<!--QuoteBegin--sekdar+Jan 19 2003, 07:01 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (sekdar @ Jan 19 2003, 07:01 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->we're talking about things that are already in there and balanced.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> They're balanced in your opinion, who said you were right?
Your balanced game element might be another man's hive-seeking nuke. Of course, chances are that man would be an idiot, but that doesn't change my point.
I, and almost <b>everyone else</b> who has replied to <b>this thread</b> apparently were right with you Kitsune until:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> * The world will continue to turn. Whether you like it or not, changes will happen that you disagree with, or not happen when you disagree with the status quo. Life will not end. Time spent complaining would be better spent actually playing the game and learning to deal with whatever paradigm shift happened in the latest patch. When in doubt, shoot it. Your character may die, you may lose the game, but fortunately there's another game starting in about twenty seconds, so the damage isn't irreparable. Learn, adapt, and move on. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Iden+Jan 19 2003, 08:29 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Iden @ Jan 19 2003, 08:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I, and almost <b>everyone else</b> who has replied to <b>this thread</b> apparently were right with you Kitsune until:<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> See comments on the ability to influence the gameplay of a mod over the long term
See comments on your mental state if you sit on your **** and make no attempt to do the above
See comments relating to the entirity of the mod on a long term scale, not individual incidents that occured on a pub one day.
Now, had you quoted kit's disclaimer instead of the paragraph you highlighted there, you might have got me to retract something.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Now, this is not addressed to people who are stating their opinions, but rather the ones who run into the forums and publically panic over whatever state of affairs they disagree with. Key words to watch for are 'overpowered', 'too powerful', 'no way to stop them', 'F4', 'OMG', and 'I quit'. I'm far from a leet FPS player; I don't get many headshots as a sniper, I don't bunnyhop or use any other engine physics exploits, never bothered with seeking a clan or practicing for hours every day. And if I am not having a problem coping with a Fade on my doorstep or jetpackers in the vents, then nobody else should, either. Sieges changed? I coped. Umbra nerfed? I coped. Being comfortable with something and not wanting it to change is natural, but change is good, and adapting isn't difficult. Get in there and try it before decrying it as the damnation of the game. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here i'm with Kit. An unreadable "OMG SUX0R" post helps no one and wastes forum space. But the "shut up and play the game" attitude is applied to any complaint that the poster dissagrees with. If you want to include kit's disclaimer into firewater's sig you end up with:
"n00bies usually whine, veterans make intelligent arguments on gameplay changes.... most of the time, or they sit back and take it up the ****"
Hmm, everyone seems so happy by watch you said; I'm going to take the other side for fun and also as a counterargument.
* Skulks do not 'own' light marines. Light marines do not 'own' Skulks. I've killed five marines in a row, I've killed five Skulks in a row. I've been killed by both in the exact opposite situations. Neither has any edge worth speaking of.
Nothing much to say here since it all depends on if you know how to play NS.
* Fades are not unfair. I've killed Fades with LMGs. I've killed Fades with pistols. Haven't knifed one yet, but I'm waiting for the chance. All it takes is the will to step around that corner and face them down.
Fades are always a fun subject for discussion. The only point I will point out is that it takes at least 2 marines with 2/1 upgrades (at least) to rush&kill a fade. Add a second fade and maybe 4 marines can kill one or both. Add a 3rd and all 4 marines probably can't even get close to that corner where they're spamming from. I hope you see where I'm going with this.
* Grenades are not unfair. The power of grenades ends at close range, which, by amazing coincidence, is where the power of most of the aliens is at its peak. Dealing with a grenadier is precisely the same as dealing with a Fade: grow a pair, run around that corner, and get in their face.
Not to be insulting but this comment speaks of inexperience vs good naders. Grenades are support weapons. You run around that corner and you'll be running into the rest of the marines with their lmgs. Damaged from the nades, you will get wasted pretty quick even if there are multiple fades. Of course, I'm assuming you didn't get celerity. Celerity fades are fun. I simply cannot understand why they're boosting grenade damage in 1.04 and God knows why they're applying the arms lab bonus to it. 260 damage at level 3? Rediculous.
* Webs are not unfair. If you're going down a hallway alone, get stuck in webs, and get eaten, then someone was a naughty ramboing boy who reaped the inevitable reward of going off alone. You should have had at least two other guys at your back to mow down the Gorge who healing sprayed you to death. Now you know better. Same goes for Gorges trying to web someone in the middle of a fight, that Gorge should be very dead as early on as possible, and certainly before it has the chance to web more than one person.
Actually as it is right now, web IS unfair. Not slighty unbalance not needing "just a little" tweak, it's flat out unfair. One gorge can web 3 marines with no problem, he'll get hurt for it, but he'll get them all webbed. With adrenaline, he can keep them webbed until that fade or skulk gets there. Or he can just drop a chamber and spam web until the chamber goes up. Combat gorge is FUN. Even during a fight that gorge is going to be BEHIND the fades/skulks. You rush for him and you get swiped/biten. If there's 2 gorges, they'll just heal each other and continue webbing. Of course, all that is skill-dependant on both gorge and marines. The only Truely game-unbalancing aspect of web is that you can web a guy with his welder firing. You can web phases effectively disabling them while the other aliens kill the webbed marines and clean up the TF or whatever. You can also web IPs but that's usually when the game's already over. Oh, also web kills your Motion hack.. err tracking, which I don't understand at all.
* Motion tracking is not unfair. I have a headset on, and am a paranoid, evil-minded man who knows that if I were a Skulk, I'd love nothing more than to sneak up on myself and make me feel like an idiot after biting me in the butt. As such, I always listen carefully, and always keep an eye down hallways and on good ambush points, like ceilings and arched doorways. I didn't need motion tracking to know you were there, I didn't need it to shoot you. It just helped. Seeing all the other blue circles on my screen from the rest of your team is more of a clutter than an aid, and it will be a cold day before I can tell what all those tiny circles on the other side of the map are doing.
