Recent Statuses

4 mos ago
Current It was option 2. It then pretty much fell away like empty hope often does. This is random, I know - but if you're the one I'm addressing, you know what I'm replying to.
7 mos ago
7 mos ago
Why does nobody pray to me?
7 mos ago
Blame sif for this. My Spamminess returns for the Star Wars thingamajig.
1 like
2 yrs ago
Wait, banned already? Damn it.
1 like


ᶳ ℙ ᶺ ᶬ ᶲ ᶱ ᶵ

Greetings, mortals. I am Spambot, an immortal entity come to bestow its essence upon the realms of humanity. Of course, you've seen part of my essence and energy. But there is more, is there not? Nothing is the sum of its face value.

And, if I have survived the profile lurks of the local gods, I must not be so horrid in this form.

I now attempt to walk among mortal entities, and pretend to be a contributing spamposter.

And so, here I am.

- - - - -

DepressedSoviet ~
Keyguyperson ~
Vashonn ~
wXw ~
Briza ~




Most Recent Posts

Hail to the great Diablo.
Golden age of spambots. Felt like being a smartass and making an alt for the memes.

The alt has overcome the main.
The literal reverse of Altered Tundra's list applies to my genre interest, on both sides even. Medieval Fantasy is pretty much my calling and the source of most of my characters and content. It is the easiest for me to write and a foundation I've built on for many years. Sci-fi comes in second, but only with particular mediums; it can very easily turn me off. The top subgenre I am interested in for that would be cyberpunk. Though I've done very little with the horror genre, I do have a long standing interest.

Conversely, I'm not particularly interested in modern contexts, extremely easy to turn off from modern fantasy, utterly disinterested in school contexts (especially high school, you would probably need to kill me and resurrect me as a mindless zombie to involve me in that genre, or wipe all of my programming and make a new program from scratch) and weary of most implementations of superhero contexts.

For the most recent question, it's hard to tell as I've been rather out of the loop for deciding what has been underappreciated as far as an actual genre. I know fantasy may be over appreciated in all forms, which is ironic given my interest. Perhaps the least usual category I would find fun that's still broad would be the aforementioned horror, where I have an interest in exploring the dwindling psychology of a character when they are exposed to certain situations. Most recently I've been very interested in considering the psychology of a character going through a mind-rending dungeon, filled with classical demons, but also elements that strip their sanity along the way. Essentially, the premise of the first Diablo game.
As an occasional poster only popping in with a small window of time, I derived the following impressions, and will only elaborate if requested. Ironically, the story I ultimately lean towards is the one that I have least interest in as a premise. Still, they're all solid concepts, and I've always had a bit of a bias towards the fantasy option.

The first tale strikes me as the one with the strongest grasp on pacing, length, and the dynamic of internal thought mixed with action. It's an easy trap to fall into 'word soup', where the tale is somewhat compromised by too many extra sentences put into it that somewhat mute the action. I observed little of any of these things, and I believe as a result the first tale is the best written, and thus earning my vote. I also enjoy the proper spacing, as a true story really doesn't need to be expressed in homogenous paragraphs; some 'breathing room' is a good thing. Short, but quaint, and the other stories were hardly much longer, only carry the appearance of said length.

This is not to say the other two were bad, but I do believe they were flawed in some of the ways I mention above.

The Amulet of Friall is ultimately a good contender, but what gets me is the pacing. Nothing stands out more than the plot twist, revealed rather anticlimactically in the middle of a paragraph-blurb through "Estelle grinned too and attacked Hazel with her magic. Confused Hazel looked up." All without spacing or any sort of breathing room. I didn't get anything from this - instead, I read over it, went 'wait what', went over it again, and I have to say, it is perhaps the clunkiest point in the story, particularly with the almost detached, vague deadpanning of 'and then she attacked her' and the next sentence being a very flat expression of confusion. I'm not someone who's all about "show show show don't tell show!", but this is a case where I think some serious attention to the idea of actually showing it happen instead of telling would have made an impact. As it stands, there was none. My reaction was identical to Hazel, ironic considering the significance of having your partner in a secretive organization tell you 'lol nope I was bad all along'. There was an effort to foreshadow later on, but for how little impact it made to the characters, it strikes me as a bit thrown in and insignificant. The pacing from there on left me going 'woah, what's this now'. I think the section could have seriously benefited from spacing and more expression of the characters. The plot is sound, yet the execution leaves a great deal to be desired.

