^ Whats funny though is that ?terrible hardware? still supports what is arguably the best looking game out now, all things considered. The upcoming God of War looks even better in terms of overall fidelity and detail. Yes, neither of them do what CoC does with AI, toolsets, depth of game systems, etc. but they?re completely different types of games. CoC is striving for survivalist realism while Horizon/GoW are clearly far more casual action/adventure oriented.
Also, remember that regardless of mods PC is an outlier with unlimited spec, and you still haven?t explained what the developers you mentioned have done that?s so much more impressive on console. As far as I?m aware, their games (Crysis 3, Doom, Metro, Battlefield) focus even moreso on visuals with window-dressing depth beyond that. At least GG put some engineering time into some of their in-game assets beyond merely making them look pretty.
^ Whats funny though is that ?terrible hardware? still supports what is arguably the best looking game out now, all things considered. The upcoming God of War looks even better in terms of overall fidelity and detail. Yes, neither of them do what CoC does with AI, toolsets, depth of game systems, etc. but they?re completely different types of games. CoC is striving for survivalist realism while Horizon/GoW are clearly far more casual action/adventure oriented.
Also, remember that regardless of mods PC is an outlier with unlimited spec, and you still haven?t explained what the developers you mentioned have done that?s so much more impressive on console. As far as I?m aware, their games (Crysis 3, Doom, Metro, Battlefield) focus even moreso on visuals with window-dressing depth beyond that. At least GG put some engineering time into some of their in-game assets beyond merely making them look pretty.
Yeah if you are incapable of technical analysis it is one of the best looking games. I admit its art direction is damn good, but do NOT confuse art for fidelity.
What? Confusing the two would be to state that Horizon's visual fidelity boils down to mere art direction.
Charcharo said:
"Yes, neither of them do what CoC does with AI, toolsets, depth of game systems, etc. but they're completely different types of games"
So none of them really have that much of a CPU footprint and use all they have to look good for screenshots and trailers? Instead of gameplay or immersion or mechanics. Figures.
No different than what Dice, Crytek, id, 4A have put on on console. Horizon's gameplay is arguably smoother, better animated and more nuanced than any of their latest shooters.
Charcharo said:
"Also, remember that regardless of mods PC is an outlier with unlimited spec, and you still haven't explained what the developers you mentioned have done that's so much more impressive on console."
DICE literally wrote the book on how to get good CPU utilization on conslow hardware and how to best use the compute performance of these devices. Their work on Deferred rendering is also one of the best and most complete and is de facto WHERE Guerrilla games copy pasted their engine from.
Source? From a few google searches it appears that Frostbite 2/BF3 was the first to use deferred rendering techniques; a full 4 years after GG published their initial presentation on the subject. Not denying they have efficient pipelines, but when playing the games it's very clear their main focus was visuals. I remember reading how many people were disappointed about the oft touted dynamic destruction being nerfed/scripted after BF:BC2, which was also released after KZ2.
Charcharo said:
4A Games managed to do with 10 million USD what takes Western Studios 70+ million dollars and one of the best, most threaded FPS engines ever. Along with a unique and incredibly effective AA method and all this is doubly more important when you realize their engine is actually made for Open World titles (as per Metro 2033 Design Documents). The work on lighting and alpha effects as well as Global Illumination is top notch and is what other studios are just now getting the hang off.
GSC Game World is obvious. For all their inability to polish their work fully, they gave a fully moddable Open World engine with the A-Life system that even nowadays no Western or Japanese studio can reach. Their modified ODE also allowed for ballistic simulation (and broken rag-dolls but I digress). Since they are yet to even be reached 11 years late by others...
Oh and their RTS/RTT engines held world record for the abuse they could take with 15 000 units in battle. Sure the computers of the time would be RIP but still.
DOOM's engine is one of the most optimized if not the most optimized piece of software. Guerilla Games are for sure not equals to id Software lol. And seeing the changes it has had with Wolfenstein 2... just lol.
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/926142332726120448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dsogaming.com%2Fnews%2Fwolfenstein-2-tech-details-30k-drawcalls-6-million-triangles-per-frame-volumetric-fog-tessellated-water-surface%2F
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/926144468570529792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dsogaming.com%2Fnews%2Fwolfenstein-2-tech-details-30k-drawcalls-6-million-triangles-per-frame-volumetric-fog-tessellated-water-surface%2F
Seeing the modified Havok and the AI in action, it is good. I would want a bigger game made with this engine, it would likely be competitive with all other AAA engines at Open World or semi-open world or even a tactical shooter.
