specific detail? Specific details are primarily in regards to the general game mechanics and presentation. That the character will be required to use goggles for issues of daylight adaptation is a trivial thing. If the statement was in regards to point of view, combat model and character system, then you, and others, would have a point. Given you can produce several visual effects that would be related to a character's visual capabilites and/or deficiencies without having to use firstperson, the point is moot.

No, you can dish out all the critiscism you like, if you think it's fit to do so.

As long as I pay and join the staff, correct?

Now isn't the Codex allowed to dish out some critiscism as well, if it sees fit to do so? In this case, isn't one "journalist" allowed to speak his mind in what is essentially his news post and be allowed to do so freely, without it being edited?

First, journalists are meant to be impartial in their judgement. I'm glad you used quotes when you mentioned journalism, because the staff is far from being impartial on many levels. If the Codex staff are journalists, then so is Jon Stewart and the rest of the Daily Show staff. In fact, the Codex is the Daily Show for CRPG geeks, come to think of it.

Second, where have I said the Codex staff is not free to dish out criticism? Can't think of a single ocasion, and I'm still wondering why that assumption is being made. Although I can think of several ocasions where said criticism was accompanied with an excessive and unecessary rudeness, and I spoke against that, *not* the criticism. There's a difference between claiming that, say, D. W. Bradley doesn't know how to make good games anymore, and saying that D. W. Bradley is a cock gobbling retarded asshole who couldn't crap a steaming pile of shit even if his life depended on it.

O'course, some people might think its the exact same, or that the second might warrant a bigger chuckle out of the audience, but I digress: the second is a pretty piss poor thing to say, even if one thinks so.

What I am saying is perhaps you need to re-evaluate your perception of the Codex and why you come here. As you said yourself, this apparently isn't the first time you've disagreed with the Codex' point of view. I think I'm fairly safe in saying the Codex has a certain "attitude" that is prevalent in its news items. It's an attitude that many enjoy (after all, there aren't many sites that are willing to speak their mind on the front page). If you don't like that attitude, perhaps you'd be better off somewhere else?

Believe me I would, if the attitude was manifested every day, every hour. But it isn't. As it stands, the Codex is a fine site for CRPG news and intelligent discussion, without the shackles of moderation and political correctness. But that doesn't mean the site, or some members of it, have to present their opinions in a tasteless manner. In my - admitedly short - time here on the forums, staff members like Saint, Exitium, Ausir and Whipporil have presented their opinions in a fairly educated way, and I can't recall any disagreements and problems with how they presented it. Whereas with Vault Dweller, I can recall quite a few, including one where I PM'ed him over it. My memory is foggy at the moment, but I think it was about his attitude towards a new user, who he insulted over very little. If he still has the PM, he can check it.


Unless of course, your comment is a suggestion that I should leave th site, and if that is the case, then I'll let the 'higher powers' ask me to do so or not.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Whereas with Vault Dweller, I can recall quite a few, including one where I PM'ed him over it. My memory is foggy at the moment, but I think it was about his attitude towards a new user, who he insulted over very little. If he still has the PM, he can check it.

OMG! I have flamed a stupid noob. WHAT WAS I THINKING?! :shock:

Unfortunately, I didn't keep the PM, but I found the thread:
http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic ... c&start=25

Here is a quote:

kotor is actually in fact turn based. so is neverwinter nights. the two fighting creatures take turns by the roll of the dice. just like in actual d&d. I know what im talking about.

I doubt that you know what you're talking about. You're the most clueless motherfucker who's ever posted here, and considering the competition, you're really good at being stupid.

In regard to your PM, if you recall, I sent you a detailed reply where I explained my reasons and the poster's stupidity. If you recall, you admitted the validity of my points.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

OMG! I have flamed a stupid noob. WHAT WAS I THINKING?! :shock:

Drama queen.

In regard to your PM, if you recall, I sent you a detailed reply where I explained my reasons and the poster's stupidity. If you recall, you admitted the validity of my points.

The validity of the points, not the attitude. If I recall correctly, you said you'd try to take into consideration my point that it was needlessly aggresive and rude.