And again, though this is an issue with both stories, there is nothing wrong with some spacing and partitioning things out. I believe Calle's work is an excellent example of how to do this. It makes things easier to read, and if it became habit, I think it would be less likely to encounter points like the above. Do not take this as a condemnation of the work; I'm simply good at going on and on about what I think is wrong, despite ultimately enjoying the work for the most part.

The third story is written in a way that's not far off from my own when I get into tales. Thus, I can relate to it automatically, as well as spot some of the persistent flaws. It seems to me that the tale could have used a bit of trimming; less sentences to convey the same concepts, or less elaboration when the original piece would have sufficed. This is a vague judgement that would take opening a can of worms I don't currently have at the moment, although if those particulars are desired, I'll give an effort to working them in down the road - for now, I'd just like to get the impressions out. Obviously I suffer from that too, and without good proofreading I'm obviously going to look a tad hypocritical when speaking of it. And again, spacing is good. Varied paragraph lengths is entirely natural and even desired.

There's points here and there that could have used a bit of review to catch. From the first, I couldn't actually spot anything on a quick glance, though I imagine it's there and reviewers with more time and a deeper view will be able to point out little things. From the second, a sentence stood out as very abrupt in the middle of the action, "Two men entered through a door". From the third, "he leapt over the fifth story railing and aimed his body straight downwards like diver,". Very minor, nitpicky things.

Seeya again in 3 months.
I believe any merit in this point-by-point tangent is drawing to a close, as I've hopefully gotten through my initial point with this post. That said, if there's anything a direct reply is desired to beyond here, I'm obliged to give it as requested.
Oh I've made tons of effort, but you'll understand that asking people on various forums and comments section of articles doesn't tend to produce much in the way of enlightenment other than colorful ways of calling me a shill or a variety of insults sprinkled with mentions of shopping cart as some kind of catch-all. There's a reason the ones shouting make the whole thing look bad.

And those individuals, like the extremes in any hot topic, are buffoons who have no legitimate desire to enter discussion with any willingness to look beyond their underdeveloped sponge of an opinion provided by someone else with no critical thinking of their own. They freely deserve the derision given. Unfortunately, the reverse happens when everyone on their side is lumped in the same camp out of the blue in a general gaming discussion thread, which prompted my entry - not, I will admit, a very bright entry, but a tired response from seeing the same tried bullshit from the same sort of person on each side of the fence, which inevitably results me in striking any post I perceive to fit into that all-too-common niche.

Well I mean you could try and not just gloss over the large amount of hypocritical views people have when they bring up Chinese companies as a reason enough to avoid using it.
I mean, the scale of Tencent's influence in the company, Epic's poor privacy handling record, their sheer scope in general and their uncanny ability to fling resources at a Google scale I think gives people the right to be weary. I think they're fully in their rights to refuse a platform on suspicion of its foundations, just as I respect those who feel the same about Google, despite me being able to say 'well, honestly, it doesn't matter' and use it anyways despite knowing those reasons frontwards and backwards and even agreeing with them.

You said it yourself: shoddy developer behavior. Or publisher.

Forgive me for the extreme I'm about to stretch here, but drug addicts are certainly at fault for taking drugs. Cheap amusement today, and damn people's impressions. The dealer is nonetheless willing to provide them and watch as the addict makes a complete shit of himself before those who know him. Can it be recovered from? Sure. Was just the dealer at fault? Nah. But in this case, I'm not going to give Epic a free pass just because developers are scummy. I'm displeased with the fact Epic is perfectly fine with creating the scenario in the first place.

