Skip to content

Lilura1 commentary on Beamdog's livestreams

2»

Comments

  • TheBarbarianTheBarbarian Member Posts: 58
    That sounds a little formulaic; more like an excerpt from an advertisement than somebody talking about something and somepeople they love.

    I mean, you obviously don't have to answer my questions. But if you want to spread awareness of the things you like about this kind of place and lifestyle, it might help to advocate some of the qualities you value about it - surely there's more to it than a company line and a string of titles and references, most of which (3-2) are apparently about things created outside of that group. I'm truly interested, not in a facetious way either.
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 2,072
    It's funny that you mentioned VD, the AoD developer in question, given that he explicitly and expressedly wanted to create a better RPG community on his own Iron Towers forums that lacked all the Codex bullshit.
  • LiluraLilura Member Posts: 148
    Uh, he still posts there on regular basis. I've had recent exchanges with him. Like me, he has his own place to post but he still posts on the 'Dex.

    Lots of devs and commentators do.
  • RifkinRifkin Member Posts: 141
    Lilura said:

    The RPGCodex is the best general RPG community out there.

    Interesting. Why do you feel that it is one of the best communities for RPGs?
    Lilura said:

    Born of a love for Fallout (the greatest RPG of all-time) and turn-based combat in general (ToEE, Jagged Alliance 2), it could not be otherwise. Among other things, it is hosting the modding efforts of Grognards from Hell, and one of its members developed Age of Decadence, one of the best RPGs ever.

    I too enjoyed Fallout, and continue to enjoy what little of the Fallout franchise we have left. (4 options for yes, 0 for no?!)

    Temple of Elemental Evil was interesting, but I don't know why but it never really stood out for me.

    Jagged Alliance 2? Never heard of it. Looks interesting, maybe I'll check it out someday.
    Lilura said:


    :)

    Have you ever tried any of the goldbox games? How about any of the Quest for Glory series? How about Arcanum?
  • SaintPhillipSaintPhillip Member Posts: 59
    edited January 2018
    The Codex is by far the best place to go for RPG information/discussion and debate. Its also a really friendly place with people who are genuine and real (and like one another) once you get past the surface...No fake nicety needed or pretend civility.

    I cannot believe I'm on this forum defending my beloved codex.

    I also think some of the comments here are being overly dramatic- Lilura can be a bit.... harsh (I'll keep it nice here lol) but shes a hardcore fount of knowledge who can dish it out as well as she can take it.... Shes probably the top authority on this game as far as im concerned and even though I dont always agree with her and think she can be harsh (which is funny imho) I know she knows her stuff far better than me when it comes to this game and all of its facets...And probably more than most everyone here.

    Leave the codex alone


    FinneousPJStummvonBordwehrTheBarbarianWandering_Minstrel
  • MrDamageMrDamage Member Posts: 210
    *Rattles cage, runs*
  • SaintPhillipSaintPhillip Member Posts: 59

    @SaintPhillip
    Now that sounds more like an actual person talking about someplace and somepeople they love, yeah. :-) If you've got the time, I'd love to hear your answers to my questions on the previous page of the thread. Not being facetious - I don't understand the mentality, and I'd like to.

    Quid pro quo: I don't think it's about the Codex, so much. The thing about the harsh behaviour, regardless of from where or whom it comes, is that it's not remotely funny for a lot of people. Many have friends and family who've been hurt by people who laughed as they were doing it - and I mean that in a "holding someone you love when they wake up screaming in the night"-kind of way. It pushes a button that, from a "Good-aligned" view, should never be pushed. We (in case nobody else feels this way, let's just assume I have multiple personalities, for the sake of the argument ^^) get angry, and protective, and resent a reality that quite simply seems to favor the ruthless.

    The idea that the people who are doing this are "simply being honest and should therefore face no repercussions for it" is even more appalling when you view it from that angle. Not everybody actually thinks and feels cruelly towards other people deep down inside, you know? We're not necessarily being dishonest when we're being kind, or polite - for us, it's less "pretending to be someone we're not" as it's "taking a bit more care to phrase things constructively so as not to harm an atmosphere we value and people whom we don't know well enough to know what they can or can't handle". The more careful (even pretentious) interaction is generally more on the surface, too.

    From this perspective, somebody professing lack of willingness to put in the modicum of effort necessary to phrase criticism so it's not actively destructive, even if it can't be turned constructive, means adding insult to injury. It makes it look like a mean-spirited person with low self-control, poor grasp of social interaction, and no regard for life, is trying to hurt others to get a laugh while calling that a sign of mental and emotional superiority. It's a type of behaviour that causes far more harm than it does good, far as I can see.

