Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 33

Author Topic: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop  (Read 56651 times)

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #180 on: September 12, 2017, 10:22:18 pm »

Quote
That is exactly what I'm saying, genius. The Castles and Kingdoms campaign finished in January 2017. The OLDEST campaign on fig finished in september 2015. no fig game has even gone through "years" of development yet.

So if they've had one project go from campaign to release and sales in 6 months....where are any of the other success stories, or stories period, of how things have fared on Fig?

so far they're at 0% "that which sleeps" incidents so it's doing better than kickstarter

Quote
So I guess we'll assume that everyone who is planning on using Fig is as educated and well informed as a tax lawyer? Because I didn't know any of this and when I did, it made my decision for me not to use Fig. Interesting to a tax lawyer. Gee I guess not. Interesting to the rest of us rubes? Yeah, I'd say so.

You still don't "know" anything. You don't know if this structure is normal for investment vehicles (it is) or why it was done, or what it means.

It's like if I told you the atomic number of cesium was 55. HOLY SHIT 55?!? Guys we need to call the DOE right now; 55 is a big number!

Quote
Quote
It's not like fig backers are encouraged to go out and recruit more backers and earn a cut of whomever they recruit.

What exactly do you call exhorting backers to spread the word, get more backers, to get the game they have a financial interest in to get more money, so it can potentially sell better and make them more money back?

Again, that's not how a pyramid scheme works. In a pyramid scheme you only get money relative to your own recruitment. Your pyramid income is 100% based on the bricks below you, not on somebody else's bricks, or the overall success of the enterprise.

Quote
Quote
The only difference is that you replace big corporate money and investors with crowdfunding.

That isn't the only difference. Another difference is in how they sell you on who they are. EA, Ubisoft, big publishers are faceless. They're monolithic. This is the good old "hey, we're people just like you who love games! We're not greedy and self-serving like the ebil publishers. We're about community! And definitely not bending you over as fast as EA or anyone else for a buck." Another difference is EA isn't courting unaccredited investors to fund their games. They damn well would if they could, and after Fig got permission I wouldn't doubt if they're exploring their own avenues of offloading development costs directly on consumers.

EA is traded on the goddamn NASDAQ. Do you have to be an accredited investor to buy stock in EA? of course they take money from unaccredited investors.

And let's be real; being an accredited investor doesn't mean anything anyway. half the goddamn population of the US lives in a household with an "accredited investor."

Exhibit #300 in "you watched a youtube video with a lot of big words but don't understand what any of it really means."

Quote
Quote
it's starting to seem like you really don't know much about any of this but watched an alarmist youtube video made by a guy who gets ad revenue exploiting your credulity

And you seem like you've got horseblinders on with a Fig logo on them. Gee isn't it fun when we both pillory each other? Or how about we just drop the snide personal attacks like anyone is winning points here.

well if you keep dropping the parts where you're objectively wrong (like "reputable companies don't solicit game ideas through email") then there won't be much left, huh?

Quote
Quote
i'm not sure where you get this idea from. i think you watch too many youtube videos.

I read industry news, from developers, who talk about their profits and what's likely versus not likely in the indie space. $1 million in two weeks is not normal, or even average. $10,000 in a couple weeks for your garden variety indie game is much closer to the mark.

You misunderstand. Where did you get the idea that Fig is out there telling people they'll all sell $1 million of games in two weeks?

Fig has a total of, what, 12 funded projects? And many of them are sequels to well-established franchises (Psychonauts 2, Wasteland 3, Pillars of Eternity 2). Where is the dumbass accusation that Fig is somehow trolling for rubes coming from?

Quote
Quote
it's just as fair to assume they're someone willing to get little or no return so that they can invest in a developer or idea they like. buying a $1000 fig share of a game instead of paying $1000 for an NPC named after you seems reasonable.

