OTOH, I imagine, though I don't know, that most of those who made pre-orders were just grateful to something from the new game, as opposed to losing their pre-order payments and getting nothing at all.
As someone who paid $100 for that piece of shit falsely advertised DCE, "grateful" is the last word I would use to describe getting that abortion of a product. If I didn't get either a game or my $100 back out of that deal I would've looked up Quinn Duffy's phone number and rang his house every day until he decided to send me $100 out of his own pocket.
|
Besides, you failed to address my points about alternative funding / monetization schemes that would likely appear in the absence of state-enforced monopoly on ideas (again, something that's unownable. Do I need to copy-paste the arguments again?).
Everyone already said they don't own the ideas of a squad and cover based WW2 rts. Broad ideas will not get legal protection. Be philosophical all you want, but at the end of the day the USPTO (or any other intellectual property office) considers software design as a trade secret. |
Furthermore, the argument from time is not meant to stand alone but in context of the more important argument, which I outlined above. It's 'empirical indication that supports deduction of truth, which itself is immutable regardless of the supposed empirical tale (which further needs to be interpreted by an analytical framework, or truth deduced from truth).' For my axiom I take that of self ownership, and reason out what it means to 'own' something, through Lockean homesteading and original appropriation, and what something must be to be ownable. 
Not trying to be an asshole, but this a gaming forum, and most of us didn't waste way too much money on a philosophy degree. Its like learning to speak Latin; its 2016 so no1 cares. 
I could ramble on and on about climate/energy/regulation, IR theory, global economy, etc. but I know most people here don't care, so I won't.
to be consistent, you'll have to argue that the fashion, magic, comedic, food, and furniture industries are deplorable because they don't have IP law.
With all those industries, you have to put in your own work. You can take inspiration, but you can't sell other peoples shit. For example a comedian can copy someones style and cater to the same audience, they still have to be funny and give a good delivery. On the other hand I cannot burn a DVD montage of the funniest bits from a Louis CK and Ricky Gervais standup and sell it, which is more comparable to mandating all video games be open source.
Let me add to that: the entire history of technological innovation has been to stand on the shoulders of giants and make small, incremental improvements. This is how the steam engine, the light bulb, the loom, and so many other marvels, were created. It is rational to apply the same understanding of progress to things like software.
Last:
Its comparing apples to oranges. All of those things took years of refinement to improve and replace. Bethesda makes great games, but they are usually buggy on release. The PC version always has a community made patch that squashes a lot of the bugs before the official patch. As a result someone could buy the next Elder Scrolls game, fix a bunch of their bugs first in a couple of days, and then sell the whole game?!?! Literally an absurd proposal, if that's what you're saying. If everyone that bought the game a couple days after the release had the option of $60 buggy vanilla game, or $60 unofficial patch version, there would be no reason not to buy the version with less bugs. |
2. Shadowwada's position - Prominent members of our community shouldn't harass other prominent members since it reflects poorly on our esports scene & community. Barton should be banned so people know relic & the coh2 community doesn't support such harassment. (I also agree it is a bad crime so there should be punishment; I viewed it more under the lens of a community/esports issue rather than just seeing it as a cyberbullying crime)
...
As I've said, it reflects poorly on our community. If we want our esports scene to grow (by extension supporting the game growing), we must punish Barton. People won't join our community if they know harassment is par for the course. Why would anyone get into this scene when you have better alternatives such as League of Legends; Riot hired Jeffery "Lyte" Lin to specifically curb the playerbase's toxic behavior as well as Riot banning specific toxic players such as major twitch streamer Tyler1. This is one of the many reasons why League of Legends is a better game and a bigger esport than CoH2. Relic needs to learn from Riot's example.
Also the whole "ZOMG SHADOWWADA SUX" type of comments are silly. At the end of the day, no one can argue I'm in the top 20 CoH2 players and top 3 NA players.
Whiles there's no shortage of people in COH2 that want to see Barton banned, lets be real, you're not the best spokesperson for the #banbarton movement. You say that Barton is harassing you, and then everybody that knows that Barton his been a complete shit stain on this community since the COH1 days think "oh cool maybe Relic will notice and he will finally get his long overdue ban." And then you post a wall of text that is honestly painful to read and reeks of some sort of entitlement for being "gud" or something. It was harassment when he does it to 4v4 plebs, when he does it to you, when he does it to some top player that doesn't stream, or whoever. It didn't suddenly become bad behavior because he did it some streamer who gives himself too much credit. Not saying you're bad, but the more you self advertise your own leet coh skills, the more people you alienate from the otherwise good cause. Looking at all the 1v1 and 2v2 players that have been active and the last year or two, some of which temporarily dipped b/c bugs imbalance, etc. you are probably top 30 NA honestly.
Stop with the self promotional "I'm prominent person" talking points and you'll win more people over. Theres several of us on this site that used to stream a lot and had similar viewership when the streaming scene was 5% what it is today, and frankly we aren't that impressed. This isn't an ewok camp, and you're not C3P0; no special treatment.  |
|
1. Wada needs to get some thicker skin. They poor guy was just about in tears because Barton exposed him for not being a top tier player. There was big time harassment too, I get that, but I know a large part of the butthurt was due to the fact that he was losing every time. If Barton was trolling and losing half of the time, I think we would have a different story here.