    Generating a hatefest on the Codex - or any other place - here isn't the point of this, though, yeah. There's a South Park song about bullying that's got a lot of wisdom about what it looks like when people feel it's justifiable to fight fire with fire that's worth looking up when feeling particularly righteous. Would recommend.

    I'd be happy to discuss it with you elsewhere but am not wanting to hijack/derail this thread.

    Suffice it to say I dont buy into the 'cyberbullying' nonsense anymore that I bought into the 'satanic panic' during the 1980s where Dungeons and Dragons was genuinely believed by the vast majority of normies to be the cause of teen murder and suicide and depression, to the point it was banned from schools and law Enforcement had 'tasks forces' searching for a grand occult conspiracy that involved AD&D, Satanism and heavy metal music.

    Granted, my friends and I were summoning demons in my moms basement using our 'Players handbooks' but...

    People who care enough about what some anon says online that they would kill themselves or have massive depression would find other reasons (Like D&D or Judas Priest) that they or their family would blame on their problems- And we are quickly becoming a victim society where we (and others) find excuses and reasons to blame our own problems and behaviors on.

    Anyhow, sorry to hijack the thread but getting back on topic I still think everyone was overly dramatic over a few words (which were funny and sarcastic and based on circumstances) and also a high degree of misunderstanding about the codex (my favorite RPG site where many of my friends and people whos opinions I respect post at) from people who only see the surface and often find offence where none really exists.

    Like everything there is a 'time and place' and situation for everything- And this isnt the place or time to have this discussion and I apologize for derailing and going off topic.
    TheBarbarianZwerkulesDiscoCat
  • TheBarbarianTheBarbarian Member Posts: 58
    edited February 2018
    I think I disagree very much on that it's inappropriate to discuss this kind of thing here, or that it's off-topic. This is a major paradigm difference in society, which makes people of either viewpoint consider it justified to attempt to harm "the other side". Public discussion on how to help people of either viewpoint better understand and appreciate the other is a good thing, so long as it remains constructive.

    Moreover, Lilura, as a blogger, wrote an opinion piece specifically intended to garner attention and provoke discussion. Aside from generating money via clicks (which, I take, doesn't apply here since the blog is apparently not monetized), this is what blogposts are supposed to evoke. Controversy is blogger gold, you know? :-) It's a good thing for all sides, not an inconvenience that ought to be squashed. Essentially comes down to people being a little more thick-skinned, and discussing and debating rather than shutting productive discourse down over being 'inappropriate', hey? ;-)

    So - thank you for the reply! I'd appreciate answers to my list of questions very much - maybe a PM would do? I'll respond publicly to what's posted publicly:

    I'll take your "I don't believe this kind of thing can actually harm anyone" and "People who would be harmed by this kind of thing would be harmed by pretty much anything anyway" arguments into consideration.

    I think you've got a point on the latter; how strongly something impacts someone depends on their level of sensitivity to that thing, rather than on the thing itself, and we're simply unable to moderate reality to a point where nobody ever would get hurt at all - but, to be fair, everybody is breakable as heck, even the toughest folks there are.

    There are always more battles that an individual cannot fight alone than there are ones we can. Person versus disease, person versus sun, person versus acid. Person versus time.

    Research and technological advancement consist of the efforts of many generations of people building upon one another's work. I'd argue that an "everybody out for themselves"-mentality that disregards the potential of out-groupers as components of collective advancement needlessly shoots itself in the foot.

    Take the desire for videogames that aren't marketed towards casual gamers, for instance. When a group rejects and repels the majority of people rather than attempting to integrate and educate them, it shrinks it's own relevance as a market demographic.

    Moreover, I'd be willing to wager (a very small amount) that artists who primarily work on their computer are predominantly people who went into this style of work because they didn't appreciate social rankfighting very much to begin with. Aiming harshly personal criticism towards them seems likely to hamper production times by distressing workers, as well as to reduce the overall amount of new devs produced - which, in turn, means that there are fewer people who are practicing this crafting skill enough to become good enough at it to produce masterpieces.

    And nobody's more likely to push back against a perceived offense than the kind of people who've got backbone enough to go into this business regardless. Destructive critics may well find themselves faced with scorn and ridicule in kind, being perceived as 'people who always would find something to be upset about wherefore their opinions should be disregarded', which could easily have been avoided by slightly prioritizing constructive behaviour over uninhibited behaviour. Though I certainly see the benefit in having places where people are just allowed to speak their mind and be themselves - the concepts of group therapy and safe spaces work in a similar way.

