Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is what I said *BEFORE* the game came out, but noooooooooooooooooooo everyone said I was a ****ing idiot and kept posting with constant disagreement, so it didn't get changed.

 

Everyone said it was "wasting time going back to town" now the game is implemented and it's too late and NOW you all wanna agree with me.

 

Good job guys, as I said in my old post which everyone also disagree'd with  "There is more idiots than intellectuals in the world, and thats the reason everything is ****, because bad idiotic design takes precedent over good design by democratic majority" (not in those exact words but yeah)

 

Also you don't mean combat, you mean mostly the game mechanics and consequences of combat.

 

*shrug*

I do mean combat though. Yes, it's the ancillary mechanics of combat that need to change. But the thing that suffers now in Deadfire are the combats because of the dearth of consequence, i.e. 9/10 fights do not require me to do any actual decision-making. Also, I didn't pay much attention to the game pre-release because I wanted to do a first playthrough as blind as possible. But ya, kudos to you for being prescient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This is what I said *BEFORE* the game came out, but noooooooooooooooooooo everyone said I was a ****ing idiot and kept posting with constant disagreement, so it didn't get changed.

 

Everyone said it was "wasting time going back to town" now the game is implemented and it's too late and NOW you all wanna agree with me.

 

Good job guys, as I said in my old post which everyone also disagree'd with  "There is more idiots than intellectuals in the world, and thats the reason everything is ****, because bad idiotic design takes precedent over good design by democratic majority" (not in those exact words but yeah)

 

*shrug*

I don't even know you mate, but I'm curious on what you said to sound so resentful now and make your post a bit more productive and with more context.

 

There is no point in being constructive, I tried to be constructive about 3 months ago and was ganged up on by inferior intellects and shouted down.

 

The game is already made, they aren't and probably cannot change the mechanics of the entire game now that it's set in stone, what I'm doing is renouncing people and that's what I planned to do because I'm bitter that the games revolutionary design from pillars 1 was watered down to the old bg playstyle due to nothing but peer pressure from the childish, lazy, drooling, mouth-breathing masses.

 

I don't even understand why they were so cowardly to buckle, the original recieved critical acclaim, they already succeeded, if they were ever gonna buckle it shoulda been the first game, not when they were already successful and already knew their old system worked.

 

Talk about fixing what ain't broke.

 

I sort of disagree with the no turning back, there is DLC coming that might introduce new dungeons that decides to go back in. As for the context of returning to the city for stocking, can be fixed if they introduce in land mechanics of having limited access to food and water so it would have the same "campfire" effect and not trivializing wounds mechanics at the same time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of disagree with the no turning back, there is DLC coming that might introduce new dungeons that decides to go back in. As for the context of returning to the city for stocking, can be fixed if they introduce in land mechanics of having limited access to food and water so it would have the same "campfire" effect and not trivializing wounds mechanics at the same time.

 

 

Well said. I said this earlier in the thread, but there are some mechanics that exist, that if tweaked, would add back the strategic layer that the original game had. Tweak empowers to have a broader use, weaken heal and/or increase enemy damage, increase the cost and/or limit the effect of camping resources, increase the cost of ship maintenance, encourage more investment in the ship. I actually think some tweaks *could* make the combat and dungeon crawl experience even better than the original. So we shouldn't lose hope entirely.

Edited by cokane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I say those things are un-fun, because I find them un-fun. I'm not going to argue about whether I find something fun or not. That's insipid.

Except the two of you have merely posted assertions and not actual arguments. You haven't articulated in any way how my suggestions would be "frustrating" and "not challenging".

 

 

 

If you can't articulate your points beyond "This is my taste", then you're not actually trying to make constructive arguments and you're not adding anything to the thread. You're also not taking the measure of any game mechanic. Again, in my original post, I did not just make a generic comment about how the combat/dungeon crawling is weaker in Deadfire, I wrote about how *specific* challenges cannot exist and how dungeon/wilderness design is limited to narrower experience because of it. Your pushback in this thread hasn't gone beyond vague attacks on others and vague rejections of others' suggestions.

 

You mean like you are doing right now? I disagree with you, therefore I am attacking other people. Classy.

 

I've outlined before the difference between actual difficult combat vs. artificially limiting supplies or inflating enemy stat numbers. If you want to go ahead and ignore all that, well you can, no one is forcing you to actually engage here. But don't attack people because they happen to disagree with you.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't think a difficulty spike is going to address this.

