|
ComradeP -> RE: Regarding the next official AAR (7/13/2010 2:47:20 PM)
|
My position on the matter is fairly simple:
1) There's no reason to go all partisan about a game that has not even been released yet. Debates about "yes men" are completely unnecessary, not to mention quite silly.
2) Attitude can contribute something to an AAR, but primarily when there's an AAR for the other side, as it adds perspective to how a player thinks. Attitude does not, however, belong in an AAR against the AI, for the simple reason that a victory against the AI, no matter how challenging, will more or less always be easier than a victory against a real player. A victory against the AI doesn't automatically make you a good player, so there's no need for an attitude.
3) What PyleDriver failed to understand is that AAR's for unreleased games are, aside from being a rarity, also problematic from the perspective that he and the other testers know what most screens, toggles and options do in the game, but we don't. Having a "no questions" policy simply doesn't work if the person writing the AAR keeps showing screenshots involving screens or features we've never seen before. The Q&A thread is not the "you can find answers to questions the writer of an AAR doesn't want to answer" thread, but should contain a general discussion in the shape of a question and answer session of the features of the game. It should not be the dump thread for unanswered questions from any AAR. Summarizing the point, asking people not to comment aside from comments on possible strategy, without giving any answers to questions as to how exactly the means to make that strategy work (the units, equipment and game system) function, doesn't work and can lead to irritated responses.
|
|
|
|