Mechwarrior 5 was an interesting case, I'd take a look at it. As a game attaching itself to one of the few series I actually give a shit about in gaming, I found myself extremely disappointed both with Epic, and especially with the developer, who in that case I certainly give a far stronger share of the blame for the ensuing bullshit than Epic themselves. That doesn't mean I'm going to like exclusivity, their offerings in general, or their platform any more. But unless we have a new tangent to go on with this or I've somehow struck a cord of agreement, I don't think there's a point of continuing along this track, as I expect we're just going to end up in circles and with incompatible priorities.

This has been addressed by Vogel and Sweeney.

Which makes it no less brutish and sloppy.

You know what also doesn't have a shopping cart? The Nintendo Switch Eshop. It doesn't even remove things from your wishlist once you buy them either.

I neither use nor care for consoles, and thus, all this means to me is that Nintendo has a poorly designed shop.

What are the numbers on that? Because every article about it that I've read uses the vague phrase 'some users' or 'many users' while all of them only ever use Pat's tweet as a solitary source.

I digress and concede as I am unable to provide anything more than vague user claims and those very articles.

Oh yeah, because Steam user reviews are so helpful and those are what people use when determining what game to buy.

In fact, they are, let me tell you why.

Steam reviews are a fickle beast you need to know in order to get the best of them. Like youtube reviews and any other kind of review, the majority is redundant/pointless, and the bias resulting from anything high profile is extreme. The value comes from
- The majority, based on reviews lacking a visible bias to any particular big name issue (ie, a truly shit game is going to have reviews clearly articulating that over some political dribble like the Rome 2 review bombs)
- The minority that puts effort into doing it right, not hard to find in most games
- Review history in the event review bombs apply

With a few other more abstract rules I can get quite a bit out of user reviews. When something is truly problematic or just plain shit, I'll know. When it's really good, I'll know. When I want anything in between and the waters are muddled, I'll use statistics and the voices of reason.

Steam gives me data to process. Epic gives me none at all.

Some of those I agree with, some I give the hand wank motion towards as being unnecessary fluff that doesn't make a storefront better or worse.

In many of those cases I couldn't give a shit. However, other users do, and not just scarce individuals. Thus, I consider them notable not because I have any sort of use for them, but because there are others who do.
How, exactly, is Epic forcing games on its platform and nowhere else? I can buy more games on Steam than I can on EGS, and several games I can buy on EGS I can also buy on Steam. It's no surprise that the games that get the big 'controversy' are big name releases. The number of true exclusives on EGS is quite low.

This seems very off point from the quote associated with it, particularly since nothing I just quoted is a claim being made on my part.
So your problem is a company with money offering incentives for other companies to make their money in a more upfront way? It almost sounds like the problem is capitalism doing its thing. Despite what people might think, at the end of the day developers and publishers largely care about profits before they care about pleasing the customer. Yes, some developers have a good track record and as such have that trust, but all it takes is one fuck up, slight or otherwise, and that trust is lost in a snap. I guess now the way to lose trust isn't to put micro transactions or have unreasonably crunch or shitty employee treatment but to follow the money and release a game on a store for a year first. Video games are expensive, and while I can fault publishers for going with the path of least resistance I'm not going to slag on Epic for offering it in the first place.

Companies are not your friends.

Companies are never friends, that is not their function. A company can garner goodwill by being a better sport for the users and offering a good platform that convinces developers and users to flock to it because it's good, not because it purely bribes developers to release there and nowhere else when in many cases it's clear they would have otherwise released everywhere. Is it selfish for me to be irritated by that? Selfish, I am. There's other assertions in there I don't intend to grace with a reply, and they're quite prevalent in this discussion. It is them that result in this being a thing,

What happened to not being snippy.

A spambot I may be, but I am a spambot encoded with the spectrum of human emotion and flaws, and while I think we've been mostly civilized, I must admit there are some influencing aspects that I approach a number of lines in your posts with less than complete trust in their motives. Occasionally I'm just being jumpy. Thus is the flaw.
I only ever intended to buy one game on there and I will do so next month. And I'll probably buy it again on Steam anyway. I don't blame Epic for the decisions of the developers/publishers.