    So this seems to me like it'd contribute to making (and keeping!) casual gamers the biggest as well as least stressful group to service, as well as decrease the amount of (and therefore competition for quality among) game developers. It'd make more sense to behave integratively, if only to bolster one's relevance on the market.

    And that's in addition to the points I've already raised earlier on in the thread. Subjective opinions on hard-to-pin-down things like "right" and "wrong" aside, this overall behaviour strikes me as counterproductive in a way that can only be mitigated via (hopefully largely constructive) criticism and debate. As long as we perceive reality through the perspectives of individual humans, and affect reality through the actions of individual humans, I'd say it'd be unrealistic to disregard either as unimportant. After all, the people we interact with do not cease being independent actors in the world if we, personally, dismiss and ignore them.

    So that's what baffles me about the attitude of these recent blog posts, the Codex in general, and Lilura's recent choice of conduct hereabouts. I'm not under the impression that these are unintelligent people at work. What am I missing to understand the logic that leads somebody to conclude that this is the best way to go about reaching this particular goal?
    Zwerkules
  • SaintPhillipSaintPhillip Member Posts: 59
    edited February 2018

    I think I disagree very much on that it's inappropriate to discuss this kind of thing here, or that it's off-topic. This is a major paradigm difference in society, which makes people of either viewpoint consider it justified to attempt to harm "the other side". Public discussion on how to help people of either viewpoint better understand and appreciate the other is a good thing, so long as it remains constructive.

    In terms of this thread I think it is quite off topic since we are moving into the realm of talking about other forums , philosophy , human nature and just about everything except the content of Liluras blog. All good things to discuss and I can appreciate the desire to try and figure out the mysteries of the universe (and the codex) but I just dont feel doing all of that in this thread is going to do anything but spiral it out of control and away from its intended purpose.

    Moreover, Lilura, as a blogger, wrote an opinion piece specifically intended to garner attention and provoke discussion. Aside from generating money via clicks (which, I take, doesn't apply here since the blog is apparently not monetized), this is what blogposts are supposed to evoke. Controversy is blogger gold, you know? :-) It's a good thing for all sides, not an inconvenience that ought to be squashed. Essentially comes down to people being a little more thick-skinned, and discussing and debating rather than shutting productive discourse down over being 'inappropriate', hey? ;-)

    Yes, but we've moved past discussing the piece... As far as that goes I think what she said was sarcastic and funny although I also agree with her opinion on 'full party control' and her reasoning behind it and believe I know why she posted what she did.

    Lilura is not my friend and I dont know her except from her blog and posts on the codex (which I dont participate in those threads, but I do read) and shes a quality poster with an opinion I respect- Even if I dont always agree with. I'm pretty sure she thinks only an idiot would want graphic updates in this game and in that regard I'm proud to be an idiot and I take no issue or offence to anything she would say on an issue we disagree on.

    So - thank you for the reply! I'd appreciate answers to my list of questions very much - maybe a PM would do? I'll respond publicly to what's posted publicly:

    I'll take your "I don't believe this kind of thing can actually harm anyone" and "People who would be harmed by this kind of thing would be harmed by pretty much anything anyway" arguments into consideration.

    I think you've got a point on the latter; how strongly something impacts someone depends on their level of sensitivity to that thing, rather than on the thing itself, and we're simply unable to moderate reality to a point where nobody ever would get hurt at all - but, to be fair, everybody is breakable as heck, even the toughest folks there are.

    There are always more battles that an individual cannot fight alone than there are ones we can. Person versus disease, person versus sun, person versus acid. Person versus time.

    Research and technological advancement consist of the efforts of many generations of people building upon one another's work. I'd argue that an "everybody out for themselves"-mentality that disregards the potential of out-groupers as components of collective advancement needlessly shoots itself in the foot.

    Take the desire for videogames that aren't marketed towards casual gamers, for instance. When a group rejects and repels the majority of people rather than attempting to integrate and educate them, it shrinks it's own relevance as a market demographic.

    Moreover, I'd be willing to wager (a very small amount) that artists who primarily work on their computer are predominantly people who went into this style of work because they didn't appreciate social rankfighting very much to begin with. Aiming harshly personal criticism towards them seems likely to hamper production times by distressing workers, as well as to reduce the overall amount of new devs produced - which, in turn, means that there are fewer people who are practicing this crafting skill enough to become good enough at it to produce masterpieces.

