Where is this mystical argument that blew mine out of the water? No one has been able to list a single seminal game that wasn't developed this way, yet I can list dozens.
I win.
Then do so. As again:
- Please explain why Burnout is a proper specific example, as outlined by your post.
- Please elaborate as to why Art is supposely more important than the medical field when viewed through the lens of game developing, as outlined by your post.
- Please elaborate as to why
G
GrimDarkDarrel
's proposition is, in your eyes, ''not valid and absurd'' and then think your link is going to be read after saying that, as outlined by your post.
- Please produce this list of ''dozens of games that support my claim'', as outlined by your post.
The last time you were given a list to elaborate upon (And it being my first post in that very thread) you ignored it , so feel free to prove everyone wrong this time around.
I know i am on ignore since you seem to have a great dislike for people disproving your views, but the first time i posted a list of questions, you ignored it aswell. This tells me
that you aren't going to elaborate regardless of who is disproving your views. The fact that you put aside two perfectly sound examples as
''They aren't great or seminal games'' is moving the goalpost, first and formost.
Saying
''I can list dozens!'' is not the same as
actually listing games to support your point. It frankly speaks of debating in bad faith that you continue to push that narrative as if its a
valid construct, when in a proper discourse its a tool nobody would use if they were debating it in a
honest fashion.
Therefore, and in line with what most people, including the staff are saying, i feel you aren't here to deliver proper debate. You are here to push a position of holier-than-thou. Which, personally, i would be fine with, if you
backed your stuff up. You do neither, + your tone is consistently aggressive. The fact that you then act
coy and almost
demand that people not offend you personally is one that confuses me:
You are actively upholding this trend yourself and you are seemingly unaware of it.
Want to be treated as a decent user? Than respond
decently to a position and don't play the victim card when it turns out more people have issues with you. Because that tells me that there is a lack of self-reflection on
your end, not the others.
Let me make this clear: when I said that no great or seminal game has ever been made without crunch/obsession/living at work, I actually meant great and seminal.
I didn't mean "indie game with primitive graphics released 20 years after its tech was obsolete."
Cave Story and Stardew Valley aren't great or seminal games. They're--if I'm generous--cute games.
Oh i see, examples are only valid when they are abiding to
your rule set.
Yet where are your examples? For all your consistent claims to
know a big list, you are awfully quick to shut down those who do provide examples.
Since you consider Stardew Valley and Cave Story inappropiate, allow me to link to a game that yes, is indie (So i reckon its not valid in your eyes) but has been a hit amongst indies, and without primitive graphics. Brilliant Game Studios is now making The Black Masses, but this one man team (So it adhers to your requirement) its
Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator.
I don't expect you to consider this a valid example either way, similarly to
how my list of PC only games (Since you had to proclaim that
''PC games dont exist anymore'') was met by you saying:
''The fact that you had to reach so far to include games that haven't even been released yet says it all.''
So i provided
an updated list involving released games, but, unsurprisingly, you ignored it. Somewhere i hope it was because you
knew that it refuted your original claim, but given all your posts, i reckon the problem lays elsewhere. I think its more because you don't want to concede when you are completely factually wrong and that damages your ego. Harsh assumption, but one that i am willing to safely make seeing your posts in action. I don't have to know you in order to establish (and prove) a pattern of dubious behavior from your end.
PS: Do you notice the pattern there in that thread? Every single time your points get refuted, all you do is put your hoofs in the sand and claim you have given
''Evidence'', but you dismiss anyone and anything that actually
does provide evidence, because you seemingly are incapable to.
Based on the above alinea, Nobody with a sound frame of mind would reason that they are debating in a
honest and
transparent fashion. The fact that you still think you are, says more about you than any user here addressing your claims.
I didn't respond because not only was I banned before that post belonged in a museum, but I already had the dude on ignore for trolling. But back to it, you can't list a single game that proves me wrong, I can list 50, and yet I'm the one who's not providing evidence. Okay.
You listed a worthless study that, once again, can't list a single fucking game that actually proves the point.
Oh, here's an article written by John Carmack saying that small focused teams that work more than 40 hours a week are more productive.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10882202
Ouch. Kind of hurts when all you've got is bullshit articles from people who don't even do substantial work whereas everyone who's actually done something of note agrees with me.
