Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Then what are you on about.
I'm merely talking about your comparison.
I'm guessing you're saying that if everyone says I'm "annoying", then it might be true.
What I'm saying is, that's not telling me anything...because you never showed me WHY I'm annoying. I discuss many different things just like you and any other person on this site so why is you trippin' all of a sudden? There's absolutely no reason to act like that.
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
I said it doesn't flow. It just simply doesn't mix. You didn't expect changes at this point, yet you tried to make it seem like there was no reason to not have changes? If you really didn't expect any changes, then there was no point in doing that.You said "the trailer didn't really show us much gameplay wise", in response to this: Zack was talking about the game itself and YOU brought up the trailer not showing much. That's why I said "it's too early to be expecting changes at this point".
But you never seem to consider WHY those "shortcomings" exist and even tried to refute that by using another game. All I basically did was mention why there's hardly anything shown in the trailer and you're the one who made a big deal out of it, not me. You said you felt it was lacking but then again, it's the "pre-alpha stages", dude.
So telling you it's too early to expect something that's in the pre-alpha stages is the same as saying "you have no right to discuss it"? 🤨 What kind of mess is that?
I don't tolerate lies.
Yes, I brought up the trailer not showing us much. You still haven't shown where I brought in expectations.(Because you brought that in.)
It's not a good reason in this case not to have the changes. I made a big deal out of it because I consider it a big enough deal to make something of it. You explicitly stated that you don't consider a big deal, yet continue to make a big deal of it. Do you really not see the difference? Your entire argument contradicts what you just said. If it's "no biggie", then leave it alone. Let those of us who do consider it a "biggie" talk about it. Everyone's happy.
Dude, you said twice on the first page that there "is no reason to point it out." That literally means you think we should not point it out. It's practically what we've been arguing about the past 4 pages. If you meant something different, then clarify now please. It might resolve the whole issue.
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Lately, I've been wondering, does anybody think the DOA characters will age this time or is this series just a floating timeline?
Originally posted by StyleTime
I didn't expect changes. I noticed that the gameplay looked strikingly similar to DOA4. "Flow". "Mix". Whatever other word you want to insert for "contradiction". It's wrong. The things I said do no conflict with each other. You don't have a point here.Yes, I brought up the trailer not showing us much. You still haven't shown where I brought in expectations.(Because you brought that in.)
It's not a good reason in this case not to have the changes. I made a big deal out of it because I consider it a big enough deal to make something of it. You explicitly stated that you don't consider a big deal, yet continue to make a big deal of it. Do you really not see the difference? Your entire argument contradicts what you just said. If it's "no biggie", then leave it alone. Let those of us who do consider it a "biggie" talk about it. Everyone's happy.
Dude, you said twice on the first page that there "is no reason to point it out." That literally means you think we should not point it out. It's practically what we've been arguing about the past 4 pages. If you meant something different, then clarify now please. It might resolve the whole issue.
Yes, it is a point. If you didn't expect changes, you wouldn't have tried to make up excuses why there shouldn't not be any changes.
Someone else mentioned the changes, then you brought up the trailer not showing any changes in your response to that, then when I brought up that it's because it's only in the "pre-alpha" stages you brought up SCV to shoot that down, only to then say you didn't expect any changes. That's why I said I saw no point in bringing it up. You basically did all of that for nothing.
See, this is exactly why your argument doesn't flow. It's just not consistent. If you didn't expect any changes in the first place, then why are you even making a "big deal" out of it? That's the real contradiction. If you truly didn't expect any changes at this point, then it wouldn't have made sense to do all of those things you did. Even when I told you that's in the pre-alpha stages, you didn't even acknowledge it. You just ignored it and kept on.
No, it doesn't mean that. It means just what I said; I didn't see any reason to point it out. However, I was mainly referring to your actions. You pointed out that the trailer didn't show much and used SCV to shoot down it's reasons for that, only to then say "you didn't expect changes". THAT'S why I said "then I see no reason to point it out". I also never said that you guys shouldn't discuss why there's no real changes in it but when it's blatantly obvious why there isn't, then that's why I see no point in making a "big deal" out of it. That's just what I think.
Originally posted by StyleTime
If I had to guess, I'd say it's a floating timeline.
I wouldn't mind that, really.
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Yes, it is a point. If you didn't expect changes, you wouldn't have tried to make up excuses why there shouldn't not be any changes.Someone else mentioned the changes, then you brought up the trailer not showing any changes in your response to that, then when I brought up that it's because it's only in the "pre-alpha" stages you brought up SCV to shoot that down, only to then say you didn't expect any changes. That's why I said I saw no point in bringing it up. You basically did all of that for nothing.
See, this is exactly why your argument doesn't flow. It's just not consistent. If you didn't expect any changes in the first place, then why are you even making a "big deal" out of it? That's the real contradiction. If you truly didn't expect any changes at this point, then it wouldn't have made sense to do all of those things you did. Even when I told you that's in the pre-alpha stages, you didn't even acknowledge it. You just ignored it and kept on.
No, it doesn't mean that. It means just what I said; I didn't see any reason to point it out. However, I was mainly referring to your actions. You pointed out that the trailer didn't show much and used SCV to shoot down it's reasons for that, only to then say "you didn't expect changes". THAT'S why I said "then I see no reason to point it out". I also never said that you guys shouldn't discuss why there's no real changes in it but when it's blatantly obvious why there isn't, then that's why I see no point in making a "big deal" out of it. That's just what I think.
