@Dentin Also, your so called greater vision for the game doesn't matter. You made this game for the player base to enjoy, so you need to accommodate them, not yourself.
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
2024 Note on Registrations
the old system to register for an account is back with a few security improvements. Please tell your friends to click the register link and, once a password is confirmed via email, visit the sticky topic in the "Introduce Yourself to Gain Access" room.
Your future on Alter Aeon: a Discussion of game trends (Page 4 of 5)
AudioGames.net Forum → General Game Discussion → Your future on Alter Aeon: a Discussion of game trends
Posts: 76 to 100 of 119
#77 2017-11-20 00:55:54 (edited by JLove 2017-11-20 01:00:37)
After catching up on this thread (we lost power and internet for the day yesterday), I will say a couple of things. First, I must give Ignotus credit. He didn't just post a tirade against the other side; he willingly admitted to breaking certain rules. He even went as far as admitting that the punishment that he received in losing his moderator status was absolutely warranted and fit the crime. I have respect for someone who will admit when they are wrong, and will accept punishment, and their credibility goes up a notch in my book.
My second observation is this: If any developer of any game fails to listen to the playerbase of that game for a long enough period, then that game will lose players until it dies. Please understand, I am not saying that this is occurring; I am simply speaking in generalities that apply to AA as well. As I previously stated, I am not high enough level to have encountered the issues that many players are speaking of. However, I firmly believe that a developer should be open to feedback (both negative and positive), and should be willing to really discuss implementations of game mechanics, attempts to preserve balances, etc. with the players. I do not believe that it is in any developer's interest to simply not entertain a dialogue with their players, and to not be willing to really explain anything; the "because I made it and I said so" approach will invariably at some point make game failure a fait accompli.
Finally, I must admit that I am somewhat troubled by Dentin's attitude with respect to negativity, insofar as using it as a reason to ban someone. One of the most fundamental freedoms that we have in this country is the right to speak openly and to protest without violence. "...
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" (U.S. Const. Amend. I). The Supreme Court has ruled that certain speech is not protected, i.e., speech that incites violence or imminent lawless action (see Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444; 89 S. Ct. 1827; 23 L. Ed. 2d 430).
However, I posit that negativity of the fashion encountered on AA does not meet the standards of that test. Moreover, in another case, Justice William O. Douglas writes:
"Accordingly a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." (Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1; 69 S. Ct. 894; 93 L. Ed. 1131). I submit that any negativity on AA would never rise to the level of such substantive evil. Therefore, it seems wrong to me that a player should be banned for negativity, whether amongst players on private channels or in mudmail, or on the gossip channel for all to see.
Ignotus claims that his negative conversations were held on private channels, through private tells, etc., with like-minded individuals. If that is truly the case (and I am inclined to believe him, given that he willingly admitted to his other wrongs without hesitation and admitted punishment was warranted), then I do not understand how he "spread negativity," and I fail to see how a ban, based on that in and of itself, is warranted. I further assert that even had he expressed negativity on the gossip, newbie, and any other public channels, this still would not warrant a ban for solely that reason (see Terminiello v. City of Chicago, supra).
One more question. Lokar, you stated: "I'm not 100% certain a ban was warranted; however, I won't say it wasn't warranted either." (@post 52). In a case such as this, where there is a doubt as to whether ban is warranted or should occur, shouldn't that doubt fall on the side of the accused? Two plus centuries of jurisprudence would say yes.
#78 2017-11-20 01:00:20
MODERATION!
@shotgunshell and LordLundin,
While I've made it no secret that I am leaning more toward your oppinion than Dentin's on this topic, I'll also remind you that the nature of posts 72 and 75 is considered flaming. Please tone it down; it is possible to say someone is disagreeable without resorting to namecalling; I reference post 72 because if I recall correctly Morpheus does have an account out here and deserves to be treated with the same respect as any other member of the forum.
When life gives you oranges, demand lemons since everyone else is obviously getting them.
#79 2017-11-20 01:01:08
@JLove Alter Aeon is a privately owned forum and the administration can do what they please. The law about free speech does not apply here. However the sentiment should.
