Jump to content

Zascha

Members
  • Content Count

    380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

44 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

473 profile views
  1. APB Reloaded is rated 'M for Mature - May contain content inappropriate for children. 18+' The argument that kids might see the word 'wh0re' is simply irrelevant. So, since that's a no-brainer non-issue that you would have already deduced on your own, let's move on to what this is really about: virtue signalling for the sake of women's rights and feminism, and also probably just general, liberal, modern-age bull$hittery. Look. We all know what the term means. But you're playing a stupid context game with this, and pretending like you thought the entire world uses words all the time by what the terms mean in the dictionary. As if there is no such thing as an 'urban dictionary' or 'street lingo' or 'semantic shift/progression/drift' or 'neologism.' You're citing this word from dictionaries as if those definitions are the ones used in this context. You don't get to frame an argument the way you want when the subject doesn't fit the frame in the first place. The context used in game isn't related to women of ill repute at all. The term wh0re also means--someone who will do anything for <insert objective> You ever heard the term Attention wh0re? Of course you have. We all have. But in case you haven't, the technical definition for Attention wh0re is "one who participates in virtue signalling." True story. Go look it up. I jest, but there is truth in my analogy. Attention wh0re: someone who will do anything for attention. Candy wh0re: someone who will do anything for candy. You're playing a dangerous game, and a stupid game, of censorship, here, based on what you're personally sensitive to. And then, to make it even worse, you're trying to hide behind kids like the coward you really are. We know you're a coward, because only cowards hide behind children--and frankly, it's sickening. You're so brainwashed to defend women's honor and all this liberal, feminist bullcrap, and it's corrupted you so much, you actually have to pretend to care about children so you can push your agenda. Can you not see how twisted that is? You need to do some serious soul-searching, pal. You literally came on here and tried to shame someone else because of what they're doing to children, when children have nothing to do with anything concerning your topic. Shame on you. Disgusting. How DARE you use children as a tool for your own gratification. Maybe we ought to censor you! I'm not telling you what to be sensitive toward. I'm not even telling you what to do. What I'm saying is no one cares what you're sensitive to. If you don't like it. Don't play it. Don't support what you don't like. There's nothing else for you to do. You don't have to get on your little soap box and pretend like you're speaking for the greater good, when you can't even hide what's in your own dark heart. Clean your own room first. Then you can tell others to clean theirs. It's as simple as that.
  2. I agree. The orange points DO change the context of what he's saying. But what he's saying is irrelevant because the context doesn't even need to be addressed. I've been saying this since my first post. It's good enough that the game systems he pointed out are just bad. To suggest they need to be changed under any other context is irrelevant. How do you tackle the problem of people being dickheads? Well, for one, you'll never be rid of them. But, there are effective countermeasures: You warn them. If they continue, you give them a temporary ban. Maybe 24 hours. If they continue the bad behavior, you give them a longer temporary ban. Say three days. Maybe a month. If they continue still, you simply delete the account and get rid of them with no chance of getting the character/account back. They blew it. They had several chances to behave correctly, and they chose not to do so. That's the punishment. And I wouldn't let MobRule change my stance on it. The rules are clear--that player broke the rules consistently. People want to complain about it--complain all you want. But that player's account will stay banned. You can't give these idiots a single inch, because they WILL take the whole mile. It would also help matters if the game was B2P in the first place. To be fair, it needs to be a better game before it can do that. But the fact remains: One major factor why this game has so many dickheads in it is because it's F2P. How do you tackle the problem of people being victimized? You kick dickheads out of the game. Simple as that. Fewer dickheads means you have fewer victims. It's basic mathematics. You make crystal clear rules, and you start enforcing the rules. Also, you let these victims learn to deal with everything else by doing nothing special for them. People breaking rules is one thing. But some of these folks are a little too sensitive for the rest of humanity who is minding their own business to have to stop everything they're doing to make sure they're all right. This isn't Kindergarten. People need to stop being babied, and the rest of humanity shouldn't be forced to be responsible for people who can't stand up for themselves. It's just like I said. I'm a nice guy, and I like to go out of my way to help folks. I will stand up for the little guy. But if you force me to do it, then you've stolen away the blessing I get from making the choice to do it myself. And that's going to piss me off<-- another point the OP failed to understand. Someone harasses you/trash talks you? Use the Mute button. Someone is