 

[Astromarine]

This type of infighting is worthy of a counterstrike clan forum. I am disgusted to find it here.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If I recall correctly, you said you'd try to take into consideration my point that it was needlessly aggresive and rude.

True, and I did.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

This type of infighting is worthy of a counterstrike clan forum.

Im gunna pwn u wit my 1337 skillz, biatch! gg

 

[Astromarine]

haha omgwtflol u n00b. ur azz is MIN!!!!11!

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Actually, it does. You aren't a paying customer here.

So, first, my opinion doesn't have any merit because I'm not a part of the staff. Now, it doesn't have merit because I'm not a paying customer. Which is it?

Notice how both of those aren't mutually exclusive? As I've implied previously, it has already been well and truly established that people at the Codex speak their minds, especially the staff when they make news posts.

Also, are you part of the staff? Don't think so, so why are you getting to determine whose opinion matters

As I said above "it has already been well and truly established that people at the Codex speak their minds". Vault Dweller was speaking his mind, you're suggesting he shouldn't.

If you don't like it, you get to leave.

I was under the impression that that kind of comment was what you and others around here disliked the most about developers who did not cared for your suggestions. If my impression is correct, its very funny you're telling me that.

1. The Codex is an already established "franchise". It has attracted people to it because of that. The people here know what the Codex is like and can expect certain things.
2. You seem to want to change that.
3. We're paying customers when it comes to games.

Notice how I get angry when people want to change already established things for something which conflicts with what's already been established?

So it would seem that one of the staff members, other than Exitium, implied he believed Vault Dweller's wording could've been more contained. Given Exitium is part of the staff, and that you think that somehow gives his opinion more relevance and power than mine, take it.

What Exitium did was idiotic. Though he's had his nose up Bethesda's arse ever since the pretty pictures came out and he jizzed his pants.

VD hasn't been chewed out.

You're saying I'm wrong because he still holds his place in the staff and no action, disciplinary or otherwise, has been made?

Correct.

NOTE: I removed the "no right to my opinion" line from your sentence because you have every right to express your opinion.

If you want a say in the direction of the Codex, get active, join the staff and start putting out your own point of view.

That's a inane argument which I didn't expect you'd make. Not only am I entitled to make it wheter I'm part of it or not, but you're making two pretty poor assumptions. The first is that I would be attempting to make suggestions that would change the direction of the Codex (in regards to their attitude), which is not the case, as my point (again) was that I felt one comment was out of line.

Let's recap, shall we?

The problem comes up when you're being excessively blunt while representing the Codex.

Role-Player's rules for the Codex:
- You are NOT allowed to post what you think, you must post "what sounds nice".

You seem to be "defending the honour of the Codex", wanting VD to restrict his posts while he's "respresenting the Codex". It's my undersanding that you believe he's not allowed to do anything which you personally feel might bring the Codex in to disrepute, even though the existing attitude and reputation of the Codex is already reasonably well established - that the "journalists" here (for lack of a better word) speak their minds, whether people agree with them or not.

It's them speaking their minds that leads to most of the discussion here. Did you ever notice that?

The second is that you still believe I would have to be part of the staff in order to point something which I would perceive to be wrong, which is as dumb as saying that the next time my car breaks down, that I shouldn't complain to the mechanic, but rather, should instead take a mechanic degree, go work to the same workshop he is working in, and only then point out the problems with his work.

That's a nice straw man you've got there. Careful not to burn it as it could become alight quite easily.

In the meantime, if what VD said was a problem for the Codex reputation, somehow I don't think he'd still be on the staff.

Because we all know that if someone is not punished, they're doing the right thing. Riiiiight.

So VD should be punished then? What VD did is wrong?

That the character will be required to use goggles for issues of daylight adaptation is a trivial thing. If the statement was in regards to point of view, combat model and character system, then you, and others, would have a point. Given you can produce several visual effects that would be related to a character's visual capabilites and/or deficiencies without having to use firstperson, the point is moot.