As you see happening in Sweden where the left is sensouring anyone else and removing the availability of any information but their own twisted and a lot of the times inaccurate information. Such appression has led to discontent and has sparked an extreme counter group to this. They created hatred.
#80 2017-11-20 01:12:52 (edited by JLove 2017-11-20 01:43:16)
Granted, they are private, but even private organizations are required to follow the rulings of the Supreme Court. And as I have already complimented Dentin's adherence for the most part to the burden of proof and case law in our jurisprudence when making his determinations, I would very much like to see his (and his admins') responses to my post (post 77).
#81 2017-11-20 03:55:19 (edited by BlindJedi 2017-11-20 04:08:54)
Ignotus wrote:
Lokar wrote:The player Ignotus
took it upon himself to harass morpheus everytime he spoke.This is an outright lie. I encourage someone to pull logs from altkeeper, combine channel logs from different sources or get non-biased sources together to confirm this. I antagonized Morpheus, but not "every time he spoke
," and not persistently. If anything, the commentary on my part lasted a week at most. Please stop exagerating.
While I'm not certain that Lokar isn't exajurating, I would imagine you would have antagonised more people than morpheus over more time than just a week. You certainly gave me a fare share of insults, and that was over at least 3 months of playing. I think lokar has a fare point here. I mean, I don't really like lokar either, but if it came down to who behaves better i'd say he would win. I don't really like either ignodus or lokar, and hell, morpheus can be annoying at times too. However, my opinion still stands, lokar has a fare point.
And as far as dentin and his "Vision" goes, dude, basically the first rule in any kind of business is to give people/fans/players what they want, not what you want them to want. Also, You should seriously tone down the "I made it, what I say goes" additude, and try to be less blunt with players when a simple question is asked such as how do I find area x? I was told many times when I asked for help to "Explore", and no real answer was given.
I am the blind jedi, I use the force to see. I am the only blind jedi.
#82 2017-11-20 04:00:16
Actually Darren, addressing you by the name you were most known as, people could be generally nice people and still be trolling you.
#83 2017-11-20 04:07:52
JLove wrote:
My second observation is this: If any developer of any game fails to listen to the playerbase of that game for a long enough period, then that game will lose players until it dies.
We definitely listen to the players, and take a lot of what the players say into account. We can't listen to everyone though, and a lot of what players want is contradictory. And ultimately, I've got more experience than any single player, and I'm in charge. That means I have to make the decisions I feel are the correct ones. LordLundin, Ignotus, and Teros disagree with my choices. That's fine; they can go play elsewhere.
JLove wrote:
Finally, I must admit that I am somewhat troubled by Dentin's attitude with respect to negativity, insofar as using it as a reason to ban someone. One of the most fundamental freedoms that we have in this country is the right to speak openly and to protest without violence.
The first amendment actually only lays out a right to be protected from the US government, and both the supreme and lower courts have repeatedly affirmed that private parties and private fora have no obligation to protect speech. In the same way that the audiogames.net forum is a private forum from which you can be banned for flaming, Alter Aeon is a private forum from which you can be banned for being a jerk.
We don't try to hide that. See also https://alteraeon.com:8081/rules/5, specifically rule 5.2:
"It is important to realize that this mud is a private forum, owned by
and paid for by real people. You have no intrinsic right to be here,
and you have no intrinsic right to speak. You can technically be
censored at any time for any reason."
JLove wrote:
"... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" (U.S. Const. Amend. I). The Supreme Court has ruled that certain speech is not protected, i.e., speech that incites violence or imminent lawless action (see Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444; 89 S. Ct. 1827; 23 L. Ed. 2d 430).
However, I posit that negativity of the fashion encountered on AA does not meet the standards of that test.
As mentioned above, this covers branches of the government, and does not apply to private parties.