    And nobody's more likely to push back against a perceived offense than the kind of people who've got backbone enough to go into this business regardless. Destructive critics may well find themselves faced with scorn and ridicule in kind, being perceived as 'people who always would find something to be upset about wherefore their opinions should be disregarded', which could easily have been avoided by slightly prioritizing constructive behaviour over uninhibited behaviour. Though I certainly see the benefit in having places where people are just allowed to speak their mind and be themselves - the concepts of group therapy and safe spaces work in a similar way.

    So this seems to me like it'd contribute to making (and keeping!) casual gamers the biggest as well as least stressful group to service, as well as decrease the amount of (and therefore competition for quality among) game developers. It'd make more sense to behave integratively, if only to bolster one's relevance on the market.

    Theres so much here and this is the area we would likely move way off base.

    You see, I have Libertarian ideals concerning many things (not all) and in this regard I would take the libertarian approach... If devs are upset because of criticism or whatever and they begin to leave in droves (and work at Mc'donalds where they feel their treatment would be better) then the market would dictate that new devs would rise up in their place.


    The fact is there are more devs joining the ranks and more games than ever even as gamers become more jaded and 'mean to the devs'.

    In my personal life I have to work and its stressful and I do it because I have to in order to have a decent life and not struggle every week deciding which bill to pay- The same reason there will always be devs who are becoming a dime a dozen thanks to new accessibility in things unity and digital distribution. This is the new "Gold Rush" and everyone want a piece. In the real westward expansion most never struck it rich (except the ones selling pick axes and providing services) many died and there was much hardship- yet always new wagons heading west. The same thing is happening here.

    Society is far more vile with the influx of social media 24/7 and everyone having a platform- from twitter mobs to review bombing to digital harassment and yet we see more people entering the industry than ever before - technology is collectively killing our humanity even though most try to pretend to be 'humane' by expressing outrage on forums over perceived offenses, trying to get people fired over personal options and forming digital witch hunts and the pack mentality over issues of 'offence'- Yet everything is also being more and more controlled and collective- Its a pressure cooker and when people have to fear what they say (because of faux outrage from the collective) then things become 'fake' and really meaningless.

    haters are labeled and fanboys emerge to rise to a cause over a ...Video game. Everything is so divided now and everyone is carrying a banner over pointless things because the real issues in life are looking more and more unsolvable- So we (using 'we' broadly and not meaning you and I) cling to things and battles that are pointless and small to garner some meaning or power- if that makes sense. And 'sides' get drawn over stupid things that people attach real meaning too when there really is none.

    We are on the cusp of the real world merging with the virtual one and powerless people finding a new outlet for expressing power from being overly hostile to virtue signalling and everyone for the most part is reading far too much into everything...Sometimes a spade is just a spade. It doesnt make it good but it is what it is.

    And that's in addition to the points I've already raised earlier on in the thread. Subjective opinions on hard-to-pin-down things like "right" and "wrong" aside, this overall behaviour strikes me as counterproductive in a way that can only be mitigated via (hopefully largely constructive) criticism and debate. As long as we perceive reality through the perspectives of individual humans, and affect reality through the actions of individual humans, I'd say it'd be unrealistic to disregard either as unimportant. After all, the people we interact with do not cease being independent actors in the world if we, personally, dismiss and ignore them.

    So that's what baffles me about the attitude of these recent blog posts, the Codex in general, and Lilura's recent choice of conduct hereabouts. I'm not under the impression that these are unintelligent people at work. What am I missing to understand the logic that leads somebody to conclude that this is the best way to go about reaching this particular goal?

    I cant speak for Lilura or her conduct... I can say that great painters are temperamental and we should be looking at the work and not the man. This is all going too far into the realm of analytical when its more of an occums razor thing imho.

    I know you dont understand the codex and theres nothing to understand- Its a bunch of passionate people who for the most part like or respect each other enough to be able to say anything (even things others would take as rude) because nobody takes any offence- Theres always the exception and trolls and really hateful people who wander in but most of it is all a joke between people who 'get it' and once you have that mindset you find some awesome people who are generally very knowledgeable and fun... Even many developers post there where they do not have a safe space and many stand up just fine (look at the dude making stellar tactics and how he handles things) and they are accessible in a way ive never seen anywhere else.

    I dont know- I think youre reading too much into it and tarring that forum with a broad brush. I see that alot.