cheating? Report them. Someone is griefing you? Report them. Someone is participating in their part of a crappy game system and it bothers you? Play another game until the crappy game system is altered or fixed. And most of all--just ignore it. Stop feeding the trolls. This isn't rocket science. Seriously. If the game bothers you that much, just stop playing it. No one is going to think less of you. Go play something that doesn't stress you out so much. Start being responsible for yourself, and stop making everyone else be responsible for you. Why does this even need to be said? Honestly, it's like there's a whole world of information about how to be a human being, and there are just billions of people who didn't get the memo... Also--kids aren't supposed to be playing this game. They should be banned on general principle. So, there's that. As for how to make those game systems better? Who knows? Even if I did know, I wouldn't waste my time writing it out. I don't get paid to design APB. Too bad, too. I'd "Make APB Great Again!" Alternatively, there have been a million comments and ideas made on these forums about each and every thing the OP brought up. Pick one from the pile. Any one of them would be better than what we have. Resolving bad behavior isn't as simple as just applying a punishment. There has to be a matter of escalation involved. You have to give the person enough time to understand what they're doing is wrong. In other words, if some guy sends you a whisper and just cusses you out for no reason for 20 minutes straight--or you know, whatever the offense is--you can't just outright ban that player. You have to give a warning. Then you apply a time out if they continue. And so forth and so on. Banning the player/account for good should be a last resort. That's basic behavioral adjustment protocol. It's the only known method that works and is actually ethical and non-abusive. I don't think you have established your argument well enough to say the game rewards bad behavior. All you and the OP have done on this front is made the assertion. You haven't successfully argued your case on this. The only thing I can say for certain is there are plenty of elements in the game that aren't very fun. Things that aren't fun, generally bring the worst out of people. If you're trying to argue that the systems are unfun and therefore bring the worst out of people, the only thing I can say is, "Why are you wasting everyone's time by stating the obvious?" Again. Irrelevant. There are also a lot of elements in the game specifically designed to create chaos. You could potentially make an argument that the systems in the game which create chaos in-turn create a sense of anxiety and frustration. And I would agree--because that's the point of the game. If you're arguing against that, then you're definitely making the wrong argument, because that's what the game is. If you don't like it--then you should play a different game. If you find you don't want to stop playing this game, and the game creates anxiety for you that you cannot handle or manifests itself as abuse toward others--I refer you to what I wrote about the rules, which, again, should be enforced. If that doesn't fix your problem, then you will eventually be banned, and well... you'll be playing something else anyway. You guys aren't getting this: You have the choice to be a dickhead. You also have the choice to be a victim. You also have the choice to be cool-breeze, like me and all the other awesome people in the world. I would encourage everyone to stop choosing to be either a dickhead or a victim. As for actual insane people--what exactly do you want me or anyone else to do about that? They're insane. That isn't normal behavior in the first place, and it's an irrelevant argument. File it under everything else I've already written. "some mechanics are really not thought out well, and are part of the reasons the game's population is as low as it is." <-- I agree with this statement. I don't understand why you guys don't understand that, that argument is good enough. You don't need to add irrelevant commentary to sell your point.
  3. I'm not offended. I'm just tired of repeating myself. Read this carefully, dude: "Things in APB that are detrimental to the mental health of the people playing it are poorly thought out game mechanics that create crate an unhealthy environment and situations comparable to a toxic workplace or a school. How you may ask? I have listed some of the mechanics and situations this game creates and how it can negatively effect someone. You think that all of this assholish behavior in the game is just baggage people bring with them to the game (which like i said i would agree with you), but you are only half right because the bad game mechanics i mentioned help to facilitate all that baggage and create an unhealthy environment, are you following me now?" All of that in orange is irrelevant. All of it. Some people are just dickheads, dude. They will always be dickheads. There is nothing you can do to the game to make them or even encourage them to not be a dickhead. They're already not supposed to be dickheads. There is nothing you can do to get rid of them or to make them not be a dickhead. There are no rules to stop them. The reason this is true is because you do not have authority over them. You have no leverage. I don't have time to explain why you need to have authority over someone before you can change their behavior. Go read a psychology book or a book on social competence. It will explain everything you need to know. Ergo, the game's design concerning this point