So why then, to paraphrase, is isometric gameplay so over-rated?

No, you can dish out all the critiscism you like, if you think it's fit to do so.

As long as I pay and join the staff, correct?

No, incorrect. You gave your point of view and have explained that view through debate. I'm arguing against that point of view.

Now isn't the Codex allowed to dish out some critiscism as well, if it sees fit to do so? In this case, isn't one "journalist" allowed to speak his mind in what is essentially his news post and be allowed to do so freely, without it being edited?

First, journalists are meant to be impartial in their judgement. I'm glad you used quotes when you mentioned journalism, because the staff is far from being impartial on many levels. If the Codex staff are journalists, then so is Jon Stewart and the rest of the Daily Show staff. In fact, the Codex is the Daily Show for CRPG geeks, come to think of it.

Do you see that as a problem? (You also avoided the question) In fact, by your statement you seem to be fully aware of what the Codex is, so why the complaint?

There's a difference between claiming that, say, D. W. Bradley doesn't know how to make good games anymore, and saying that D. W. Bradley is a cock gobbling retarded asshole who couldn't crap a steaming pile of shit even if his life depended on it.

Yet you said this kind of language is acceptable when it comes to Chucky? How do you evaluate this double standard?

As it stands, the Codex is a fine site for CRPG news and intelligent discussion, without the shackles of moderation and political correctness.

Yet things that, in your point of view, are made in a "tasteless manner" should be moderated and people should be "politically correct" when they're "representing the Codex"?

Whereas with Vault Dweller, I can recall quite a few, including one where I PM'ed him over it. My memory is foggy at the moment, but I think it was about his attitude towards a new user, who he insulted over very little. If he still has the PM, he can check it.

So your problem here is not that VD called Pete Hines "full-of-shit" on the front page, but extends beyond that to include everyone posting their own opinions in the forum? Your complaint now seems to have extended to cover a situation where VD wasn't representing the Codex. What's also funny is that in the thread VD linked, you seem to be pretty harsh yourself.

Once again, there's a lack of consistency in your argument.

Some questions for you:

1. When is the staff representing the Codex and when aren't they? Are they representing the Codex at all times or is there no time when they're allowed to say what they want?
2. At what point does Pete Hines become "full-of-shit" and an acceptable phrase, seeing as this seems acceptable to you "when there's reason" (as in Chucky / FOPOS)?
3. Related to above, how do you define "unnecessary" rudeness?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Notice how both of those aren't mutually exclusive? As I've implied previously, it has already been well and truly established that people at the Codex speak their minds, especially the staff when they make news posts.

As I said above "it has already been well and truly established that people at the Codex speak their minds". Vault Dweller was speaking his mind, you're suggesting he shouldn't.

No, I suggested he should use more tact, not that he shouldn't give his opinion. Quoting Vault Dweller himself, learn how to read. Or at least understanding what I say. Your recurring suggestion that I am saying people shouldn't speak their mind is only amusing you at this point.

The Codex is an already established "franchise". It has attracted people to it because of that.

• 1. The people here know what the Codex is like and can expect certain things.
  
• 2. You seem to want to change that.
  
• 3. We're paying customers when it comes to games.

Notice how I get angry when people want to change already established things for something which conflicts with what's already been established?

Good for you. On the other hand, you might want to notice that suggesting a bit more of a contained attitude from one of the staff members does not conflict with what has already been established, it also is no indication that such a suggestion would end up changing the entire system.

Speaking of noticing things, you may also want to realize that your problem is that you keep assuming I am complaining about Vault Dweller giving his opinion. I have explained (more than once, in fact), that my complain was based on his presentation of his opinion, not against his freedom of speech. In fact, I'm against what Saint seemed to imply was wrong with Vault Dweller's statement, his drama.

What he calls dramatic I would call arrogant and overly rude, but the point is, that my suggestion was simply that he should be less of an insulting git on several ocasions which, if it wasn't clear to you, doesn't meant that the site would automatically become the opposite of what it is now, or that it would lose its touch.