 

I think the decision to move spells and abilities to be entirely per encounter has doomed this aspect of the game. Added to this is the removal of long-term health, the focus purely on wounds and removal of limited camping supplies.

 

These changes together have led to two big problems.

 

The first is that bite-sized encounters no longer matter. They are just wasting the player's time. Any fight that does not threaten to knock one of my characters out is meaningless. Because these fights no longer drain meaningful resources from the player, they no longer have any long term effect. And for players who take any effort to study the game's systems, the overwhelming majority of encounters in the game are going to fall into this category.

 

Think back to PoE1 with the temple below the first village, Gilded Vale. It was one of the first difficult areas many players would encounter, and yet no single fight in that temple is a maximum effort "boss fight". This kind of dungeon crawl cannot exist in Deadfire.

 

Upping the difficulty isn't going to change this, it's actually only going to make even more of a chore. All it means is that I go from using almost none of my abilities in these kinds of fights to having to use more and more of them. So long as my characters aren't getting knocked out, I don't have to worry about optimizing my performance in the majority of fights.

 

The second problem is that, even when the game throws a tough fight at you, requiring you to burn per rest items, empowers and suffer wounds, the cost of resting afterwards is so minimal that it's a no-brainer. Food is cheap. Camping is unlimited and risk free. The only kind of "agony" a player might feel in whether to rest or not rest is perhaps if they will burn nice inn bonuses or previous food bonuses.

 

It's a shame because I greatly appreciate the other aspects of the game such as expanded factions, better companion interaction, better thieving options and on and on. But combat, which is a core focus of the game, feels like a repetitive grind for all but the absolutely hardest of fights.

 

This is why turn-based games like Divinity do so well.

 

I haven't gotten as immersed, or played thru a game as many times as I have DoS 2. That is one of my favorite games of all time now. In fact, I'm re-installing it as we speak for another play thru. (along with fallout 4)

 

Turn-based, tactical combat. Not the clunky fast-food combat in this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I sort of disagree with the no turning back, there is DLC coming that might introduce new dungeons that decides to go back in. As for the context of returning to the city for stocking, can be fixed if they introduce in land mechanics of having limited access to food and water so it would have the same "campfire" effect and not trivializing wounds mechanics at the same time."

 

 

So wishful thinking? Nothing about the DLC said they were gonna do that.

Edited by alexis13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like you are doing right now? I disagree with you, therefore I am attacking other people. Classy.

 

I've outlined before the difference between actual difficult combat vs. artificially limiting supplies or inflating enemy stat numbers. If you want to go ahead and ignore all that, well you can, no one is forcing you to actually engage here. But don't attack people because they happen to disagree with you.

 

Can you quote something where you actually "outlined" the difference? Because I went back and read your posts. These are things you wrote:

 

"Exactly. Challenge is good, frustration is bad."

 

"All of that sounds frustrating and unfun."

 

"I say those things are un-fun, because I find them un-fun. I'm not going to argue about whether I find something fun or not. That's insipid."

 

Where is the outlining? What I see here is "things I don't like are bad and unfun, things I do like are good and fun."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

can i ask the people who insist POE1 'forces' you to backtrack for camping supplies: why do you unload your spellbooks on every single encounter? don't you think the per-rest system incentivises and rewards, by design, judicious use of lower and higher spells and abilities over a period of time?

Do you just barge into the temple of Eothas at level 2 w/ Aloth & Eder, get 3 rooms in then hump it back, over and over until the temple is clear? and never think 'there has to be a better way?' cos that's funny as **** tbh

This is excellent and I think an important point. People talk about backtracking on dungeons in PoE1 but I'm skeptical many players actually did this.

 

*Person complains about personal experience that they disliked*

 

Random stranger on message board: YOU'RE A LIAR! THAT NEVER HAPPENED!  WHY ARE YOU CONSPIRING AGAINST THIS GAME?!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

can i ask the people who insist POE1 'forces' you to backtrack for camping supplies: why do you unload your spellbooks on every single encounter? don't you think the per-rest system incentivises and rewards, by design, judicious use of lower and higher spells and abilities over a period of time?

Do you just barge into the temple of Eothas at level 2 w/ Aloth & Eder, get 3 rooms in then hump it back, over and over until the temple is clear? and never think 'there has to be a better way?' cos that's funny as **** tbh

This is excellent and I think an important point. People talk about backtracking on dungeons in PoE1 but I'm skeptical many players actually did this.