is irrelevant. And yes, I understand that isn't your primary point. We first have to examine this aspect, because what you're talking about doesn't exist in a vacuum. The problem you're pointing out cannot be fixed in the game, because the problem is with the people playing the game. <-- This is my counterargument to your argument, which we still haven't gotten to yet. So pay close attention. Just look at our very conversation. I have explained this to you three times now. The first two times, you got pissy and obnoxious with me over nothing. You've even gotten pissy and obnoxious with others. And it's all your doing. No one incited you to be that way. You could have chosen not to be pissy and obnoxious, but I guess the forums aren't designed well enough for you to have made a better choice for your online social conduct. Also, I couldn't have explained myself any better, and you still acted like a dickhead to me for God knows why. Tell me something. Do the APB Forums need to be redesigned since you've caused me a lot of unwanted stress? I'm feeling very victimized right now, and I don't think I can handle your abuse. Do you see? Do you see now how silly this all is? Secondly: "Dude, what you highlighted in red is a a response to your strawman that i want a "safe space", this is not true and i explained what my actual position." I didn't strawman you. You just didn't understand what I meant, because you don't even understand your own argument. If you would just calm down and READ, you will see that I'm trying to help you make a better argument. Your actual position is a "Safe Space" in principle. It's exactly the same concept in both principle and execution. Here is your argument --> Your position is that people behave badly because the game incites them to do so. Your concern, however, is not for the people who behave badly, but for the people who are the victims to those who behave badly. Your solution to the problem is to redesign the rulesets/mechanics of certain aspects of the game so that the victims cannot be harmed by the people who behave badly. A Safe Space is a concept which allows perceived victims to be shielded from perceived threats. What you're talking about is actively asking for such designs to be implemented. They're your words. Not mine. If what you're trying to explain truly isn't a Safe Space, then you need to do a better job explaining what you mean. Because everything you've said thus far is exactly what a Safe Space is in principle. Since adding "Safe Space" rules aren't going to resolve the problem--and we know they won't resolve the problem, because they don't even address the problem in the first place--then we can safely conclude no amount of redesigning is going to reduce the threats of abuse victims receive. And it stands to reason that is true, since it is also true that there's nothing you can do to make people not be dickeads--which I have already established. Are YOU following ME now? Therefore, the problem is not the game: It's the people. Like I said in the beginning. Dickheads need to buzz off. People who can't deal with dickheads need to buzzoff. Better yet, both of them need to give me and everyone else who belongs to the human race a 4ucking break and grow the hell up. APB needs to focus on being a good game. Period. For example: We don't need any better reasoning for why Ram Raiding needs to improve other than, "Ram Raiding sucks!" <-- here is your fixed argument. Had you just written that to begin with, every single person on these forums would have given you a thumbs up, because it's one of the most true things you can say about APB.
  4. Yeah... That's not really what I mean, though.
  5. This is where I fall. I dance between Silver and Gold status all the time. I go to Bronze Dis, and within two or three missions, I jump to Gold. I go to Silver Dis, within two or three missions, I'm back to Silver. That's just how it is. This was less an issue when the game had an actual population. But because the game failed to be updated with new content, the population left. So now, this is where it's at. They should have gotten rid of the whole Bronze/Silver/Gold thing a long time ago. That information should have been kept secret, and entering an Action District should have been Auto-Assigned according to a Match-Making system that rated your skill level according to your Bronze/Silver/Gold rank. Problem solved.
  6. *sigh* Dude. The title of your thread is: THINGS IN APB THAT ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE MENTAL HEALTH OF ITS PLAYERS ... Nothing in that paragraph you just wrote to me--the part I have hi-lighted in red--has anything to do with the title of your thread, or the original post you made, or anything you've written to me in response since then. You're literally changing your argument every single time I write to you. I don't have trouble grasping what you've written. You have trouble keeping up with what you've written. I am, however, having trouble caring to respond at this point, because you aren't paying attention. Moreover, I haven't written anything that is knee-jerk reactionary. I have not been coarse with you. I have not made strawman arguments. You simply aren't understanding, and you are reading everything I have written with your inner angry voice. ... I want everyone else reading along to witness this, because this is exactly how it happens: This is one of those times on these forums when a person gets suckered into a stupid argument over something superfluous by someone who simply isn't right in the head. And I'm just gonna side-step this whole thing...