Quote
If someone wants to donate just out of the goodness of their heart or for a t-shirt, why would they seek the profit option at all? By definition you have a profit motivation if you seek the for-profit option. Ergo, your focus is not just on supporting the developer or the game, you've got an ulterior motive of personal enrichment as well.

so ok, this whole line of argumentation is fine. it's an aesthetic argument about the proper relationship between the artist and the audience, which i don't agree with, but it's not really objectively wrong (unlike literally every other argument you've made).

the thing is, how can you argue this while also arguing that Fig is somehow a pyramid scheme or a scam? either it's ruining indie kickstarting by introducing a profit motive, or it's not because it's a scam that doesn't deliver games. you can't argue both.
Logged

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #181 on: September 13, 2017, 12:31:14 am »

Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

Draignean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Probably browsing tasteful erotic dolphin photos
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #182 on: September 13, 2017, 12:48:57 am »

Realistic Ballistics also kinda makes my eyebrows levitate spontaneously, particularly considering the videos already shown. I get what they're doing, and I like it, I just think they're overselling a wee bit. I'm going to be interested to see how cover will actually work out, considering that I really like the idea of what they're doing, but it has the potential to make a couple of things really... wonk.
Every part of this sounds wonky and awful. FPS aiming to get around boxes on top of Fallout-style limb targeting? I don't see how that's going to work without making you wish it hadn't.

See, I treat games like I treat my hookers- I hold off the dirty talk until after I've paid. I'm trying to look at things in a positive light, and there is a bit of a silver lining. Let's assume that 'realistic ballistics' means more than 'hit scan random rays comprising a cone to simulate shots fired', which it damn well should.* Since we're not exactly dealing with significant ranges here, that means that material penetration and impact geometry is potentially a thing- which could be cool. Taking the basic crab man we've seen so far, it means that going for a headshot takes you perilously close to the heavily sloped chitin plates above and behind the head. Likewise it means that shots from elevation actually give your better angles to strike plates with, theoretically giving you a better chance of punching through. As far as cover goes, it means that a soldier with a PDW might be forced to try and shoot an exposed elbow, you can tell your heavy who's humping a pig to just unload on most light cover and punch straight through. That has the potential to lead to moments more like, say, this (You only need to watch until the end of the scene, about 30 seconds), with the right squad composition.

Now, granted, my skepticism is currently screaming in the background that there are damn good reasons why games about small groups of survivors don't feature realistic ballistics, and that, in realistic ballistics, that arm cannon we've seen the crab people using would fuck up anything this side of a tank. Bah. He's likely throwing it around as a buzzword, when he means the conic ray trace- which is going to break down to percentage chances however you slice it.

I want to set aside my skepticism and be optimistic, but I'm not terribly impressed in they way they talk about their features. It's not that I mind the features, exactly, I just wish they'd be a bit more honest with them. Go into the details of why they're cool, and how they're more skill based and less prayer focused. Can we adjust the tightness of our shot spread? Can we free aim shots, go gull auto, and hit max spread to try and clip multiple bunched targets?


PPE: Looked at the actual 'detailed' post on the ballistics. It does not fill me with hope. This feels like the kind of thing that ends in screaming frustration when a soldier has the wrong pose behind cover.
Logged
I have a degree in Computer Seance, that means I'm officially qualified to tell you that the problem with your system is that it's possessed by Satan.
---
Q: "Do you have any idea what you're doing?"
A: "No, not particularly."

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #183 on: September 13, 2017, 10:19:01 am »

Quote
so far they're at 0% "that which sleeps" incidents so it's doing better than kickstarter

Quote
Fig has a total of, what, 12 funded projects?

You don't get to play with both sides of the coin.

Then neither do you.

You accuse Fig of trying to lure small hobbyists with the promise of get-rich-quick, when that's patently false. Most of the projects on Fig are by well-known developers and/or part of well-known franchises.

You seem concerned that Fig investments are a scam, when so far there's been literally 0 evidence of that ever happening and nothing in their corporate structure is unusual for a company that needs to divvy up shares in individual games that they're publishing.