 

*Person complains about personal experience that they disliked*

 

Random stranger on message board: YOU'RE A LIAR! THAT NEVER HAPPENED!  WHY ARE YOU CONSPIRING AGAINST THIS GAME?!

 

What I don't see here is any talk about the frequency of pulling out of dungeons. You sure showed that straw man who's boss though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

can i ask the people who insist POE1 'forces' you to backtrack for camping supplies: why do you unload your spellbooks on every single encounter? don't you think the per-rest system incentivises and rewards, by design, judicious use of lower and higher spells and abilities over a period of time?

Do you just barge into the temple of Eothas at level 2 w/ Aloth & Eder, get 3 rooms in then hump it back, over and over until the temple is clear? and never think 'there has to be a better way?' cos that's funny as **** tbh

This is excellent and I think an important point. People talk about backtracking on dungeons in PoE1 but I'm skeptical many players actually did this.

 

*Person complains about personal experience that they disliked*

 

Random stranger on message board: YOU'RE A LIAR! THAT NEVER HAPPENED!  WHY ARE YOU CONSPIRING AGAINST THIS GAME?!

 

What I don't see here is any talk about the frequency of pulling out of dungeons. You sure showed that straw man who's boss though.

 

What I don't see here is an intellectually honest question worthy of a serous response. You sure showed those game-hating liars, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What I don't see here is an intellectually honest question worthy of a serous response. You sure showed those game-hating liars, though.

 

 

Where did I say anyone hated the game?

 

I just don't think people should complain about a problem without also taking the measure of it. This is why the frequency question is important. If you had to abandon non-Endless Path dungeons only 2-3 times in a completionist playthrough, is that really a problem worth talking about? Much less redesigning the game around?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

What I don't see here is an intellectually honest question worthy of a serous response. You sure showed those game-hating liars, though.

 

 

Where did I say anyone hated the game?

 

I just don't think people should complain about a problem without also taking the measure of it. This is why the frequency question is important. If you had to abandon non-Endless Path dungeons only 2-3 times in a completionist playthrough, is that really a problem worth talking about? Much less redesigning the game around?

 

No. What you're doing is calling into question other peoples honesty because the experiences they talk about don't match with your own. Instead of discussing the problem you're attacking the statements about the problem to cast doubt on whether the problem even exists.

 

I won't play your game, but I'll mock you for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...

 

No. What you're doing is calling into question other peoples honesty because the experiences they talk about don't match with your own. Instead of discussing the problem you're attacking the statements about the problem to cast doubt on whether the problem even exists.

 

I won't play your game, but I'll mock you for it.

 

 

Again, talking about a problem without also measuring it isn't a helpful addition to a discussion. I don't think this is hard.

Edited by cokane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This is what I said *BEFORE* the game came out, but noooooooooooooooooooo everyone said I was a ****ing idiot and kept posting with constant disagreement, so it didn't get changed.

 

Everyone said it was "wasting time going back to town" now the game is implemented and it's too late and NOW you all wanna agree with me.

 

Good job guys, as I said in my old post which everyone also disagree'd with  "There is more idiots than intellectuals in the world, and thats the reason everything is ****, because bad idiotic design takes precedent over good design by democratic majority" (not in those exact words but yeah)

 

*shrug*

I don't even know you mate, but I'm curious on what you said to sound so resentful now and make your post a bit more productive and with more context.

 

There is no point in being constructive, I tried to be constructive about 3 months ago and was ganged up on by inferior intellects and shouted down.

So just because you had a bad experience with certain individuals 3 months ago, you've condemned the entire user base of this forum for good and now attempt to use that as justification for hostile posting? I'm afraid that's not how it works. Chances are that you're largely talking to different people now. Also, "inferior intellects." lol. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

...

 

No. What you're doing is calling into question other peoples honesty because the experiences they talk about don't match with your own. Instead of discussing the problem you're attacking the statements about the problem to cast doubt on whether the problem even exists.

 

I won't play your game, but I'll mock you for it.

 

 

Again, talking about a problem without also measuring it isn't a helpful addition to a discussion. I don't think this is hard.

