Nothing to spend my excess of bits on.

[Guest]

I stayed pretty consistently close to broke the entire game. Even with a beefy Science score, tinkering still gets expensive.

[highlor3]

On 11/9/2019 at 2:26 PM, algroth said:

For the record, in case my previous message may have been misinterpreted as a complaint on the game's economy, I have no issue with bits being scarce - if anything it makes perfect sense in a setting that is deliberately touching on ideas such as the hoarding of resources by the few and the scarcity the many suffer in turn, the overinflating of prices, and the likes. In games especially, a good economy is one which doesn't allow you to buy everything you could possibly want and still have a mountain of currency at your disposal. But it's also true that tinkering is the only real money-sink in the game and it's not as psychologically rewarding as finding an awesome item at a vendor's store and acquiring it with hard-earned cash (in-game of course).

I agree.
I think tinkering should use armor/weapon parts, in reasonable amounts. Also the Science milestones having better impact in it's cost. Spending almost 5 million bits (625 kilobytes lol) to raise a Spacer's Choice armor to lvl 35, is not the best choice.

[Devilangel58]

Well, yeah. No RPG has a good economy in their games. It's basic barter system. Easiest way to get rich and manipulate. This isn't like Runescape where there is an economy within the game and pretty well-established over the years thanks to the millions of players. It's a matured economy. Still broken, but matured. Also depends which version you play, old school or new.

I believe EVE online has some sort of economy as well, but again - that's a player-established thing more than anything else.

 

We are in a single player game where you are literally the only trader. All of the money in the game's universe is yours - especially since the only limiting factor is the programming's data type before you accidentally crash the game.

Edited November 11, 2019 by Devilangel58

[algroth]

6 hours ago, highlor3 said:

I agree.
I think tinkering should use armor/weapon parts, in reasonable amounts. Also the Science milestones having better impact in it's cost. Spending almost 5 million bits (625 kilobytes lol) to raise a Spacer's Choice armor to lvl 35, is not the best choice.

Well, that's because it's not the best choice, it's Spacer's Choice!

(Sorry, couldn't help myself.)

[thearmourofGod]

14 hours ago, KnightNine said:

thearmourofGod is entitled to his opinion that opinions can be true or false and to think otherwise is to be illogical. Though stating "to think that ones opinions cant be incorrect is a basic lack of logic" leaves no room for debate and reflects badly on thearmourofGod's willingness to try and comprehend the reasoning behind opposing views even if he could be correct. I don't blame him since this never started out as a respectful debate but rather just trying to "1up" each other on who is "correct".

Ommamar is entitled to his opinion that thearmourofGod is being egotistical through stating his opinion and that opinions are not provably true or false.

I don't really expect anyone to want to dive into a real discussion at this point among all the baseless insults between two people who barely know each other on the internet, but it gives me a chance to look into this more due to my personal interest.

I might've been mistaken in separating "false statements" from being classified as opinions after considering this though it's overall just semantics:
https://medium.com/@jason.richardsonwhite/why-opinions-can-be-true-or-false-and-why-it-matters-8180e4b16017
I could accept that some opinions can be proven true or false as opposed to my previous post where I wasn't considering them as opinions but rather as false statements since they can be objectively and directly quantified ("2+2 = 5" and so on).

I think I found the root of the misunderstanding:

• the definition of an opinion is different between O and T
• T believes opinions can be proven true or false
• O, if he agrees with my initial assumption, believes that statements that can be objectively quantified as true or false do not qualify as opinions.

To see if O's opinion is an opinion that can be proven true or false we'd have to deconstruct the qualities of this opinion that are relevant. The article considers that the "relevant considerations have an independent, objective existence" that are not "made up by the person" will make a vague opinion as a whole (i.e. "Lincoln was the best president.") be proven true or false if these relevant objective qualities are present and accounted for. The issue with this is that the qualities that anyone considers relevant are biased, not necessarily universally agreed upon, and therefore subjective and it doesn't matter how many people are of the same opinion.

Despite this, If O is still here and is able to describe the individual objective qualities of his opinion, perhaps a better understanding would be reached even if the initial statement would still technically be subjective at the time it was made, if not then the opinion is subjective and not based on anything but emotion and would be in fact illogical though not objectively false. Subjectivity is illogical thearmourofGod.

 

i hear what you are saying, but, all you have to do is go back to the original posts in the proper order

lol, yes, it became a 1up but nothing wrong with that until I started being specifically targeted

”lol @ asexuality”

he commented on that comment by telling me to search BEFORE posting a RESPONSE.  thats unbelievably foolish.

he also attempted to direct my future comments.  thats unbelievably inappropriate.

im a grown man with a family and to have some internet yo start attempting to do such things is ridiculous;  its why i also involved my family, so as, to use it as a teaching moment

nothing i said was horrible or out of line, yet, he tried to then switch the subject to me, as if, i had done something wrong, while, simultaneously, adjusting his stance on the “my opinion is valid” debate.

lol, of course, he is entitled to his “opinion.”  of course, his natural reaction/opinion is valid at the time he has it.

My comments had nothing to do with that since that would be ridiculous on MY part.  That wouldve been illogical on MY part.

Thats why i purposefully stated that his opinion could be proven false based on my intent.  That answer has nothing to do with the restated twist he attempted to apply.

again, HE responded to me.  HE didnt like my comment and for some foolish reason thought it appropriate to make the subsequent comment.

It was not.  then it turned into the typical internet comment banter, lol, though, very tame in reality.

no big