    -And I have no idea what 'goal' shes trying to reach except to sway development the way she wants- Which is all of our goal. He blog was already massive and shes not monetizing it- She loves these games (maybe too much , lol) and over time has become the authority on them imho. Not sure she has a goal but she will have to answer that.
    TheBarbarian
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811
    Maybe a mod can split this insightful and thought provoking conversation from the thread and place it in off-topic?
    TheBarbarian
  • TheBarbarianTheBarbarian Member Posts: 58
    For what it's worth, I love direction we've turned this thing here, and think it's definitely worth the effort to try to do something about the vitriol everywhere, or provide kindlier counterpoints to it, rather than give up and blast contempt out into the world, too. :-) Thank you for helping me with that.

    I think I'd actually argue that dragging human nature, philosophy, and all the mysteries of the universe, into minor conflicts is the single best way to go about addressing them, and possibly the only way to do something about *fixing* these rifts in society. When it comes down to it, we're all sitting on the same thin crust over a lavafirecore of death in space and contributing to the same future together - that's the context under which we ought to be debating any individual issue, big or small, because it's the context we've got. It puts things into perspective, in a good way.

    And... huh. I think you've just managed to explain what I've been missing about the Codex. The Codex is about examining a whole lot of commercial games and discerning which are worth people's limited time and money resources, wherefore individual creators are only considered valuable insofar as they produce something the majority finds valuable. ::headscratch::

    From where I've been looking at it, I've been considering the mentality of people who want to build stuff. The Vault is a very different type of place; we essentially have a giant unlimited lego box, and a whole bunch of people who're all building and playing in their own way. We share combined pieces, help eachother find stuff, puzzle out how to build specific things together, assist in bugfixing, we almost all more or less passively study some degree of logic and programming on the side via NWScript. It's a quieter place, where few personal value judgements are being made. We've just got less reason to stamp projects as "worthy" or "unworthy" of time - it's up to the individual creators what they want to be spending their limited and non-refundable lifetime building.

    I'd consider constructivity the primary ideal there, since we know for a fact that we won't have anything unless we build it, as that's just... how reality really works, underneath all the head-bashing rank-fighting social-posturing paying-the-bills-stress going on IRL. If we want something to exist, we need to figure out how to make it exist. That's one of the most grounding, steadying, wisest things I've found in life so far.

    These're people for whom being anything other than constructive and helpful and open about sharing their skills and knowledge has been a rare exception in the years that I've known them. Most of our projects are interwoven in that we helped eachother figure out how to bring them about - manually, one problem at a time, or via the masses of tutorials people have written over the years. It's a collaborative environment, which makes it difficult to elevate any personality above another, as the things that we could receive adulation for exist because we've had the opportunity to benefit from the work of people who came before us.

    In these parts, we don't have money as an incentive, and I think most of us would consider it horribly damaging to the atmosphere. NWN modders these past years got rewarded via modest amounts of social recognition and appreciation, skill gain, personal entertainment, and sanity maintenance. If those drop away or are inverted, I think a lot of these people wouldn't stick around. I'd consider that a horrible loss for all of us; the world needs more of this type of attitude, not less.

    Honestly, I think if everybody everywhere was like these folks, we'd have instant world peace and a giant, ever-increasing heap of neat stuff for everybody. Seeing them scorned as no-namers, bottom-feeders, or common rabble, annoys me a lot.

    ::thoughtful chinscratch::

    I think, overcomplicating as it may be, what you and I are doing here in reaction to a perceived (and, to be fair, fairly certainly also intended) offense is much better for people to witness than when these things end as "Person A says something mean about generic group of people B, group B gets upset, group A jeers, moderator C shuts things down, group B stews in angry silence, group A keeps jeering, repeat with the roles reversed".

    The internet's only been around for a blink of an eye, in the grand scheme of things, and the species will continue to evolve (if we don't wind up being wiped out over someone-or-other's ego problems, anyway). I think rather than considering humaneness a lost cause and concluding that we've just got a horrible mess of a world that we've got to accept having, we ought to be holding ourselves to higher standards, especially for benevolence.

    Constructivity can be spread just the same way and via the same means as destructivity can be - it's just a question of what we want there to be more of enough to cultivate it in ourselves and put it out into the world. I don't think all virtue signalling is by nature false or pointless - the "Fake it 'til you make it!"-principle seems to work for a lot of people for building confidence, too. What somebody would want to be if they could choose freely says a lot about who they are, too. It's always kinda depressing me how many people seem to want to be someone who's allowed to hurt other people without repercussions.

