Upload
Login or register

ilcecchino

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:10/08/2011
Last Login:10/01/2016
Stats
Comment Ranking:#6621
Highest Content Rank:#8228
Highest Comment Rank:#4166
Content Thumbs: 11 total,  23 ,  12
Comment Thumbs: 1769 total,  3166 ,  1397
Content Level Progress: 23.72% (14/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 17% (17/100)
Level 216 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 217 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:1
Content Views:3820
Total Comments Made:1851
FJ Points:1653

latest user's comments

#245 - you seem to have not read I said lying ASIDE. the gam…  [+] (9 replies) 08/12/2016 on No Mans Land -4
User avatar
#249 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
So is this the just the usual run of the mill victim blaming or do you have something legitimate?
User avatar
#257 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
"victim blaming" ok i'm done here, you're clearly void of all logic
User avatar
#268 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Okay, so, im void of logic, but you cant seem to string a valid argument together so let me lay this out for you. You open up with adhominem, victim blaming, speaking for people, and a strawman, then you have the gull to flame. Your entire point is its wrong for people to want X to be in a videogame because its not a contributing factor.

Now since I'm "void of logic," it would be a real shame for me to tell you that not only is that argument totally invalid, its not even applicable. What you're essentially saying is not only do you know why anyone who wanted multiplayer wanted it and exactly how they wanted it, and its wrong for them to want it, and delusional to expect it to be delivered. You're defining what should be in a game, what should be expected out of whats in a game, and whether or not people should enjoy it. No real logic to be found.

As one guy said, if the next CoD was marketed as a sandbox, you might expect it to be weird as fuck but still buy it anyway. If they show up and say oops, no sandbox, it would totally change the theme and feel of the entire game, regardless if your stupid ass never wanted to play sandbox and just wanted to play CoD. You can't say any feature of anything "doesn't matter," because it affects the way the game is played.

Im going to humor your raccoon ass and give you some examples to make it harder for you to inevitably flame again for this post. What if you just like survival games, and didn't really care to play with people, but are worried about being griefed? Or excited to find someone? Or your end game goal is to find someone? Looking forward to running into people in the center of the galaxy? Maybe just knowing its a part of the game changes your perspective and mentality lets you enjoy and immerse yourself in the game more? All this completely excusing the fact that you could easily party up with someone you found and stick together, which has literally already almost happened.
User avatar
#275 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
I'm defining based on what the game IS and what the DEVELOPERS defined the Multiplayer (if it was in it) TO BE. There is no and never promised any form of Party system. no way to keep track of who you're with. no rhyme or reason to continue on with someone.

Let's use a similar example to your COD example. Battlefield Hardline. Considering we're going to compare a space exploration game to COD i figured Battlefield isn't far off here... You know those secret fancy reloads you have once in a million chance of finding? They're now gone. ho-hum i guess the game is unplayable. that's essentially the weight of "feature" not being promised

Again, when i say that they lied and it should be dealt with. it's correct. they shouldn't have lied. but how weight fully that feature effects the game is about the same as Easter egg reloads on BF:HL being promised, then ditched upon release

Inb4 you claim me for not stating facts and telling things how it should be. considering you have absolutely no facts to your statement and you're trying to tell me what i meant when i said what i said

What i'm basically saying, is if you're buying No mans sky for it's multiplayer, You're essentially buying World of warcraft to participate in their pet-battle system
User avatar
#277 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Okay. Alright. Lmfao, I dont even know what to say. You just compared a few second animation to an entire games lack of multiplayer, I don't even know what to say to that. Thats some next level autism my friend.

Also, ill add tu quoque to your list of logical fallacies, and yes, you don't have any facts. You want a fact? Google the word center, and educate yourself. Because you must have a fundamental misunderstanding of what center means if you don't think people aren't going to run into eachother going to the center of the galaxy, something that has been a core part of the game all along. And your retarded party system strawman is just as irrelevant, you don't need a party system to interact with other people. A better wow example would be buying it to find out it has no endgame.
User avatar
#285 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
Source on the galaxy information, I'm a fucking first year astronomy student and that's literally the first thing you learn
User avatar
#284 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
OH, and also. he never stated that getting to the center of the galaxy was the "objective" of the game, or Core. he had stated multiple times that "yeah i suppose it's a goal. but it's not like that's the end of the game"

Paraphrasing of course
User avatar
#283 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
"buying wow and finding it has no endgame" you're placing way to much emphasis on what multiplayer was supposed to be in this game. you do realize the center of the galaxy does increace the proximity of the stars. but there is no center "point" the "center point" is a fucking event Horizon that, depending on the size of the galaxy can range from a few miles. to thousands. not to mention the Density of stars near the center of the galaxy increase exponentially meaning that you'll have an even TOUGHER time finding other people



The game at it's core. (assuming multiplayer was implemented IN WHAT WAS PROMISED, where you can simply see other players) has NO multiplayer elements or implications. you see someone, you wave. you peace. hardly considered End-game level. Now, if say. you could pary up. fight shit. share shit. and get better shit cause you had help. different story and that would be end-game. You're literally complaining that Blizzard removed pet-battles from WoW and therefor the game is unplayable. when that's just an extra feature that has no effect on game play in any realm of physical possibilities.