JLove wrote:
Ignotus claims that his negative conversations were held on private channels, through private tells, etc., with like-minded individuals. If that is truly the case (and I am inclined to believe him, given that he willingly admitted to his other wrongs without hesitation and admitted punishment was warranted), then I do not understand how he "spread negativity," and I fail to see how a ban, based on that in and of itself, is warranted. I further assert that even had he expressed negativity on the gossip, newbie, and any other public channels, this still would not warrant a ban for solely that reason
The evidence I used was largely the content I found in his logfile, which had been collected over the course of several weeks. As it is private information, I can not/will not post even snippets of it; all I can give you is the results of my investigation, which resulted in the ban.
What I will say is that I don't want Ignotus, or people like him, on any game I have to be responsible for. Other people may disagree; they're free to start their own game and allow him, or ban me, or whatever. But in my world, no.
Lokar is not staff, and is not admin. I am both, and I am personally responsible for this set of decisions. I am as certain as I can be that the ban was warranted. If I had to do it again, I would. If I could go back and do it a month earlier, I would.
As for benefit of the doubt, Alter Aeon has a long history of giving people chances far beyond the point that it makes sense; feel free to read the case law board, and see all the other instances in which Teros/Athlon was involved. Also keep in mind that in the two decades that Alter Aeon has been running, we have literally banned less than a dozen players in this fashion. If that doesn't speak to tolerance above and beyond the call of duty, nothing will.
I hope that clears things up for you, JLove. Thanks for the detailed questions and references.
#84 2017-11-20 04:13:55
LordLundin wrote:
Actually Darren, addressing you by the name you were most known as, people could be generally nice people and still be trolling you.
I'm not just talking about me though. I actually don't really remember a time where ignodus was actually "Generally nice" to anyone. And given that my darren char has been deleted long ago, that name has nothing at all to do with me. So i'm going to kindly ask that you stop calling me that now and never use it again.
I am the blind jedi, I use the force to see. I am the only blind jedi.
#85 2017-11-20 04:36:51
Dentin wrote:
The evidence I used was largely the content I found in his logfile, which had been collected over the course of several weeks. As it is private information,
I can not/will not post even snippets of it; all I can give you is the results of my investigation, which resulted in the ban.What I will say is that I don't want Ignotus, or people like him, on any game I have to be responsible for. Other people may disagree; they're free to
start their own game and allow him, or ban me, or whatever. But in my world, no.Lokar is not staff, and is not admin. I am both, and I am personally responsible for this set of decisions. I am as certain as I can be that the ban
was warranted. If I had to do it again, I would. If I could go back and do it a month earlier, I would.
I am not interested in being unbanned from your game; I merely posted here because my name has been repeatedly run through the mud, both literally and figuratively, with little to no basis for the claims beyond "I'm dentin and it's my game and I don't like you." One cannot argue that this has been publicized, because it was first posted on a game board, then announced by IFTTT to Twitter and, presumably, Facebook. Seeing as I don't want to get unbanned, I have no reason to lie or misrepresent information. This said, I find myself vaguely interested in what Dentin is seeing in his logs. Since he can't post them publically, maybe you could send them privately so I even have a remote idea of what I did, beyond the obvious. Because right now, I'm pretty clueless. And for whatever reason you continue to parrot the statement that if you could go back and ban me a month ago, you'd do it. I'm not sure where you're getting this or if it just makes you feel better to say it, but I've looked through my own MUD logs and can't find anything that even comes close to jerk behavior on October 11 and earlier. (I was banned November 11.)
#86 2017-11-20 04:54:10
Ignotus wrote:
I am not interested in being unbanned from your game; I merely posted here because my name has been repeatedly run through the mud, both literally and figuratively, with little to no basis for the claims beyond "I'm dentin and it's my game and I don't like you."
Fine then; I am Dentin, and it's my game, and I don't like you.
You won't get your pound of flesh from here. I have better things to do with my time than fight off trolls.
#87 2017-11-20 05:43:32
well dentin if you really had better things to do you wouldn't have replied to this topic at all in the first place. Since anyone you ban is a troll in your eyes, why did you bother with this topic? I'm starting to wonder if some of the people you ban are largely banned simply because they've annoyed you in some way, no matter how little of an annoyance they may have caused you. I'm not saying any of the people in this topic are, since I've been on the game with both ignodus and tiross, and i know that in the passed I was a bit of a troll, but if you don't have time to fight with trolls, then why come post on here at all since you obviously think that teross is a troll.
