Bethesda - the most overrated RPG studio of all time.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#151 Posted by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@musalala said:

@texasgoldrush: Dude, seriously have ever wondered why 99% of your threads end like this? You post opinions as facts and then get angry when people point this out, When I used frequent Bioware forums you were just as bad...other biodrones called you out for being a douche...OTHER BIODRONES!!!

Maybe you wrong and you opinions are wrong...just saying

I love how you say Biodrone, it just shows that you are biased and hate the company. Why should I respect your opinion?

And I have been critical of Bioware at times, even getting into an argument with Gaider about the Mark of the Assassin DA2 DLC being a rip from Kasumi's Stolen Memory DLC from ME2 while he claims to never have played the ME2 DLC.

And while I do think they copy their stories far too much, this does not mean they copy them all the time like you said. I call you out. You are stating things as fact when they are wrong. That's your problem. I then drop a bomb on you.

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

Which you agreed to.

But that doesn't mean I am a poor critic.....I am only a poor critic to your standards, which are poor.

You lost...good day. I don't care what you think.

Well obviously you do or you wouldn't have tried so hard to deny it.

Also if you agree with my standards but know that the opinion is wrong based on said standards, that makes you a liar. And since you're a liar, you are in turn hypocrite, for stating that I am not a truthful critic.

No I am just beating you at your own game.

Is that what it is? Because it sure looks like you tried awful hard to take your ball and go home in that last post, for someone who's winning at my game.

Because you are beaten so badly its not worth it. You are the one getting rattled. calling me a liar and all when all I did was poke through your loophole.

If it wasn't worth it then why are you still responding? It was apparently worth the words in the post.

The winner should just be able to drop the mic and go home while the audience laughs their competitor off the stage, that's how the game works. But of course it's system wars so that doesn't happen, which is why the game never ends. Why did you agree to play when you don't even know the rules? tsk tsk.

And actually yea you did lie, you agree to an opinion knowing that you don't agree to the standards that formed the opinion. Do you deny this? Because if it isn't lying, I certainly wouldn't call it anything praise-worthy.

No, its called you being played...well you got played. You don't want to admit that you got played, so you resort to calling me a liar.

I found the loopholes in your rules and took it.

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

Avatar image for Jankarcop
#153 Posted by Jankarcop (11056 posts) -

Texas is the worst biodrone in the history of the earth. Dude thinks SWTOR was the best invention.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#154 Posted by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Jankarcop said:

Texas is the worst biodrone in the history of the earth. Dude thinks SWTOR was the best invention.

And once again, you made this up. When did I say this?

Avatar image for Vaasman
#155 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance. You can't really have it both ways; if I was naive, then you lied, because you were agreeing to a fact when you did not, therefore hiding the information from me. If I was not naive, then you were attempting to work around the agreement, which you never attempted to. An agreement that, as is established, was a thing that definitely happened.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#156 Edited by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance.

When did I establish this as fact?....the only time I established this was with a condition, which was I was a poor critic by your standards (which coming from you it was)....meaning I am not giving a damn about you.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#157 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance.

When did I establish this as fact?....the only time I established this was with a condition, which was I was a poor critic by your standards (which coming from you it was)....meaning I am not giving a damn about you.

Yet you're still responding so you do, you have to or you would ignore these posts. Lying again I see! For shame! How can we agree with any of your critiquing if you aren't truthful hmm?

Also you now admit you established it. Condition or no, you did, it's in the post the whole world has seen it. It's part of the canon you are co-authoring.

How many teeth did we have to pull for that? I can't tell. At least four.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#158 Edited by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance.

When did I establish this as fact?....the only time I established this was with a condition, which was I was a poor critic by your standards (which coming from you it was)....meaning I am not giving a damn about you.

Yet you're still responding so you do, you have to or you would ignore these posts. Lying again I see! For shame! How can we agree with any of your critiquing if you aren't truthful hmm?

Also you now admit you established it. Condition or no, you did, it's in the post the whole world has seen it. It's part of the canon you are co-authoring.

How many teeth did we have to pull for that? I can't tell. At least four.

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#159 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance.