Quote
Quote
You still don't "know" anything. You don't know if this structure is normal for investment vehicles (it is) or why it was done, or what it means.

I can read, I've got a brain and it's not rocket science. You can judge the terms of a deal based on the average for how most people succeed in the indie game market and judge it as shit.

Again, no.

1) Most of these aren't even "indie" games. They are games by established developers or part of established franchises that have been published before, like Pillars of Eternity 2 or Rock Band 4. Fig is not some place where you get to gamble on indie developers.

2) The "terms of the deal" has nothing to do with Fig's corporate structure.

Quote
Quote
Again, that's not how a pyramid scheme works. In a pyramid scheme you only get money relative to your own recruitment. Your pyramid income is 100% based on the bricks below you, not on somebody else's bricks, or the overall success of the enterprise.

Fig makes money no matter what. It's just a question of how much they make. But they can't make anything without developers.

That has nothing to do with pyramid schemes.

Quote
Developers get money no matter what. They get the pledge at a bare minimum. But only if they have backers.

Again, nothing to do with pyramid schemes.

Quote
Backers get fuck all unless it actually succeeds, and to recoup their investment at least the game has to be a huge success or it takes 10 years. Their take is proportional to what they're willing to put in. Fig scheme IS 100% based on the bricks below them.

Again, that is not what a pyramid scheme is. Your success in a pyramid scheme has nothing to do with the game being a huge success or taking 10 years.

We're talking about launching a discrete product, which will have a sales arc and product lifespan. You can buy shares in the launching of that product.

If you think Fig is a pyramid scheme then every stock IPO in the world is a "pyramid scheme."

Quote
Quote
And let's be real; being an accredited investor doesn't mean anything anyway. half the goddamn population of the US lives in a household with an "accredited investor." of course they take money from unaccredited investors.

1) Half of joint US households make over $300,000k each year? Try again.

My bad - I read a chart on household net worth wrong. It's more like 10-15% of the US population, not half. The point is that it's incredibly common. "Accredited investors" are not some special club of stock geniuses.

Your link isn't helpful, though, because average doesn't tell you anything about distribution. Also, income is only one way to become an accredited investor.

Quote
2) EA isn't directly asking investors to pay for the development of their next game. Because actual investors would say "Kiss my ass."

Of course they are. What business do you think EA is in? What do you think you're investing in when you buy stock in EA? Do you think they engage in any other business besides developing and publishing games?

Quote
3) Accredited investor status is there to protect both the investor and the business. But it's mostly to ensure people don't gamble their livelihood away in the stock market.

IT LITERALLY DOES NOT DO THAT

Nothing is stopping you from gambling every dollar you have or can borrow on the stock market, whether you're accredited or unaccredited. That is NOT what accredited investor status does.

Quote
You can get all that from Google by the way. Or "that youtube video which I just took as gospel and is factually correct but no one should actually listen to it."

Yes, you can get a fundamental misunderstanding of what "accredited investor" status means from googling or watching ill-informed youtube videos.

Quote
Quote
well if you keep dropping the parts where you're objectively wrong (like "reputable companies don't solicit game ideas through email") then there won't be much left, huh?

You're really gonna stand by Paradox as your example?  They've pulled some shady BS on their own time too. So no, I don't consider that me being "objectively wrong" because I don't hold up Paradox as some exemplar of professionalism or huge business. And more to the point, to Fig, developers are as much bricks in the pyramid as backers in Fig's eyes. They need developers as much as developers need backers.

all publishers needs developers, genius. all publishers need funding. publishers don't just pop up in the middle of nowhere, fully funded, ready to spend money developing games. publishers get their money from somewhere, and it's usually equity investment firms or parent media corporations (like Warner Brothers) that have exactly the same funding setups that fig have. all fig has done is replaced the source of the money with crowdfunding. Instead of Warner Brothers Entertainment Inc. being the money behind WB Games Inc. who then publishes a game on behalf of a developer.

