203
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 262:
Line 262: + +
Talk:Left Behind: Eternal Forces (view source)
Revision as of 22:48, March 17, 2008
, 22:48, March 17, 2008→Edit war
The reviews are pertinent, but we have references for them if people want to check them up. It is understood that initial versions will have bugs that need to be addressed, but that should not be the focus. The focus should be on how the game plays after the fixes. On a different note, fully patched does not mean that all greivances ever brought up about the game have been solved. The developers of the game would not even have any way of knowing all of those greivances. It does mean that playability issues as presented in the patch documentation have been resolved. It should also be pointed out that some of the greivances raised against the game are ideological or differences of opinion in what makes a fun game. People who want a shoot 'em up will not be happy with Left Behind: Eternal Forces, nor should an effort be made to make them happy. Our article should report about the game and what it is as the focus. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:57, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
The reviews are pertinent, but we have references for them if people want to check them up. It is understood that initial versions will have bugs that need to be addressed, but that should not be the focus. The focus should be on how the game plays after the fixes. On a different note, fully patched does not mean that all greivances ever brought up about the game have been solved. The developers of the game would not even have any way of knowing all of those greivances. It does mean that playability issues as presented in the patch documentation have been resolved. It should also be pointed out that some of the greivances raised against the game are ideological or differences of opinion in what makes a fun game. People who want a shoot 'em up will not be happy with Left Behind: Eternal Forces, nor should an effort be made to make them happy. Our article should report about the game and what it is as the focus. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:57, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
Well, actually, Jinx, what you would have realised, had you bothered to read what I have written, is that 'fully patched' means 'all available patches have been applied', as I have stated several times. According to you, however, it means 'any and all issues of any kind have been addressed by patches'. As I have also stated above, saying that 'fully patched means fully patched' means nothing if you are not giving the proper meaning of 'fully patched' in the first place. At no time have I said 'fully patched does not mean fully patched', I have said, repeatedly, that what you have claimed 'fully patched' actually means is simply wrong. The idea that the links I provided are people 'creating problems' with Windows (and, in fact, the different links I supplied referred to several bits of software, not just Windows, so try reading them) shows you are ignorant of fairly basic facts on the subject. Hackers and crackers don't 'create' problems with Windows, etc, they FIND them. The malware they create are only designed to take advantage of existing problems, of one kind or another. Thus, the links I provided disprove your definition of 'fully patched' (that any and all issues are fixed). If that weren't enough try simply doing a Google search for the phrase, and count how many times the phrase is clearly used to mean what you claim it means. I have already asked you to do this twice, and you apparantly simply refuse. To date, you have utterly failed to actually provide any evidence, bar your own assertion, that you are correct, but, instead, have repeatedly tried to arbritrarily insert the idea that all issues, of any kind, raised by the reviews have been addressed by patches, based, apparantly, entirely on your own opinion that the game is fantastic, and therefore cannot be legitimately criticised in any way, backed up by one sentence that uses the phrase 'fully patched' in one article and your own faulty understanding of what 'fully patched' actually means. As far as I'm concerned, if someone wants to rewrite the section so that no reference is made to this issue at all (or, indeed, simply remove the sentence in question) I have no objection. What I do have an objection to is Jinx perpetrating a factual inaccuracy based purely on his own opinion, and in face of the evidence. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 18:48, 17 March 2008 (EDT)