 

You're not "measuring" the problem and you're not looking for data. You're just questioning the experiences of a *LARGE* group of people because it allows you to dismiss their experiences as invalid. It's a common type of ad hominem attack; "You're experiences run counter to my opinion, so I'm going to say you didn't actually experience that". Talk about adding nothing to the thread; attacking peoples honesty to dismiss their experiences adds nothing but your excuses rather than actually discussing the issue itself, which is what should be the main focus.

 

I don't feel the need to prove to your ass that I experienced a large degree of frustration from the need to backpedal throughout the game. We can talk all day long about how gameplay styles differ, about why I may have experienced this differently from you, about things that can be done to push the experience one way or the other, all sorts of things. But when I tell you that I experienced something, we don't debate about whether I experienced that--unless my statement is blatantly absurd or otherwise wholly disconnected from reality. You can question the validity of any facts that I state, but you don't tell me that I didn't feel that way or didn't experience this situation. Basically, saying "I don't think you really had to backtrack at all" invalidates your argument by proving that you have no way to argue against my experience, so have to resort to my experience not actually existing.

 

To do otherwise is pure fallacy and serves only to undermine the integrity and validity of any debate. So as long as you keep stating that whole groups of people are lying about what they experienced during gameplay, I'm just gonna keep mocking you rather than attempt to engage a legitimate debate with somebody whose whole opening statement was nothing more than a dismissive ad hominem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

You're not "measuring" the problem and you're not looking for data. You're just questioning the experiences of a *LARGE* group of people because it allows you to dismiss their experiences as invalid. It's a common type of ad hominem attack; "You're experiences run counter to my opinion, so I'm going to say you didn't actually experience that". Talk about adding nothing to the thread; attacking peoples honesty to dismiss their experiences adds nothing but your excuses rather than actually discussing the issue itself, which is what should be the main focus.

 

I don't feel the need to prove to your ass that I experienced a large degree of frustration from the need to backpedal throughout the game. We can talk all day long about how gameplay styles differ, about why I may have experienced this differently from you, about things that can be done to push the experience one way or the other, all sorts of things. But when I tell you that I experienced something, we don't debate about whether I experienced that--unless my statement is blatantly absurd or otherwise wholly disconnected from reality. You can question the validity of any facts that I state, but you don't tell me that I didn't feel that way or didn't experience this situation. Basically, saying "I don't think you really had to backtrack at all" invalidates your argument by proving that you have no way to argue against my experience, so have to resort to my experience not actually existing.

 

To do otherwise is pure fallacy and serves only to undermine the integrity and validity of any debate. So as long as you keep stating that whole groups of people are lying about what they experienced during gameplay, I'm just gonna keep mocking you rather than attempt to engage a legitimate debate with somebody whose whole opening statement was nothing more than a dismissive ad hominem.

 

 

It isn't a large group of people though. It's literally only you and one other poster. Also you're questioning my motives and calling me a liar. I guess it's okay when you do it.

 

I repeat, bringing up something that could happen in the original game and then refusing to talk about how *frequently* it happened, repeatedly, is suspect. By the way, if you go back through the thread, one poster did answer my question thoughtfully and, I think, a constructive discussion emerged. The rest of your post is just swearing and ad hominem, so I'll ignore it. You can do better.

 

Edit to add: I even just went back and missed another poster, who did mention the frequency of this issue, and said it only happened a few times, and not enough to effect the experience.

Edited by cokane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try actually looking at statements about the game outside of just this thread? Five seconds on Google will give you a literal list of threads going back to 2015, during the actual launch of the game, with people already complaining about how forcing you to backtrack to rest when you run out of camping supplies is annoying and frustrating.

It's not up to people to prove to you that their experiences happened. If somebody chooses to, that's whatever. But your demand of calculations to prove that this is something people experienced isn't a legitimate debate tactic and undermines the whole integrity of your argument.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

