Opinions of 1.05?

[molotov_billy]

Assuming I do get your position you need to understand that it is just an opinion

Where does this keep coming from? Did you literally not read the post where I explicitly pointed out that everything I had said was an opinion?

I understand what your opinion is, it's sitting on my harddrive. If you do not want my opinions on the game's successes and failures, you are absolutely free to not read or reply to a single thing that I write. I am not requesting responses from you, writing you a personal email, or knocking on your door, insisting with a gun to your head that you do anything. I'm having a debate with some like-minded people in a forum built for the discussion of the video game that I purchased.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by molotov_billy:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:

If I might make a suggestion, strong statements like "CMSF is not fine" come across badly even if you do preface them with "(OPINION)". While everyone is entitled to opinions, some of them are based on flawed logic or unwarranted conclusions.

"CMSF is not fine" isn't a terribly strong or offending statement. It is clear and to the point.

Please point out the flawed logic or unwarranted conclusions.

</font>

[dalem]

Reminds me of the Starship Modeler forum when the new Battlestar Galactica came out. There were several open threads started by various people encouraging discussion and critique.

Unless you happened to think the show was less than perfect, it turned out. Then you were being rude, or misinformed, or silly, or disruptive. The structure of one's particular position, argument, or opinion was unimportant, because it was considered invalid from the start.

I'm reminded of that a lot around here the last 6 months.

-dale

[Battlefront.com]

molotov_billy,

I understand what your opinion is, it's sitting on my harddrive. If you do not want my opinions on the game's successes and failures, you are absolutely free to not read or reply to a single thing that I write. I am not requesting responses from you, writing you a personal email, or knocking on your door, insisting with a gun to your head that you do anything. I'm having a debate with some like-minded people in a forum built for the discussion of the video game that I purchased.

Well, if I'm not involved... then why bother having the discussion at all? If you care enough about your position then you must have me involved because otherwise there is 0% chance of your concerns being address. Right? Perhaps I'm presuming too much here... I'm presuming that you've got enough of a life that you don't need to waste your time here complaining about things with no care if they are ever addressed at all. And based on that presumption I am engaging you. If I have it wrong, let me know and I'll ignore all future posts from you. I know I certainly don't want to waste my time discussing things with people that don't really care about what they are saying.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Dale, I was enjoying this forum a lot more when you were busy posting your vitriol on another forum.

As always Dale, you do not believe that critics should have their views challenged. You're an advocate for intellectual cowardice, whether you know it or not. It is your belief, which I've noted for a long time, that people only need to have the courage to be critical, not to have the fortitude to be criticized for their views. They also, in your view, can not be held accountable for the manner in which they express their opinions. Well, except in your case since you reserve the right to judge for yourself.

It's a one way street of logic and we'll never be on the the correct side of it in your view. Which is why I still don't get why you bother reading anything here. Seems like a big waste of your time, especially considering you don't even have the game to make your own conclusions on.

Steve

[molotov_billy]

Flamingknives - my opinion is that an uninteresting campaign is one that requires more work or a rethinking in terms of design - my opinion is therefore that CMSF is an unfinished product. It is not an unwarranted conclusion.

If an advertised feature doesn't exist in the final product, it literally holds no value to a person playing the game - ie, the customer. I do not understand how this is flawed logic.

"Small child throwing a trantrum" - you may say whatever you wish, the more obscene the statement, the less likely people are to care about what it is you're saying.

I think the key difference is that my points are about the topic at hand, and not merely a critique of a person's personality or writing style.

[Battlefront.com]

Molotov_billy,

If an advertised feature doesn't exist in the final product, it literally holds no value to a person playing the game - ie, the customer. I do not understand how this is flawed logic.

It is flawed only in the sense that it does exist, you just don't wish to use it or haven't found someone else willing to make the thing you want to see. As Flamingknives pointed out there are endless possibilities for a game engine like CM. We simply can't make it do everything for all people all the time. We used the tools to make the campaign we wanted in the way we wanted. There is nothing "unfinished" about the game in any material way. It's just not to your liking.