Motion tracking negates silence in 1.03; I don't know about 1.04. For that reason alone, MT is broken. In the event that it's fixed, it's still off a bit on the balance issue as the only way for aliens to kill is to get lvl 3 carapace and strafe/charge.
* Umbra is not unfair. If people poured attention on the Lerk rather than just shot blindly into the yellow mist or ran away, I'd have been having much less fun playing a Lerk than I do. One guy usually has the right idea and runs up to knife me, but one guy alone doesn't cut it, and is often swiped down by my Fade, because I'm his bestest buddy in the universe. Throw grenades at them. Knife them. Weld them. Lerks drop like chumps, and even the good Lerks will flee after taking damage rather than die and put those 37 RPs down the tubes. Chase them off or kill them, either way it leaves the Fade high and dry.
We'll see how this do in 1.04. A smart lerk umbras then flies back behind the fades, rush forward again, umbra, runs back. Good luck chasing them. Only grenades effectively cancels umbra, and they're doing a fine job now. God help the lerks in 1.04 when the grenades gets a boost...
* Walls of Lame and Turret Farms are not unfair. There's always a weak spot, it's your own problem if you can't exploit it. Jump over the offense chambers to kill the defense chambers first. Find the side of the turret factory with the least number of turrets covering it, then clear those turrets out.
WoLs are awesome. TFs are fun. *shrug* I haven't seen anyone saying either are unfair-- I don't know why you put them in here.
* Jetpacks are not unfair. I'll admit, it's always obnoxious to see the jetbo with the health-spamming commander going for a hive. However, it's easy for a Lerk to bankrupt the marines. It uses up a two-resource medkit for every time you hit the guy, and with the high rate of fire of spikes... Keeping them busy long enough for Skulks to get up on the ceiling and lay some bites on them isn't that big of a trick. Jetpacks take skill to use. I know it sounds weird to most of you who, like me, have racked up plenty of Tribes hours in our pursuit of team-based games, but it's true. My roomie has killed himself numerous times with a jetpack, because he has no control over it. Trying to explain finesse with a jetpack to him falls on deaf ears, he just mashes on the thrust button until he hits the ceiling, just before falling in a heap right back on the floor. There are in fact people who cannot hover and do midair acrobatics around pipes while shooting at Lerks, the fact that some guy mowed you down from twenty feet overhead speaks highly of his talent, not poorly of jetpacks.
I guess the only problem is that people keep trying to kill jetpackets as a skulk in an open area and cries when they can't.
* You did not pay for Natural Selection. You are not the boss of Flayra. The developers owe you nothing. For commercial software, they would have an obligation to you, but you downloaded their game for free. You get what you paid for, and the nothing you spent entitles you to an equal nothing back. As your money is not paying their rent, please do not assume that your displeasure with something they choose to do will make them lose any sleep tonight. It's their game, their idea, and they can do what they want with it. They could swap out all of the models with coil's cute chibi aliens, replace the weapons with pink Barbie pillows and rename the game to 'Teenage Girl Pillow Fight: Slumber Party Assault!' and it's perfectly within their rights to do just that.
Why isn't this in the Ideas&Suggestion forums...?
* The world will continue to turn. Whether you like it or not, changes will happen that you disagree with, or not happen when you disagree with the status quo. Life will not end. Time spent complaining would be better spent actually playing the game and learning to deal with whatever paradigm shift happened in the latest patch. When in doubt, shoot it. Your character may die, you may lose the game, but fortunately there's another game starting in about twenty seconds, so the damage isn't irreparable. Learn, adapt, and move on.
Complaints/arguments/concerns are what makes better games. These things are otherwise known as FEEDBACK. How/What the creators of the game chooses to catelog/do with them are THEIR concerns.
You know TeoH, I might of known you'd take that personally.
I might of known you wouldn't of seen it with the humor I was trying to portray and that I assume Kistune was pointing out. But you missed it. Both with me and him. We're trying to say lighten up. We're trying to say don't obsses, just relax, take a breath here.
I should of also known that there are just some people, who are so up tight, so into themselves, their opinions and their way of life that they'll take every single breath coming from every single other living being as an attack on them and will need to retort with some sort of snide comment for someone unfathomable reason.
I'm sorry if you thought that was an attack on you. I'm sorry you couldn't loosen up. I'm sorry you can't realize it's a game.
on the other hand, some of your counter-arguments,AIucard, lack some force behind them, but i'm not saying there bad, i just dont agree with them <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> .
>> I simply cannot understand why they're boosting grenade damage in 1.04 and God knows why they're applying the arms lab bonus to it. 260 damage at level 3? Rediculous.
True. You said you don't know who is saying WoL are unfair?
Well, that would be Flayra.
Coz 104 grenades upgraded tend to rip through ANYTHING a gorge can make like an incandescent samurai sword through my soft-white belly.
103 grendades ripped up alien defenses fast enough - at least I never had a problem with any WoL if I had GL in hand. 104...Geez. They may want to provide a counter to the onos or umbra fade or something, but they have also managed to unbalance a good part of the rest of the game. Esp in casual where FF isn't an issue.
In response to the 'Grenades are going to kill poor lerks' complaints...maybe, instead of sitting in the umbra and waiting for the 'in umbra' thing to disappear, you should learn how long it takes for umbra to disappear and stay someplace else until it does, then flap by, drop an umbra cloud, and wait outside the line of fire. Repeat as necessary.
In response to those who are afraid that newbies will start to lead the course of the game, and they'll lead it poorly...thankfully, NS has a strong community, and it's not all that hard to tell those who are intelligent and know the game, and thus have good suggestions, from those who aren't the sharpest tool in the shed and don't have much experience playing, and thus have no idea what they're talking about. Besides, it's Flayra's baby, he's not going to let anything bad happen to it.
