Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Multiple misleading statements. Engineering is in,
This is not misleading or a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BMNFLamZ4w
It is in Arena Commander already, and parts of it are in the PU (I already gave more specific details about this).
server meshing is in “tech preview” - this means nothing.
How does this mean nothing? Players have actually gotten to test server meshing and it was really cool to see. This means that the tech actually exists. They’re not just “misleading” or lying to us about the capabilities of the game. If you’d like I can explain more about what we saw that proves that this isn’t some faked tech capability.
You haven’t been able to explain what capabilities CIG is lying about and, besides the sandworm, anything you have brought up is already in-game or has been tested by players in some way. Which leads me to believe that your information is very much outdated. Or if you’d like, you can explain in more detail why you think they are lying about something rather than essentially saying “It’s a lie because I say it is”.
I didn’t (and don’t) agree that their crowdfunding is a scam… I agreed that server ticks need work, but I explained that it’s definitely possible to find good servers with good server tick rates.
I think, in the end, you and I have very different ideas of what a scam is. Maybe this is because of regional differences where scams are classified in a different way, or maybe it’s just a different way of thinking.
With my understanding of scams I’m not seeing the red flags that you normally see with kickstarters that are actually scams (I’ve already explained what some of those red flags are in a previous comment).
Maybe we can nail down the definition of a “scam” a little better. For instance, is there a specific % of money that a CEO can take from a company before he crosses into scam territory? Are we including the stock that he owns in the company as part of the deciding factory in how much he has “extracted”? Or should we ignore how much that stock is worth entirely from the equation?
I think I could agree with you (or at least understand where you’re coming from) depending on how you define a scam, although how courts legally define a scam would probably be the best way to approach this.
This is not misleading or a lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BMNFLamZ4w It is in Arena Commander already, and parts of it are in the PU (I already gave more specific details about this).
How does this mean nothing? Players have actually gotten to test server meshing and it was really cool to see. This means that the tech actually exists. They’re not just “misleading” or lying to us about the capabilities of the game. If you’d like I can explain more about what we saw that proves that this isn’t some faked tech capability.
You haven’t been able to explain what capabilities CIG is lying about and, besides the sandworm, anything you have brought up is already in-game or has been tested by players in some way. Which leads me to believe that your information is very much outdated. Or if you’d like, you can explain in more detail why you think they are lying about something rather than essentially saying “It’s a lie because I say it is”.
I didn’t (and don’t) agree that their crowdfunding is a scam… I agreed that server ticks need work, but I explained that it’s definitely possible to find good servers with good server tick rates.
I think, in the end, you and I have very different ideas of what a scam is. Maybe this is because of regional differences where scams are classified in a different way, or maybe it’s just a different way of thinking.
With my understanding of scams I’m not seeing the red flags that you normally see with kickstarters that are actually scams (I’ve already explained what some of those red flags are in a previous comment).
Maybe we can nail down the definition of a “scam” a little better. For instance, is there a specific % of money that a CEO can take from a company before he crosses into scam territory? Are we including the stock that he owns in the company as part of the deciding factory in how much he has “extracted”? Or should we ignore how much that stock is worth entirely from the equation?
I think I could agree with you (or at least understand where you’re coming from) depending on how you define a scam, although how courts legally define a scam would probably be the best way to approach this.