What Exitium did was idiotic. Though he's had his nose up Bethesda's arse ever since the pretty pictures came out and he jizzed his pants.

So, somewhere along the road you imply staff members would have more relevant opinions about their own affairs when compared to mine. So, why are you dismissing Rex's opinion now? Does it have less value now because it doesn't support yours?

Correct.

Thanks. Your opinion has been noted.

Role-Player's rules for the Codex:
- You are NOT allowed to post what you think, you must post "what sounds nice".

Dark Underlord's antics of the day:
- Whatever you throw at me, I'll fumble its meaning to support my own case.

You're being exceptionally dense at this point. Seriously. What part of my argument didn't you understand? When have I made a statement indicating Vault Dweller should not post his opinion? And at what point does suggesting a slightly more contained attitude suddenly becomes the same as being against opinions altogether? You seem to be desperately grasping for straws along the lenght of the thread and going off on unrelated tirades instead of actually paying attention to what I'm saying. If those are your new "debate tactics", and if that is your plan for the remainder of the thread, please warn me now so I can stop taking it seriously.

You seem to be "defending the honour of the Codex", wanting VD to restrict his posts while he's "respresenting the Codex". It's my undersanding that you believe he's not allowed to do anything which you personally feel might bring the Codex in to disrepute, even though the existing attitude and reputation of the Codex is already reasonably well established - that the "journalists" here (for lack of a better word) speak their minds, whether people agree with them or not.

I'm not defending the reputation of the Codex, more like pointing out that it can keep the reputation it has now without the need for going overboard with statements such as those VD posted. You can be an underground, hard edge, uncompromising CRPG news site tempered with the ocasional mud slinging or name calling without having to call others retarded, morons, motherfuckers, and insulting people in the most crass ways possible over little or no reason and out of place.

Maybe you and others think that's a necessary aspect of the Codex? Fair enough. I, however, don't.

It's them speaking their minds that leads to most of the discussion here. Did you ever notice that?

OMG i thout i waz teh only 1 to C dat! Im no longer teh ONE!!!

That's a nice straw man you've got there. Careful not to burn it as it could become alight quite easily.

Thanks for the advice, but no, it's not a straw man. I'm addressing your original argument, simply replacing the scenario but keeping the same core points of your suggestion, making a valid comparison that shows how ridiculous the idea is.

So VD should be punished then? What VD did is wrong?

I find he was out of line. That's wrong enough.

So why then, to paraphrase, is isometric gameplay so over-rated?

What are you attempting to paraphrase here? We're talking about how that statement was immediately assumed to be an indication of firstperson, when I pointed out it doesn't. We're not discussing how something is over-rated or not.

No, you can dish out all the critiscism you like, if you think it's fit to do so."]

As long as I pay and join the staff, correct?

No, incorrect. You gave your point of view and have explained that view through debate. I'm arguing against that point of view.

So, what does that first quote say about your initial point of how my point of view was not to be taken into account because I wasn't part of the staff; and what does that last quote say about how irrelevant my point of view supposedly is when not supported by my position as a staff member? Because if its irrelevant, why are you wasting time with it?

Do you see that as a problem?

What, exactly? I mentioned different things in my post. What are you asking me if I see as a problem? The lack of impartiality? No, not really really much of a problem, more like separating the concept of journalism from those that are playing pretend.

(You also avoided the question)

Wonder why? It couldn't be because I'm getting tired of telling you that I wasn't supporting censorship, but rather, a less ostentatious attittude from VD, could it? I try avoiding repeating myself or ignoring questions which aren't productive or related to the matter at hand, wheter you think otherwise or not.

In fact, by your statement you seem to be fully aware of what the Codex is, so why the complaint?

I've seen the Codex's staff keep its hardline attitude for quite a while, and the times where that attitude is presented intelligently and calmly over the times where that attitude is accompanied by a string of callous offenses were in greater number. As with endless debates over what constitutes Fallout or not, I don't consider the Codex to be centered around the second attitude, but more around the first.

Yet you said this kind of language is acceptable when it comes to Chucky? How do you evaluate this double standard?

