Is locking down negative posts really nessessary?

[Dillweed]

Now, I think CMSF sound like a really really cool game. I was amounst the first to defend it in the dark days after the announcement. But my question is this: is it really nessessary to lock down posts by people saying they don't want to play for whatever reason. Now I certainly understand the reasoning for this initially. There were many larger posts where people were voicing their similar opinions. The small "I don't want to have to play as Americans" posts would clog up the board. But now, the large complaint thread have fallen away (with good reason, in my opinion) But I think it is important to mention that those posts are no longer available to view under the default settings. So in effect any posts that arn't posative, a question or a peng challenge are being censored.

Now I realize that this is a business and not some pinko feel good people republic of BFC, but I think not locking down posts by people who say they don't want to play would be bennificial. I assume since the forums are no longer raging with complaints that some of the initial naysayers have been won over to at least a "wait and see" position, perhaps they could help convince these new posters. We seem to get them infrequently enough that I have no problem explain the concept behind modules, for example. It seems to me if a post is just instantly locked down at best that person is probably not going to buy the game. At worst we get another falco. I'd like to share my wisdom to help out if I can, and if not mock their stupidity.

Guess that sums it up. Any one else have an opinion?

[Vanir Ausf B]

When the guy says he won't play it because he doesn't like the subject matter there doesn't seem to be much to discuss. And the particular guy I assume you're refering to gave the impression he wasn't going to stick around to discuss it anyway.

No big deal, IMO.

[stoat]

If you don't like the subject matter, don't buy the game. Those threads serve no purpose as there is no way anyone can change the content. If they are only going to whine and contribute nothing, lock the threads down.

[PseudoSimonds]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

But I think it is important to mention that those posts are no longer available to view under the default settings. So in effect any posts that arn't posative, a question or a peng challenge are being censored.

Huh? All those threads are still there for anyone to read.

Actually I wish some of those guys would have stuck around to defend the hypocrisy of their gaming choices.

[Battlefront.com]

Closing up those threads isn't a form of censorship, it is a form of perserving our sanity There is absolutely no reason to have to keep seeing the same drivel over and over and over again each time someone who doesn't like the setting discovers this fact. Especially because history shows that such posters generally don't care about having a discussion and also don't care about sticking around to have one.

Now, if the poster doesn't appear to be trying to drop a bomb and leave, then I see no reason to lock up the thread. However, I'll probably not waste my time on it. The decisions have all been made and aren't going to be reversed so there isn't much point hearing about how disapointed someone is.

Steve

[Peter Cairns]

Hows this for a compromise,

Set up a second forum option for CMx2 called

CMx2 ( I don't want to play Shock force),

and let them all post their, then once a week Steve can go in and post a bogus story about Strykers being able to leap 40' gaps or something just to drive them all mad.

Peter.

[Michael Emrys]

Here's my take on it. If someone brings up a legitmate point and supports it rationally, discussion ensues and as long as it stays reasonably rational, BFC has not—SFAIR—made a practice of locking those threads. There have many, I repeat MANY, threads over the years that have been critical of some aspect or other of a current or projected game that have gone on for pages and hundreds of posts. There were one or two (at least) such threads open on this particular forum last time I looked.

The BFC mods have been pretty good at spotting threads that had descended or threatened to descend into pure pissing matches of no demonstrable benefit and locking those. If anything, I might be tempted to say that sometimes they have erred on the side of leniency. I have not always agreed with particular decisions of locking or leaving open threads and I don't expect to in the future. But I can live with that, I think.

Michael

[Peter Cairns]

I am with Micheal on this i think we get a fair bit of leeway before the shutters come down.

For example there is supposed to be no politics but in the discussion of the "Will we be in Syria" and the "Iranian President" posts there was some pretty political stuff.

However as it never got nasty and was pretty much focused on the merits of the scenarios and the probability of either, they let it go.

What gets me is this,

Just, why would you want to start an "I'll Never Ever Play This Game, Ever" post anyway....

Peter.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Closing up those threads isn't a form of censorship, it is a form of perserving our sanity There is absolutely no reason to have to keep seeing the same drivel over and over and over again each time someone who doesn't like the setting discovers this fact. Especially because history shows that such posters generally don't care about having a discussion and also don't care about sticking around to have one.

Now, if the poster doesn't appear to be trying to drop a bomb and leave, then I see no reason to lock up the thread. However, I'll probably not waste my time on it. The decisions have all been made and aren't going to be reversed so there isn't much point hearing about how disapointed someone is.

Steve

OK then

I am still surprised that this thread is not locked

Just seen my signature line if you are unclear about anything...

-tom w

[Sixxkiller]

Also this board is not ruled by the democratic process. Battlefront is totalitarian and thank god for that! Only one gaming company is even in the same universe as BFC and thats Blizzard. Go there and post something negative, see how fast it disappears.

I actually think they give way too much latitude for inane drivel, hence Peng threads, which were funny in 2000 but now are just sad. Its like a bad joke that is immortal.

Plus most here are adults. If you havent learned contructive negativism by now..... 30 posts on the same subject wont teach ya anyway.

-Ray

[Efraim]

Of course you sycophants do all realise that some of us, despite all these optimistical, house-made rambling and claques, will still probably never buy nor play such a "Big Jim" game, don't you :-P

Thanks god we still have CMBB to spend our time with... A game that survived (very well) so many years... incredible.