TeoH, 'cope with the changes' is a statement on my part that involves the assumption that Flayra isn't going to insta-spawn Onoses instead of Skulks, or anything of similar game-annihilating nature. It's wrong to base things on assumptions, I'll grant you, but I consider it to be a pretty safe assumption.
Likewise, you pointed out, as I said, that there's a world of difference between stated opinions and flat-out complaining. The former has a chance to be productive, while the latter just wastes time. Most importantly, though, is that people actually sit down <i>and play the game</i> before running in and making suggestions or whining. A quick five-minute exposure to something does not give someone the basis of experience to deal with it. If, rather than come here and ask for something to be changed, people kept on playing and tried to figure out a new way to deal with whatever is bothering them, they'll probably find that way.
I don't always agree with things the way they are in the game, or with Flayra's changes. I didn't know what to think about the siege cannon changes, for example, so I went and played games on those servers to see how it all panned out before deciding that it wasn't in any way a big deal. I disagree with the 1.04f carapace changes, because I've played long enough and have dealt with the numbers behind carapace long enough to have a good idea of how it will turn out. If Flayra disagrees with my opinion and keeps it in, however, I don't see it as the end of the world. I'll deal with the new carapace and go right on playing.
Jedi Knight 2 is a prime example of how people who demand that challenging parts be removed rather than learning to surmount them and developers who listen to them can destroy a good thing. It had a very finely balanced combat system, my friends and I played boatloads of the multiplayer game. Some, like me, preferred using the sabers, others preferred the guns. None of us had any real edge over the others, despite all of us continually working to refine our tactics against the others. If anything, improving our tactics just made it all the more balanced. But the whiners rolled into their forums, and the developers actually listened to them, and the patches made it easier to papercut someone to death than kill them with a superheated energy sword. It was still possible, but it took so many hits that it just became tedious.
I have no problem in the world if, after someone's dealt with a part of a game at length, they have the opinion that it needs tweaking. They may well be right, like your WC3 example. My problem is the knee-jerk brigade who can't be bothered to even try to conceive of a way to adapt to the situation.
Place yourself in the game. YOU are standing there, in a hallway. There is a big, nasty alien coming your way that wants to eat YOU. Telling the alien that it's too powerful is not going to stop it from that appointed task, so YOU had better come up with something to do about that in short order. Perhaps a little motivation along those lines will help people come up with new and inventive ideas to deal with those situations.
<a href='http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_PlayToWinPart1.htm' target='_blank'>This link</a> is something that should be read, thanks to Daemonlaud for sharing it with me. Up to a point, I disagree with the author, which I suppose makes me a scrub by his definition. I won't use bug exploits, and will take it easy on someone if it looks like I'd just demolish them otherwise. I'll intentionally restrain myself, because I find no thrill in winning if my opponent either couldn't challenge me or didn't have the opportunity to challenge me. It's like a professional athlete taking on children; sure, he'll win, but what value did that victory have?
Despite that, however, I am in full agreement with the author on the point of a game evolving to match the growing skill of the players. And while I won't use a bug, or force push a newbie off ledges all the time in JK2, I feel no restrictions at all when it comes to beating on a skilled player. If they beat me, it just means that I need to learn what method, bug, or technique they used to do it, and learn how to counter it. Complaining to them that it's unfair isn't going to accomplish anything, if they cared they wouldn't be doing it. Learn to be better than they are, and spank them. Simple as that.
TeoH said that he felt that people who say 'shut up and play' don't care enough about the game to want to better it. I say that people who can't be bothered to improve themselves are the ones who don't care enough. If you truly care about Natural Selection, then you should work hard to surmount whatever challenges you in the hopes that the game with gain a greater depth from finding workable counters to popular strategies. The game must evolve, and if people cut down on the viable strategies by complaining about ones they don't like, eventually everyone will be playing exactly the same as everyone else, there will be no surprises, and no challenges.
Of course, Flayra's working hard to make many viable strategies, and so many of them will probably come to pass without any help at all from the players. Players who just complain about changes they dislike rather than trying to cope with them, however, are selling the developers' hard work short. It deserves the benefit of the doubt and testing rather than being immediately condemned.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Likewise, you pointed out, as I said, that there's a world of difference between stated opinions and flat-out complaining. The former has a chance to be productive, while the latter just wastes time. Most importantly, though, is that people actually sit down <i>and play the game</i> before running in and making suggestions or whining. A quick five-minute exposure to something does not give someone the basis of experience to deal with it. If, rather than come here and ask for something to be changed, people kept on playing and tried to figure out a new way to deal with whatever is bothering them, they'll probably find that way. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Despite the presentation of our posts, we basically agree. You're presenting the common scenario, players making premature and poorly thought out complaints which, had the player gained more experience before posting, they would have known to be invalid. I'm presenting the exceptions, and warning that to brush off every complaint on the forum is to miss the complaints which actually hold water. And they do exist. This is the problem with the "Newbies whine, veterans adapt" statement. As it automatically brushes off any complaint as the ranting of a newbie. Its when the veterans complain that you really have to listen.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This link is something that should be read, thanks to Daemonlaud for sharing it with me. Up to a point, I disagree with the author, which I suppose makes me a scrub by his definition. I won't use bug exploits, and will take it easy on someone if it looks like I'd just demolish them otherwise. I'll intentionally restrain myself, because I find no thrill in winning if my opponent either couldn't challenge me or didn't have the opportunity to challenge me. It's like a professional athlete taking on children; sure, he'll win, but what value did that victory have? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its not the first time thats been posted, appears to be a popular article :) I agree with the majority of it, however i believe some of the comments in there relating to this thread are short sighted, and don't apply to the sort of situation we're in.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> TeoH said that he felt that people who say 'shut up and play' don't care enough about the game to want to better it. I say that people who can't be bothered to improve themselves are the ones who don't care enough. If you truly care about Natural Selection, then you should work hard to surmount whatever challenges you in the hopes that the game with gain a greater depth from finding workable counters to popular strategies. The game must evolve, and if people cut down on the viable strategies by complaining about ones they don't like, eventually everyone will be playing exactly the same as everyone else, there will be no surprises, and no challenges. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Either can be correct, it comes down to who is right, you or the game? The game may be correct, and your issue with the gameplay might be resolvable if you just play a little more and take in a little more depth. On the other hand you may be correct, and there may be a genuine issue with the gameplay. Now i'll state right away that the majority of complaints come from players who simply don't understand the game well enough to know better. But do these complaints really harm anybody? Do they cause more harm than the players who know about real gameplay problems and keep their mouth shut? Its important to realise that the game isnt always right, even the most respected commercial software (WC3?) can stand to be improved somewhat.