You might want to avoid accusing me of having double standards, and go back and read again that part where I state that using it in ocasions where its unjustified is out of line, and is what I am predominantly against. It might help you put things in persective. Or not, depending if you'll keep on ignoring or misunderstanding what I say.

Yet things that, in your point of view, are made in a "tasteless manner" should be moderated (...)

Not moderated. Kept in check.

and people should be "politically correct" when they're "representing the Codex"?

No, they should know the appropriate way and time in which to phrase certain things.

So your problem here is not that VD called Pete Hines "full-of-shit" on the front page, but extends beyond that to include everyone posting their own opinions in the forum?

Can you get any more desperate? Sorry, but first, your hyperbole is not helping your argument.

Second, you also seem to believe that because I addressed Vault Dweller in a situation where he wasn't exactly representing the Codex would somehow question my other point. Newsflash: it doesn't, because its a different situation altogether. There's a reason why I PM'ed him then as opposed to publicly confronting him like I did now over this matter, and the reason is that I feel the current situation was (is) more detrimental to the Codex, while the other one wasn't.

This time he's addresing a member of the industry in a disrespectful manner in a situation which in my mind doesn't justify it, he's not addressing ordinary Joe Blow.

Your complaint now seems to have extended to cover a situation where VD wasn't representing the Codex.

Not everything is as it seems.

What's also funny is that in the thread VD linked, you seem to be pretty harsh yourself.

Whats even more funny is that you bring up an example of me being harsh as that would undermine my argument, when my argument is not against being harsh or hard on people, but being flatout insulting at them in certain ocasions which don't merit said attitude. At this point, I can only either suggest Ritalin or that you stop grasping for straws. Either of them will help you in the long run.

But hey, since I'm a nice guy, I'll make your own argument for you, since you seem to have difficulties. If you search back, there will be some posts I made with the same attitude which I am now criticizing. Go find us some, we'll wait. Don't expect a vitory out of that though, but feel free to scour for them and publicly display them.

Once again, there's a lack of consistency in your argument.

This would imply there had been inconsistency before, but unfortunately for you, you were left with the task of proving that after claiming it the first time, and failed. The above would also imply there was inconsistency now, which would happen if I hadn't explained extensively my former point in contrast to your assumption.

Should we go for the third time in a row where you try to pass off the claim that my argument is lacking of consistency while you keep on failing to prove this? I've got the time if you've got the patience.

Some questions for you:
When is the staff representing the Codex and when aren't they? Are they representing the Codex at all times or is there no time when they're allowed to say what they want?

Personally I find that whenever they're handling issues which involve their capacity as 'journalists' they are representing the Codex. When you're posting a news bit on Terra Arcanum, you're representing your site. When you conduct an interview with someone in the gaming industry, make an editorial, or publicly address members of the gaming press and gaming industry, or their press releases, quotes, etc., in a public manner, you're representing your site.

At what point does Pete Hines become "full-of-shit" and an acceptable phrase, seeing as this seems acceptable to you "when there's reason" (as in Chucky / FOPOS)?

I had already answered to that. At the point which he becomes another Chuck, both in actions and statements, its when I feel you're entitled to criticize him at will.

Related to above, how do you define "unnecessary" rudeness?

I think I already commented on that, on this very thread, even.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Wow, long reply. Few comments though....

What he calls dramatic I would call arrogant and overly rude

I would call it being honest and blunt. I was, and still am, under the impression that Pete is lying. Sure, I could have said that he lied, or he didn't tell us "teh truth", but I don't see a fundamental difference between a liar and a full-of-shit person, other then political correctness which I don't do, not here, not in real life. You may call it rude, but I'm sick and tired of bullshit, and not planning on tolerating it. If somebody doesn't want to be called such a name, he shouldn't lie. You are saying that I disrespected Pete, well, I'm saying that Pete disrespected us, the community, first. Now, if it turns out that FO3 is not a FP RT game I would post a public apology here.

... but the point is, that my suggestion was simply that he should be less of an insulting git

Let's not get carried away with name-calling here.