I am the blind jedi, I use the force to see. I am the only blind jedi.
#88 2017-11-20 06:26:19 (edited by JLove 2017-11-20 09:32:25)
@Dentin,
First, I hope that you do not take personal offense from my posts. That is not at all my intent; I am not trying to attack you on a personal level at all. I am merely trying to present my beliefs and viewpoint on the subject in a respectful way. For the purpose of the discussion, let me also make it absolutely clear that I am not referring to your banning of the player responsible for that reprehensible death threat. That clearly was ridiculous, uncalled for, abhorrent, and is definitely grounds for permanently removing someone, without equivocation. I am simply referring to a vague, broad definition of "negativity," being a jerk, general asshole, that sort of thing. That being said, I am not intimately familiar with this area of law, so I am looking for case law that states that social media, private fora/websites, blogs, etc., are not required to uphold Amendment I and can censor speech any way they please. So far, the only cases I have found regarding the internet and censorship deal with dissemination of obscene/sexual materials/child p0rn (Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844; 117 S. Ct. 2329 2334; 138 L.Ed. 2d 874, Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U.S. 564; 122 S. Ct. 1700; 152 L. Ed. 2d 771, Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234; 122 S. Ct. 1389; 152 L. Ed. 2d 403). I haven't found anything relevant to private parties or fora, which is what I want to know. I will grant that the cases I mentioned in my above post (#77) deal with the government, yes, and therefore, one could argue that they are not directly on point. While that may be true to some degree, cases that deal with governmental issues have, in the past, been interpreted in such a way as to have a larger, further-reaching scope than just that of the government. I guess the problem comes down to this for me. Look at this one line, in my opinion the most pertinent one:
"freedom of speech, though not absolute, is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." The key words here being "far above." No one likes to be around a jerk. However, I do not think that being around a jerk is going to give rise to such extreme anger as to induce a danger of substantive evil far above inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. Therefore, with all due respect, even if your assertion that private parties are not required to uphold Amendment I is, in fact, true, I can't help but feel that, while you are not breaking any law, you are obliterating the spirit of what was set forth in Terminiello.
#89 2017-11-20 07:45:23
@Nocturnus I agree with you actually, I probably did get a little to angry, and I could have reworded that post to be nicer. That being said though, my opinion still stands about Google employees being untrustworthy.
@Dentin If my post provided the oil for a flame war, then post 86 provided the lighter. I would strongly advise not posting to this topic anymore. I get that you're trying to stand up for your position, but you're only succeeding in making people decide against playing your game, because they'll be afraid of asking questions or doing anything that might get them banned. You literally just made it apparent that if someone annoys you to even the slightest degree, they'll get banned because you don't like them and it's your game.
#90 2017-11-20 11:40:14
Dentin wrote:
JLove wrote:
My second observation is this: If any developer of any game fails to listen to the playerbase of that game for a long enough period, then that game will lose players until it dies.
We definitely listen to the players, and take a lot of what the players say into account. We can't listen to everyone though, and a lot of what players want is contradictory. And ultimately, I've got more experience than any single player, and I'm in charge. That means I have to make the decisions I feel are the correct ones. LordLundin, Ignotus, and Teros disagree with my choices. That's fine; they can go play elsewhere.
when was the last time you did anything other than to collect statistics and actually got *real* experience with playing your own creation?
Dentin wrote:
JLove wrote:
Ignotus claims that his negative conversations were held on private channels, through private tells, etc., with like-minded individuals. If that is truly the case (and I am inclined to believe him, given that he willingly admitted to his other wrongs without hesitation and admitted punishment was warranted), then I do not understand how he "spread negativity," and I fail to see how a ban, based on that in and of itself, is warranted. I further assert that even had he expressed negativity on the gossip, newbie, and any other public channels, this still would not warrant a ban for solely that reason
The evidence I used was largely the content I found in his logfile, which had been collected over the course of several weeks. As it is private information, I can not/will not post even snippets of it; all I can give you is the results of my investigation, which resulted in the ban.