When did I establish this as fact?....the only time I established this was with a condition, which was I was a poor critic by your standards (which coming from you it was)....meaning I am not giving a damn about you.

Yet you're still responding so you do, you have to or you would ignore these posts. Lying again I see! For shame! How can we agree with any of your critiquing if you aren't truthful hmm?

Also you now admit you established it. Condition or no, you did, it's in the post the whole world has seen it. It's part of the canon you are co-authoring.

How many teeth did we have to pull for that? I can't tell. At least four.

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#160 Edited by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

There are no loopholes, only wormholes in this game. Every possible flaw in logic is actually an extension into a separate universe where the logical hole is filled, thus it is one-way and every part of the game is air-tight even when it isn't.

See you don't even know any of my rules, how can you expect to win my game at this rate?

By definition, playing a person is the same as lying to them. If you played the part of a character you are not, then you are an actor, whom are all liars in their own way.

You admitted you agreed to opinion, when really, you didn't agree with any of the standards upholding the opinion. Is that not lying? You have yet to show how it isn't. You can't genuinely agree with an opinion you don't agree with. Only I can, because, as we've established, we're playing my game.

No, you got played because you are naïve. The thing is, I would only agree with you if I used your poor standards. That's not lying, You are trying to force me to agree with you, but I played you instead, get over it.

But you did agree to it. You already said as much. We've very clearly established that as fact. How am I supposed to make any sense of this if you're going to change the facts?

Also I'm pretty sure you don't know what the word naive means. I would have to have been ignorant to the fact that you are attempting to play my game for me to have been naive in this instance.

When did I establish this as fact?....the only time I established this was with a condition, which was I was a poor critic by your standards (which coming from you it was)....meaning I am not giving a damn about you.

Yet you're still responding so you do, you have to or you would ignore these posts. Lying again I see! For shame! How can we agree with any of your critiquing if you aren't truthful hmm?

Also you now admit you established it. Condition or no, you did, it's in the post the whole world has seen it. It's part of the canon you are co-authoring.

How many teeth did we have to pull for that? I can't tell. At least four.

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

And you think I agreed to you at first? really, are you that stupid. You asked if I agreed and that's when I played you for the idiot you are.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts from you are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#161 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference. You have lied and therefore are not truthful, and therefore, by your own standard, are a poor critic.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#162 Posted by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

rabble rabble rabble, keep changing the rules, rabble rabble rabble.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#163 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

rabble rabble rabble, keep changing the rules, rabble rabble rabble.

First of all it's my game. Second of all, since you didn't know the rules, you can't know if I changed them or not. Third, I established a contingency that allows rules to be changed to suit my needs, and you chose to keep going anyway, so you already should have known that it could happen, which really, it never did. Fourth, no denial that you lied. Love it.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#164 Edited by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

rabble rabble rabble, keep changing the rules, rabble rabble rabble.

First of all it's my game. Second of all, since you didn't know the rules, you can't know if I changed them or not. Third, I established a contingency that allows rules to be changed to suit my needs, and you chose to keep going anyway, so you already should have known that it could happen, which really, it never did. Fourth, no denial that you lied. Love it.

So what you are saying is this Rabble rabble rabble, I can't stand to lose my own game, rabble rabble rabble.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#165 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

rabble rabble rabble, keep changing the rules, rabble rabble rabble.

First of all it's my game. Second of all, since you didn't know the rules, you can't know if I changed them or not. Third, I established a contingency that allows rules to be changed to suit my needs, and you chose to keep going anyway, so you already should have known that it could happen, which really, it never did. Fourth, no denial that you lied. Love it.

So what you are saying is this Rabble rabble rabble, I can't stand to lose my own game, rabble rabble rabble.

Mmhmm still no denial of lying, still failing to appreciate the game cannot be won or lost while it continues, on top of something that roughly equates to foaming at the mouth, crying, and giving up while not entirely avoiding response, which simply makes no sense. This might be my que for the mic drop in a normal session.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#166 Posted by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

I was truthful, but I did it in a way where you were played, but waited to reveal the play. Hey I was playing your game but you don't like how I played your game. Keep calling me a liar, but you got played. End of the line.