    We're, as a species, never going to manage to agree on one single standard for behaviour for everybody one way or another, since everybody has different needs and has their sensitivities in different places - and that's why I'd consider maybe the only thing problematic enough to be worth fighting over at all to be when people, no matter from which faction and in the name of which cause, outright refuse to show consideration for others. It's basically a statement of "Why shouldn't I harm others? It doesn't hurt me", y'know? That's a giant red flag for a (potentially) abusive partner, parent, boss, or colleague - the kind of people that make day-to-day life miserable for everyone else. And once the entertainment aspect comes in, you've got "I will harm others and enjoy doing it". I don't find that less worrisome on the internet than I find it in real life. We're arguably seeing a clearer expression of what the people who're walking around IRL have got going on in their heads on here than we do anywhere else.

    I think the best we can do is communicate, and show a modicum of compassion for eachother. And maybe, if we see nothing good in the world, we can try to think of and then create something that we'd consider to have value rather than try to smash everybody else's hopes and dreams too. Heck knows the world's a frustrating, depressing place. :-/ I don't think I could deal with this (expletive) if I didn't keep trying to convince myself and others there can be something "good" at all.

    Anyway. Here's a hat tip to you for doing a respectable job of representing your community and advocating for it's values, @SaintPhillip. I think you've improved my impression of the place a good bit. :-)




    And, a peace offering to @Lilura1:

    You're not a no-name bottom feeder whose opinion doesn't matter either, Lilura. At least, not in the modest opinions of some people hereabouts - and, honestly, that's probably the best we've got in this wonked-up reality of ours. Countless generations before us have been, and have been forgotten, and one day soon, so will we, even the rich and the famous.

    Truthfully, everybody who produces anything (including words) churns out crap sometimes - and that's okay. People don't get better at things they don't practice.

    So here's the Butterfly of Constructivity on the Beamdog boards, whose "didn't even try to blend it"-abysmal quality level stands for The Indomitable Serenity of Viewing The Things We Have Crafted That Totally Sucked, Knowing That What We Craft Today Also Sucks In Comparison To What We May Yet Craft In The Future™, to accompany us on our way. It's a feelings all crafters know, hobbyist or otherwise.


    Source 1 2 3

    The hammer stands for Wielding The Force That Could Do Harm Constructively Rather Than Destructively, and the oversized safety helmet stands for remembering that we're all breakable, no matter how hard-headed we may be. :smiley:

    The Butterfly of Constructivity also stands for not getting too horribly angry about people who don’t value the Sacred Law of At Least Pretend To Try Not To Be A Jerk, because honestly, we’re all jerks from somebody's perspective, and it's entirely possible for cruel intentions to bring about good thoughts in response.

    ...

    and it stands for how incredibly convenient it is to be able to just grab somebody else's work and hack-job something together in three minutes or so. skies below I love this worldwide sharing thing heck yeah now this is what the internet is for

    ...

    welp, that's the single most ridiculously pretentious thing I've ever said, and I say a lot of ridiculously pretentious things.
    semiticgoddessFinneousPJProontZwerkules
  • LiluraLilura Member Posts: 148
    @Saint Phillip has impeccable taste. As such, he should post on the 'Dex.

    That said, even people with good taste are ocassionally set upon and ripped a new one by gifted trolls; it's funny. It comes down to their form of expression: pretentious people deserve it, f.e.

    Just to clarify: I don't consider myself a top authority on Aurora; I am just a commentator who covers the single-player mode of the game, and Aurora is a multi-faceted platform of which no one controls the narrative; not even Beamdog. Humility aside (I can't fake humility for long so why bother?), I do consider myself an authority on Infinity Engine commentary. I like to rub that in the face of people every now and again. So what?

    And yes, my blog is not monetized in any way. No ads or donate begging. I don't need to make money from a blog. I've seen other bloggers go down that road; good luck to them. My blog began out of just wanting to write a bit more seriously about RPGs, out of wanting to get away from public forums which I find to be either too friendly, too hostile, or downright ignorant. First and foremost, I did it for personal reference, but a secondary effect is that my write-ups have helped a lot of people get into the games I cover, or go on a nostalgia trip, take a walk down memory lane...

    I really don't care what Beamdog think of me, least of all the current community they have cultivated here. I got PM'd by @Julius Borisov, saying something to the effect of "everyone is equal", and got "jailed". Whoop-de-doo. I don't respect you, Trellolord. I find your PR and blogging skills to be subpar.

    Can't take the criticism? BAN MY ASS. :)
    Wandering_MinstrelTrinitalWarChiefZekeRifleLeroy
This discussion has been closed.