Quote
Quote
You misunderstand. Where did you get the idea that Fig is out there telling people they'll all sell $1 million of games in two weeks?

I didn't, because you're putting words in my mouth. Fig does the usual "investing is a risky business" spiel just like Kickstarter. The difference is they pitch making money as the thing that makes their platform special, as if making a plug nickle on half a dozen indie games is likely at the rate at which they have to sell for you to actually see a return. You've shown an example that proves their model, and what I"m telling you is it's an exception, not a rule. It's the Jackpot on the slot machine.

With Kickstarter it's "Ah shit, there's goes my $60 bucks and my fun" when it fails. Or it just doesn't take off to meet the hype and that's the end of it. With Fig it's "How did you not make me money!!!!" Those are two very different realities. As if making games wasn't hard enough to please publishers, now you got a fan base that also expects your game to be a financial success not just for its health but for their wallets too.

I understand this argument to some extent. The problem is that it's not an "exception" or a "rule." It's the first game to launch from a brand new funding system. Turns out it made a shitton of money. It's one data point; all it proves is that Fig isn't going to run away with all the money (so far). It proves the model, not that all Fig games are going to make investors lots of money. Your jackpot analogy is shitty because nobody has been plugging nickles in this whole time, waiting for the jackpot.

The other problem with your concern about what's "normal" for indie games is that they're not publishing every indie game that comes along. They are clearly picking projects more likely to succeed. If anything, Kickstarter has the problem you're concerned about: they will let almost anyone create almost any project and take a cut of the funds, with little concern for if the product ever materializes. That Which Sleeps is one of a million examples of vaporware games. You will never see that on Fig.

Quote
Quote
Where is the dumbass accusation that Fig is somehow trolling for rubes coming from?

When they started trying to bring average people with average incomes into an investing scheme, using their favorite past time as bait.

It's much harder to invest in Fig, than say, buy stock in a game publisher or any other company associated with a hobby you like. Funding of these games is very limited, and it's not really going to be something the "average" person does. Who is the "average" person who is lured into dropping $1000 on a risky investment?

Quote
Quote
the thing is, how can you argue this while also arguing that Fig is somehow a pyramid scheme or a scam? either it's ruining indie kickstarting by introducing a profit motive, or it's not because it's a scam that doesn't deliver games. you can't argue both.

Control F on this thread and look for scam. Look who hasn't said it.

Jesus dude. You called it a pyramid scheme. A pyramid scheme is a kind of scam.

Quote
I do think it's a pyramid scheme though. It just happens to be a pyramid scheme that sometimes has a happy ending and produces an actual product.

Ok, so you do think it's a scam. Unless by "pyramid scheme" you really do mean "works how all investing works." You spend money with the hope to get money based on the success of the enterprise.

Quote
It's putting low dollar investment in front of average people and asking them to gamble like actual investors do with their money. And I find that pretty scummy.

I'll admit, I generally have a low opinion of investing period and that does color my bias. It's fine when it's not intruding on my world. But when someone is trying to change the way games get made and suddenly average fucking gamers are trying to make money, it's not really a hobby anymore is it? Real money trading in games, gambling on skins you can then sell for $1000, microtransactions, it's all about siphoning money away from people in little bits via their hobby. Buying the game isn't enough and hasn't been for a while. Now you need to keep giving them money. Now, even paying for it to be made isn't enough. You can' get people to foot the ENTIRE BILL for it right? Right? There aren't enough whales for that right? Unless....what if you turn average people can't afford to spend money like that in to gamblers, just telling them to pull the lever and maybe they'll be rich without having done a thing (except risk their money.)