If his negative behavior had been public so would the information as anyone logged into the game could view it and there are log files on the website. Since you deam the content to be private, what's the objection to discussing a poorly ran game with like-minded individuals via private in-game means that no one of your newly obtained newbies can see?
Finally though Dentin, I'm glad you speak so freely at last. Anyone who wish to play Alter Aeon should be shown this topic on forehand so they know what they get themselves into.
Honestly though I think you're just sick of developing so I see no reason for you to do so anymore. It clearly shows in your attitude. I would personally at this stage hand over the code to a young and spry coder who wants Alter to blossom.
#91 2017-11-20 12:40:21 (edited by Drewin 2017-11-20 12:50:17)
@89
I'm sorry, but deciding if someone is trustworthy or not, based on where he/she works is just ridiculous.
Anyway, we are, at least from my point of view, arguing over the wrong subject.
I am not exactly a full time alter player.
I connect a few minutes per day with one of my chars to kill a few things, check the changes, and maybe do/finish a quest on my quest list, then i disconnect, to connect later with a different char.
I advance then little by little, because I don't really like to grind.
At low levels i agree, it's not so noticeable, the experience that you get from mobs and quests, versus what you need to level is quite fine.
But to a high level player things start to get...grindy.
Drewin, my total level 105 char,has a exp cap of 280k experience.
Right now his lowest class to level is warrior, with 7 micro-levels of 18mil experience each.
so we have:
18000000 (the number of experience per micro level) / 280000 (my exp cap) =64 (mobs killed giving full exp)
and 64 (number of mobs to kill) * 7 (the number of micro levels) =448 (total number of mobs i would need to kill to gain the full level).
Actualy the real number is 450 or 451, because i rounded down a few of the previous numbers, at the number of mobs per micro level it was something like 64.5, but you can't kill half of a mob.
Compared to numbers that were mentioned here in previous posts, this is nothing, but it only goes to show how grindy it becomes after some point.
Don't get me wrong tough, i like the game, i like the recent changes, i love the crafting, tough i'm not sure how relevant it'll be because of how equipment works and how dependent everyone is of cast level and all that.
That's it for now, i think.
Edit:
I also need to add that the total number gets reduced, tough i don't know by how much, with the casting of spells and using of skills...But it's still super grindy, and maybe, just maybe, that's why so many players connect there only to chat.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.
#92 2017-11-20 15:51:57
@all of you who thought that Dentin was being serious in post 86 -- I believe he was being sarcastic.
@JLove, Dentin is correct here. If you create a web site, you have the right to define what and what is not allowed; federal law does apply, but only if a supreme court rules that it overrides all rules set before and after the ruling was issued, and since no issuance has occurred via court, whether local, state, or federal, Dentin has full authority when it comes to free speech and who he wants on his game. It is 'his' game, after all.
Other than that, I have nothing to say other than the fact that this topic sounds like a bunch of adults who are acting like five-year-olds because someone did something they didn't like. Seriously, people, I'm quite sure you've got other things to do. I think we all do.
"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." — Charles Babbage.
My Github
My Github
#93 2017-11-20 16:19:21
Hello everyone. I would like to say that I've seen some pretty valid points on either side, however, it's disappointing that they got berried in the many posts which were out of topic in my humble opinion. I'll do my best to not look biest here.
For teros and ignotus, I've known teros for quite a while now, he is a smart guy, but he used this intelligence to breeak the rules, and he was enjoying it too. don't get me wrong, I like teros and he knows that. I also remember telling him on teamtalk once something like dude, why do you put yourself in trouble like that. why is it so funny to you.
Ignotus, I just want you to bare with me for a second, and imagine this. Imagine you're visiting a ffriend or living with them for a while, and you didn't like his food all he time, or you didn't like the way he setting up his new living room so to speak. it is considered rued to go around in his house tellling the other people who are visiting that this house is horrible and talk bad about it, don't you think? I'm not saying you should not speak up your mind, you're allowed to speak up your mind, everyone does, but there are red lines we should not pass while doing so, like completely bashing Morpheus. I admire you for saying that you deserved being stripped of your avatar stats, but that doesn't make you innocent from the other things you did.
