Berkut
Posts: 757
Joined: 5/16/2002 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins Berkut, quote:
ORIGINAL: Berkut I get tired of the automatic attacks on people who simply find something they don't like or take issue with in a game. This is hardly unique to FoF of course - all game forums seem to have their loyal fans ready to punce upon anyone expressing criticism of "their" game. Seriously, if we didn't like the game, we would not be here. I like very few games, and I don't post on the forums of games I don't like, I simply ignore them and do something else. Take a look at Hotdog's original post at the start of this thread. I thought he actually made a good point - if you value historicity, how far do you really go in your own game to make a historical test valid? Do you promote historical generals over more capable ones, ignoring the benefit of hindsight? Do you pursue a less than ideal strategy because it reflects historical ones? Those are good points regarding why most historical tests end up ahistorical as soon as hindsight is involved. Regards, - Erik Nah, his original point, to be blunt, was poorly thought out. I value historical accuracy of options. I want the table to be set with the historical setting, and then see where it takes me. Sometimes the lack of ability to make different decisions is part of that, but the idea that unless you make the same decisions as those made historically you have no standing to complain about the historical setup is fallacious. quote:
It did devolve from there, but I did not see his initial post as hostile or an attack. I saw frustration in the immediate responses, which seemed a bit odd to me, but I didn't involve myself until I felt like Hot Dog was really being ganged up on a bit. This forum is open to all viewpoints and we are involved as developers and publishers as well. I thought it was most certainly an attack. It was a new thread responding to issues raised in other threads, pretty clearly with the intent to create strawmen to attack. It added nothing ot the discussion, and the result was frankly inevitable. It is not the case that those who object to the South, for example, starting with a fleet they never had, should perforce also insist that the player make the same decisions their historical counterparts made. That is a clearly silly argument. quote:
We accept criticism, but we'll let you know if we don't agree with it. That doesn't mean stop posting and we don't want any sycophants suppressing discussion. However, we reserve the right to agree to disagree. As much as we love our customers, you guys are not _always_ right (just most of the time). Pfft, most customers are wrong most of the time. And my only objection to this thread is that it just lowers the signal to noise ratio of the forum. The original post was jsut a petty little attack on one side, and the respsnses were petty little attacks in response. Somewhat inevitable for a forum of this nature though.
|