Contrary to Dale's position that opinions don't matter when they differ from our own, I don't disagree with your fundamental point of view. The game doesn't do what you want it to do in the form in which it was shipped. The difference is that I don't see there being any obligation on our part to make it behave the way you want it to, you do see that obligation existing. So we're going to have to agree to disagree here because there is no one right answer.

Now, perhaps you would like to get back to discussing different campaign designs and the issues surrounding them? I did make a post last page about this and I haven't seen you respond to it yet. I can keep a discussion going while at the same time having fundamental disagreements with people, it would be helpful if you could too.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[dalem]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Dale, I was enjoying this forum a lot more when you were busy posting your vitriol on another forum.

As always Dale, you do not believe that critics should have their views challenged. You're an advocate for intellectual cowardice, whether you know it or not. It is your belief, which I've noted for a long time, that people only need to have the courage to be critical, not to have the fortitude to be criticized for their views. They also, in your view, can not be held accountable for the manner in which they express their opinions. Well, except in your case since you reserve the right to judge for yourself.

It's a one way street of logic and we'll never be on the the correct side of it in your view. Which is why I still don't get why you bother reading anything here. Seems like a big waste of your time, especially considering you don't even have the game to make your own conclusions on.

Steve

Steve, I've not bothered your forum for many weeks now, and I've explained my motivations related to CM and its kin a dozen times in the past. You continue to interpret and belittle my motivations while I continue to not post about yours, and you're clearly aggravated to the point where you can't even let mild commentary go by without slashing out.

So be it.

I'll stick to the MBT from now on. Good luck with your new game series.

-dale

[molotov_billy]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Well, if I'm not involved... then why bother having the discussion at all? If you care enough about your position then you must have me involved because otherwise there is 0% chance of your concerns being address. Right? Perhaps I'm presuming too much here... I'm presuming that you've got enough of a life that you don't need to waste your time here complaining about things with no care if they are ever addressed at all. And based on that presumption I am engaging you. If I have it wrong, let me know and I'll ignore all future posts from you. I know I certainly don't want to waste my time discussing things with people that don't really care about what they are saying.

My interest is discussing a topic with like-minded people. I do not think that is in any way a waste of time - you've done the same thing with unrelated topics in this forum - discussing the merits or failings of the Stryker vehicle, or US military doctrine in Iraq, or whatever else. The people deciding those things are not on these forums, and your opinions will have zero effect on the design of the Stryker, or US doctrine in Iraq, or anything else. There's nothing wrong with that and there's nothing wrong with anybody sharing their mind on any topic.

My point was simply that if you're uninterested in my opinions, or that you think they are simply random rantings, or that your goal is to let people know that you disagree with every point they make and that what they say is not important because they are merely opinions, or if your goal here is to reaffirm over and over that each decision your team made was the only correct one - then why waste my time and yours replying to anything that I say? Doesn't make much sense, to me.

[flamingknives]

molotov_billy - If I might be so bold, surely your first opinion is that the campaign is uninteresting as you cannot get to any further position without the initial premise. Others disagree.

If that is the case, then an alternative position is that the game is finished but that you don't like the campaign. Since the campaign and the scenarios are part of the user-modifiable areas of the game, it is entirely possible that someone else other than BFC might generate a campaign to your tastes. That's been BFC's business model since CMBO, AFAICT. The engine is their bit, the scenarios are the communities bit. Some community scenarios are shipped with the game to start people off.

"Small child throwing a trantrum" - you may say whatever you wish, the more obscene the statement, the less likely people are to care about what it is you're saying.

Yes, indeed. That was rather my point, if you care to see it.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[molotov_billy]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

It is flawed only in the sense that it does exist, you just don't wish to use it or haven't found someone else willing to make the thing you want to see. There is nothing "unfinished" about the game in any material way. It's just not to your liking.