Here's my main problem with the playing to win article. In that article every complaint made against the game is false, every player who thinks the game might be better if it worked slightly differently is wrong. It doesn't matter how much experience you have or what your complaint is, the author of that article would insist that you were wrong - basically assuming that the game is always right. This is pretty much the same as "Newbies whine, veterans adapt" or similar statements. In the apparently unlikely event that the game is ever wrong, the author would simply have you play another game. This attitude is probably a mindset created by the sort of games the author had in mind when writing the article. Although it's intended to be a general comentary on competitive gaming, it is obviously skewed towards the Street Fighter series.
(Insert any version of SF here) is an arcade game, well past the stage of playtesting and in a fixed state. Patches for each version are stopped very shortly after the cabinet hits the streets and no more changes are ever made from that point on. The SF series is also exceptionally well written, with many layers of depth that few people appreciate. In the street fighter world, its very hard to find any complaint with the gameplay that doesn't become meaningless if you just play the game a bit longer. And should you ever find a genuine problem, there's little point complaining about it, because it isnt going to be fixed. Unless it happens to be the sort of problem that community laws can get around. This creates the mentality that the game is always right, and if the game is ever wrong, get another game.
NS is an entirely different situation, the game is in development, and its gameplay is not yet at a mature stage. There's a much higher chance of you finding real problems in NS than in SF, and if you do have a problem with the game, its not beyond the realms of possibility for it to be fixed.
The play to win author offers 1 exception to his argument, Gouki in SSF2T, but he presents the exception in a way that suggests "This is a one-off and never happens." He portrays Gouki as the SF equivalent of a hive-seeking nuke, the implication is that nothing less than a hive-seeking nuke should ever prompt a complaint about a game. I've made many exaggerated examples to show situations where complaints are warranted, but i do not believe it's only worth complaining when Flayra gives the marines an instant win button. There is a fuzzy line at best between important and unimportant complaints.
Should someone come into the general forum, make a complaint about the resource model not working well for varying team sizes (it doesn't) an offer a suggestion that might improve the game, are you going to brush him off as a whining newbie?
As for the rest of the article, i use everything at my disposal to play the game to the best of my ability, and i agree with him that i would feel cheated if other people did not do the same. I've mentioned before that i would like to see silent hopping removed from NS, but that isnt stopping me from using it in every game i play untill its removal. The only game element i don't make use of is the marine model console command, as its universally accepted as a cheat by everyone, and will get you banned on the majority of servers. Making a complaint does not stop me from continuing to play the game and develop my understanding of it, perhaps i may suddenly realise that silent hopping is a valuable game element - but somehow i doubt that.
>> and will take it easy on someone if it looks like I'd just demolish them otherwise. I'll intentionally restrain myself,
I think your 'disagreement' here is not one at all in fact - if you read his article carefully you will see that he is referring exclusively to either a) top level, competitive, cutthrought tournament professional play or b) making game alterations based on player experience.
I am sure Sirlin wouldn't 'play to win' if he was teaching his newphew how to play Virtua Fighter or something.
>> or force push a newbie off ledges all the time in JK2, I feel no restrictions at all when it comes to beating on a skilled player. If they beat me, it just means that I need to learn what method, bug...
See? That is what he is saying. He isn't saying you have to compulsively kill everyone at all times and win regardless of circumstance - he is saying, when you are playing to win, play to win and don't restrict yourself. If you are trying to get better, and aren't the master, don't say 'Oh well using that spell is cheap so I just refuse to acknowledge its existence' - learn to deal.
The point? 'newb' and 'scrub' are not the same thing. The newb is NEW. The scrub is a n00b who isn't new at all.
>> And while I won't use a bug, >> . I won't use bug exploits,
Well two points here. Firstly, part of the world of bug exploits are slightly different today. In console games and pre-internet PC games, what was released was, essentially, what you got. There would be no patches or changelists or forum discussions like this, no chance to confer with the developers. So the devs had to make it as strong a release as they could and then hope it couldn't be broken too badly. And the players had to cope.
On the other hand, some 'bugs' and 'exploits' actually add to games, and are features in themselves, in some cases indistinguishable from real game features.
Bunnyhopping, regardless of your ability or view on its legitmacy in team mods, is a critical part of the gameplay or quakeworld. In fact, a better part of the real skill and depth of QW DM came from unintended 'exploits' of the physics engine, that allowed people to reach skill heights simply not comparable in any other electronic game since, excepting maybe HLDM.
'Lumber bug' from War2 became standard for all players, and actually improved the game - so much so that Blizzard enshrined it in war2:bnet edition by including its effect permanently even when it fixed the actual bug.
The difference for me between 'exploit', 'cheat' and 'bug - feature' or legtitmate tactic is this: A legitmate tactic that comes as a consequence of a bug is not less legitmate simply because its creators did not intend it. It simply is.
Whether it is one-sided or reduces the strategic depth of the game are the questions you ask to decide on which side of the fence this falls.
If you want to know the difference between the exploit and anything else, read my big post on this page <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=20304&st=15' target='_blank'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/in...5&t=20304&st=15</a>
Is it just me, or does anybody else think Kitsune and Teoh are one and the same ? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> Your style of posting is very similar.