GG put a lot of time into making the art good. They arent dumb, they know their strengths. It isnt AI, nor physics. It isnt fidelity per say or getting new technology working. They wanted to make a good game, why not leave it at that? Why put them in comparison with people that are, at LEAST from an objective engineering standpoint (not necessarily better games!) superior?
*Id also argue that devs who arent making console exclusives are superior from a moral standpoint since their art will last longer and doesn't depend on inhuman, anti-consumer and anti-art mega-corporations but whatever.
I've only played the Metro series on PC, and from what I remember it played well enough, but was no optimization king. It may have looked marginally better maxed out than most other PC games at the time but I also remember the performance hit it took getting there.
It's clear that Tech 6 is a big improvement over the bloated, static mess that was Tech 5, but still what is it doing in terms of gameplay like you suggest that benefits anything beyond looking pretty? Doom runs at 60fps, but on console often needs to be scaled down to 900p or even 720p in some cases. Horizon and even the launch game Killzone Shadow Fall are well-optimized displays of Decima as well, in large envirnoments especially in Horizon's case. Just because the latter is a custom in house engine instead of a multi platform solution doesn't make it less impressive. I doubt Tech 6 could run Horizon any better, looking any better for instance. Besides, why would an exclusive developer even bother making a multi platform engine in the first place?
As for Wolfenstein 2, it's definitely not going to win any best visuals awards. At least it shouldn't. Not only does it look significantly worse than Doom, it still uses pre rendered cutscenes. I thought the industry has moved past those things by now.
But you also are ignoring that its HARDER these days to make a game look tons better compared to last year's games. I mean to me even some 2005 games look good enough.
That's the whole point. Graphics are at the diminishing returns point.
Charcharo said:
I would argue that the difference between 60 fps and 30 fps is gigantic. And that between 144 fps and 60 it is still quite large. And no, you dont know what those things mean lol...
Depends on the RTS. Ryzen has twice the IPC and higher clocks than a console CPU, so it wins every single metric. But in THOSE RTS titles you mentioned, at max load (as in things actually happening on the screen, not static draw call tests) the power of modern Covfefe Lakes and Ryzen are enough. A console's.... would not be enough. You are not helping yourself, you stated that a console COULD do it.
Call of Chernobyl has no narrative. In the classical sense that is, so its right up your alley...
You overrate gameplay in general and underrate narrative, literature, and the very mixture of gameplay and story for a coherent, thematically rich product.
Those developers I put on a pedestal may have bugs and issues. But they advance technology and push boundaries. What do your favourite devs do? Nothing special or unique, no frontiers are explored. Hell I am certain those games you champion have or had their fare share of launch day faults themselves. Hell if I know, I wont get to play them at launch.
PS2 and PS3 werent X86-64. And not all PS3s had backwards compatibility and you know that very well.
Emulating CELL whilst *MUCH* easier than X86-64 is also still not actually easy. That is why the PS3 emulation isnt perfect or even that good... for now. Its getting better slowly but surely. Will a PS4 or PS5 emulate the PS3 though? And remember, Sony has it easier than most emulation teams as they have all the information on their past products. So until they do it, it is just hot air, whilst MS did it.
A console COULD play those game if the devs didn't code the games to be so reliant on a single core.
Great gameplay can carry a game whereas great narrative can't unless it's an adventure style game. Games have major issues of making me trudge through shit to get to the good stuff, there should only be the good stuff. If you can't do narrative, then don't try; if you can't do gameplay, then don't try. Or learn how to do it before releasing a product. Every other medium is hugely better at narrative so why should I play a game with shit gameplay and a good narrative when I can experience something else with a great narrative in much less time while not having to experience shit to get to it? In a perfect world, I'd love every game to have great gameplay married with amazing narrative but that's not a reality.
Those devs don't push boundaries in gameplay, you know, that thing that separates games from other mediums. Let's make a game about monster hunting that sucks at monster hunting for the 3RD TIME, that's Witcher 3. Whereas Horizon succeeds where it's most important, monster hunting. It even has a better over-arching plot than Witcher 3 to boot. And, there's far more technical issues that take you out of the world of Witcher 3 than Horizon. Nor are the devs you put up on pedestals technical wizards either, maybe they are the best in the world at a single technical aspect; however, their games have many technical shortcomings. For example, the STALKERs don't look good in motion at all. And the CoC mod you listed as better technically than other games has it's massive share of problems. Let me know when the mod is as solid as Horizon was at launch, which will probably be never. You ever heard of the saying 'A chain is only as strong as its weakest link'?