  7. I'm not overlooking anything. I understand exactly what you're saying. I'm talking about the principle of a thing. What are we talking about, here? APB? No. We're talking about the principle: APB is a game. All games are the same. We could be talking about Basketball. So let's apply your logic to the game of Basketball. Your friend shoots a 3-Pointer, but misses because you blocked his shot. Then he gets in your face and starts to curse at you and maybe he even gets physically violent. Why? Because what you did caused him stress he didn't like. He didn't get to have the thing he liked because of you. And you did what you did because the rules allowed it. What you did is the objective of the game, even. Even if we consider that his behavior is wrong--which it is--and we focus purely on you, think about how much stress you would be under if your friend behaved this way toward you. What you're saying in this case is that 3-Pointers should be removed or redesigned from the game NOT because it causes stress in your friend, but because it causes stress in yourself by proxy of your friend's behavior. What I'm telling you is that the 3-Pointers aren't the problem. The problem is the people involved. Your friend has a behavior problem, and you have a coping mechanism problem. Changing the 3-Pointer rules isn't going to resolve either person's problem. Point is, your argumentation is derelict of real value, because you aren't being objective with your reasoning. This is exactly why "Safe Spaces" are stupid in concept. It's just another rule or law that pretends it's going to fix the problem that was created by people not respecting rules or laws already in place. It doesn't work. APB needs to focus on being a fun/good game. People need to stop being dickheads to one another. That's as good as it's ever going to get. The best thing people who behave badly in APB can do is to stop playing the game and go out and live an actual life. The best thing a person who cannot deal with assholes can do is to stop playing the game and go out and live an actual life. APB needs to change. But it needs to change for reasons that have nothing to do with keeping people safe from abuse. It can punish bad/abusive behavior, but what you're talking about will generate a concept which will proactively prevent people from proper social functionality according to their own free choice. In other words, I am a good person because I choose to be. Because that's who I am. I like being as good a person to others as best I can. But when you start forcing me to do things--even if I would have done them anyway--what you're doing is you're removing my own authority from my own heart and mind. And that's going to make someone even like myself very, very upset.
  8. APB isn't causing people to be assholes or to have dysfunctional social skills. People bring that behavior into the game and onto the forums. I know this. I have been in so many arguments on the forums concerning superfluous $hit with people like this before I realized I was arguing with someone who simply wasn't right in the head. I'm not being a jerk when I say that. I'm saying that as a statement of virtue: I don't tolerate their bull$hit. Period. I don't care what the excuses are. Bad behavior is bad behavior, and people don't deserve to be treated the way a lot of folks who play this game treat others. You can say almost anything, and there will always be that one pleasant fellow who shows up to rip you a new one over something incredibly stupid. I once got my patootie chewed out by a guy on these forums NOT because of what I wrote or even my tone, but because I didn't write it the way he wanted it written. I'm not even kidding or exaggerating. These days, there might seem to be a whole lot of them because most sane people moved on years ago. I don't know for certain. I don't hang around here but once on a blue moon to see if anything has happened. APB is an old game that had a lot of poorly designed and developed systems even when it was released. It had it's time to be fun, but that time has passed. Nothing has been done to change any of those issues since then. It keeps getting a slop of paint every now and then, but the problems are subsurface. And those problems have never been addressed. Point is: People have problems. APB has problems. They aren't related. What you're trying to do is make an argument that APB is triggering people with problems, and so the solution is to remove the triggers. No. The problem isn't the triggers, and honestly, I'm not even confident that you have established certain systems in the game ever are behavior triggers. Most of the points you raised are just poorly designed systems. The problem is the person who has the problems. APB and the community who enjoys the game are not responsible for that person's social development. There are doctors for that sort of thing. APB just needs to worry about being a good game, and the community just needs to stop being dickheads to one another. Not to protect people with poor social development. But simply because it's better when people aren't acting like they have no concept of functional social interaction.
  9. I said that I remember. Besides that, I'm pretty sure you're not suggesting that all APB has to do is to turn off Red Crosshairs and then it will magically be awesome like those games. You're not actually implying that, are you? Because that would be funny.
  10. I think this is an extraordinarily bad idea. Not that I fault the person who brought it up. It's nothing against them. It's just not thought out very well. Look. I know you guys have been playing this game since before you were born. I realize that sentence makes no sense, but forgive my hyperbole for the sake of making a point. Point is, you know how the game works because you've been playing it since forever. Enter in a new guy. I know they're rare these days, but just hang in there. Imagine they log in for the first time and they start shooting at people in a mission. They're moving all over the damn place. The enemy is jumping and running and moving all over the damn place. What are they going to do? They're going to lead the target. That's what they're going to do. Especially if they're sniping. And why wouldn't they? Any modern shooter would require you to do that. I haven't played a game like APB where you have to be right on the target since... Hell, I don't even remember. Maybe back in 1995 when I was playing Duke Nukem 3D on a modem. Pretty sure all those old games had a Crosshair Marker Color Change. Reason being so you knew the difference between a Hit and a Miss. It had to be there because the game wasn't actually calculating bullet velocities and all that stuff. Just like APB. It's a function of the mechanic. You can't get rid of it. Like I said. I know YOU know you can't lead targets. I know YOU know about Hitboxes vs Character Size. But you've been playing since forever. But assuming this game somehow one day gets a resurgence in playerbase--I doubt it will ever happen, but it might--if you remove this feature then the new players are going to be complaining more than they already do about not being able to kill people: people are cheating, and so forth and so on. And then what? Every day you'll have some new thread pop up, "I CAN'T HIT ANYONE!" And then you'll get the Forum Nazi's flooding those threads every day to explain how the game is supposed to work. And then those guys will start complaining about how every day there's a brand new thread about the same old thing, and that just gives them one more thing to be toxic about. This is a monumentally bad idea. The only way you could do it is if you straight up changed the entire Ballistics Code in the game to where the guns are actually shooting bullets and all of that is calculated properly like in any other modern shooter. I wouldn't be opposed to that mind you. But there's a greater chance of a population resurgence happening than that happening.