1: I've seen a lot of you guys saying that Dentin does not listen to his player base. Dentin actually listen to the player base, however, only if you approach him with your request, in a reasonable nice way, without being an asshole about it. For the last month or 2, I've seen him talk back and forth to people on bovine about every single change when we get a reboot with new changes.
2: judging someone by the place or the company he works for is totally unfair and ignorant in my opinion. I think I said enough about this matter.
3 Morpheus is pretty helpful, he gets out of his way to help newbies whenever they need help, and accusing him of yelling at people who doesn't speaking english as a 1st language is false. I am from kuwait, there for, english is not my 1st language. in fact, I have horrible english and I would like to take the chance to kindly ask you guys to excuse my poor spelling and grammar. Anywway, as I said my english is very bad, and yet he spend a huge amount of time to help me step by step when I was a newbie like 7 years ago, and my english was alot worse back then.
4: As you may have noticed, I didn't talk about the main issue here, because honestly there is no much I can add to it. I don't agree with Dentin 100% on alot of changes, but that doesn't mean I should seek attention by posting in this foram like I have noticed some of you did. last, I would like to apologize for my poor grammar and spelling, and I'd like to ask you guys to stick to the main issue at hand, and lets stop bashing one another.
#94 2017-11-20 16:30:30
My first ever interaction with Morpheus was after the release of a new area he made. While walking through the quests there the quest chain broke and I reported this as a bug. Morpheus informed us that he was working on fixing it.
A couple of hours later I asked him if he was done working on it and how we would know what to do when all's said and done and he basically started yelling at me. I wasn't insulting him, I used a nice language and nice but worried tone, and yet he wanted me to apologize for it.
@Aziz Dentin seems a lot harder compared to other admins to reach out to, not in terms of contactability but in terms of feeling as if you're being listened to. Sure, he backed off the alignment thing just a bit at one point if my memory serves. Then he went ahead and made it even harder to keep evil while everyone and their mom was evil because it was reflected in the eq. I don't know how it looks today, but back then evil gear was so much more common than good gear.
#95 2017-11-20 16:32:15
@Lokar and powercreep. It's true that powercreep will happen anywhere. That doesn't mean you should accept it and look the other way, but rather try to come up with a solution to fix it. Redoing old eq, making limits on new eq even stricter, or something entirely different. Whatever you do you shouldn't ignore it. It basically makes old areas no longer worth exploring and a huge letdown to those that try it.
#96 2017-11-20 18:52:36 (edited by JLove 2017-11-20 18:55:50)
@Ethin:
As I stated in my post, this is an area of law with which I am not very familiar and I have not found any cases that would directly speak to this as of yet; I have already said that he may very well be right on the point of owner censorship. As to your other comment, where you wrote: "Other than that, I have nothing to say other than the fact that this topic sounds like a bunch of adults who are acting like five-year-olds because someone did something they didn't like. Seriously, people, I'm quite sure you've got other things to do. I think we all do," I fail to see how my posts (either of them) could be viewed as the rantings of a five-year-old. The only thing that I said was that even if he is 100% right, and is not breaking the letter of the law, that I feel (note the word "feel," which is perfectly reasonable, and not disrespectful, to say) that he is definitely breaking the spirit of the ruling set forth in Terminiello. I might not be right, and I have even acknowledged that. I have tried to remain respectful in my disagreement, and I have tried to give rational reasoning for my opinion. How can that be considered in any way disrespectful or petulant, which is what you were alluding to with the "five-year-old" reference? No matter whether I am right or wrong, I have taken no offense from the dialogue between me and Dentin, nor do I personally dislike him or wish him any ill will. In fact, I have actually enjoyed the discourse between us, as it has been civil, respectful, and intellectually stimulating, providing an opportunity for me to learn. Isn't that what free speech is all about? Therefore, I cannot regret my posts. If anyone has found them to be disrespectful, then I would like to know why, and I apologize. That was never my intent.