Again, if PS3 emulation was possible on PS4, Naughty Dog wouldn't have wasted a year getting TLOU to run on PS4.
I find it funny that Microsoft has the most votes by far but is talked about the least in this thread. It weirdly shows how insignificant they are right now in the mind of console games or PC games. The last year was so bad for Microsoft, What was even released last year for the Xbox? for good or for ill Nintendo and Sony are still in are minds.
I'm not sure if that means their anti-consumer but it means that They don't seem to care about the game division at the moment.
^ Whats funny though is that ?terrible hardware? still supports what is arguably the best looking game out now, all things considered. The upcoming God of War looks even better in terms of overall fidelity and detail. Yes, neither of them do what CoC does with AI, toolsets, depth of game systems, etc. but they?re completely different types of games. CoC is striving for survivalist realism while Horizon/GoW are clearly far more casual action/adventure oriented.
Also, remember that regardless of mods PC is an outlier with unlimited spec, and you still haven?t explained what the developers you mentioned have done that?s so much more impressive on console. As far as I?m aware, their games (Crysis 3, Doom, Metro, Battlefield) focus even moreso on visuals with window-dressing depth beyond that. At least GG put some engineering time into some of their in-game assets beyond merely making them look pretty.
Yeah if you are incapable of technical analysis it is one of the best looking games. I admit its art direction is damn good, but do NOT confuse art for fidelity.
What? Confusing the two would be to state that Horizon's visual fidelity boils down to mere art direction.
Charcharo said:
"Yes, neither of them do what CoC does with AI, toolsets, depth of game systems, etc. but they're completely different types of games"
So none of them really have that much of a CPU footprint and use all they have to look good for screenshots and trailers? Instead of gameplay or immersion or mechanics. Figures.
No different than what Dice, Crytek, id, 4A have put on on console. Horizon's gameplay is arguably smoother, better animated and more nuanced than any of their latest shooters.
Charcharo said:
"Also, remember that regardless of mods PC is an outlier with unlimited spec, and you still haven't explained what the developers you mentioned have done that's so much more impressive on console."
DICE literally wrote the book on how to get good CPU utilization on conslow hardware and how to best use the compute performance of these devices. Their work on Deferred rendering is also one of the best and most complete and is de facto WHERE Guerrilla games copy pasted their engine from.
Source? From a few google searches it appears that Frostbite 2/BF3 was the first to use deferred rendering techniques; a full 4 years after GG published their initial presentation on the subject. Not denying they have efficient pipelines, but when playing the games it's very clear their main focus was visuals. I remember reading how many people were disappointed about the oft touted dynamic destruction being nerfed/scripted after BF:BC2, which was also released after KZ2.
Charcharo said:
4A Games managed to do with 10 million USD what takes Western Studios 70+ million dollars and one of the best, most threaded FPS engines ever. Along with a unique and incredibly effective AA method and all this is doubly more important when you realize their engine is actually made for Open World titles (as per Metro 2033 Design Documents). The work on lighting and alpha effects as well as Global Illumination is top notch and is what other studios are just now getting the hang off.
GSC Game World is obvious. For all their inability to polish their work fully, they gave a fully moddable Open World engine with the A-Life system that even nowadays no Western or Japanese studio can reach. Their modified ODE also allowed for ballistic simulation (and broken rag-dolls but I digress). Since they are yet to even be reached 11 years late by others...
Oh and their RTS/RTT engines held world record for the abuse they could take with 15 000 units in battle. Sure the computers of the time would be RIP but still.
DOOM's engine is one of the most optimized if not the most optimized piece of software. Guerilla Games are for sure not equals to id Software lol. And seeing the changes it has had with Wolfenstein 2... just lol.
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/926142332726120448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dsogaming.com%2Fnews%2Fwolfenstein-2-tech-details-30k-drawcalls-6-million-triangles-per-frame-volumetric-fog-tessellated-water-surface%2F
https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/926144468570529792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dsogaming.com%2Fnews%2Fwolfenstein-2-tech-details-30k-drawcalls-6-million-triangles-per-frame-volumetric-fog-tessellated-water-surface%2F
Seeing the modified Havok and the AI in action, it is good. I would want a bigger game made with this engine, it would likely be competitive with all other AAA engines at Open World or semi-open world or even a tactical shooter.