So not only have you not denied that you lied in your last post, but you also accept that you concealed the truth that your admission was not genuine. The agreement happened and then you later showed that you secretly didn't agree to the agreement, as you could only agree when there was an added condition. This establishes that your original agreement that you are a poor critic was not the truth, because the condition was not there. And if it was not the truth then it was a lie. At the absolute minimum it's a lie of omission, but it's my game so we'll be taking the maximum. WHEN WILL THE LIES END IT MAKES ME SAD!

There is no end. It only ends when you stop responding. Seriously, you're very bad at my game if you haven't figured that out yet. How many time must we go down this rabbit hole together before you realize that early on?

When did I ever agree that I was a poor critic without the condition? never said that. Just because I say "you are no better" doesn't mean I agreed with you that I was a poor critic. It just means you are no better that me, but you being much worse is also a possibility. Now you are being dishonest. And no, your idiom doesn't make you less dishonest.

You wanted to play your game and you got beat, its very simple. You left yourself open. Now you want to change the rules to say that I cannot do this. Its laughable. Any more posts are just rabble rabble rabble to me.

See but the problem was that when I said you were in agreement you never made any attempt to deny it, which is where the agreement comes in. Your simple addition of a condition does not change what was very clearly implied and therefore immutable fact as far as any outside reader and I are concerned. And now several post later, after the admission of an added condition had already happened, It's far too late for such a denial. This also does nothing for the lies further in about your indifference.

It's strange that you still insist you've been winning, when I already made it clear that there is no winning. It's in the rules man. So forgetful. Why must you try and bend the rules of a game that is not your own? If you wanted to play your game, you should have said as much.

rabble rabble rabble, keep changing the rules, rabble rabble rabble.

First of all it's my game. Second of all, since you didn't know the rules, you can't know if I changed them or not. Third, I established a contingency that allows rules to be changed to suit my needs, and you chose to keep going anyway, so you already should have known that it could happen, which really, it never did. Fourth, no denial that you lied. Love it.

So what you are saying is this Rabble rabble rabble, I can't stand to lose my own game, rabble rabble rabble.

Mmhmm still no denial of lying, still failing to appreciate the game cannot be won or lost while it continues, on top of something that roughly equates to foaming at the mouth, crying, and giving up while not entirely avoiding response, which simply makes no sense. This might be my que for the mic drop in a normal session.

Rabble rabble rabble, cannot recognize that TGR isn't even playing anymore, rabble rabble rabble

Just laughing at your wasted effort. I already declared victory a page ago.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#167 Posted by texasgoldrush (10859 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:

They need to seriously make the caves/dungeons a lot smaller in The Elder Scrolls games.

They're better in Skyrim, but they're still so copy paste. It's even worse considering how big they are. It's the same room filled with the same enemies, filled with the same items, over and over again. I would have a much better time with the game if they just made them smaller, considering pretty much every quest demands you to go and clear out a dungeon.

It would help the tedium if they just made the dungeons smaller. It's the same rooms over and over anyway. Nothing valuable would be lost.

It would also help if they did something about the fetch quests, which is every quest in that game, but that requires extra effort on their part.

No, they need to make the dungeons more diverse with different themes and challenges. Too much quantity over quality. Its not really about size, because even if you make the smaller, its still copy paste.

Some of the dungeons in Skyrim look amazing, I will give them that, especially dwarven ruins. But they need to make dungeons more diverse mechanically. Fallout 3 did better in this regard.

And not only are they fetch quests, you don't feel rewarded doing them. Also the quest design for the civil war sections is atrocious in Skyrim. Why does Bethesda continue to try and capture war battles with their engine, its laughable. The siege of Whiterun is a joke.

Avatar image for Maroxad
#168 Edited by Maroxad (11929 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:

They need to seriously make the caves/dungeons a lot smaller in The Elder Scrolls games.

They're better in Skyrim, but they're still so copy paste. It's even worse considering how big they are. It's the same room filled with the same enemies, filled with the same items, over and over again. I would have a much better time with the game if they just made them smaller, considering pretty much every quest demands you to go and clear out a dungeon.

It would help the tedium if they just made the dungeons smaller. It's the same rooms over and over anyway. Nothing valuable would be lost.

It would also help if they did something about the fetch quests, which is every quest in that game, but that requires extra effort on their part.

The dungeons and caves are already small enough, I can clear most of them in about 30 seconds (being roughly 2 or 3 rooms large), those I can't clear in 30 seconds are usually done in 2 minutes. Problem is, there are way too many of them, cut the number of them in half or something.

@Jankarcop said:

Texas is the worst biodrone in the history of the earth. Dude thinks SWTOR was the best invention.

No he isnt...

far from it. Even on GameSpot he is not the worst (let's not forget Dreman or SkyWard20 for a moment)

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#169 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Maroxad

Forgot Me Already ? :(

Avatar image for Vaasman
#170 Edited by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@texasgoldrush: Could have fooled me. For someone so confident in his victory over an unwinnable game, you sure seem desperate to ignore posts and logic, as well as continue far beyond the obvious loss of your posting quality as demonstrated by the last few posts. You don't win with a simple declaration anyway. Otherwise I would have a long time ago. As it actually stands, by refusing to play you would be conceding to utter defeat. You sure that's what you want?

Avatar image for Maroxad
#171 Edited by Maroxad (11929 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Maroxad

Forgot Me Already ? :(

I dont see you going on crusades against people and stalk them because they dislike games you like. Then take stuff they said 2-3 years ago out of context to use that as ammunition against them today.

Edit: And then return after a year of absence just to call someone a virgin only to disappear again right afterwards.

Avatar image for freedomfreak
#172 Edited by freedomfreak (48813 posts) -
@Maroxad said:

The dungeons and caves are already small enough, I can clear most of them in about 30 seconds (being roughly 2 or 3 rooms large), those I can't clear in 30 seconds are usually done in 2 minutes. Problem is, there are way too many of them, cut the number of them in half or something.

It always takes me like a half hour, because it's room after room, split up between a loading screen that leads to more rooms.

I wish I was running into the caves you're running into.

Avatar image for The_Last_Ride
#173 Posted by The_Last_Ride (76371 posts) -

i think the Elder Scroll series is overrated personally, i haven't tried Fallout yet though

Avatar image for perfect_blue
#174 Posted by Perfect_Blue (28124 posts) -

I don't know about "most" but they are certainly up there. Tied with Bioware for me.

Avatar image for Vaasman
#177 Posted by Vaasman (12418 posts) -

@Desmonic: Doomed before it even left the gate I'm afraid.

Avatar image for musalala
#178 Posted by musalala (2845 posts) -

@freedomfreak: @Desmonic:

With skyrim it really depends , they are some dungeons can be down in seconds some minutes the main ones can even be an hour long. Its also depends on you play style , I usually play stealth and It takes much longer, i would assume if you are playing as a warrior all gung ho the dungeons would be alot shorter in length.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#179 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Maroxad

No Worries... I just have try harder, wish me luck. :).

Avatar image for turtlethetaffer
#180 Posted by turtlethetaffer (18383 posts) -

@texasgoldrush: Sure, plenty of them do.

Avatar image for turtlethetaffer
#181 Edited by turtlethetaffer (18383 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: Not all JRPGs have ATB based gameplay ;)

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#182 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer

Depends how you define JRPGs. Either way, they suck. ;) I was interested in Deception though.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#183 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer

Depends how you define JRPGs. Either way, they suck. ;) I was interested in Deception (Tecmo Koei) though.

Avatar image for blackace
#184 Posted by blackace (23069 posts) -

@texasgoldrush: Opinions vary. Yes, this probably should have just been blogged.

Avatar image for Maroxad
#185 Edited by Maroxad (11929 posts) -

Yes, that thread is serious. Sadly...

@musalala said:

@freedomfreak: @Desmonic:

With skyrim it really depends , they are some dungeons can be down in seconds some minutes the main ones can even be an hour long. Its also depends on you play style , I usually play stealth and It takes much longer, i would assume if you are playing as a warrior all gung ho the dungeons would be alot shorter in length.

It does dephend on playstyle, I played as a light armor warrior who was using restoration spells (with 100% spell cost reduction) to recover stamina allowing me to sprint endlessly. My weapons were able to instakill most enemies and those they didnt (dragons) survived 3 normal hits at most.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#186 Posted by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@Maroxad said:

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Maroxad

Forgot Me Already ? :(

I dont see you going on crusades against people and stalk them because they dislike games you like. Then take stuff they said 2-3 years ago out of context to use that as ammunition against them today.

Edit: And then return after a year of absence just to call someone a virgin only to disappear again right afterwards.

sounds like a deranged loser to me, oh wait, it's TGR

Avatar image for Shielder7
#187 Posted by Shielder7 (5191 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@papatrop said:

I wouldn't say "most".

I believe that title belongs more to companies such as Bioware.

Bioware games tend to lack in just about every aspect of, what should be, standard RPG design in this day and age.

And it looks like Dragon Age Inquisition is going to be outclassed by just about every other high-profile WRPG this year and next.

Eventually people will come around to it much like they did with SquareEnix (who has repeatedly produced bad JRPGs for over a decade, and seen their sales suffer more and more).

Wrong

Bioware has been the company that has influenced the direction most when it comes to WRPGs since 2000 and the end of the Ultima series. They are the company that sets examples for others to follow, like it or not.

This statement would be true 13 years ago, Now it's just LMAO NO. That Bioware is long dead and is the same in name only.

Avatar image for Whiteblade999
#188 Posted by Whiteblade999 (5844 posts) -

Bethesda makes RPGs?

Avatar image for bussinrounds
#189 Edited by bussinrounds (2690 posts) -

Bethesda and Bioware can both **** right off with their casual dating & hiking sims.

Thank you kickstarter for bringing back the RPG genre with games like Original Sin, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, new Torment, Dead State, Age of Decadence (not a ks)...

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#190 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@bussinrounds

Hmmmm. That Nostalgia. ;)

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#191 Posted by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@bussinrounds

Hmmmm. That Nostalgia. ;)

hmmm dat waste of forum space.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#192 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Krelian-co

The Internet Space is Infinite. Besides, the Forum itself is the waste of space, Still, it doesn't excuse the Peter Pan Syndrome you got going on there. :p

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#193 Edited by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Krelian-co

The Internet Space is Infinite. Besides, the Forum itself is the waste of space, Still, it doesn't excuse the Peter Pan Syndrome you got going on there. :p

finite or infinite your posts and your very presence are a waste of space :(

Also don't need an excuse

Avatar image for turtlethetaffer
#194 Posted by turtlethetaffer (18383 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: Nah, your opinion is simply wrong.

Avatar image for bussinrounds
#195 Posted by bussinrounds (2690 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@bussinrounds

Hmmmm. That Nostalgia. ;)

Nostalgia...hmm... the default 'I'm out of valid arguments' rebuttal by people who don't understand what made a genre/game so popular or loved by the people discussing it in the first place.

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#196 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@Krelian-co

Just like you....

@turtlethetaffer

No they're not. You of all people should no that you don't need to make a good game to have a great RPG.

@bussinrounds

You made a default post, what did you expect, come on man, seriously.

You're right though, I don't know what made it so popular, but it Most definately was not gameplay.

Avatar image for bussinrounds
#197 Posted by bussinrounds (2690 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@bussinrounds

You made a default post, what did you expect, come on man, seriously.

You're right though, I don't know what made it so popular, but it Most definately was not gameplay.

If gameplay only means AWESOME ACTION COMBAT, then no, it's not what made them popular.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
#198 Edited by Krelian-co (13274 posts) -

@bussinrounds said:

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@bussinrounds

You made a default post, what did you expect, come on man, seriously.

You're right though, I don't know what made it so popular, but it Most definately was not gameplay.

If gameplay only means AWESOME ACTION COMBAT, then no, it's not what made them popular.

it doesn't go boom boom, scrutu_scrutu does not approve :(

Avatar image for Lulu_Lulu
#199 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (19564 posts) -

@bussinrounds

You understimate the importance of "Boom Boom" also I'm not in the habbitt of encouraging developers to compensating for flaws in the gameplay instead of actually fixing them. Which is why I've been highly supportive of recent Bioware than Old School Black Isle. Now if we can get them to fix that god awful Dialogue system then we should be fine.