This time he's addresing a member of the industry in a disrespectful manner in a situation which in my mind doesn't justify it, he's not addressing ordinary Joe Blow.

I really don't see the difference here. Do we have some kind of caste system here? Oridinary Joe Blow and a RESPECTAD MEMBAR OF TEH INDUSTRI that shall not be touched?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I would call it being honest and blunt. (...) but I don't see a fundamental difference between a liar and a full-of-shit person, other then political correctness which I don't do, not here, not in real life.

As I've said, my entire point was basically my opinion on that. If you think its fine to do that, be my guest. I simply don't agree with it, and believe its useless, and possibly hazardous, for all involved. I can be blunt, and not tolerate bullshit, and even call people on that, but I wouldn't see myself telling my kid (if I had one) that he was a cockgobbling full-of-shite arsewipe simply because he wasn't being honest (or worse, because I felt he wasn't being honest without being certain).

Now, if it turns out that FO3 is not a FP RT game I would post a public apology here.

That's unrelated, as far as I can tell. Wheter he was full of shit or not, it was still insulting.

Let's not get carried away with name-calling here.

I was using git in the sense of you being obnoxious, which I felt you were. I apologize if it was that insulting.

I think I should bring up a funny tidbit, though, as you seem to not care for political correctness, and feel you were justified in calling Hines something based on your perception of his action, but then ask that I do not go into name-calling based on my perception of your attitude.

This couldn't be hipocrisy, could it?

I really don't see the difference here.

You don't see the difference between random internet user #38746428329 and with an inudstry (or more specifically, with workers on said industry) which you report about?

Do we have some kind of caste system here? Oridinary Joe Blow and a RESPECTAD MEMBAR OF TEH INDUSTRI that shall not be touched?

Members of the gaming industry aren't sacred cows, but they're also not rabble whom you can treat as you see fit. Well, you can treat them as you want, really, but don't expect any respect back. Not everyone thrives on insults, or appreciates them.

 

[EEVIAC]

Since when were PR jerk-offs considered part of the industry? They don't make games, they're full-of-shit by trade.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Members of the gaming industry aren't sacred cows, but they're also not rabble whom you can treat as you see fit. Well, you can treat them as you want, really, but don't expect any respect back. Not everyone thrives on insults, or appreciates them.

Feargus loves abuse. He's like The Hulk, the more you throw at him, the stronger he becomes.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I wouldn't say he loves it, but I think he's become a bit desensitized with the abuse thrown at him.

In any case, I feel myself somewhere in between Sawyer's and Rosh's points of view. I think some measure of politeness should exist, but not to the point of being a neutered little yes-man. Dish out complaints, criticism, whatever; just don't give devs and such a reason to stop listening to you.

 

[Volourn]

Just to point out something really important - NWN Still Rules!

 

[Vault Dweller]

As I've said, my entire point was basically my opinion on that.

I know, it's cool. I can handle criticism.

If you think its fine to do that, be my guest.

I don't see a big deal, but your position was noted. I may or may not do the same in the future. If I choose not to, that would be because of you.

Wheter he was full of shit or not, it was still insulting.

If he was, I don't really care

I was using git in the sense of you being obnoxious, which I felt you were. I apologize if it was that insulting.

Cool

I think I should bring up a funny tidbit, though, as you seem to not care for political correctness, and feel you were justified in calling Hines something based on your perception of his action, but then ask that I do not go into name-calling based on my perception of your attitude.

This couldn't be hipocrisy, could it?

Not really. I was merely wondering if you were planning on starting a round of name-calling, that's all. As in should I call you something too, or should I disregard it. Since you said it wasn't hostile, that's fine then.

You don't see the difference between random internet user #38746428329 and with an inudstry (or more specifically, with workers on said industry) which you report about?

Not really. If a person makes sense and has something interesting to say, that's the only thing that counts. You are very well aware that we flamed many developers and other members of the industry in the past, in many cases it never stopped them from dropping by and having some discussions with us (Feargus, JE, Fargo, Gaider, Dallaire, etc). They were always treated as "just another guy" without any consideration to their ties with the industry. Why change that?

