Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
This Forum is Read Only

Why is it so difficult for SE to balance/fix SPFollow

#52 Mar 28 2011 at 3:09 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
Sorry, dissidia and 13 may have been good games but innvoation had little to do with it.


I don't see how you can say with a straight face that innovation had little to do with Dissidia's success. Of course Dissidia II isn't going to be much of a change... I wouldn't expect it to be.

XIII, on the other hand, was a relative success in spite of it's innovation more than because of it.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#53 Mar 28 2011 at 5:31 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
844 posts
Because what little innovation went into its making is nothing compared to the boost it got from having our favorite FF characters in it.

It was a great game but that doesn't equal being innovative, it still can be described as a Power Stone game + JRPG item/equipment system + FF characters.

Just let it go, you are being pathetic, and no one is saying that every game should be innovative and fresh, once in a while we may get a Portal but that doesn't make Half Life 2 any less great.

Kachi wrote:
Quote:
Sorry, dissidia and 13 may have been good games but innvoation had little to do with it.


I don't see how you can say with a straight face that innovation had little to do with Dissidia's success. Of course Dissidia II isn't going to be much of a change... I wouldn't expect it to be.

XIII, on the other hand, was a relative success in spite of it's innovation more than because of it.

____________________________
See your face upon the clear water. How dirty! Come! Wash your face!
#54 Mar 28 2011 at 11:56 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
Because what little innovation went into its making is nothing compared to the boost it got from having our favorite FF characters in it.

It was a great game but that doesn't equal being innovative, it still can be described as a Power Stone game + JRPG item/equipment system + FF characters.

Just let it go, you are being pathetic, and no one is saying that every game should be innovative and fresh, once in a while we may get a Portal but that doesn't make Half Life 2 any less great.


Lookie here, ********

Maybe you should check the dictionary, or maybe check into a school where they can teach you rudimentary critical thinking skills. The game is innovative because it did things that had never been done before. That's what innovation IS. You can't just claim that because the game had other things going for it, the innovation doesn't count, or didn't matter. You think a fan service mash-up game has never flopped before? Get a ******* clue. Your description doesn't even mention the fighting elements of the game, or the board game interface-- these are major features, so clearly it's not so simple a game as you would conceive.

And you're right-- no one is saying that every game should be innovative and fresh-- I certainly didn't say that, which you would know if you exercised a little reading comprehension.

I was content to be perfectly civil towards your stupid ***-- we were, afterall, just having an innocent, amusing, completely peaceable discussion about video games-- but you had to go and be a rude stupid *** on top of it. Unfortunately for you, I am a relentlessly antagonistic *** when crossed, and will gleefully accept this as an excuse to pick apart your every asinine word. Fortunately for you, I'm easily defused by apologies.

So, want to rethink that "pathetic" crack? Maybe acknowledge that it was a bit foolish or hasty to be so dismissive to someone over a harmless discourse?
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#55 Mar 29 2011 at 12:39 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
844 posts
TL;DR

whatever, you win the internets!

Kachi wrote:
Quote:
Because what little innovation went into its making is nothing compared to the boost it got from having our favorite FF characters in it.

It was a great game but that doesn't equal being innovative, it still can be described as a Power Stone game + JRPG item/equipment system + FF characters.

Just let it go, you are being pathetic, and no one is saying that every game should be innovative and fresh, once in a while we may get a Portal but that doesn't make Half Life 2 any less great.


Lookie here, dipsh*t.

Maybe you should check the dictionary, or maybe check into a school where they can teach you rudimentary critical thinking skills. The game is innovative because it did things that had never been done before. That's what innovation IS. You can't just claim that because the game had other things going for it, the innovation doesn't count, or didn't matter. You think a fan service mash-up game has never flopped before? Get a ******* clue. Your description doesn't even mention the fighting elements of the game, or the board game interface-- these are major features, so clearly it's not so simple a game as you would conceive.

And you're right-- no one is saying that every game should be innovative and fresh-- I certainly didn't say that, which you would know if you exercised a little reading comprehension.

I was content to be perfectly civil towards your stupid ***-- we were, afterall, just having an innocent, amusing, completely peaceable discussion about video games-- but you had to go and be a rude stupid *** on top of it. Unfortunately for you, I am a relentlessly antagonistic *** when crossed, and will gleefully accept this as an excuse to pick apart your every asinine word. Fortunately for you, I'm easily defused by apologies.

So, want to rethink that "pathetic" crack? Maybe acknowledge that it was a bit foolish or hasty to be so dismissive to someone over a harmless discourse?

____________________________
See your face upon the clear water. How dirty! Come! Wash your face!
#56 Mar 29 2011 at 6:45 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
And you win a free trip to my *********
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#57 Mar 29 2011 at 7:13 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
844 posts
Kachi wrote:
And you win a free trip to my sh*tlist!

lul
____________________________
See your face upon the clear water. How dirty! Come! Wash your face!
#58 Mar 29 2011 at 7:22 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
My sentiments exactly. Don't think it matters to me whether you're at all put off-- I'm simply going to enjoy the license to treat you with the lack of civility you've earned.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#59 Mar 30 2011 at 1:18 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
494 posts
ok 1.
innovation = taking something that exists, and improving on it
Invention = creating something new.

2.
What do these arguments have to do with the topic of this thread..... You guys are just using my thread for a flame war. im sad.
#60 Mar 30 2011 at 10:05 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
351 posts
Azurymber wrote:
ok 1.
innovation = taking something that exists, and improving on it
Invention = creating something new.

2.
What do these arguments have to do with the topic of this thread..... You guys are just using my thread for a flame war. im sad.


Although the word innovation often implies an improvement, the definition only requires that it be new and not necessarily "better."
#61 Mar 31 2011 at 12:30 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
494 posts
ForceOfMeh wrote:
Azurymber wrote:
ok 1.
innovation = taking something that exists, and improving on it
Invention = creating something new.

2.
What do these arguments have to do with the topic of this thread..... You guys are just using my thread for a flame war. im sad.


Although the word innovation often implies an improvement, the definition only requires that it be new and not necessarily "better."


very true
1 2 Next »
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (20)