red_hex said:
This sounds like a challenge. I will not be belligerent in my entire reply. Let us enjoy this debate.
people here need to go out in the world and try arguing the way theyre arguing here, because theyll get beat up by some sensible but quick to anger guys pretty quick.
You might be the type to strike a belligerent debater, or you might know several people who are the type, but I would not be so hasty to generalize the social nature of the entire world. I have had heated debates in which name calling and insults lead to nothing but loud voices and hurt egos.
Anyways, this moralizing is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. While painting "the enemy" in a bad light is a nice rhetorical trick, it will hold little water in convincing or shaming anybody; especially those who you believe to be "belligerent."
certain people seem to think that their opinion is the only opinion. even when ostensibly claiming to understand that what they think is not a universal truth, they follow it up with something reaffirming, to themselves as much as to anyone else, that they do in fact believe their opinion is the universal truth.
This is silliness. Everyone knows there are other opinions. What you should be saying is, "Certain people think that their opinion is the correct opinion." This is true of basically everybody. You believe the opinion you gave is correct. I believe this critique of your opinion to be a correct opinion. You've attempted to turn natural human behavior into a despicable terror of intellectualism run rampant.
Moralizing over the kindness or social skills of a person does not do anything to discredit or destroy the veracity of his opinion. You are implying the opposers to your opinion are unreasonable people; this cannot possibly be proved. You cannot be determine whether or not they are telling the truth, simply on the level of force of personality they utilized in an attempt to intimidate you. While it isn't nice, it definately doesn't make their point wrong.
Your subtle attempt to say their opinions can't be truths because they are delivered forcefully is hereby denied.
those are the people who need to get their faces smashed, because they wont learn how to be normal, reasonable, intelligent human beings otherwise. theyll be belligerent, irritating people their whole life... you know this is true, youve met them yourselves, and thought "my god, what a twat... theres no point talking to him". well thats you, right now, and i have to point it out to you because you apparently think the smart thing to do is say "im right and represent everyone in the world" then when called on it, to say "yeah i know its a personal opinion and i pulled that everyone bit out my ringpiece... but my personal opinion is right because of X reason". WRONG.
Hypocrisy is a common human trait, so I forgive you. You act quite belligerently in this passage. This is especially ironic considering you have just attempted to discredit the veracity of the opinions of others, based on the belligerence apparent in their posts.
If we accepted the criteria you were using to judge others, your own opinion would also be discredited by that measure. This only goes to show how ultimately irrelevant your own moralizing is to the points presented in this debate.
to get real truths and real answers, you can only look outside yourselves. config.sys is right to post those server stats. they show that, irrespective of what spin and qualifiers and niggles anyone can invent to try and dismiss them as relevant... in the real world, the vast, vast majority of online game players - tribes' target audience - choose to play the kinds of games that veer away from "fighting sport" titles, and therefore are not akin to the fighting sport you people want in t:v.
The visual theme of the game is irrelevant to the style of gameplay used in the game. Excluding BF1942 and Raven Shield, most of those games are intimate, high-paced shooters in the vein of CS. These are "fast" games, supported by the CPL for their sport-like ease of play and quick rounds.
I must preemptively note that fast does not imply fast footspeed. Rather, it implies gameplay that constantly and consistently engages all players in combat. In BF1942, Raven Shield and Tribes 2, I was able to wait for long periods of time, doing nothing, without harming the overall team effort. In a fast game, the opposite is true: all players must be fully engaged at all times.
By this more objective criteria, built from the concepts of game design theory rather than wishful thinking, we can easily show that the market is not dominated by only slow games, but rather has a mix of all sorts.
THAT is a fact, verifiable. not an opinion you believe in, its there on the stats page, truth. and saying tribes isnt like those games is a retarded thing to say, because it doesnt matter. online players are online players, they play games online, games they like. if they like t:v theyll play it. if t:v proves to be bad for them, theyll go back to playing those other games that are so unlike tribes; theyre normal, they do what they enjoy. there is not a special interest group of tribes-only players out there who will snap up t:v as the first game they play since the last tribes game.