Members of the gaming industry aren't sacred cows, but they're also not rabble whom you can treat as you see fit.

Why not?

Well, you can treat them as you want, really, but don't expect any respect back. Not everyone thrives on insults, or appreciates them.

Respect is just a word. I'll leave that for IGN and GameSpy who are always busy trying to perfect a blowjob.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Not really. If a person makes sense and has something interesting to say, that's the only thing that counts.

That works perfectly on paper, but in reality its different. Simply put, many people don't appreciate that kind of response or attitude. They prefer to be told how and why they're wrong in a clear manner, or at least are more receptive to points of view, which are not accompanied by insults.

You are very well aware that we flamed many developers and other members of the industry in the past, in many cases it never stopped them from dropping by and having some discussions with us (Feargus, JE, Fargo, Gaider, Dallaire, etc). They were always treated as "just another guy" without any consideration to their ties with the industry. Why change that?

Yes, I am aware of that flaming. If you recall, I participated in that as well in the past. I simply feel there's a time and a place to make certain comments. Which is another part of my point: I'm not asking you to dramatically change your stance regarding communication with others, in this case, people in the gaming industry; only that you take the time to ponder on what kind of situation you might be creating for yourself and others when you get carried away in your posts.

Members of the gaming industry aren't sacred cows, but they're also not rabble whom you can treat as you see fit.

Why not?

They potentially handle games you might want; they're in a position to directly work with the fanbase. They can potentially change the course of the gaming industry to a direction that you like. For a gaming community, that's important. I wouldn't risk calling every last one of them fucktards when I can be instead trying to work with them, showing them what I think about the gaming industry, while being more than a handful of dollars on their charts.

Regular Joe Blow can just, well, blow.

Respect is just a word. I'll leave that for IGN and GameSpy who are always busy trying to perfect a blowjob.

Respect is more than a word. I'm not suggesting you, or any other staff member, take up on the same attitude of places like IGN or Gamespy. Virtual fellatio should never be on the menu around here, unless we get desperate and Volourn is hanging around.

 

[Sheriff05]

Since when were PR jerk-offs considered part of the industry? They don't make games, they're full-of-shit by trade.

Actually they now run the industry. Focus groups analysis of potential buyers by the PR/marketing geniuses directly dicate design decisions. This is why we should only be buying games from indie developers and not wasting time arguing about what "X" developer is saying, as their masters haven't spoken yet. So everything they say should be taken as speculation, even though they proabably think otherwise. It is a sad and shitty state this industry is in. Personally speaking, this year I began importing every game I buy from the UK as US publishers don't deserve the money.
(not to mention I like DVD cases better for games :D )

 

[Seven]

Just to point out something really important - NWN Still Rules!

Looks like some one's looking for attention...

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Aren't we all?

 

[Volourn]

"Looks like some one's looking for attention..."

And, it worked!

 

[Sol Invictus]

I would call it being honest and blunt. I was, and still am, under the impression that Pete is lying.

Maybe he's just handling this situation rather poorly, but of course that can't be the case, since bad PR management could never, ever[b/] happen.

Sure, I could have said that he lied, or he didn't tell us "teh truth", but I don't see a fundamental difference between a liar and a full-of-shit person, other then political correctness which I don't do, not here, not in real life.

That is both immature, and pointlessly inane. Using personal insults like calling Pete Hines 'full-of-shit' to extend shock value to a subject does not make your point any less, or any more valid. If someone were to call me out on being 'full-of-shit' instead of simply calling me a liar which is far more powerful a term, especially when used in the context of a logical, and well-built argument, I would be very unreceptive to it, particularly because calling someone 'full-of-shit' without even bothering to clarify your position depicts a standoff-ish idiot of a person with nothing valid say. Remember those Anti-Bush protestors? That's whom your behaviour reminds me of.

You may call it rude, but I'm sick and tired of bullshit, and not planning on tolerating it.