It's not even low!! Ubisoft shares are 60 euros right now. EA shares are $120. $1000 for a share of a Fig game is going to eliminate all of these "average people" you're concerned about. What "average person" has $1000 they're ready to spend on something that, best case scenario, doesn't pay out for years? And that's assuming they ignore all the fair warnings that "this project may fail and your investment will disappear." The average person isn't about to buy $1000 worth of anything on a whim, even if they love gaming.
Logged

Reelya

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #184 on: September 13, 2017, 10:31:10 am »

I don't think you can compare share prices like that. How much return are you promised for 60 Euros in Ubisoft, how much for $120 in EA and how much for $1000 of a Fig game? That's apples and oranges. A "share" is whatever it's worth. A share that's worth half of another share may or may not be a bargain. You can't compare them. It's a economically meaningless complaint.

$1000 could well be a bargain, if you're getting a $200 return per share. Without more information you can't tell if it's a good deal or a bad deal. The price doesn't tell you jack shit. If you think so, here I'll sell you a pile of defunct dotcom-era shares for a penny a piece. Bargain!

Just the fact that you can get "8 EA shares" for that prices doesn't tell you anything. What's the dividend like on EA shares?

On the other hand, most people who paid full retail price for the X-Com reboot and X-Com 2, people with money to burn, will probably be buying Phoenix Point. Whether some old-school dudes on indie game sites say it's not like the glory days of the 1990s is not relevant here. Gollop has a pretty solid track record working on recent AAA titles as well as running his own company etc. People here call him a "dinosaur" but that's ignoring the work he's done in recent years for modern franchises and platforms. He spent most of the last decade as a project lead at Ubisoft, calling him a "dinosaur" ignores that - implying he randomly popped out of retirement to make new games now since the X-Com reboot was a hit. At this stage it's not longer reasonable concerns,s it's just random mudslinging from people who want to find as many things wrong as possible, so they're making shit up now, like the argument about share prices, which doesn't really make any sense. Setting a high barrier to investment is actually less predatory, since anyone who can't really afford it is dissuaded from investing at all. It doesn't mean you get any more or any less of a percentage return.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 10:54:09 am by Reelya »
Logged

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #185 on: September 13, 2017, 10:55:53 am »


« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 12:11:48 pm by nenjin »
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #186 on: September 13, 2017, 12:57:54 pm »

I don't think you can compare share prices like that. How much return are you promised for 60 Euros in Ubisoft, how much for $120 in EA and how much for $1000 of a Fig game? That's apples and oranges. A "share" is whatever it's worth. A share that's worth half of another share may or may not be a bargain. You can't compare them. It's a economically meaningless complaint.

$1000 could well be a bargain, if you're getting a $200 return per share. Without more information you can't tell if it's a good deal or a bad deal. The price doesn't tell you jack shit. If you think so, here I'll sell you a pile of defunct dotcom-era shares for a penny a piece. Bargain!

Just the fact that you can get "8 EA shares" for that prices doesn't tell you anything. What's the dividend like on EA shares?

That's really my point. If nenjin's worried that "Joe Average" investor is going to drop thousands on Fig shares without understanding anything, why does it matter what the actual returns are? And why doesn't it matter that literally -anybody- can make a schwab/td ameritrade/etc account and spend the exact same money investing in video games? The whole point is that if people aren't going to read the offering circulars or do research, there's already nothing stopping them.
Logged

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #187 on: September 13, 2017, 01:04:07 pm »

3) Accredited investor status is there to protect both the investor and the business. But it's mostly to ensure people don't gamble their livelihood away in the stock market.

Can I get an answer just on this one?

In what way does being an unaccredited investor prevent you from gambling away your livelihood on the stock market?
Logged

Chiefwaffles

  • Bay Watcher
  • I've been told that waffles are no longer funny.
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #188 on: September 13, 2017, 01:07:24 pm »

Can we maybe keep this to its own thread or PMs?
Logged
Quote from: RAM
You should really look to the wilderness for your stealth ideas, it has been doing it much longer than you have after all. Take squids for example, that ink trick works pretty well, and in water too! So you just sneak into the dam upsteam, dump several megatons of distressed squid into it, then break the dam. Boom, you suddenly have enough water-proof stealth for a whole city!

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #189 on: September 13, 2017, 01:10:50 pm »

Can we maybe keep this to its own thread or PMs?