GG put a lot of time into making the art good. They arent dumb, they know their strengths. It isnt AI, nor physics. It isnt fidelity per say or getting new technology working. They wanted to make a good game, why not leave it at that? Why put them in comparison with people that are, at LEAST from an objective engineering standpoint (not necessarily better games!) superior?
*Id also argue that devs who arent making console exclusives are superior from a moral standpoint since their art will last longer and doesn't depend on inhuman, anti-consumer and anti-art mega-corporations but whatever.
I've only played the Metro series on PC, and from what I remember it played well enough, but was no optimization king. It may have looked marginally better maxed out than most other PC games at the time but I also remember the performance hit it took getting there.
It's clear that Tech 6 is a big improvement over the bloated, static mess that was Tech 5, but still what is it doing in terms of gameplay like you suggest that benefits anything beyond looking pretty? Doom runs at 60fps, but on console often needs to be scaled down to 900p or even 720p in some cases. Horizon and even the launch game Killzone Shadow Fall are well-optimized displays of Decima as well, in large envirnoments especially in Horizon's case. Just because the latter is a custom in house engine instead of a multi platform solution doesn't make it less impressive. I doubt Tech 6 could run Horizon any better, looking any better for instance. Besides, why would an exclusive developer even bother making a multi platform engine in the first place?
As for Wolfenstein 2, it's definitely not going to win any best visuals awards. At least it shouldn't. Not only does it look significantly worse than Doom, it still uses pre rendered cutscenes. I thought the industry has moved past those things by now.
Well, if things like poly count, texture resolution, animation quality, ToD lighting, volumetric clouds, PBR, GPU-based procedural placement, etc. all fall under art direction, then I suppose. GG used some shortcuts [https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=A0eaGRcdwpo] for sure, but that's expected working with limited spec hardware.
Charcharo said:
You have to define what smoother gameplay means to you as well as what "nuanced" gameplay is. Better animated? If it is like Phoenixmgs's idea of animation (lol) then that is not the case.
Horizon for example, at least past the intro chapter, controls like a hot knife through butter. Shooters can too, but Horizon also has some of the most nimble platforming I've personally seen in a game, along with nearly as agile riding mechanics, slo-mo slide aiming, on-the-fly crafting, sneaking, etc. The targeting of various weapon types is also incredibly smooth and precise for analog, with no noticeable dead zone. If a game could play like a pleasant dream, even if only @ 30fps, then this would be it.
Charcharo said:
If you want to be technical, STALKER SoC first had working rudimentary Deferred Rendering *and* Global Illumination (since 2004 and 2005 respectively). But no points if it is not all the way "in". A presentation is not relevant, getting it working is.
Ok, they were "first" since KZ2 didn't officially release until 2009. It was in development since 2006 though, and I'm sure they had a design plan laid out a while before that. But yes, STALKER SoC was and still is impressive for its time. Shame it didn't utilize multiple cores which probably hampered its efficiency quite a bit.
Charcharo said:
KZ2? That game was ugly as shit. It was compared to other console drivel at the time that is why it was liked for its visuals.
It used a lot of motion blur and QCAA, which don't do screenshots justice, but it ultimately still looked better than most shooters in motion.
Other than some laggy kill animations there's really no downgrade in mp either
It also had/still has some of the best art design on any platform. The only things hurting its visuals for the time were lower res. textures, but even then some assets like gun models and interior environments were exceptional on console.
Charcharo said:
Metro Last Light and Redux is one of the most optimized games out there. Just dont enable Super Sampling. Which should be obvious to you, I hope. It looked better than all PC Games bar Crysis 3 and it still looks better than most (not all) modern games. It loses in character animation and facial animation, but wins all else basically.
I'd probably go so far as to say Last Light looks better than Crysis 3, but that's probably being subjective.
Charcharo said:
id Tech 6 legit looks great for how well it performs. I dont know how they run on consoles, it is irrelevant. Consoles should not exist. Full stop. People claiming they should have blown a long term thinking head-gasket and are a danger to gaming.
The problem is would the gaming industry have enough $$ in it to support high end games and engines they run on if PC was the only place to play? I think at the very least the form factor would have to accommodate, not intimidate the less technically inclined consumers, and there are a lot of them. Most people don't care to use something if it's not almost fool proof.