Yap. Yap. Yap. You sound like one of those protestors. Do you think that everyone's psychic and will instantly know what the hell you're talking about? When did an anti-Bush protestor ever get any of the people they heckle to listen, anyhow? It's just plain irritating, hardly 'mind opening'.

If somebody doesn't want to be called such a name, he shouldn't lie.

Now you sound like a little kid whining about how some other kid stole his candy and how you wouldn't have broken all of his toys if he didn't do that - as if that justifies your actions. Guess what? It doesn't.

You are saying that I disrespected Pete, well, I'm saying that Pete disrespected us, the community, first.

You could have just said the above in the beginning and no one would have made a fuss about your attitude. Do you honestly think that calling Pete "Full of Shit" is more effective than simply saying, "It would be nice if Pete and the rest of the Bethesda clan were more forthcoming about this information to us, the fans, and not disrespect us."

See, that's mature - and it conveys a point more powerful than calling someone 'full of shit'. Do you know what they do to people who start screaming and throwing insults during debates? They tell them to shut up and sit down, regardless of what they have to say. Unless it's a Taiwanese debate, of course - in which case screaming and throwing insults and hurling chairs at other people comes naturally to their parliament. But guess how it looks to the rest of the world. Oh, I'm sure they don't care, like you don't, but guess what: it's completely asinine.

I'm sure you can go off on some merry tirade about how you're proud to be a loudmouthed redneck but nobody is going to respect you for it. What's the point in fabricating some 'internet tough guy' image of yourself if nobody is going to listen to you, or even care? You sound like someone bragging about his law degree in a room full of scientists.

I really don't see the difference here. Do we have some kind of caste system here? Oridinary Joe Blow and a RESPECTAD MEMBAR OF TEH INDUSTRI that shall not be touched?

Well, if DarkUnderlord's posts are anything to go by about this place, then the answer is yes, because apparently any points our readers make are automatically less valid than anything you have to say. Imagine that.

VD, do us all a favor and stop behaving like a simpleton. Simply because someone chooses to give Bethesda or any other company the benefit of some doubt doesn't mean we're automatically brown-nosing. I understand, but disagree with your stark contrasting. You need to realize that not everything is in black and white, certainly not something like this, and please don't give me some damn speech about how you're 'jaded' with 'all the shit' in the world. Keep that angst on your Deadjournal.com page.

 

[Vault Dweller]

That works perfectly on paper, but in reality its different. Simply put, many people don't appreciate that kind of response or attitude. They prefer to be told how and why they're wrong in a clear manner, or at least are more receptive to points of view, which are not accompanied by insults.

Very few people like to be told how and why they're wrong, no matter how you put it, especially those who are accustomed to fans praising them.

Anyway, to respond to your point, yes, you are right, people don't appreciate that, but do you think we, the fans, appreciate being lied to? I do believe that Pete could have been more honest with usl. He chose not to, hence my reaction. That doesn't affect my attitude toward Kathode and MrSmileyFace. I will respect them unless they give me reasons not to. It's a very simple philosophy.

I simply feel there's a time and a place to make certain comments.

I agree, and when I made my comment I felt that both the time and the place were appropriate.

only that you take the time to ponder on what kind of situation you might be creating for yourself and others when you get carried away in your posts.

I don't really care about any situation I create for myself. I need nothing from Pete and Bethesda. If they choose to ignore me, that's fine. As for the site, if they disagree they can always fire me and post "the jerk is gone, will you be my friend now?" news post.

They potentially handle games you might want; they're in a position to directly work with the fanbase. They can potentially change the course of the gaming industry to a direction that you like.

I highly, highly doubt that. I don't believe that they are willing or interested in making a TB ISM game. If they were, we wouldn't be in this situation right now. Since they aren't, I really don't care what kind of game they will make.

For a gaming community, that's important. I wouldn't risk calling every last one of them fucktards when I can be instead trying to work with them, showing them what I think about the gaming industry, while being more than a handful of dollars on their charts.

I simply don't believe in any of that. Beth is a business, not a charity. Developers do what they want (way too many examples of that, how about JE's guns handling for example), and that's just how it goes.