  11. Engine Upgrade to MINIMUM Unreal 3.5, PREFERABLY Unreal 4.0 Period. There's nothing the community can do or should do without this game receiving some kind of worth-while update. Anything short of these two possibilities is a complete and total waste of time for everyone, including Little Orbit. /thread
  12. This. The weapon drop off mechanic does not work with the level design in this game. Financial doesn't suffer quite as much since it's more dense in general. The streets are not as wide and there are a lot of places you can run through and loop back around and so forth. There's "stuff" in the way. It gives a wider range of play for both attackers and defenders. It's not perfect, but it's better in comparison to Waterfront. Waterfront is very spacious, and there isn't much range variance. There aren't a lot of ways to get to an objective, but there are a lot of ways to defend an objective. And most of the defense points allow for multiple long range weapons such as the HVR and/or OBIR. And these weapons simply dominate on that map. In Finanial, HVR isn't always the best option for defense because the proximity of the point and line of sight aren't working in your favor. Personally, I've never enjoyed the range drop off mechanic. It's not so much that I didn't like the idea. It's that I think it could have been handled a little better, and I knew as soon as it happened it would exploit the Level Design. It's why we are stuck in this HVR/OCA war.
  13. The first quote was to someone else who was doing exactly the same crap you are trying to do me now. I don't draw first blood. I respond to people who do accordingly. You example here is not helping your case. The second quote was in an entirely different thread to the same guy who I was speaking to in the first item you quoted. The guy treated me poorly. I tend to remember when people do that to me, and I don't really have much positive things to say about them for a long while after. Sorry. Rub me the wrong way and persist at it, it tends to leave a lasting impression with me. It's fair to say I jumped the gun there, however. Maybe I should apologize for it. But... the guy was a jerk. So... I probably won't. The third thing you quoted was in direct response to the person whom I said that to after they had already said the same thing to me. So again, this example fails. Go back and read the thread. They're the ones who said they didn't care about anyone's opinion. I said the same thing to him to reflect exactly his attitude toward everyone else. I didn't even read what else you wrote. It's a waste of time. Your examples are stupid that don't show anything but that I treated someone like an unpleasant fellow after they had already treated me like an unpleasant fellow first. Good job being pointless.
  14. Lol, I am so glad you guys stopped-- Wait... no... You didn't stop. You said you were done, but no... you really weren't. You guys can't even do what you say you're going to do. You said it. And you can't even do it. You started this whole mess. You and the other guy--I can't even be bothered to scroll up to look at his name. "We're done speaking to you..." *moments later* "And another thing..." What the hell has got you guys so upset that you feel the need to continue responding? Is it because you feel the need to be right? You think you have to change my mind? Nothing you've said has changed my opinion. Nothing. I started this thread thinking they should get rid of LtL, and I still feel the same way. You guys are mad because I don't share your opinions. That's it. That's what this whole thing is about. You will not shut up, because someone thinks differently than you. That's it. Ad hominem? Do you even know what that means? It means someone directs an argument against a person instead of their position. Go back and read the conversations. YOU are the ones who started the ad hominems because I didn't accept your positions. You did not show me that you were correct and that I was wrong. I'm sorry. You didn't. YOU. You have started ALL of this shit. All of it. You have no one else to blame but yourselves.
  15. I don't expect people to not criticize others' opinions. But I do expect people to criticize others' opinions with some amount of human decency--to treat them like they aren't automatically stupid--to actually try and have a natural, normal conversation. There's absolutely no reason to be sarcastic or bitter toward someone over anything. It just shows a general lack of respect for other people and yourself. It's juvenile, and I'm sick of playing that game with people. You will not get away with it when you speak to me. If you're going to behave that way with me, then you should be prepared to accept worse from me. Because I will bring it. Guaranteed. I'm done letting this community get away with being toxic. If you don't address these issues, these people will run all over you and they will continue to do it. It's just like any other bully. If you don't stand up for yourself, they will continue to do it. But I would rather people just have civil discourse as I've demonstrated in this thread with others who have responded to me.
×
×
  • Create New...