Charcharo said:
I am fairly certain a modified id Tech 6 (to work better with Open World design) would crush Guerrilla Game's efforts. This is like telling me that the efforts of some Turkish tank designers and engineers will equal those of Russian designers or engineers or even American and German ones. They may do well and better than before, but they are out of their league. Same thing for Guerrilla Games.
That's of course debatable. Tech 6 may work well for linear shooters, but those kinds of games are also mechanically very simple. Then there's also the fact that a mostly static gun model on screen is far easier to render than a full character model whose hair alone is 100k poly's [https://www.artstation.com/artwork/EDbk4]. The painstakingly detailed machines of Horizon: Zero Dawn are far beyond what any Tech 6 game has had to render as a fully mobile AI character. The thunderjaw alone consists of 550k polygons [https://wccftech.com/horizon-dawns-thunderjaw-consists-550k-polygons-stands-24x9-meters-tall/], and it's often surrounded by dozens of smaller machines. I'm wondering how many poly's Doom or Wolfenstein 2's largest enemy is, within a much smaller environment.
Charcharo said:
Those tweets are the lead designer of the engine basically saying the Wolfenstein 2 engine is superior to DOOM's (he was lead on BOTH). And I agree, it has problems with the faces and some textures...but those are on MachineGames, not the technology. The actual game does look better to me than DOOM, overall.
Fair enough. I admit Wolfenstein 2 can look good at times, but personally from what I've seen it's nothing exceptional.
Charcharo said:
"I thought the industry has moved past those things by now."
This is literally a design choice. It is even pettier than me mocking the rich stupid Dutch devs for Horizon for their no-show of A-Life.
Anyways why not also address the final part of the argument? The last lines? Is the fear of doing something immoral and coming to grips with it THAT bad?
Why do I get the impression that if a console-only game did that, you'd swap "design choice" with "no RAM"? I know that quite a few games still use pre-rendered video here and there, but it's still an unfavorable substitute for real time. With no modern platform being RAM starved anymore, it's a technique that has outlived its usefulness. What used to be a necessary concession is now more of a peculiar distraction, and points to either engine limitations or a lack of skill on the developer's part.
I get what you mean, but practically speaking even the oldest console games haven't been forgotten. If they have, then they simply weren't very good, no different than bad PC games. If anything I'd say the issue of shutting down servers is a bigger deal on the mp side of so many console games. Backwards compatibility is something that console makers should all have standard by next generation, but it's something that will probably always fall short of what's possible on PC. There will always be more limitations on a closed box/controlled platform.
I know you're biased towards PC and I completely get that. My stance is more along the lines of acknowledging that console game development is a major thing now, and is intertwined with PC game development thanks to certain market forces whether good or bad. There's no point in dismissing developers' efforts just because they're on an "inferior" platform. I find it interesting to see what they can do with limited hardware. It puts the load on their shoulders vs the consumer via upgrades when their system can't handle it.
I wonder how efficient PC API's would be these days if cross platform development wasn't a thing. Maybe that's about the only good thing that came from Microsoft getting into the console race. Actually no, it could have very well been even better if they chose to instead focus solely on the PC. I don't think designing a console API should be a prerequisite to learning efficient techniques on Windows.
Delusional stuff from a Sony and Horizon fanboy... When you use tried and tested methods with zero risk and no ambition, at all. YOu get Horizon. Less chances to fail at technology when you do not attempt anything new or unique. Same for gameplay. And please stop with the Damage Control, I see the patch notes for Horizon Zero Dawn. The game wasnt released in a perfect state (nothing is)... your only argument for the AAA title is basically "my Horizon may have lesser gameplay and much worse AI, terrible ballistics, inferior Open World, inferior setting, smaller in scope and size, but at least it is polished!!!1". If Horizon was a free mod too or even just a free PC Game (so you dont have to buy a shitty toy to play it) ... I would accept that critique, but its childish otherwise.
I'm done with your condescending bullshit, this is why Horizon is better than Witcher 3. I should start on poll on which fight is better. You get the first video when lacking ambition.
It?s tough not to think that if GG were a PC dev releasing Horizon as an exclusive with no major design changes Charcharo would be singing a different tune about it.
It?s tough not to think that if GG were a PC dev releasing Horizon as an exclusive with no major design changes Charcharo would be singing a different tune about it.