Wait and see and hope and cross my fingers and toes... good luck!

Yet I fear this science fiction venture looks already pretty bad, he. The more info the more creeps.

I bought all previous CM games (and that's quite funny, since I basically stopped buying software many years ago, so easy it is to find it for free on the web).

Ok, here's the deal: I'll download the full CM:BigJim from a torrent server, I'll try it out (even if the subject looks crap) and afterwards even *buy it* if outstanding. Promised. If outstanding.

Which I still doubt.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Efraim:

Ok, here's the deal: I'll download the full CM:BigJim from a torrent server

You're such a cuddly mango, aren't you? If you were a baby seal, I'd use a padded club just to make it slow.

[PseudoSimonds]

Originally posted by Efraim:

Of course you sycophants do all realise that some of us, despite all these optimistical, house-made rambling and claques, will still probably never buy nor play such a "Big Jim" game, don't you :-P

Thanks god we still have CMBB to spend our time with... A game that survived (very well) so many years... incredible.

Wait and see and hope and cross my fingers and toes... good luck!

Yet I fear this science fiction venture looks already pretty bad, he. The more info the more creeps.

I bought all previous CM games (and that's quite funny, since I basically stopped buying software many years ago, so easy it is to find it for free on the web).

Ok, here's the deal: I'll download the full CM:BigJim from a torrent server, I'll try it out (even if the subject looks crap) and afterwards even *buy it* if outstanding. Promised. If outstanding.

Which I still doubt.

Yes, yes, we all know you'd rather play CM:SSOfficersAreCool.

[flamingknives]

Efraim, you are a self-admitted thief and imply that while a possible future conflict gives you the creeps, you have no problem wargaming one of the bloodiest events of the last century.

At which point should anyone care what you think?

[Romulus]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Efraim, you are a self-admitted thief and imply that while a possible future conflict gives you the creeps, you have no problem wargaming one of the bloodiest events of the last century.

At which point should anyone care what you think?

I don't care.

[Dillweed]

Originally posted by Sergei:

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

Ok, here's the deal: I'll download the full CM:BigJim from a torrent server

You're such a cuddly mango, aren't you? If you were a baby seal, I'd use a padded club just to make it slow. </font>

[MikeyD]

Negative rants fall into identifiable categories:

There's the heat-of-the-moment outburst rant (the type I'm most guilty of). Then there are constructive criticism rants, followed by the ever-popular disappointed expectations rant. But the kind that gets locked out most are the crap-on-the-carpet-just-to-make-a-stink rant.

Are there people who show up on "The Sims" discussion forum simply to trash consumer culture? Or show up on the "Tombraider" forum to trash... um... buxom women wearing tight clothes?

[Dillweed]

Originally posted by Efraim:

Yet I fear this science fiction venture looks already pretty bad, he. The more info the more creeps.

You think you're joking, but you're not. You obvously havn't heard of the 3rd game in the series:

CM: Space Lobsters of Doom

I am being 100% serious.

[ November 07, 2005, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: Dillweed ]

[MikeyD]

We're talking of a 2007 timeframe as though it were "near-future science fiction". But in terms of game sales that should place it smack-dab into the middle of the game's production run - making it current! I've heard of nothing 'futuristic' in BFC's game concept. They seem to be trying very hard to make a game that a Stryker Brigade soldier in 2007 (1 year and 2 months from now) will recognize as current technology. If they weren't shooting for 2007 warfare then a year from now their 'current' game would already be outdated.

[Dillweed]

CM: SLOD has been confirmed. Just "not nessessarily with space lobsters"

"I can state that we have an unofficial list of our Top 5 subject matter for CMx2. As I've stated pretty clearly, not all are WWII I'll at least go so far as to say that contemporary (i.e. current/near future) combat is on there as well as Space Lobsters. And no... I am NOT kidding about the latter."

Getting pretty off topic, feel free to lock this up

[Sergei]

Mr.Babysealclubber would like to point out that that doesn't count as a confirmation.

[Peter Cairns]

So tell me Efraim, just exactly what is it about using a first class simulator of small scale unit combat to simulate warfare in say 50 years time as opposed to 50 years ago that you are so afraid of or against.

So far all I have seen is a belief that looking three or four decades ahead and setting in on other planets and moons in this solar system, might be the basis for a good game that people would want to play and buy.

What particular form of heresy or blasphamy would this be committing.

Peter

[Tarquelne]

What particular form of heresy or blasphamy would this be committing.

Are we assuming a heliocentric universe?

[Peter Cairns]

Helocopters can't fly in space.

Peter.

[Warmonger2005]

The problem I found is that no one really wants to debate the issues. Instead you have forum thugs who seem to like to go around and personally attack and riddicule anyone who is unhappy with the new game. (This thread is a prime example) With the end result that the thread gets locked.

However it is a waste of time to b*t*h about it. Battlefront seems to be commited to this project and we are not going to change thier minds in this forum. It is thier company and they are taking the risks.(I bet they are sweating a bit from the heat they are getting but they won't admit it.)

I have gotten over my initial shock of the topic of this game and I will try the demo but it better be really good before I buy the full game. However with a better subject for the game I would be asking if they were taking preorders right now instead of wondering if I will buy it!

I hope this new game does well as I know then that the promised WW2 version will be even better as CM have always improved with each version. So I will wait and see.

Good Hunting

Warmonger