Since you refuse to do more than the bare minimum and actually provide proper cites, i did it for you.
Carmack said this:
Carmack said:
''I glanced at the other links, and they look potentially interesting, but non-responsive as far as giving actual data showing that working more than 40 hours a week makes you less productive.''
There are multiple things that i find troubling here:
- He isn't referring to small teams. You added that in yourself.
- Carmack admits he glanced at the other links. Meaning: He didn't gave it a full, proper on research and as such it should not be taken as a fact, but as a foot note in the rest of his comment. This is fully ignored by you.
- He isn't saying what you claim in the bolded. He is saying that based on the few glances he has made on the other links, he feels that they lack in giving you actual data that working more than 40 hours a week makes you less productive. That is something different than what you claim, namely that Carmack was ''saying that small focused teams that work more than 40 hours a week are more productive.''. He isn't saying what you are claiming, you are literally changing the nuance of his cite and changing the meaning of it to fit your position, which is completely false.
In short, you aren't even
properly reading your own links.
Ouch, kind of hurts indeed.
The point stands. There isn't a single great or seminal game that wasn't made under workaholic/obsessive/crunch conditions, and no one can list a single fucking example that challenges that point.
I win.
Except there is, but you are dismissing it because
reasons. Your only claims so far are:
- I can list dozens of titles. (Show it then.)
- I developed games. (Alright, please prove this.)
- I did something with MAME. (Talk about it.)
The fact that out of 3 out of 3 you have yet to provide
any credibility for yourself is what is problematic. But hey, you get
likes so it
must mean your position is
constantly a great one, right?
Somehow you fail to understand that 1 good post out of 10 posts does not make you
respected by any means. If anything it just shows that you
rarely have a point that makes sense, but far more
commonly you are talking complete nonsense.
And the sad bit is: You seem to
geniunely think that proclaiming that you know
''dozens of titles'' is the same as
actually listing said titles.
Spoiler alert: It isnt. By doing so you are just refuting your own position.
dirthead, Where's your list of 50 great/seminal games that supports your position. You're calling several people out for not disproving your point... When you have failed to prove a point.
You roll up into a thread, make a claim, and then seagull the whole thing by demeaning everyone who disputes your claim. You get a ban, because apparently your shitty demeanor isn't exclusive to this thread, get unbanned, and then come back crying like you're some sort of victim.
I could've bought that you were just being sarcastic, trolling, or just taking a stance to debate something. The victim card you played though tells me that you actually believe the stuff you posted. You provided zero evidence to your claim, dismissed others for not providing evidence, looked at evidence that others DID provide, looked at it, said "Nah, I'm still right because reasons brah", and then can't understand why nobody takes you seriously.
Consider yourself being put on the ignore because you are
personally criticizing him. Heck, its why i got ignored aswell. Can't have it when people take your position seriously and call you out when its a generalization or unjust.
Its a shame though. The one time he actually
has a point, i find myself being in heavy agreement. Like Bill said, i think that's what makes it extra sad.
So far my "side of the fence" has provided data to back our arguments up. The only thing you've managed to do to counter said data, is to insult the source of the data and the person who posted it. Solid argument. Troll/10
I ask again, where is your evidence for your claim that working extreme hours increases the end quality of a videogame? Data. I'm asking for data. I mean, I know it's not forthcoming because you don't have any, but I'm going to keep asking you until you realise just how flimsy your argument and so-called corroborating 'evidence' is.
Regarding the Carmack cite i didn't even go that far. I just looked at what he claimed and i looked at what Carmack said and even that single sentence is
twisted to put his position in a better light. If twisting the
meaning of sentences is needed to support your point, than i don't feel like
honesty is the first goal on your list. (Heck, we are still waiting for
any list to begin with.
)
I mean, i have been constantly backtracking my own posts where i list things and links as to that people can check out my
point in this thread and to establish a pattern of prior behavior. I am calling his stuff out, because his opinion essentially comes down to that the PC platform is superior and
everything else sucks. Ill happily invite him to actually
elaborate what he is saying and he can definitely redeem himself by putting his money where his mouth is, but based on past behavior, which compromises several posts (Not just one, i wouldn't call anyone out based on just one post), i feel confident in claiming that he isn't going to. But i love surprises, so there it is.