I can't believe I'm saying this each time, but you still don't get it. Pointing out shortcomings does not mean I had expectations. I can't understand why this is so difficult to get through to you.
You've missed several things here. Mainly, there was no contradiction in what I said. I acknowledged it was an early stage of development, and I specifically refuted that. Also, I repeat that pointing out shortcomings does not mean I had expectations. I spoke quite literally. You're adding subtext because your entire argument hinges on me saying something I never said.
We're basically back at "no contradiction with what I said" in this part. I've no problem if you think it's not a big deal; however, some of us want to highlight the shortcomings. Leave us to it please.
Originally posted by StyleTime
No, it's not. I showed that it's possible to have changes at an early stage of development. You still don't seem to grasp that an early model of DOA5 does not have to play like DOA4.
Nobody ever said that it HAD to play like DOA4 but at this stage, it's not a surprise that it does since all it is is an early model, like you said. You can't fault them for that. Just like any early model of a game, it improves more as they develop it.
Originally posted by StyleTime
I can't believe I'm saying this each time, but you still don't get it. Pointing out shortcomings does not mean I had expectations. I can't understand why this is so difficult to get through to you.
You still never acknowledge why those "shortcomings" even exist. That's what I'm trying to show you this whole time.
Originally posted by StyleTime
You've missed several things here. Mainly, there was no contradiction in what I said. I acknowledged it was an early stage of development, and I specifically refuted that. Also, I repeat that pointing out shortcomings does not mean I had expectations. I spoke quite literally. You're adding subtext because your entire argument hinges on me saying something I never said.
See? There was nothing for you to refute if you knew the reason for it. If you knew it was in the early stages, you shouldn't have been trying to refute it by bringing up another game. Being in the early stages is enough to explain why there's hardly any changes at this point. You said you weren't expecting changes but it still makes no sense to make a big deal out of it if you weren't even expecting them.
Originally posted by StyleTime
We're basically back at "no contradiction with what I said" in this part. I've no problem if you think it's not a big deal; however, some of us want to highlight the shortcomings. Leave us to it please.
I'm gonna be blunt; there are no shortcomings to highlight yet for reasons everybody should know by now.
Originally posted by Zack Fair
Sigh.Get a room you two.
Please no! ❌
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Nobody ever said that it HAD to play like DOA4 but at this stage, it's not a surprise that it does since all it is is an early model, like you said. You can't fault them for that. Just like any early model of a game, it improves more as they develop it.You still never acknowledge why those "shortcomings" even exist. That's what I'm trying to show you this whole time.
See? There was nothing for you to refute if you knew the reason for it. If you knew it was in the early stages, you shouldn't have been trying to refute it by bringing up another game. Being in the early stages is enough to explain why there's hardly any changes at this point. You said you weren't expecting changes but it still makes no sense to make a big deal out of it if you weren't even expecting them.
I'm gonna be blunt; there are no shortcomings to highlight yet for reasons everybody should know by now.
Yes, I acknowledged what you said. Unfortunately for you, "it's early" does not mean no changes from the previous are possible. It's been that way for the past 5 pages.
See the above sentences.
The mere existence of the shortcomings justifies their discussion. You don't have to if you don't want to. I will.
Originally posted by Zack Fair
Don't make me punch you to the other side of the room, Ein style uhuh
Originally posted by StyleTime
Yes, I can fault them for that. It's a fault. If they improve, so be it.
But it's not a fault.
Originally posted by StyleTime
Yes, I acknowledged what you said. Unfortunately for you, "it's early" does not mean no changes from the previous are possible. It's been that way for the past 5 pages.
Actually, it does mean that in some cases. If they just started on this game, then chances to see any changes at this point are slim to none. It depends on how far it is in development. SCV was confirmed last year. DOA5 was just confirmed this year, thus it's high possibility that SCV is further in development than DOA5.
Originally posted by StyleTime
See the above sentences.
In which I responded to.
Originally posted by StyleTime
The mere existence of the shortcomings justifies their discussion. You don't have to if you don't want to. I will.
There are no shortcomings to discuss though.
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
But it's not a fault.Actually, it does mean that in some cases. If they just started on this game, then chances to see any changes at this point are slim to none. It depends on how far it is in development. SCV was confirmed last year. DOA5 was just confirmed this year, thus it's high possibility that SCV is further in development than DOA5.
There are no shortcomings to discuss though.
None of that indicates "early" = "no can do."
See first two sentences. (amazing how much I've narrowed this down. It was really only two issues at the root of this.)
Originally posted by StyleTime
If you don't mind the way it currently plays, then you're right. I do mind it, so I consider it a fault.
Neither one of us has played it yet because they're still working on it. You can't fault them for something they haven't finished yet.
Originally posted by StyleTime
None of that indicates "early" = "no can do."
Yes it does. A game can't be created instantly.
Originally posted by StyleTime
See first two sentences. (amazing how much I've narrowed this down. It was really only two issues at the root of this.)
See my first sentence.
Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Neither one of us has played it yet because they're still working on it. You can't fault them for something they haven't finished yet.Yes it does. A game can't be created instantly.
No, it doesn't. That doesn't refute what I said.
Originally posted by StyleTime
Are you really about to start an argument about that? Yes, I can critique their product at any point I choose.
That would make sense if you actually had someting to critique, in which you don't.
Originally posted by StyleTime
No, it doesn't. That doesn't refute what I said.
So are you saying that they can?