Theres a thin line between a legtimate complaint/discussion (wrong or right) and a plain out whinge.
The difference is usually easy to tell from the language used and the presence (or lack) of an actual arguement. Legtimate discussions are needed, as has been pointed out, as they are an important form of feedback for the Devs. At least i'd like to think they are.
What really ticks me off is when I see the 4th post about the same thing particulary when its about one of the beta versions of a patch which isn't even finalised yet.
Shhhhh! It's not supposed to come out until page 8 that we're the same guy! Have you no sense of proper forum etiquette? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> (For people who don't know, an Everquest scammer was posting under different aliases on a message board to try to make people think that his three character accounts were, in fact, separate people. Except on the eighth page of the thread, he screwed up and posted as one person, under another person's account. More hilariously, his post as person A was busy blaming person B for all the scams, and saying how he hated her for it, except he was posting with person B's account.)
But more seriously, yes, TeoH and I are basically agreeing with each other, except on different sides of the coin. Good feedback is important to the game and can help considerably. I would simply prefer that people take more time exploring the intracasies of features before making judgements.
You know what makes me all warm and fuzzy inside... when I read a post thats well thought out and deserves the time that it takes to read it We all know the spam posts of "OM6 T3|-| H4x!"... but its rare that I find one that I enjoy reading. Kudos kitsune.
Comments
we're talking about things that are already in there and balanced.
They're balanced in your opinion, who said you were right?
Your balanced game element might be another man's hive-seeking nuke. Of course, chances are that man would be an idiot, but that doesn't change my point.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
* The world will continue to turn.
Whether you like it or not, changes will happen that you disagree with, or not happen when you disagree with the status quo. Life will not end. Time spent complaining would be better spent actually playing the game and learning to deal with whatever paradigm shift happened in the latest patch. When in doubt, shoot it. Your character may die, you may lose the game, but fortunately there's another game starting in about twenty seconds, so the damage isn't irreparable. Learn, adapt, and move on.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You sooooo lost us there.
See comments on the ability to influence the gameplay of a mod over the long term
See comments on your mental state if you sit on your **** and make no attempt to do the above
See comments relating to the entirity of the mod on a long term scale, not individual incidents that occured on a pub one day.
Now, had you quoted kit's disclaimer instead of the paragraph you highlighted there, you might have got me to retract something.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Now, this is not addressed to people who are stating their opinions, but rather the ones who run into the forums and publically panic over whatever state of affairs they disagree with. Key words to watch for are 'overpowered', 'too powerful', 'no way to stop them', 'F4', 'OMG', and 'I quit'. I'm far from a leet FPS player; I don't get many headshots as a sniper, I don't bunnyhop or use any other engine physics exploits, never bothered with seeking a clan or practicing for hours every day. And if I am not having a problem coping with a Fade on my doorstep or jetpackers in the vents, then nobody else should, either. Sieges changed? I coped. Umbra nerfed? I coped. Being comfortable with something and not wanting it to change is natural, but change is good, and adapting isn't difficult. Get in there and try it before decrying it as the damnation of the game.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here i'm with Kit. An unreadable "OMG SUX0R" post helps no one and wastes forum space. But the "shut up and play the game" attitude is applied to any complaint that the poster dissagrees with. If you want to include kit's disclaimer into firewater's sig you end up with:
"n00bies usually whine, veterans make intelligent arguments on gameplay changes.... most of the time, or they sit back and take it up the ****"
nice sig :)
* Skulks do not 'own' light marines. Light marines do not 'own' Skulks.
I've killed five marines in a row, I've killed five Skulks in a row. I've been killed by both in the exact opposite situations. Neither has any edge worth speaking of.
Nothing much to say here since it all depends on if you know how to play NS.
* Fades are not unfair.
I've killed Fades with LMGs. I've killed Fades with pistols. Haven't knifed one yet, but I'm waiting for the chance. All it takes is the will to step around that corner and face them down.
Fades are always a fun subject for discussion. The only point I will point out is that it takes at least 2 marines with 2/1 upgrades (at least) to rush&kill a fade. Add a second fade and maybe 4 marines can kill one or both. Add a 3rd and all 4 marines probably can't even get close to that corner where they're spamming from. I hope you see where I'm going with this.
* Grenades are not unfair.
The power of grenades ends at close range, which, by amazing coincidence, is where the power of most of the aliens is at its peak. Dealing with a grenadier is precisely the same as dealing with a Fade: grow a pair, run around that corner, and get in their face.
Not to be insulting but this comment speaks of inexperience vs good naders. Grenades are support weapons. You run around that corner and you'll be running into the rest of the marines with their lmgs. Damaged from the nades, you will get wasted pretty quick even if there are multiple fades. Of course, I'm assuming you didn't get celerity. Celerity fades are fun.
I simply cannot understand why they're boosting grenade damage in 1.04 and God knows why they're applying the arms lab bonus to it. 260 damage at level 3? Rediculous.
* Webs are not unfair.
If you're going down a hallway alone, get stuck in webs, and get eaten, then someone was a naughty ramboing boy who reaped the inevitable reward of going off alone. You should have had at least two other guys at your back to mow down the Gorge who healing sprayed you to death. Now you know better. Same goes for Gorges trying to web someone in the middle of a fight, that Gorge should be very dead as early on as possible, and certainly before it has the chance to web more than one person.
Actually as it is right now, web IS unfair. Not slighty unbalance not needing "just a little" tweak, it's flat out unfair. One gorge can web 3 marines with no problem, he'll get hurt for it, but he'll get them all webbed. With adrenaline, he can keep them webbed until that fade or skulk gets there. Or he can just drop a chamber and spam web until the chamber goes up. Combat gorge is FUN. Even during a fight that gorge is going to be BEHIND the fades/skulks. You rush for him and you get swiped/biten. If there's 2 gorges, they'll just heal each other and continue webbing.