There we are at the impasse. Forgive the extremes of my comparison, but I find the one who drove a criminal to a crime to be liable as well as, of course, the criminal who commits it. I guess it's obligatory to say that the dynamics are being used here, not the examples being paired together as reality.
The two situations aren't exclusive.

Obviously. A shame that, from my perspective, Epic is treating them as though they are.

I'd say Epic handing out games for free (well other than the eternal price of your soul for having EGS on your machine I guess) is at least something that should be taken as a positive; whether or not it outweighs the negatives is up for individual dispute.

I do not believe it outweighs the negatives, even as I fully acknowledge it as a positive. I was almost tempted before I started looking into the games and deciding I just didn't care for the offerings. But that is entirely personal and does not deduct from the positive.

Or rather, Steam is seen as being for the customer while Epic Games Store is seen as being for the corporation.
It should never be mistaken that Valve is any way a benevolent entity that isn't prone to entirely business decisions. However, I would say their ability to hang back and let 'you do you' leaves a markedly better tastes in my mouth than what I have seen of Epic's approach, one that, while precedented on consoles, is not precedented nor desired on PC.

I'm sure people do have viable reasons, as you've demonstrated. But I'm still allowed to punch down at the people who review bomb and fling shit at the walls as soon as someone mentions the words 'Epic Games Store' while refusing to air their grievances or otherwise reduce it down to the simple, a la "no shopping cart omegalul" .

And so you are, carry on, and enjoy my full support in that. However, the impression I got upon the beginning of this conversation was a universally derisive approach towards everyone with a bone to pick on Epic, and that's not something that sat well with me, prompting my reply and this stream of events. Given the right conditions, I would be the 'epic fanboy', not because I think epic is any good whatsoever, but because in a given situation the developer has been fully up front on their motivations (the Shenmue case had the developers preaching the quality of EGS in a post that I read, and that really irritated me given how full of shit it was) and did it all well before any perceived release and making any sort of integration with other platforms that would lead customers to reasonably expect to get the game on that platform (the fact Shenmue had a steam page means it failed this condition of mine miserably). I'm sure there are many games over on EGS that fit those conditions well. Well, power to them. More power to the ones who simply approach it as another platform alongside the rest.

For the rest of the nitty grit, I think Kuro is doing decently. Me, I think I've babbled on about as much as I can babble on the matter.

In [ADVENTURER] 9 days ago Forum: Spam Forum
>name Spam[Bot]
>>I am a [NULL] year old [Spammer]. My birthday is [NULL] of [NULL].
>> I am [ect] and look [mandmascurofemgynous], with [TALL, POINTED] hair and [RED CUBIC] eyes. My expression is usually [NOT SINISTER I SWEAR]
>> It's my dream to [Spam the forum out of existence]
"I don't hate Epic Games Store" = fanboyism. Okay.

I just have to wonder, considering the best responses to these things are measured ones that try to take the full case into account, and you made zero effort to even look beyond 'whe whe shopping cart', which anyone with two pennies of wit should realize is hardly everyone's complaint or even the persistent source of primary complaints. I went for the least insulting reason for that to be the case. But yes, I took that to needless sniping, and I'll attempt to avoid that.

I'm not even a fanboy of it. Everyone screams and shouts about how it's the worst thing ever, how it's killing games (hahahahahaahah), how it shot their dog and pissed on its corpse but no one ever has any reason why other than "lol no shopping cart, lol a moderately popular former youtube lets player bought games and had his account tagged, tencent is the worst now let me go play League of Legends while listening to Spotify hop in our Discord server to coordinate, also Fortnite sucks".

On the other hand, when views are taken like this, maybe I won't.