2. Barton is a pos and needs to go. There's a difference between being rude and this level of harrassment, which is essentially stalking. Had he sniped him one time, called Wada a braindead dipshit, and then fucked off...no big deal. But if you're trolling someone persisently for several hours multiple days per week, that is the kind of offense that gets restraining orders in real life. Its not about being mean or unsporting, its legit stalking, an absurd invasion of privacy. |
"Besides the utilitarian argument, thoroughly in favor of deposing IP law, there's also the natural law argument: if property is from the natural law, then why haven't the vast majority of civilizations throughout history acknowledged intellectual property along side it? Why is it a very recent invention?
Relatively speaking, the complete end of legalized slavery in the west, suffrage, child labor laws, etc. are "recent inventions." How long the idea has been around is irrelevant.
Moreover, what constitutes ownership, and how can one 'own' an 'idea'? If ideas are ephemeral universals, they must be owned by all, as one could only discover and distribute ownership: there would be no way to scarcity in the economic sense, and thus no way to lock it down as a given person's. If ideas are only present in each mind, be it as universals or as particulars or as illusions, they must be re-created in each person's mind from external stimuli. If it is their creation, and if its removal depends upon aggressing (lobotomizing) them, then it is theirs wholly simply by knowing it."
Your argument is really odd. On one hand its a "everyone owns everything" communist mentality, but you rationalize it because it would supposedly increase competition, which is a free market idea. Well you don't increase competition by letting someone be lazy and steal code, and then repackage Relic's hard work with different icing on the top to cut in to their market. They don't own the rights to WW2 RTS, cover system, vet, or any other concepts in their game. If someone else wants to compete and develop a COH clone under a new title that would be great, but they better get their own art assets, engine, etc. Ripping off 95% of someone elses hard work just to improve the shitty 5% would be so pathetic, thank god for intellectual property laws. |
I wonder that this thread is still here, if people dont want the developers anymore. Why you dont play coh1 or dow1 if the games are much better.
Last COH1 patch was great for balance but there are 2 important bugs they never fixed. Even though the balance is good, the meta has gotten stale after 5 years on one patch. The steam version has messed up leaderboards. Other than a few streamers the community is dead, very few minor tournaments, no high quality youtube commentaries, no SNF, etc. The 2v2 AT playerbase (which was actually AT unlike this COH2 bullshit) really died down after the half broken New Steam Version release. |
Idk...
I mean, if we take out bugs, optimization, OP and UP stuff, CoH2 would be perfect WW2 game so I hardly see new stuff in CoH3.
Maybe Africa theme or alternative history like single campaign where Reisch invade USA and UK (aka Panzer Corps  )
So basically if we fix everything that sucks about the game, it could be a great game  
ps: theres still other problems with the game though KappaClaus
|
well.. it is design for console. Wouldn't expect much from it then.
...
Battle for Middle Earth 2 was a console port, and a great one. I never played HW1 but it looks most similar to BFME, so there is definitely promise. |
Why blobbing is so prominent is a direct result from the maps being tiny in a game where indirect fire is the meta. You cannot stay static so you can't play this cute little positional vcoh wehrmacht combined arms type of game everyone dreams it was. You have to press forward to dodge mortars and get to the juicy support units. And if the maps are designed as small as they currently are, relative to the range of most support units, then most of the time your flanking units might only be 1 or 2 squad lengths away. This isn't blobbing. I'm sure there's a lot of players, allies bros included, that look at their enemy's 4-5 squads with support units and tanks as just one big blob and that it lacks finesse. The finesse is in timing and making sure no 2 squads can get suppressed in the same volley by 1 mg. That X distance 2 squads have to be away from each other to not both get suppressed as they're converging on a single point is called micro. If they're close enough to all get suppressed then it's a blob. That's the definition. Likewise, calling out "infantry spam" for allies is also nonsense. Not everyone can be Wehrmacht every game.
The only solution is the issue that Cultist talked about with the bullets.
+1
So many plebs in the COH community that don't even know what a blob is. Hell I even see some people on COH1 that don't know what a blob is. Having lots of infantry isn't a blob, its how the fucking game is played. Support units SUPPORT infantry because they are force multipliers, meaning your support:infantry ratio is low. Now defense is a little different, you can lock down a point with less men if you more heavy weapons, that should go with out saying. But on offense, maneuver is king, and you aren't breaking through with diversity for the sake of diversity. I hate to bursts some peoples bubbles, but a typical skirmish in WW2 did not consist of 3 machine guns, 3 mortars, a sniper, 2 AT guns, 3 regular infantry, two "elite" infantry, a couple tanks, several engineers, artillery, and a "officer" squad. Realistically and practically speaking it would be 80% or more regular infantry, <20% other shit.
Theres some valid problems with the game that promotes blobbing a bit too much, but it also gets conflated with a bunch of people on here that don't even know the difference between blobbing and smart play. Managing to sneak 4 or 5 infantry behind a group of support weapons and stealing them all is not a blob, its a good flank. No serious discussion can be had about fixing "blobbing" in a public forum, this is an issue for the someone with experience like DevM, Budwise, etc. to hash out....which will never happen anyway because Relic is not committed to bold big changes to the game.
|
United States
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