Your point, while believable, doesn't actually disprove what you say it disproves. Specifically, you say, "and saying tribes isnt like those games is a retarded thing to say, because it doesnt matter" which you then back up with the following passage:
"online players are online players, they play games online, games they like. if they like t:v theyll play it. if t:v proves to be bad for them, theyll go back to playing those other games that are so unlike tribes; theyre normal, they do what they enjoy."
The conclusion that most people draw from this is as follows: "If Tribes is fun to play, people will play it." If you notice, this conclusion has nothing to do with "isnt like those games is a retarded thing to say, because it doesnt matter." In fact, to better back up your argument, you'd have to show fast games aren't fun, which is a ludicrous proposition.
As I have shown above, the theme of the game isn't as important as the engagement it gives the player. Along these lines, the market is much more evenly divided then you would have us believe.
except there is, and theyre called tribalwar forum whores. this strange breed of people believe that their INCREDIBLY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE ONLINE GAMING MARKET governs all of it, or at least that their love of fighting-sports is what drives, or is what should drive, everyone. they forget that their numbers are a drop in the ocean of potential tribes players. in fact many of them refuse to accept it, claiming, against the decisive evidence of sales figures, server figures and media content outside of tribalwar, that they are it when it comes to tribes players.
To claim the game will only be entertaining to Tribalwar players is an extraordinary claim, and you would need extraordinary evidence to prove it.
You haven't proved that there is no market for Tribes. Your proof is lacking, and so is your conviction that T:V will not sell.
personally, because im not one of them and ive seen that decisive evidence, i believe that if t:v is too fighting-sport oriented, fast paced, unforgiving and rampantly nonsensical compared to other games in favour of competition... then it wont be loved by the public. for example, ive never seen anyone suicide at all, let alone as a matter of course to play the game, in counterstrike. or ut. or wolfenstein. or any of those other games that are irritatingly popular, there on the stats. thats the audience t:v is competing for. not its own, special, secret, super-loyal kind that get a hardon for tribes and nothing else ever and are in hibernation right now.
You take issue with suicide in particular in this passage, as if it was a reason people would reject Tribes. It is such an inconsequential element of Tribes gameplay, so specific to gametype, that I'm surprised you chose *it* above anything else. Your comparison is weak; and even then, it is a comparison made between a game which has been released and a game still in development that hasn't even been completely feature-revealed to the public.
Don't you think you'd be jumping the gun a little to declare outright your foreknowledge of T:V's failure? Or is there a hidden agenda in your argument; say, you'd like T:V to fail because it doesn't fit your vision of a Tribes game?
I believe so.
i think thrax and the team know all this. what they choose to do with it, i dont know. but rest assured of this; he told sierra something that perked their fatcat ears, and made them greenlight an addition to a franchise that they had considered, with good reason, dead. you dont do that by pandering to fansites. you do that by pandering to profits. i tend to believe that what he told them was "single player". isnt it interesting that most of the fighting-sport types around here couldn't give a damn about the single player?
What particularly titled the Tribes series, "rightfully dead?" This sounds like more hopeless opinions being enforced as fact: the very behavior you declared hopelessly false! As I said, it doesn't disprove your point, but it goes a long way to show you are being incoherent and driven by irrational emotions rather than reason.
I believe you fear the change in the Tribes series; the official recognition of the faster gamestyle has not only scared you, but it has pleased those who have historically offended you; namely, the competitive players!
I pity you, more than anything. You are so emotionally attached to the future of Tribes as an epic warfare game that you are flaming competition players as an effigy for the development team who has taken the game in a direction you don't like.
ps. real competition grows from a game, it isnt born with it and it isnt an integral part. only the most hardcore approach a game from the start with an eye to real competition. again, the hardcore are a minority.
The hardcore also provide the vast majority of the free and press hype that a game recieves. If you don't at least marginally please hardcore players prior to release, your game will get a bad reputation on the internet, which will then only be countered by beyond stellar gameplay.
Have a good evening, red_hex.
Welcome to Tribalwar's Tribes Talk. We actually talk about Tribes here. :]
Edit: So beaten by Sojourn. Good work dawg.