Let's look at some actual arguments. I'm going to post a link put my own views on it.
Yes, ink just posted it, I'll go into detail.…
1. This one is a primary reason for me dismissing the store on principle. A platform that encourages developers to break off from expected and perfectly decent platforms that were kickstarter/preorder funded on the expectation of releasing on those platforms (going beyond Steam alone) effectively results in the developer breaking promises. Several games have done this and you are shoehorning into a single one. Notably, Shenmue 3 had a horrible response and a series I particularly enjoy, Mechwarrior, has had the latest entry pull this shitty stunt. In that case it's just the last straw in a stream of shoddy developer behavior, but I digress.
2. Generally in agreement despite finding it unproven that Epic actively does anything with personal data. That strikes me as a wee bit paranoid, even as someone who makes a habit of being paranoid on the internet. Despite that, their privacy controls are poor and the reach they have in your system before even logging in is dubious.
3. Again, a point of principle, elaborating on 1.
4. Dead wrong and an uncommon argument, although a later poster makes a good point regarding later sales potentially chopping the split well below how Epic handles it.
5. What stands out for me is the brute-force nature of how Epic is accessing the file in question when there are perfectly decent alternatives to doing so.
6. I haven't observed this, but it doesn't sound very good to me either.

Now for mine, largely on the platform just on what it has as features.

It's not that they lack a shopping cart all by itself. They lack a shopping cart (which is pretty goddamn basic for platforms to use), have falsely banned more than a single moderately popular youtuber automatically for being too enthusiastic when running through games one at a time to buy, entirely lack forum integration and any form of reviews, and just about any integration for some of the lesser bling (groups, per-region pricing, screenshots, achievements, cloud saving, mod workshop, multi device/account support, profiles, two factor authentication, gifting, and other things too minor to make a case for. In truth, I use very few of these, and yet I know and have seen many players who do. By no means does EGS need match point-by-point or be a clone of how Steam operates. However, some of these are quite basic, and the excuse of 'well it's new' and 'steam started off bad too' no longer applies. Steam lacked any sort of precedence. That precedence is now established and practically expected, especially when a platform forcibly injects itself alongside the top platform in features by making a mission of forcing any game on its platform and nowhere else when it would otherwise be in multiple places, all at prodigious expense to EGS (which is a good source for people's concern about Tencent, as I'm skeptical Fortnite alone allows them to blow money the way they do). All that money, and yet, no will to invest a good portion of it into making something serviceable at release, let alone months down the line. Sure, some of these things are on the roadmap.


It would be one thing if it launched buggy including efforts for several of these things, but that would imply a level of effort that simply didn't take place. Despite all this on the features end, I and probably many others who dislike the platform (note that I do not automatically default to 'hate hate hate no chance anything else' and neither do many, just the ones picked out of the crowd) would give it a fair shot if their behavior hasn't been developer priority over all else (it strikes me that they have zero interest in appealing to the customer and simply take that audience for granted, which, after fortnite, I suspect is the attitude) and point 1 from above, where there is not even a semblence of tact in their wheedling and dealing.

You can bet a good portion of the outrage would be reduced if they had a policy of doing this on undecided games that have made no platform commitments. They do not, and the examples take the headlights.

Despite the above, I do not entirely rule out playing on that platform, aside from the (completely subjective) fact that I have no interest in the offerings presented. The few that were interesting, blew it, and others just aren't needed enough to forsake my desire to be rid of something I frankly don't like at fundamental levels.

I believe I addressed most of the following blurb by proxy, but one section in particular,

Is EGS as 'feature rich' as Steam? No. Is Epic offering incentives for publishers for timed exclusivity? Yes, but what's the problem there? That it's a company throwing money around while Good Guy Gabe's crew don't?

It is the way the money is being thrown at lifting games from promised release details at the apparent expense of improving their own platform that gets on my nerves twofold.

Epic is using 'timed exclusives' to brand build, they aren't holding devs at gunpoint and forcing them to do so at the expense of gamers and Steam.

Epic (perhaps not anymore, but else) has considerable room to brand build by the expression 'be the better man'; by making a platform that is less of a monolithic greyscale entity as Steam, giving priority to developers, but also customers and improving on basic concepts that Steam has floundered to understand. Steam is practically a monopoly. Something equally decent in its offerings one way or another could break it up. It would have plenty of 'brand build' exposure without that exposure being constant controversy and a platform that by itself wouldn't get a fraction of the distance.

Obviously it's not a lack of a shopping cart.
Good of you to notice.