Most probably and god forbid if Horizon were developed in eastern Europe as well. He'd be like Horizon is thematically so much better than open world conslow garbage that are mainly collection and checklist simulators that inorganically put the plebeian plot on hold to do near unlimited busywork. Whereas Horizon's open world structure makes more thematic sense than it does in most open world games, even Witcher 3; Aloy discovering the world and taking her time makes sense to both the story and gameplay whereas Geralt taking time to find a pan or fight a monster while already a master witcher and man of the world (knowing kings and everything) when desperately trying to find Ciri doesn't make sense. Speaking of Witcher 3, you should checkout Charcharo's review of Witcher 3 [https://www.gnd-tech.com/content/1051-The-Witcher-3-Wild-Hunt-Complete-Review-of-the-base-game%21/view/2] if you have time (and you'll need some time lol), it's the most pretentious review of a game I've ever read.
To be fair, I think we both made our posts before he was banned. I just noticed it when I saw my quote notification and reopened the thread. Charcharo was clearly being a condescending fellow and unwilling to acknowledge any opinions other than his own elitist variety.
1) All anti-consumer practices are bad and corporations should take flak for it, always. There is no place for 'but A does even worse things than B' excuse. This thread and poll is inflamatory at its core and serves no purpose but to ruffle up 'console fanboys' division lines, should have been locked.
2) Subject of this thread makes it 'Game Industry Discussion' rather than 'Gaming Discussion'
3) You banned (or whichever moderator did) one side of an argument. All the while mod's friends got 'please, you can stop now, we removed person you couldn't come to terms with' as 'a warning'. Either ban everyone involved (and 'rude behaviour' starts here like 5th post in...) or none. What took place looks partisan and witnessing this type of 'treatment' puts off new people. I hope you do realize that. Unless that's the whole point, then nvm carry on, it works.
That's why it was just a friendly FYI warning in the thread. I just didn't want the two of you to start a back and forth about how terrible other guy's opinions are so I'd rather step in now when I can just ask you guys to stop rather than potentially have to step in later if it went too far.
Jamcie Kerbizz said:
3) You banned (or whichever moderator did) one side of an argument. All the while mod's friends got 'please, you can stop now, we removed person you couldn't come to terms with' as 'a warning'. Either ban everyone involved (and 'rude behaviour' starts here like 5th post in...) or none. What took place looks partisan and witnessing this type of 'treatment' puts off new people. I hope you do realize that. Unless that's the whole point, then nvm carry on, it works.
Contrary to popular belief, we don't just roam around looking for things to give warnings to. If you feel a post broke a rule, feel free to report it and The Mods will determine what to do with it.
If you have any questions or concerns, take it outside the thread and PM a Mod.
That's why it was just a friendly FYI warning in the thread. I just didn't want the two of you to start a back and forth about how terrible other guy's opinions are so I'd rather step in now when I can just ask you guys to stop rather than potentially have to step in later if it went too far.
Jamcie Kerbizz said:
3) You banned (or whichever moderator did) one side of an argument. All the while mod's friends got 'please, you can stop now, we removed person you couldn't come to terms with' as 'a warning'. Either ban everyone involved (and 'rude behaviour' starts here like 5th post in...) or none. What took place looks partisan and witnessing this type of 'treatment' puts off new people. I hope you do realize that. Unless that's the whole point, then nvm carry on, it works.
Contrary to popular belief, we don't just roam around looking for things to give warnings to. If you feel a post broke a rule, feel free to report it and The Mods will determine what to do with it.
If you have any questions or concerns, take it outside the thread and PM a Mod.
I already voiced my concern openly.
It's basically look at what you are doing, and think about outcome of what you are doing.
Until mods start vehemently ban 'friends' who report others as part of resolving long lost argument (which they dragged themselves into dumpfire in the first place), nothing will improve. I have nothing more to add but to note that I have never had a moderation here answer a single pm inquiry on this board. Not one. So telling me to send a PM is basically telling the old man to get f-ed. Which I don't appreciate.
Either way I'm done on the subject. You do what you see fit. You guys are not paid to do your job so stringing you up for its quality is mealy proposal at best. Dick move by default. That I am aware of as well.
3) You banned (or whichever moderator did) one side of an argument. All the while mod's friends got 'please, you can stop now, we removed person you couldn't come to terms with' as 'a warning'. Either ban everyone involved (and 'rude behaviour' starts here like 5th post in...) or none.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