#97 2017-11-20 19:13:38
JLove wrote:
@Ethin:
As I stated in my post, this is an area of law with which I am not very familiar and I have not found any cases that would directly speak to this as of yet; I have already said that he may very well be right on the point of owner censorship. As to your other comment, where you wrote: "Other than that, I have nothing to say other than the fact that this topic sounds like a bunch of adults who are acting like five-year-olds because someone did something they didn't like. Seriously, people, I'm quite sure you've got other things to do. I think we all do," I fail to see how my posts (either of them) could be viewed as the rantings of a five-year-old. The only thing that I said was that even if he is 100% right, and is not breaking the letter of the law, that I feel (note the word "feel," which is perfectly reasonable, and not disrespectful, to say) that he is definitely breaking the spirit of the ruling set forth in Terminiello. I might not be right, and I have even acknowledged that. I have tried to remain respectful in my disagreement, and I have tried to give rational reasoning for my opinion. How can that be considered in any way disrespectful or petulant, which is what you were alluding to with the "five-year-old" reference? No matter whether I am right or wrong, I have taken no offense from the dialogue between me and Dentin, nor do I personally dislike him or wish him any ill will. In fact, I have actually enjoyed the discourse between us, as it has been civil, respectful, and intellectually stimulating, providing an opportunity for me to learn. Isn't that what free speech is all about? Therefore, I cannot regret my posts. If anyone has found them to be disrespectful, then I would like to know why, and I apologize. That was never my intent.
Your post was an complete misunderstanding of that last comment I made about five-year-olds. I was referring to everyone in this topic. I see no problem with the existence of this topic; while it may be intellectually stimulating at some points, it is nevertheless full of petulant children arguing about who's right and who's wrong. It's like a group of kids arguing about who should get the toy and who shouldn't. Due to that, any outsider reading this topic could ever, ever collect enough data to come up with an unemotional, logical assessment other than the one I have generated here. I do enjoy reading about the legal references; however, I do feel this could be expedited to another topic. I may be harsh when I've written posts like these, but since anyone else who says it is going to wrap it in wool and not actually be blunt and say it, it comes down to me to be blunt about it and come out and say that this has seriously a waste of everyone's time and was a waste of time for the OP unless they were deliberately trying to cause mischief, which they completely succeeded at doing.
"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." — Charles Babbage.
My Github
My Github
#98 2017-11-20 19:32:54 (edited by JLove 2017-11-20 19:35:37)
Ethin wrote:
...This has seriously [been] a waste of everyone's time...
I have to disagree. I have actually enjoyed the time that I have spent researching the legal aspects and reading the associated SCOTUS cases. Not a waste of time at all to me.
#99 2017-11-20 20:02:56
since no one seems to be concerned with the *valid* points here I guess it goes back to normal with only a little stering in the pot. Shame, though I guess I shouldn't expect anything else given Alter Aeons history.
#100 2017-11-20 20:15:11
I have to agree with the poster that said the game turns into a big grind fest. This is the problem I run into at higher levels. The amount of experience required is ridiculous. You basically spend all your time killing monsters in groups. Soloing becomes impossible in higher level areas even if you have minions.
I think the game should include more activities besides combat. I personally love all the quests on the islands as they give you something to do that isn't always about kill this enemy and report back to me. I love the new Faerie Land areas. The quests are engaging and aren't all about the kill kill kill theme. I'll be sad when that's over and will probably stop playing the game for a while.
This is not to say I hate the game. I think the whole fantasy aspect is great. I just think there should be more to do at higher levels besides grinding experience and gaining levels. That gets very repetitive and makes the game less enjoyable.
Grab my Adventure at C: stages Right here.
Posts: 76 to 100 of 119
AudioGames.net Forum → General Game Discussion → Your future on Alter Aeon: a Discussion of game trends
Generated in 0.023 seconds (63% PHP - 37% DB) with 9 queries