What's wrong with its practices other than the fact that it's capitalism doing its thing to the PC market that its been doing to the consoles for years? What makes it anti-consumer? The fact that you might have to wait a bit longer to play it on a *preferred* platform? What makes it so egregiously awful?

PC and consoles have developed differently; I hope I don't have to articulate exactly why something is wrong with applying one field's business strategies to another abruptly. For my part, I dislike consoles for their hardware, their operating systems, their selections and business (which is slightly more fitting on them than on desktops anyways, if you want me to articulate why, I shall) and the very way games are played on them, so I am not one who is at all appetized by console practices on desktop systems. But I digress. The primary issue is with Epic's apparent priorities and their extremely mediocre platform despite obviously having the resources to make it better. The rest is fairly marginal in comparison, but to speak for myself and probably a good portion who would agree, those are fundamental reasons. All is capped off by a disinterest in their offerings, privacy concerns and extreme disappointment - I was rooting for them in the very beginning purely on the basis that they were going to bust Steam's balls. Unfortunately, it went quite unlike what I had wished for. Kuro's post pretty much boils down my core issues.

My goal is not to convince you, or indeed, anyone to share these views, as they are situationally applicable and I can't imagine a great many guild members at all would see eye to eye. My only intent is to indicate that people do have viable reasons, and as such, are not worthy of the dismissive mockery they've been approached with save in cases where they are clearly not expressing their own opinions or doing so very poorly.

The latest example I've heard is Shenmue 3 which was never actually confirmed for just Steam but just 'PC'.…
Anyway, the Epic Games Store is fine stop being whiny babies over the lack of a shopping cart.

There's considerably more than that that makes me weary of it just as a platform, let alone its practices that lead me to dismissing its usage on principle. To narrow it down to this is disingenuous fanboyism of the platform.
Image link is broken, don't you hate it when quips are only around long enough for a few people to see it?

Link is done properly, site isn't a problem. I concur with Jordan, it's certainly just you.
Can't disappoint Ammokkx by ignoring this one, ei?

So, I'm going to start off with a quip. Numbers don't lie, but interpretations do, unwillingly or not. Why I think the point is utterly missed, I think has been articulated well across the thread so far. This isn't to say there aren't things I acknowledge. In fact, I agree with much of it until it gets into the claims made from the title. I believe there has been a horrible misdiagnosis, even if the factors presented I do think apply to some extent. But they're nothing you don't see across roleplaying in general. "The numbers" based on those factors I find are little different, and if you disagree, it is time to present those numbers so confidently referred to and explain precisely how the factors applied over anything else.

The very premise of this idea is nonsensical and removes the incentive to succeed in lieu of a "functioning narrative." In a narrative based Nation RP--in the equation of deciding battles--you are asking someone to intentionally lose in the interest of story. This forced collectivization can cause resentment or even a tug of war of narrative favoritism in the vein of: "I lost last time, you should lose this time."

This is a serious issue with roleplaying in general, where players in combat situations simply cannot bring themselves to take a hit for the good of story or their own character's development. However, even as this element exists on the guild, there are many others who are advanced to the point of recognizing that this is a primitive way to roleplay, like poorly written self inserts. By thinking this way, you are subverting the very idea of roleplaying, injecting a conventional game into a medium where it simply results in conflict unless that premise was part of the OOC in the first place.

Rest assured, the numbers indicate the amount of stat-based roleplays that kick the bucket is just as bad as narrative-based ones. This is beyond the concept of nations, and the reason goes well beyond what you tried to shoehorn here. It's not that people don't do this, it's the implication that it's unavoidable or standard, and that it supersedes more generic reasons why roleplays tend to fail.

Where you especially lose me is when you insist NRP should be viewed as a game as compared to a story. No. People abandon games as easily and for as fickle reasons as they abandon stories. People can do it both ways and both have their successes and failures. The Guild (and other places I'm sure) tends to err towards the story end, since as already stated, people who want to make a win/lose game out of it can go play Civ and other things. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this.
© 2007-2017
BBCode Cheatsheet