hello luthier!

[Jatta Raso]

Originally Posted by Ataros

Funboys improve sales and encourage the devs.

Whiners reduce sales and discourage the devs.

Quite simple.

sales improvement comes from quality. even simpler.

if it has quality it will sell itself, if it hasn't, it won't, no matter how hard it's advertised; anything else is bollocks. you can't fool people into buying crap no matter how often you post it's not crap, and reverse is also true. besides, those who look for an external opinion go essentially for professional reviews and avoid this kind of bi-polarized places (fanboys vs whiners). thus i really can't see how posting affects sales.

regarding marketing, it's responsibility of publishers and developers, not of posters.

as for devs they must find encouragement on revenue and personal satisfaction upon their product, as every honest worker does.

my 2 cents

[ChrisDNT]

Who's the guy responsible for the greens ?

[Blackdog_kt]

To answer Manu's question which is also shared by many, i'll try to give my interpretation of what constitutes negative and non-constructive posting.

I think it's not about the message, but the poster's attitude and the way it's delivered.
There are dozens of people pointing out inaccuracies and faults with the sim and they are not branded "whiners" or doom and gloom merchants, ever wondered why?

It's simple, they stick to a reporting style and not engage in personal attacks and speculation.
This also applies to the other camp, the so called "fanboys".

You see i'm using quote marks because i don't really accept that division. There are no "whiners" or "fanboys", there are only people who are realistic and people who detach themselves from reality on purpose (they are not stupid, they are just disappointed and aggressive to contrary opinions, so their defensive mechanisms kick into gear).

In fact, i think that both "whiners" and "fanboys" are part of this same group. Some are disappointed with the developers and the sim and the rest are disappointed with how the first group is supposedly killing their favorite game, but both groups use the same ineffective methods (half-baked, aggressive arguments and personal vitriol) to push otherwise relevant points.

This doesn't only aggravate the bystanders, it also detracts from their points because it's clear they are too lazy to come up with a coherent argument and prefer repeating one liners ad nauseum or getting into slagging matches among themselves. My question is, how does such a person expect to convince the rest of us if he can't take the time to formulate his opinion in a coherent manner that's at least appealing to read? I mean, if they won't take the time to support their own viewpoint how am i as a 3rd party expected to consider it worthy of attention?

Take the time to proof-read your posts before clicking submit (the preview button is there for a reason), try to edit out some stuff that might be getting personal, emotional or speculative and stick to giving us your experience of it all without snide remarks.

I guarantee you the amount of people who are willing to discuss things with you will rise, even though not all of them will agree. I find it much easier to respect an opinion (no matter if i agree or disagree with it) if it's at least worded in a manner that doesn't give me the mental image of a person frothing at the mouth behind a keyboard, not to mention it's easier to avoid getting dragged into similar behaviours myself

[furbs]

All very well in a perfect world Blackdog, I agree with you, but this is not a perfect world. This is the INTERNET!!

So good luck with that. (though your right)

You do remind me of the guy from Southpark, "drugs are bad, mmmkk"

he was right too, but still all the kids(forum members) pay no notice.

[6S.Manu]

Blackdog, I don't write often on this forum now, but if I must then I try to do my best translating my thought in a different language (so many mistakes, shame on me!).

I agree that it's the attitude.

Anyway as Furbs writes we are still on the Internet.
You know...



In every social board there will always be immature guys who writes down "one sentence posts" (with or without bad words) and of course this can only split the community in the "White" and "Black" sides (the ones who stay in the "Grey" are positioned according their actual interlocutor).

In the board we still use an indirect way to communicate and we often have misunderstandings who are the reasons quarrels.

We have quarrels in my squad's board (something like 20 people now) and we're all talking italian.. I can imagine how many more misunderstanding between posters with different mother tongues.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

To answer Manu's question which is also shared by many, i'll try to give my interpretation of what constitutes negative and non-constructive posting.

I think it's not about the message, but the poster's attitude and the way it's delivered.
There are dozens of people pointing out inaccuracies and faults with the sim and they are not branded "whiners" or doom and gloom merchants, ever wondered why?

It's simple, they stick to a reporting style and not engage in personal attacks and speculation.
This also applies to the other camp, the so called "fanboys".

You see i'm using quote marks because i don't really accept that division. There are no "whiners" or "fanboys", there are only people who are realistic and people who detach themselves from reality on purpose (they are not stupid, they are just disappointed and aggressive to contrary opinions, so their defensive mechanisms kick into gear).

In fact, i think that both "whiners" and "fanboys" are part of this same group. Some are disappointed with the developers and the sim and the rest are disappointed with how the first group is supposedly killing their favorite game, but both groups use the same ineffective methods (half-baked, aggressive arguments and personal vitriol) to push otherwise relevant points.

This doesn't only aggravate the bystanders, it also detracts from their points because it's clear they are too lazy to come up with a coherent argument and prefer repeating one liners ad nauseum or getting into slagging matches among themselves. My question is, how does such a person expect to convince the rest of us if he can't take the time to formulate his opinion in a coherent manner that's at least appealing to read? I mean, if they won't take the time to support their own viewpoint how am i as a 3rd party expected to consider it worthy of attention?

Take the time to proof-read your posts before clicking submit (the preview button is there for a reason), try to edit out some stuff that might be getting personal, emotional or speculative and stick to giving us your experience of it all without snide remarks.

I guarantee you the amount of people who are willing to discuss things with you will rise, even though not all of them will agree. I find it much easier to respect an opinion (no matter if i agree or disagree with it) if it's at least worded in a manner that doesn't give me the mental image of a person frothing at the mouth behind a keyboard, not to mention it's easier to avoid getting dragged into similar behaviours myself

I agree with this post. But am on the side of "pissed off" because when ever I made any constructive criticism/critical comments pre release I got jumped on and nuked. Maybe some of these huge faults could or should of been seen by the development team... Its frustrating especially because the screw up has/is so bad and was avoidable. In any case I think I have earned my right to whine at this point (even though I hardly post anymore).

[Jatta Raso]

i never intended to state that CoD is crap, far from that... i just had (and maintain) such high hopes on this one...