I hope you at least understand that you could put a piece of cat dung in a box, ship it, and make the same argument. My confusion is that the statement that "there's nothing unfinished" about CMSF doesn't jive with the literal fact that the Battlefront team continues to fix bugs and finish out blank features every working day.

Contrary to Dale's position that opinions don't matter when they differ from our own, I don't disagree with your fundamental point of view. The game doesn't do what you want it to do in the form in which it was shipped. The difference is that I don't see there being any obligation on our part to make it behave the way you want it to, you do see that obligation existing. So we're going to have to agree to disagree here because there is no one right answer.

I don't believe I've ever mentioned any type of obligations - you're legally within your rights to never touch the game again. My opinions have been about what would make a CMSF campaign better.

Now, perhaps you would like to get back to discussing different campaign designs and the issues surrounding them? I did make a post last page about this and I haven't seen you respond to it yet. I can keep a discussion going while at the same time having fundamental disagreements with people, it would be helpful if you could too.

Sure, it's a long post, so I haven't digested it yet and haven't figured out if there's anything useful to add to it.

[molotov_billy]

Flamingknives - that's fine. I haven't seen any user made campaigns, and it's my belief that a feature doesn't have value until it exists in the form of playable content. If those types of things hold value to you - then let me say this - I have the perfect wargame in my head, it just doesn't exist yet. I'll take your money as soon as you're ready

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[molotov_billy]

Originally posted by Adam1:

It's a whole lot different. I have a real tool I can use to make a campaign with if I have the time. If it wasn't there I wouldn't have that potential. Therefore there is an easy value there.

That makes sense. The value is certainly different depending on if you're a casual customer who just plays the game, or a scenario designer.

[Battlefront.com]

Adam1

Please tell me CMSF is not finished

We've always said, CMx2 will be an evolutionary process with new features going in over a period of years. Tweaks, fixes, and even outright replacements for existing features are also inherent in our plans. We've already outlined some major changes coming up, such as a redo of the QB system. Therefore, CMx2 will NEVER be "finished". It's just not "unfinished" in the specific way molotov_billy is claiming.

Dale,

Steve, I've not bothered your forum for many weeks now, and I've explained my motivations related to CM and its kin a dozen times in the past. You continue to interpret and belittle my motivations while I continue to not post about yours, and you're clearly aggravated to the point where you can't even let mild commentary go by without slashing out.

Because you intend your commentary to be aggravating. It's your style and I grew tired of it a long time ago.

Molotov_billy,

My point was simply that if you're uninterested in my opinions, or that you think they are simply random rantings, or that your goal is to let people know that you disagree with every point they make and that what they say is not important because they are merely opinions, or if your goal here is to reaffirm over and over that each decision your team made was the only correct one - then why waste my time and yours replying to anything that I say? Doesn't make much sense, to me.

The flaw in this is that I am interested in your opinions. If someone feels they have the time and the energy to post something here, I feel obligated to at least consider it. Where we part company is in how I respond to it. I do not consider it a bad idea to disagree with customers (Dale thinks it is a mortal sin, and has said so many times over) because I think it makes better customers out of them and better game designers out of us. If there was a forum populated by General Dynamics Land Division designers, who are in charge of Stryker development, I would be posting there instead of here about my ideas about Stryker improvements. Not that they would matter much since I've never used one in real life

I don't believe I've ever mentioned any type of obligations - you're legally within your rights to never touch the game again. My opinions have been about what would make a CMSF campaign better.

Great, then we can agree to disagree then as I've been suggesting for several posts now, right? I'm fine with that.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Egads... we're well over the 300 post limit. Time to close this up.

Molotov_billy... I encourage you to start up a new thread based on the discussions of what features make a good campaign system in your opinion. I've posted some detailed thoughts on the previous page that perhaps you might like to use to kick off the discussion. Someone else is welcome to do it too.

Steve