Difference between revisions of "Talk:Left Behind: Eternal Forces"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
I've edited the 'controversy and criticism' section to be a bit more accurate. With the exception of Max Blumenthal's blog, the cited sources do not, in fact, criticise the game - they report others criticising the game, and also give quotes from Left Behind Games refuting that criticism. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 16:46, 6 March 2008 (EST) | I've edited the 'controversy and criticism' section to be a bit more accurate. With the exception of Max Blumenthal's blog, the cited sources do not, in fact, criticise the game - they report others criticising the game, and also give quotes from Left Behind Games refuting that criticism. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 16:46, 6 March 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Jinxmchue, I do not know why you keep reverting my edit. You seem to be trying to say that all of the complaints have been addressed by patches. This is simply not the case. You provided a [http://www.lbgstore.com/lebetrfoupcd.html URL] that would allow me to purchase an add-on CD that would update the game with the Tribulation Forces expansion. Well, that's a paid-for expansion, not a free patch. If you were directing me to the patchnotes for the various patches to the base game underneath that, if you compare that with the complaints voiced in the various sources in the article, this simply proves that not all the complaints have been addressed. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 15:28, 7 March 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 20:28, March 7, 2008
Uhhh... criticism of issues within the game isn't allowed? Barikada 13:32, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- Sure it is, but snarky, unsourced (love the hypocrisy of that) edits like yours aren't. Jinxmchue 13:42, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- I think I may have misinterpreted that statement, but... Sir, are you accusing me of making nothing but snarky, hypocritcal edits? For that matter, how is it hypocritical? Barikada 13:45, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- That edit was snarky and hypocritical, yes. It is snarky because it was made simply to be obnoxious and hypocritical because you questioned unsourced material in the Video game article. Jinxmchue 13:48, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- Ah. Gotcha. Sorry for misinterpreting what you said, then. I shall read more carefully next time. Barikada 13:49, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- That edit was snarky and hypocritical, yes. It is snarky because it was made simply to be obnoxious and hypocritical because you questioned unsourced material in the Video game article. Jinxmchue 13:48, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- I think I may have misinterpreted that statement, but... Sir, are you accusing me of making nothing but snarky, hypocritcal edits? For that matter, how is it hypocritical? Barikada 13:45, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- There is a large and well referenced section on controversy and criticism. All you added was unreferenced parody. Learn together 13:43, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- All of which focuses on claims made before the game came out. It wasn't parody. Barikada 13:45, 23 January 2008 (EST)
I've edited the 'controversy and criticism' section to be a bit more accurate. With the exception of Max Blumenthal's blog, the cited sources do not, in fact, criticise the game - they report others criticising the game, and also give quotes from Left Behind Games refuting that criticism. Urushnor 16:46, 6 March 2008 (EST)
Jinxmchue, I do not know why you keep reverting my edit. You seem to be trying to say that all of the complaints have been addressed by patches. This is simply not the case. You provided a URL that would allow me to purchase an add-on CD that would update the game with the Tribulation Forces expansion. Well, that's a paid-for expansion, not a free patch. If you were directing me to the patchnotes for the various patches to the base game underneath that, if you compare that with the complaints voiced in the various sources in the article, this simply proves that not all the complaints have been addressed. Urushnor 15:28, 7 March 2008 (EST)