While I agree that the areas I gave as an example are ones where you are indeed intended to go back and forth, the question I'd pose is and the conclusion I've come to (and others such as Multihog also mentioned) when looking back at PoE2 is...why do you have to? You weren't always running back to turn in a quest or deciding to return later because of high difficulty in Endless Paths or White March areas. Sometimes you were just out of stuff. Other times, you would NOT backtrack or run out of camping supplies, but that was specifically because, playing on PotD, you had prior experience with the game, knew how long each dungeon was, and usually resupplied on camping stuffs before you went in. And why? Just so you don't waste the time to go back for that stuff later. The motivation? Save bunch of time on loading screens...and like 300 cp for the supplies if you went back to pick up ones you left behind instead of buying new ones. That is an illusion of a motivation, just like injuries are in PoE2. They don't really matter, you can clear them out easily. You can camp 5 times in one dungeon floor in PoE1 too, if you really wanted to. It'd be annoying for time reasons but not much else. I'm coming to the conclusion that those out-of-combat attrition systems might as well not be there to pay lip service to some table-top mechanics. No real need to rebalance them if you're not going to really commit to a system that matters, like in XCOM. Get rid of them for all I care. But provide the same stimulus and the same level of difficulty we had in PoE1 (same level of difficulty relative to the per encounter system we now have in place, not the old system of PoE1). Because looking back at it now, PoE1's attrition system was, though less blatantly, just as broken and meaningless as PoE2's is if you were willing to tolerate the loading screens. But I didn't care because the combat was so goddamn satisfying on higher difficulties I would tolerate all the dialogue I'm going to skip through just to get to it. I'm not willing to do that for PoE2, because in terms of enjoyment of combat, there is little there.

 

So yeah, if your point is that PoE1's attrition system wasn't any better, I agree. It's just that the game was much less open about it, since the resolution to your problems (injuries) wasn't a single button click away, you had to sit through some load screens too.

 

 

Appreciate the thought out reply.

 

On the question of why backtrack? I can't say for sure why the designers wanted this, but it's clearly their intention. My personal experience is that it allowed the game to have more depth without having to create a ton of new art assets? You could pack low-level and high level content into the same area. My experience is that this helped with immersion, areas felt more real and less like dungeon level 1 -> dungeon level 2 -> 3, etc.

 

I even forgot in the White March that you literally can't enter the Battery without going back to town after visiting Galvino. So clearly this was a core design principle. I dunno, I personally thought it added something to the game, encouraging players to have a cycle of: gear up in town, rest at inn, adventure to your limit, return to town, gear up again, rest at inn and head out again. You know, like people would actually do in a medieval-ish fantasy world? Just my experience.

 

I have a problem with your logic here: "The motivation? Save bunch of time on loading screens...and like 300 cp for the supplies if you went back to pick up ones you left behind instead of buying new ones. That is an illusion of a motivation."

 

One, of course, it's all an illusion. Second, this very same logic could apply to something that I think is completely uncontroversial: gear. What's the motivation to equip better gear? You can actually beat the game, lower difficulties at least, without top end gear. It's more of a grind, it requires a heckuva lot more resting and/or backtracking. Why have gear? All equipping good gear does is let you rest less or die less. All it does is help you beat the game faster. This can apply to other things as well, why focus on making a better build? Why use potions or scrolls or any items for that matter? Again, you can technically beat the game just using spells and class abilities.

 

But that's always been the reward/punishment systems at the heart of every video game. You beat the game faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe try actually looking at statements about the game outside of just this thread? Five seconds on Google will give you a literal list of threads going back to 2015, during the actual launch of the game, with people already complaining about how forcing you to backtrack to rest when you run out of camping supplies is annoying and frustrating.

 

It's not up to people to prove to you that their experiences happened. If somebody chooses to, that's whatever. But your demand of calculations to prove that this is something people experienced isn't a legitimate debate tactic and undermines the whole integrity of your argument.

I'm not asking anyone to give me some in-depth calculation. Again this a strawman. As you can read in this very thread, I've replied to thoughtful posts about frequency and had no problems with others. You haven't spoken about frequency except in a very vague, impossible to decipher sense. You seem committed to attacking me personally and are putting a great deal of effort into repeatedly posting these attacks while you could have spent that same amount time ticking off a short list of dungeons you had to leave midway completed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe try actually looking at statements about the game outside of just this thread? Five seconds on Google will give you a literal list of threads going back to 2015, during the actual launch of the game, with people already complaining about how forcing you to backtrack to rest when you run out of camping supplies is annoying and frustrating.

 

It's not up to people to prove to you that their experiences happened. If somebody chooses to, that's whatever. But your demand of calculations to prove that this is something people experienced isn't a legitimate debate tactic and undermines the whole integrity of your argument.

I'm not asking anyone to give me some in-depth calculation. Again this a strawman. As you can read in this very thread, I've replied to thoughtful posts about frequency and had no problems with others. You haven't spoken about frequency except in a very vague, impossible to decipher sense. You seem committed to attacking me personally and are putting a great deal of effort into repeatedly posting these attacks while you could have spent that same amount time ticking off a short list of dungeons you had to leave midway completed.

 

 

Why should he have to do that? Why should he have to prove with his personal anecdotes, what countless people online have complained about, as has been brought up.

 

And furthermore, why would he bother when you dismiss other people in this thread doing it as just single anecdotes that don't add up to much. Apparently unless we can get a signed affidavit from every person who's ever been annoyed by this issue, and can get an "accurate count", our experiences don't amount to any proof for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing they have to do is remove the ability to replenish resources in combat. Empower should only allow increasing a single ability strength per combat, that's it (although even that may not be a good idea as you can just nuke encounters into fog of war with this). It's too much of a crutch and allows you almost infinite amount of buffs, heals, etc. compared to what enemies can bring to the table.

 

Then lower the amount of your D&D4 power points you gain per level, as having so many makes everything absurd in the endgame.

 

Once that is done, one can design encounters around "beat that only using your 4 power points on everyone", without ability to replenish. Maybe allow more classes to replenish pp with effective actions in combat (like Barbarians can with their kits and Smash attack).

 

Also, nerf heals. They are simply too powerful now, a single dedicated healer can make whole party ignore all damage. Some points in Athletics give any character an oh**** button on a level of class based special abilities.

 

The long term drain in resources could come in using consumables. Although then there are some other problems, like the fact that you swim in money, especially later when you can sell 12 naga bows for 100k; and that consumable recipes are dumb as hell, like make le bomb out of stuff that is artifact upgrading tier and often lacks in game (vithrak brains for a single potion). But I guess you could just buy them and game is full of them so it's not a big deal.

 

I'd say the food is pretty ridiculous too, as eating rice bowl gives you more protection than wearing full plate but eh.

Edited by Shadenuat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went into this game blind on veteran with difficulty indicator turned off and lvl scaling all up running only a solo character. Alltho lvl scaling didn't work so once they had it fixed I started over on a berserker/drugmonk (and no I do not use the broken swift flurry ability) and this feels like the way the game is meant to be played. One character on veteran going in blind actually provides some challange here and there and keeps it interesting.

 

I really really hope they get Potd right so I can enjoy this game with companions too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy both games, but I definitely prefer this. 99% of POE1 you could simply leave and rest. Individual combats only mattered if you tried to see how far you could go without a rest. Also, conserving your resources encourages using less resources and doing more boring auto-attacks.

 

HOWEVER... I would like a semi-health mechanic so in battle healing is not infinite. You could regain it between battles, but cannot heal forever within a single fight.

Edited by Incendax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But kudo's to you for being prescient

 

That's all I wanted buddy, that's all I wanted. =P

 

So just because you had a bad experience with certain individuals 3 months ago, you've condemned the entire user base of this forum for good and now attempt to use that as justification for hostile posting? I'm afraid that's not how it works. Chances are that you're largely talking to different people now. Also, "inferior intellects." lol.

 

?

 

This has nothing to do with comdemning anyone specific, and if you are feel you are being condemned that's completely on you as I never mentioned you or anyones names,

 

I've shared my stance and I condemn any lazy, entitled, casual that rejects the very honest and noble point of the OP and myself.

 

Also do I think it's the majority? Yes, that comes from my entire life experience of their being more fools than not and them constantly battering the world with their idiocy, but if it happends to not be the majority then I am condemning each individual of that minority.

 

If you refuse to see that might want to take a look at 90% of people who've been in power throughout all of history.

 

That'll do pig.

Edited by alexis13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But kudo's to you for being prescient

 

That's all I wanted buddy, that's all I wanted. =P

 

So just because you had a bad experience with certain individuals 3 months ago, you've condemned the entire user base of this forum for good and now attempt to use that as justification for hostile posting? I'm afraid that's not how it works. Chances are that you're largely talking to different people now. Also, "inferior intellects." lol.

 

?

 

This has nothing to do with comdemning anyone specific, and if you are feel you are being condemned that's completely on you as I never mentioned you or anyones names,

You stated that you "tried to be constructive 3 months ago and were shouted down by inferior intellects." Now, you're taking it out on people who had nothing to do with whatever problems you had 3 months ago. Yes, you are condemning the whole forum. I never said "anyone specific."

 

You think highly of yourself and obviously think you posses superior intelligence compared to most people, yet you fail to see that simple connection. You really need to be cut down to size. 

 

Enough about this, though, as it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. 

Edited by Multihog
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...