Of course, all that is skill-dependant on both gorge and marines.
The only Truely game-unbalancing aspect of web is that you can web a guy with his welder firing. You can web phases effectively disabling them while the other aliens kill the webbed marines and clean up the TF or whatever. You can also web IPs but that's usually when the game's already over. Oh, also web kills your Motion hack.. err tracking, which I don't understand at all.
* Motion tracking is not unfair.
I have a headset on, and am a paranoid, evil-minded man who knows that if I were a Skulk, I'd love nothing more than to sneak up on myself and make me feel like an idiot after biting me in the butt. As such, I always listen carefully, and always keep an eye down hallways and on good ambush points, like ceilings and arched doorways. I didn't need motion tracking to know you were there, I didn't need it to shoot you. It just helped. Seeing all the other blue circles on my screen from the rest of your team is more of a clutter than an aid, and it will be a cold day before I can tell what all those tiny circles on the other side of the map are doing.
Motion tracking negates silence in 1.03; I don't know about 1.04. For that reason alone, MT is broken. In the event that it's fixed, it's still off a bit on the balance issue as the only way for aliens to kill is to get lvl 3 carapace and strafe/charge.
* Umbra is not unfair.
If people poured attention on the Lerk rather than just shot blindly into the yellow mist or ran away, I'd have been having much less fun playing a Lerk than I do. One guy usually has the right idea and runs up to knife me, but one guy alone doesn't cut it, and is often swiped down by my Fade, because I'm his bestest buddy in the universe. Throw grenades at them. Knife them. Weld them. Lerks drop like chumps, and even the good Lerks will flee after taking damage rather than die and put those 37 RPs down the tubes. Chase them off or kill them, either way it leaves the Fade high and dry.
We'll see how this do in 1.04.
A smart lerk umbras then flies back behind the fades, rush forward again, umbra, runs back. Good luck chasing them. Only grenades effectively cancels umbra, and they're doing a fine job now. God help the lerks in 1.04 when the grenades gets a boost...
* Walls of Lame and Turret Farms are not unfair.
There's always a weak spot, it's your own problem if you can't exploit it. Jump over the offense chambers to kill the defense chambers first. Find the side of the turret factory with the least number of turrets covering it, then clear those turrets out.
WoLs are awesome. TFs are fun. *shrug* I haven't seen anyone saying either are unfair-- I don't know why you put them in here.
* Jetpacks are not unfair.
I'll admit, it's always obnoxious to see the jetbo with the health-spamming commander going for a hive. However, it's easy for a Lerk to bankrupt the marines. It uses up a two-resource medkit for every time you hit the guy, and with the high rate of fire of spikes... Keeping them busy long enough for Skulks to get up on the ceiling and lay some bites on them isn't that big of a trick. Jetpacks take skill to use. I know it sounds weird to most of you who, like me, have racked up plenty of Tribes hours in our pursuit of team-based games, but it's true. My roomie has killed himself numerous times with a jetpack, because he has no control over it. Trying to explain finesse with a jetpack to him falls on deaf ears, he just mashes on the thrust button until he hits the ceiling, just before falling in a heap right back on the floor. There are in fact people who cannot hover and do midair acrobatics around pipes while shooting at Lerks, the fact that some guy mowed you down from twenty feet overhead speaks highly of his talent, not poorly of jetpacks.
I guess the only problem is that people keep trying to kill jetpackets as a skulk in an open area and cries when they can't.
* You did not pay for Natural Selection.
You are not the boss of Flayra. The developers owe you nothing. For commercial software, they would have an obligation to you, but you downloaded their game for free. You get what you paid for, and the nothing you spent entitles you to an equal nothing back. As your money is not paying their rent, please do not assume that your displeasure with something they choose to do will make them lose any sleep tonight. It's their game, their idea, and they can do what they want with it. They could swap out all of the models with coil's cute chibi aliens, replace the weapons with pink Barbie pillows and rename the game to 'Teenage Girl Pillow Fight: Slumber Party Assault!' and it's perfectly within their rights to do just that.
Why isn't this in the Ideas&Suggestion forums...?
* The world will continue to turn.
Whether you like it or not, changes will happen that you disagree with, or not happen when you disagree with the status quo. Life will not end. Time spent complaining would be better spent actually playing the game and learning to deal with whatever paradigm shift happened in the latest patch. When in doubt, shoot it. Your character may die, you may lose the game, but fortunately there's another game starting in about twenty seconds, so the damage isn't irreparable. Learn, adapt, and move on.
Complaints/arguments/concerns are what makes better games. These things are otherwise known as FEEDBACK. How/What the creators of the game chooses to catelog/do with them are THEIR concerns.
I might of known you wouldn't of seen it with the humor I was trying to portray and that I assume Kistune was pointing out. But you missed it. Both with me and him. We're trying to say lighten up. We're trying to say don't obsses, just relax, take a breath here.
I should of also known that there are just some people, who are so up tight, so into themselves, their opinions and their way of life that they'll take every single breath coming from every single other living being as an attack on them and will need to retort with some sort of snide comment for someone unfathomable reason.
I'm sorry if you thought that was an attack on you. I'm sorry you couldn't loosen up. I'm sorry you can't realize it's a game.
Feel better now?
on the other hand, some of your counter-arguments,AIucard, lack some force behind them, but i'm not saying there bad, i just dont agree with them <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> .
True. You said you don't know who is saying WoL are unfair?
Well, that would be Flayra.
Coz 104 grenades upgraded tend to rip through ANYTHING a gorge can make like an incandescent samurai sword through my soft-white belly.
103 grendades ripped up alien defenses fast enough - at least I never had a problem with any WoL if I had GL in hand.
104...Geez.
They may want to provide a counter to the onos or umbra fade or something, but they have also managed to unbalance a good part of the rest of the game.
Esp in casual where FF isn't an issue.
In response to those who are afraid that newbies will start to lead the course of the game, and they'll lead it poorly...thankfully, NS has a strong community, and it's not all that hard to tell those who are intelligent and know the game, and thus have good suggestions, from those who aren't the sharpest tool in the shed and don't have much experience playing, and thus have no idea what they're talking about. Besides, it's Flayra's baby, he's not going to let anything bad happen to it.
Likewise, you pointed out, as I said, that there's a world of difference between stated opinions and flat-out complaining. The former has a chance to be productive, while the latter just wastes time. Most importantly, though, is that people actually sit down <i>and play the game</i> before running in and making suggestions or whining. A quick five-minute exposure to something does not give someone the basis of experience to deal with it. If, rather than come here and ask for something to be changed, people kept on playing and tried to figure out a new way to deal with whatever is bothering them, they'll probably find that way.
I don't always agree with things the way they are in the game, or with Flayra's changes. I didn't know what to think about the siege cannon changes, for example, so I went and played games on those servers to see how it all panned out before deciding that it wasn't in any way a big deal. I disagree with the 1.04f carapace changes, because I've played long enough and have dealt with the numbers behind carapace long enough to have a good idea of how it will turn out. If Flayra disagrees with my opinion and keeps it in, however, I don't see it as the end of the world. I'll deal with the new carapace and go right on playing.
Jedi Knight 2 is a prime example of how people who demand that challenging parts be removed rather than learning to surmount them and developers who listen to them can destroy a good thing. It had a very finely balanced combat system, my friends and I played boatloads of the multiplayer game. Some, like me, preferred using the sabers, others preferred the guns. None of us had any real edge over the others, despite all of us continually working to refine our tactics against the others. If anything, improving our tactics just made it all the more balanced. But the whiners rolled into their forums, and the developers actually listened to them, and the patches made it easier to papercut someone to death than kill them with a superheated energy sword. It was still possible, but it took so many hits that it just became tedious.
I have no problem in the world if, after someone's dealt with a part of a game at length, they have the opinion that it needs tweaking. They may well be right, like your WC3 example. My problem is the knee-jerk brigade who can't be bothered to even try to conceive of a way to adapt to the situation.
Place yourself in the game. YOU are standing there, in a hallway. There is a big, nasty alien coming your way that wants to eat YOU. Telling the alien that it's too powerful is not going to stop it from that appointed task, so YOU had better come up with something to do about that in short order. Perhaps a little motivation along those lines will help people come up with new and inventive ideas to deal with those situations.
Despite that, however, I am in full agreement with the author on the point of a game evolving to match the growing skill of the players. And while I won't use a bug, or force push a newbie off ledges all the time in JK2, I feel no restrictions at all when it comes to beating on a skilled player. If they beat me, it just means that I need to learn what method, bug, or technique they used to do it, and learn how to counter it. Complaining to them that it's unfair isn't going to accomplish anything, if they cared they wouldn't be doing it. Learn to be better than they are, and spank them. Simple as that.
TeoH said that he felt that people who say 'shut up and play' don't care enough about the game to want to better it. I say that people who can't be bothered to improve themselves are the ones who don't care enough. If you truly care about Natural Selection, then you should work hard to surmount whatever challenges you in the hopes that the game with gain a greater depth from finding workable counters to popular strategies. The game must evolve, and if people cut down on the viable strategies by complaining about ones they don't like, eventually everyone will be playing exactly the same as everyone else, there will be no surprises, and no challenges.
Of course, Flayra's working hard to make many viable strategies, and so many of them will probably come to pass without any help at all from the players. Players who just complain about changes they dislike rather than trying to cope with them, however, are selling the developers' hard work short. It deserves the benefit of the doubt and testing rather than being immediately condemned.
Likewise, you pointed out, as I said, that there's a world of difference between stated opinions and flat-out complaining. The former has a chance to be productive, while the latter just wastes time. Most importantly, though, is that people actually sit down <i>and play the game</i> before running in and making suggestions or whining. A quick five-minute exposure to something does not give someone the basis of experience to deal with it. If, rather than come here and ask for something to be changed, people kept on playing and tried to figure out a new way to deal with whatever is bothering them, they'll probably find that way.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Despite the presentation of our posts, we basically agree. You're presenting the common scenario, players making premature and poorly thought out complaints which, had the player gained more experience before posting, they would have known to be invalid. I'm presenting the exceptions, and warning that to brush off every complaint on the forum is to miss the complaints which actually hold water. And they do exist. This is the problem with the "Newbies whine, veterans adapt" statement. As it automatically brushes off any complaint as the ranting of a newbie. Its when the veterans complain that you really have to listen.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
This link is something that should be read, thanks to Daemonlaud for sharing it with me. Up to a point, I disagree with the author, which I suppose makes me a scrub by his definition. I won't use bug exploits, and will take it easy on someone if it looks like I'd just demolish them otherwise. I'll intentionally restrain myself, because I find no thrill in winning if my opponent either couldn't challenge me or didn't have the opportunity to challenge me. It's like a professional athlete taking on children; sure, he'll win, but what value did that victory have?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its not the first time thats been posted, appears to be a popular article :)
I agree with the majority of it, however i believe some of the comments in there relating to this thread are short sighted, and don't apply to the sort of situation we're in.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
TeoH said that he felt that people who say 'shut up and play' don't care enough about the game to want to better it. I say that people who can't be bothered to improve themselves are the ones who don't care enough. If you truly care about Natural Selection, then you should work hard to surmount whatever challenges you in the hopes that the game with gain a greater depth from finding workable counters to popular strategies. The game must evolve, and if people cut down on the viable strategies by complaining about ones they don't like, eventually everyone will be playing exactly the same as everyone else, there will be no surprises, and no challenges.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Either can be correct, it comes down to who is right, you or the game? The game may be correct, and your issue with the gameplay might be resolvable if you just play a little more and take in a little more depth. On the other hand you may be correct, and there may be a genuine issue with the gameplay. Now i'll state right away that the majority of complaints come from players who simply don't understand the game well enough to know better. But do these complaints really harm anybody? Do they cause more harm than the players who know about real gameplay problems and keep their mouth shut?
Its important to realise that the game isnt always right, even the most respected commercial software (WC3?) can stand to be improved somewhat.
Here's my main problem with the playing to win article. In that article every complaint made against the game is false, every player who thinks the game might be better if it worked slightly differently is wrong. It doesn't matter how much experience you have or what your complaint is, the author of that article would insist that you were wrong - basically assuming that the game is always right. This is pretty much the same as "Newbies whine, veterans adapt" or similar statements. In the apparently unlikely event that the game is ever wrong, the author would simply have you play another game. This attitude is probably a mindset created by the sort of games the author had in mind when writing the article. Although it's intended to be a general comentary on competitive gaming, it is obviously skewed towards the Street Fighter series.
(Insert any version of SF here) is an arcade game, well past the stage of playtesting and in a fixed state. Patches for each version are stopped very shortly after the cabinet hits the streets and no more changes are ever made from that point on. The SF series is also exceptionally well written, with many layers of depth that few people appreciate. In the street fighter world, its very hard to find any complaint with the gameplay that doesn't become meaningless if you just play the game a bit longer. And should you ever find a genuine problem, there's little point complaining about it, because it isnt going to be fixed. Unless it happens to be the sort of problem that community laws can get around. This creates the mentality that the game is always right, and if the game is ever wrong, get another game.
NS is an entirely different situation, the game is in development, and its gameplay is not yet at a mature stage. There's a much higher chance of you finding real problems in NS than in SF, and if you do have a problem with the game, its not beyond the realms of possibility for it to be fixed.
The play to win author offers 1 exception to his argument, Gouki in SSF2T, but he presents the exception in a way that suggests "This is a one-off and never happens." He portrays Gouki as the SF equivalent of a hive-seeking nuke, the implication is that nothing less than a hive-seeking nuke should ever prompt a complaint about a game. I've made many exaggerated examples to show situations where complaints are warranted, but i do not believe it's only worth complaining when Flayra gives the marines an instant win button. There is a fuzzy line at best between important and unimportant complaints.
Should someone come into the general forum, make a complaint about the resource model not working well for varying team sizes (it doesn't) an offer a suggestion that might improve the game, are you going to brush him off as a whining newbie?
As for the rest of the article, i use everything at my disposal to play the game to the best of my ability, and i agree with him that i would feel cheated if other people did not do the same. I've mentioned before that i would like to see silent hopping removed from NS, but that isnt stopping me from using it in every game i play untill its removal. The only game element i don't make use of is the marine model console command, as its universally accepted as a cheat by everyone, and will get you banned on the majority of servers. Making a complaint does not stop me from continuing to play the game and develop my understanding of it, perhaps i may suddenly realise that silent hopping is a valuable game element - but somehow i doubt that.
I think your 'disagreement' here is not one at all in fact - if you read his article carefully you will see that he is referring exclusively to either a) top level, competitive, cutthrought tournament professional play or b) making game alterations based on player experience.
I am sure Sirlin wouldn't 'play to win' if he was teaching his newphew how to play Virtua Fighter or something.
>> or force push a newbie off ledges all the time in JK2, I feel no restrictions at all when it comes to beating on a skilled player. If they beat me, it just means that I need to learn what method, bug...
See? That is what he is saying. He isn't saying you have to compulsively kill everyone at all times and win regardless of circumstance - he is saying, when you are playing to win, play to win and don't restrict yourself. If you are trying to get better, and aren't the master, don't say 'Oh well using that spell is cheap so I just refuse to acknowledge its existence' - learn to deal.
The point? 'newb' and 'scrub' are not the same thing. The newb is NEW. The scrub is a n00b who isn't new at all.
>> And while I won't use a bug,
>> . I won't use bug exploits,
Well two points here. Firstly, part of the world of bug exploits are slightly different today. In console games and pre-internet PC games, what was released was, essentially, what you got. There would be no patches or changelists or forum discussions like this, no chance to confer with the developers. So the devs had to make it as strong a release as they could and then hope it couldn't be broken too badly. And the players had to cope.
On the other hand, some 'bugs' and 'exploits' actually add to games, and are features in themselves, in some cases indistinguishable from real game features.
Bunnyhopping, regardless of your ability or view on its legitmacy in team mods, is a critical part of the gameplay or quakeworld. In fact, a better part of the real skill and depth of QW DM came from unintended 'exploits' of the physics engine, that allowed people to reach skill heights simply not comparable in any other electronic game since, excepting maybe HLDM.
'Lumber bug' from War2 became standard for all players, and actually improved the game - so much so that Blizzard enshrined it in war2:bnet edition by including its effect permanently even when it fixed the actual bug.
The difference for me between 'exploit', 'cheat' and 'bug - feature' or legtitmate tactic is this: A legitmate tactic that comes as a consequence of a bug is not less legitmate simply because its creators did not intend it. It simply is.
Whether it is one-sided or reduces the strategic depth of the game are the questions you ask to decide on which side of the fence this falls.
If you want to know the difference between the exploit and anything else, read my big post on this page <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=20304&st=15' target='_blank'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/in...5&t=20304&st=15</a>
Theres a thin line between a legtimate complaint/discussion (wrong or right) and a plain out whinge.
The difference is usually easy to tell from the language used and the presence (or lack) of an actual arguement. Legtimate discussions are needed, as has been pointed out, as they are an important form of feedback for the Devs. At least i'd like to think they are.
What really ticks me off is when I see the 4th post about the same thing particulary when its about one of the beta versions of a patch which isn't even finalised yet.
But more seriously, yes, TeoH and I are basically agreeing with each other, except on different sides of the coin. Good feedback is important to the game and can help considerably. I would simply prefer that people take more time exploring the intracasies of features before making judgements.