I don't see how. If the argument is "I'm not going to buy this game no matter how good it is because of its funding method" then the funding issues are key to discussing the game.
Logged

Draignean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Probably browsing tasteful erotic dolphin photos
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #190 on: September 13, 2017, 01:20:29 pm »

Can we maybe keep this to its own thread or PMs?

I don't see how. If the argument is "I'm not going to buy this game no matter how good it is because of its funding method" then the funding issues are key to discussing the game.

There could be a nice dedicated 'How I Learned To Begin Worrying and Hate the Fig' thread! You could have your own alerts and wouldn't be troubled by these bizarre people who want to interrupt your discussion of financial policies by talking about this irrelevant 'Phoenix Point' game-thing.

Just imagine what you could do if you weren't pouring lant in everyone else's corn flakes!

Your mutual hissy-fit is like if someone says 'I'm not going to by this game because I'm a Christian and it features the Devil being a good guy!' and you then proceed to debate the nature of Christianity, artistic meaning, and the purpose of games. It's fucking irrelevant. If he doesn't want to buy it because of the funding method, okay, tough. That's his problem, and it's beyond the context of discussing the game. You want to discuss fig, discuss fig, but it kills my desire to talk about this game in any way when it's filled armchair economics and general pissing.

Would you kindly take it where it belongs? Fig is not Pheonix Point. The Pheonix Point thread does not deserve to be Fig's nidus of Hate.
Logged
I have a degree in Computer Seance, that means I'm officially qualified to tell you that the problem with your system is that it's possessed by Satan.
---
Q: "Do you have any idea what you're doing?"
A: "No, not particularly."

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #191 on: September 13, 2017, 01:28:55 pm »

In that case you should probably be addressing me, not him, as I'm the one with a problem with it. I've tried to spoiler since point to point replies take up pages. But I'll just knock it off.

Quote
In what way does being an unaccredited investor prevent you from gambling away your livelihood on the stock market?

Some will not deal with unaccredited investors because of the risk they pose. You can still gamble away your livelihood on the stock market as an unaccredited investor but it takes far more work than investing with Fig. Which is the whole point.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 01:33:49 pm by nenjin »
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

ZeroGravitas

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #192 on: September 13, 2017, 01:51:24 pm »

Can we maybe keep this to its own thread or PMs?

I don't see how. If the argument is "I'm not going to buy this game no matter how good it is because of its funding method" then the funding issues are key to discussing the game.

There could be a nice dedicated 'How I Learned To Begin Worrying and Hate the Fig' thread! You could have your own alerts and wouldn't be troubled by these bizarre people who want to interrupt your discussion of financial policies by talking about this irrelevant 'Phoenix Point' game-thing.

Just imagine what you could do if you weren't pouring lant in everyone else's corn flakes!

Your mutual hissy-fit is like if someone says 'I'm not going to by this game because I'm a Christian and it features the Devil being a good guy!' and you then proceed to debate the nature of Christianity, artistic meaning, and the purpose of games. It's fucking irrelevant. If he doesn't want to buy it because of the funding method, okay, tough. That's his problem, and it's beyond the context of discussing the game. You want to discuss fig, discuss fig, but it kills my desire to talk about this game in any way when it's filled armchair economics and general pissing.

Would you kindly take it where it belongs? Fig is not Pheonix Point. The Pheonix Point thread does not deserve to be Fig's nidus of Hate.

Fair enough.

Nenjin, perhaps you should post here instead of parachuting into every thread about a Fig game.
Logged

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #193 on: September 13, 2017, 02:11:54 pm »

That's fair. I don't consider it parachuting but I understand why you're calling it that.
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Phoenix Point : In the works X-COMlike from Gollop
« Reply #194 on: September 13, 2017, 04:12:15 pm »

Yeah, hopefully this can be kept civil no matter where it lands.  The tone is getting out of hand.  If you can make the same point without slipping insults into the post, please try to do so!
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 33