Defecting SC players

Status
Not open for further replies.
SuckingMaw said:
I'm glad we've come to an understanding over how stupid this is.

I have a humble request though. Let people dig their own holes, it drives conversation forward.
Click to expand...
calm down princess, nobody here hates you. you just cant stay on topic. if you cant do that then your'e just here looking for attention. or maybe its affection.......... i wonder
 
SinsOfSalvation said:
calm down princess, nobody here hates you. you just cant stay on topic. if you cant do that then your'e just here looking for attention. or maybe its affection.......... i wonder
Click to expand...

Look, kid. I'm not talking to you, because we can't have a conversation given the irrational stance you have on what the word "subjective" means.

I'm talking to sensible individuals who understand the difference between conversational layers other than OPINIONS CANT BE INVALIDATED HERP DERP.

There are plenty of them here, but you are not one of them. So stop talking sideways out of the keyboard at me and get back on topic. Either that, or you can continue looking like you have no idea what you are talking about, or to whom, about what.
 
SuckingMaw said:
Look, kid. I'm not talking to you, because we can't have a conversation given the irrational stance you have on what the word "subjective" means.

I'm talking to sensible individuals who understand the difference between conversational layers other than OPINIONS CANT BE INVALIDATED HERP DERP.

There are plenty of them here, but you are not one of them. So stop talking sideways out of the keyboard at me and get back on topic. Either that, or you can continue looking like you have no idea what you are talking about, or to whom, about what.
Click to expand...
no, as soon as you atarted posting you kept calling the post stupid, and ranting about how your opinion matters more than anyone elses. that shows no interest in talking about this threads topic.
 
SinsOfSalvation said:
no, as soon as you atarted posting you kept calling the post stupid, and ranting about how your opinion matters more than anyone elses. that shows no interest in talking about this threads topic.
Click to expand...

I didn't post my opinion. I first posted what is fact, per the developers of the game. told me DIRECTLY. Then you decided that it didn't agree with the worldview you hold, and you called it subjective, the standard internet argument defense of something that is not refutable that you do not like.

The parts of my post that were mine were clearly indicated either directly or through their sarcasm.

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's "subjective".
 
SinsOfSalvation said:
but its a little more than that. people are not only playing other games, which is normal, but they've gone back to playing previous sc games, which i dont think is normal.
Click to expand...
I'm guilty of that. I played SCIV for a second, but hated it because of the lack of quick step, so I went back to SCV.

But....I went back to playing SC3 and intended on playing it for a half an hour and ended up playing it for 4 hours.

Of course this is based on gameplay...
and the fact that Xianghua's moveset was so much better in SC3.

The roster of SCV I've at least been able to adapt to.
 
UnseenWombat said:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathOfTheAuthor

We don't care what the developers think. Our subjective opinions are just as good as the subjective opinions of the developer.
Click to expand...

I don't want to live in a world where people actually believe this drivel.

Also, Death of the Author doesn't apply to sales date directly affecting releases, how they affecting outlooks of sequels, development cycle times, or even corporate policy regarding international releases. Those are all part of why SC5 is the way it is.
 
SuckingMaw said:
I didn't post my opinion. I first posted what is fact, per the developers of the game. told me DIRECTLY. Then you decided that it didn't agree with the worldview you hold, and you called it subjective, the standard internet argument defense of something that is not refutable that you do not like.

The parts of my post that were mine were clearly indicated either directly or through their sarcasm.

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's "subjective".
Click to expand...
kai' s obersevation on defecting sc5 players is a good example of being objective. i defected for my own reasons and not because of the advise of others. that makes it subjective, not objective. im pretty sure anyone who defects does, so for there own reasons, their reason for defecting is subjective. talking about our nastalgia feelings is subjective. this post is about why people defect but when you quoted the developer, it was only to say that defecting players were ignorant or were horrible players. Dashi rebooted the series with changes nobody asked for. the whole point of being objective is to listen to what the community wants.
 
SinsOfSalvation said:
this post is about why people defect but when you quoted the developer, it was only to say that defecting players were ignorant or were horrible players.
Click to expand...

I want you to see the inherent conflict between this statement...

Dashi rebooted the series with changes nobody asked for. the whole point of being objective is to listen to what the community wants.
Click to expand...

..and this one.

Most people in this thread have non-specific gripes, and a lack of understanding of why changes were made in SC5 to certain things, specifically, game-play aspects. Developer statements clarify those things. How am I not going to assume the people who willfully ignore them are ignorant/bad players. Seems like a logical claim to me.
 
I understand why casual players are dropping this game, it lacks single player modes and players who are bad/mediocre can only get crushed so many times online before they drop it.

As far as players dropping it because of mechanics (higher damage, meter system, loss of old characters, etc) i don't get. I've played since SCII and i think the changes made were exactly what this game needed. this game was built to focus on online play and it did a damn good job of making a game with good netcode.

So yeah i get why casual players are dropping it but for the people dropping it based on all the changes made i just don't see why.
 
I have neglected SCV for quite a while now, and getting back into it is really hard.

I guess it was because that SCV wasn't keeping me hooked like SCIV did, not sure why, maybe because it has changed so much from IV to V. I mean, Ivy lost half or more of her movelist. This really bummed me out. I just get bored of playing this game now which upsets me because I used to play IV so much.

As other people have said, PS have stopped the patches now, so anything still unbalanced or glitchy sticks. I'm not really up for that, tbh.
 
Mage said:
I have neglected SCV for quite a while now, and getting back into it is really hard.

I guess it was because that SCV wasn't keeping me hooked like SCIV did, not sure why, maybe because it has changed so much from IV to V. I mean, Ivy lost half or more of her movelist. This really bummed me out. I just get bored of playing this game now which upsets me because I used to play IV so much.

As other people have said, PS have stopped the patches now, so anything still unbalanced or glitchy sticks. I'm not really up for that, tbh.
Click to expand...


But..but.....4 stances
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom