This is not the best channel on GameSpot to ask for feedback. :|
Gelugon_baat's forum posts
It happened again, apparently.
I get the impression that some people's attempt at doing the maintenance of the directories for game-pages is causing more problems than it solves.
UPDATE: Editing a review of mine which has been downgraded to "rating" status" does nothing. Also, some of these reviews had been affected by this recurring problem many times over, especially the Spellforce 2: Shadows Wars one.
I am not sure how this information would help any staffer which is listening, however - considering that this problem has been coming back again and again.
I want to mention here that this problem doesn't appear to be occurring for me anymore. If this was fixed, can anyone give me a link to any mention by any GameSpot staffer?
I don't have a good answer, but if your browser can support blocking tools, you might want to experiment by looking up what you can block without breaking the display of webpages on this site.
Here's a screenshot of what I have blocked on GameSpot with Ad-Block Plus thus far - on this page alone.
GameSpot links itself to a lot of tracking sites - for example, Clicktale. Maybe that's one of the causes.
Also, the current site framework has a lot of resizing scripts; when you resize your window, your browser often has to load in more webpage elements which have been tailored for that resize - images especially. It gets really slow when this happens.
Oh so now it went from "Who cares about the survival of AMD" to "But amd will hang in there and still compete ike they always do, the market will survive, this is fearmongering!".. You got called out on your idiocy, you can't back step and retroactively claim that's what you meant from the beginning..
Ah, so that what's you thought that I said - and indeed that is what I meant: I do not care for AMD's fortunes. Also, I will still say that that you are a fear-monger. You will see no retractions from me.
You can call me out for my "idiocy" when and if AMD does fold - that has not happened yet, has it?
As for the rest of your remarks, you are just recycling statements which you have said before - how tiresome.
P.S. For you fear-mongers, I suggest that you do research on AMD's health before you go around raising fears of monopolies by Intel and such other paranoid shit. AMD still has some opportunities to pull itself up to survive; its main competitor doesn't have to be pulled down for that to happen.
I am pointing out the idiocy of your claim ...
Yet what was it do you think that my "claim" was? Do point this out.
And I would say the exact same thing if roles were reversed, this hardware fanboyism is sickening on all ends..
Tell that to Xtasy26, not me. Xtasy26 is the one twisting the court case into a trumpeting for AMD.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist if your a consumer to put 2 and 2 together and realize having Intel and AMD competing against each other in the market is a GOOD THING.. It brings down prices, pushes the quality of both products to compete..
What makes you think that I, or anyone else here, don't know this?
I would tell you this though - and this is something that I have already told you earlier - I am not worried over AMD folding. It has been competing with Intel for years, and the two of them had their valleys and peaks during those times.
Maybe you want to freak out over Intel resorting to such sleazy practices, but I have yet to see Intel get away scot-free when it gets caught.
It's mind boggling why I even have to explain the basics of why competition in a market place is good for the consumers.
What's mind-boggling - at least to me - is that you would flip out over my remark of ambivalence for AMD's fortunes. Also, you sound like a fear-monger to me - I personally don't see Intel being able to edge out AMD with such dirty practices when it gets caught so many times and lose court case after court case.
Perhaps you should understand that you can't bribe retailers and PC makers as well follow that up with threat's because it's ILLEGAL. I am not arguing from a social responsibility point of view, I am arguing from the point of view of legality. They violated European Law.
Intel would violate many others to gain an edge; it's a given. With that said, Intel is shooting its own foot; considering Intel's high profile, there are plenty of people watching it for wrong-doing. Besides, there's Intel litigation history - it lost a lot of suits and made many settlements. Any gains it made from sleazy business would be carved away by its legal losses, and any long-term benefit that Intel has would be mitigated by its bad reputation.
I am not worried that Intel would "win", because the checks and balances are already there. The most that I would hope from Intel is reliable and effective products - not Intel suddenly turning honest and such other unlikely occurrences.
Maybe I should tell you that I don't support your opening post because you are using this latest legal debacle by Intel to trumpet AMD.
intel screwed AMD out of billions of dollars in their bribing scheme..which AMD could have used that extra revenue to pump into R&D and adding more to their engineering staff.
How would you know what AMD would do if it had more revenue? Were you a fly on the wall during AMD's financial meetings?
How would you know how much AMD was hurt? If there is any information that you have, it's second-hand, and it originated with AMD - who prepared that information for the court cases to hurt Intel for being stupid enough to get caught.
If you don't have any hard evidence, those are a lot of naïve suppositions - suppositions that you made to trump up AMD here.
Perhaps you buy into the image that AMD is a "victim" here, but expect others to be more skeptical.
Do you understand that Intel's practices were undermining the only real competition in the market? To the point that AMD was getting into financial trouble and couldn't directly compete with them.. If AMD were to go bankrupt you would be left with one option in the industry in which they could charge what ever the hell they wanted.. They already started doing this sh!t with AMD falling behind in charging extra for chips just to be able to overclock it..
If AMD folds, that's its own problem - specifically its would-be/maybe inability to compete in both advantage-gaining business practices and creating products which consumers want.
Also, I don't believe that Intel could edge out AMD. After all, there are people like you and the Xtasy26 who make purchases of "conscience". AMD can also always sue Intel with antitrust suits, like it has done in the past.
Plenty of "fair competition" to be had if AMD knows where to look for it, and it does, considering that it won quite a number of suits against Intel and Intel paid out to AMD more than a few times in settlements, like in 2009.
Its mind boggling that I even have to explain this simplistic reason why you should be for this, regardless of what ever stupid fanboyism you have.
Alright, if you are going to say that, what if some time in the future, AMD turns out to be doing the same damn thing that Intel did then? Then what would you say?
For now, it can be argued that AMD seems to be the "good guy", of course - even ranking quite well in some NGO's rating of corporations' conscience about their supply chains. Yet, there's no guarantee because AMD is ultimately a profit-seeking corporation after all, is there?
I would tell you this too; I buy whichever product is the most convenient and cost-effective to me at the time. If I look at brands, I use the brand names for doing research on these aspects of their products. I am not one for brand loyalty, be it due to outright favoritism or conscience-driven drivel.
How does it not hurt consumer's when intel bribes PC makers to not use AMD or sell it to retailers? It as simple as when a consumer walks into a retail store and only sees intel processors on the shelf and no AMD they don't have a choice. Instead of choosing intel they could have chose AMD. If you don't understand this simple concept then there is seriously something wrong with you.
Then I would say here that the consumer is better off walking out and going to a retail store which did not take Intel's money.
Intel can't take away the dignity of independent retail stores and the wisdom of the consumer. If it did, the fault lies as much with the retailer and consumer as much as it is with Intel.
Perhaps you think that Intel should uphold the social responsibility which it has, but if you do, you are the one with something wrong instead: naïveté.