Jump to content

shadow9d9

Member
  • Content Count

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About shadow9d9

  • Rank
    Garrulous Glaahk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Remakes are less risky because they are cheaper and quicker. I don't think there is any arguing that. I am not necessarily talking new franchises here. I'd rather Avadon 3-51 if so be it rather than remaking old material. I don't see any inherent risk in expanding the most successful franchise that he has made so far. Counter to this, you suggest that remaking old games might bring in more new people, than say, something new like Avadon 3. Do you see more risk in Avadon 3 than remaking old games? "SW mixes these remakes with new titles. It keeps revenue flowing; it allows for suc
  2. What? So, "pretty objectively" means in your opinion... and that was exactly the original context. You tried to frame it so that it appeared less like an opinion and instead, "objectively," meaning it is universally accepted. I'm afraid that this is not and never was true. Even someone trying to defend your statement, above, said as much. "there isn't really much debate about the substantial difference..." Again, this is where you again try to state one of your opinions as if it were universal truth. There is plenty to debate. You just are interested in only stating your opinion as
  3. I am around 28 now. Much less bouncing back and forth between hubs. More areas per region in a row. Better story with much better flow. More quests and better flow to them. Still don't like the "return later for possibly more quests" part and I ESPECIALLY do not like that these are kept in your quest journal, which makes figuring out what quests you are on a nightmare.
  4. Well, I did ask, "you mean, by the people that already bought it?" In other words, why would a game that is previously well liked, by a very small community, have any effect on a remake's success? What spiderwebsoftware game has this community NOT liked prior to Avadon? Can you explain what makes Blades of Exile/Avernum evidence? And evidence of what? I still don't understand how, despite Avadon doing better than any other SWS game, that you'd make the claim that the opposite "may" have more success.
  5. I don't have an assertion to make. I simply pointed out that what was posted as "objective" was absolutely incorrect and was simply an opinion that is trying to be elevated into fact by declaring it objective. Why should I have to make an assertion to disprove someone else's assertion? My original post was saying that I have no interest in playing remakes. People countered by saying that their gameplay is "completely different" and that this is apparently objective fact. I responded by saying that that is in no way fact. It is pure opinion. Then, I requested what made someone think t
  6. It wasn't snide. It pointed out the truth. He posted his personal opinion masquerading as "objective" fact. Thanks for proving my point. That was EXACTLY what he had asserted. Let me quote him- "also that the game mechanics are completely different. " Can you explain how you think they are substantially different please? "Fairly different" is an opinion. Stating opinion is fine. The post that I responded to(that you are in turn responding to a response of) made the claim that "objectively" the gameplay is "completely different." This is the bogus claim that
  7. The assertion was made by the original poster, not me. The remakes allow SW to target the same audience that any other game of theirs have.
  8. First statement: Requiring fewer resources does nothing to bring in new customers. The link between pumping out games faster and more new customers in a niche genre is tenuous at best. Second statement. "Well liked," you mean, by the people that already bought it? They would have already recommended it to their friends. Avadon brought WAY more attention than Avernum/Geneforge did, and it was brand new.
  9. Health is all that we, as living beings have. Without it, nothing else matters. When we form a society, we don't just do what we each personally would prefer to invest in. We also help each other as a society. In reality, if money were a determining factor, you'd have people being denied care because it wasn't profitable enough and a group of haves and have nots. This is not a society that I would want to be a part of. Many people who think they are rugged individuals quickly change their tune when they actually experience what poor health of either oneself or a loved one would have to d
  10. How are they "completely different"? I do not agree that it can "objectively" be said that they are "completely" different. You are confusing your opinion with objective observation.
  11. How does a remake accomplish finding new customers any more than a brand new game?
  12. Has anyone ever argued this? I guess I just don't know who you could possibly be responding to.
  13. I'd argue that in comparison to grades 1-12, the internet has more of an effect on education, communication, and freedom than the traditional "education" system.
  14. I don't personally see the difference between the 2. This difference would only matter to the doctor involved. No doctor would be forced to do something they don't want anyways, so it is self correcting. It doesn't matter why someone would choose to end their life, depressed or otherwise. It should be their choice, and is no different to any other personal choice they make. Euthanasia would just make it easier on all involved.
  15. I interpreted the question as just what people's opinions are. This is not the same as having someone enforce the opinion.
×
×
  • Create New...