Keep crying and whining. It's terrible that he lied. i would like either a formal apology or at the very least a statement explaining their side. but to call a game bad because it doesn't have a Nicety, basically cosmetic feature. is just plain dumb
User avatar
#286 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Yeah, I'm totally done with you, you're basically talking to yourself at this point. Lets count it off here, never said it was bad, strawman, strawman, I don't give a shit that you know what an event horizon is but somehow don't understand basic geometry, stop forcing this wow meme, stop flaming... did I miss anything? Oh yeah, and I know for a fact you DON'T have any idea what you're talking about because they specifically stated you could harm grief and interact with other players. But its cool dude, keep talking out of your ass. Here, ill even end this how you like to end yours to make you feel better.

You clearly have zero idea what you're talking about and are here to force your narrative. Go bitch and whine to another shill who'll defend anything with no vetted interest just for the sake of it, maybe they'll buy into your nonsense.
#243 - awesome "multiplayer" game. Thats literally…  [+] (5 replies) 08/12/2016 on No Mans Land -3
User avatar
#260 - cryoticshell (08/12/2016) [-]
Of course the gameplay doesn't come from the multiplayer, it isn't fucking there like it was promised
User avatar
#263 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
i repeat. i'm not saying it's okay they lied. i'm saying if you were looking for a multiplater game (if it was in) you were buying this game for the wrong reasons
User avatar
#267 - cryoticshell (08/12/2016) [-]
You cant say "ignore the fact that they lied" and then use the result of that lie as your argument.

This game was supposed to have multiplayer, which doesn't make it an actual multiplayer game, but it does make it an option for the people who do want it, which was pretty much everyone who heard about it when they first announced it a few years ago.
User avatar
#261 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
Except that if the multiplayer WAS there, it'd have a generous 0.00% impact on the gameplay
User avatar
#264 - cryoticshell (08/12/2016) [-]
That's literally impossible. If you're alone and doing whatever this game actually does allow you to do, then you group with someone, there's an immediate change.
#242 - If you bought this game for the multiplayer prospect, that's L…  [+] (12 replies) 08/12/2016 on No Mans Land -3
User avatar
#309 - clavatninenine (08/12/2016) [-]
I don't know why you're getting thumbed down. You're absolutely right. Hello Games have stressed for ages now that the game is not multiplayer focused, that people should not be buying the game expecting to be able to join up with friends super easily, that any player to player interaction, if any, would be extremely rare and unlikely.

And yet people ignored that and continued to hype it up as having a multiplayer system similar to Elite: Dangerous.
User avatar
#244 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
So if someone bought a game based on features it was presented as having, only to find it doesn't have them, they shouldn't complain huh?
User avatar
#245 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
you seem to have not read

I said lying ASIDE. the game isn't a multiplayer game. and if you bought it with the prospects of thinking it's an MMO like WoW where you'll be running into peope, partying up and going on adventures together, you're seriously delusional. even if the multiplayer was in the game it would have a 0.0% impact on the gameplay
User avatar
#249 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
So is this the just the usual run of the mill victim blaming or do you have something legitimate?
User avatar
#257 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
"victim blaming" ok i'm done here, you're clearly void of all logic
User avatar
#268 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Okay, so, im void of logic, but you cant seem to string a valid argument together so let me lay this out for you. You open up with adhominem, victim blaming, speaking for people, and a strawman, then you have the gull to flame. Your entire point is its wrong for people to want X to be in a videogame because its not a contributing factor.

Now since I'm "void of logic," it would be a real shame for me to tell you that not only is that argument totally invalid, its not even applicable. What you're essentially saying is not only do you know why anyone who wanted multiplayer wanted it and exactly how they wanted it, and its wrong for them to want it, and delusional to expect it to be delivered. You're defining what should be in a game, what should be expected out of whats in a game, and whether or not people should enjoy it. No real logic to be found.

As one guy said, if the next CoD was marketed as a sandbox, you might expect it to be weird as fuck but still buy it anyway. If they show up and say oops, no sandbox, it would totally change the theme and feel of the entire game, regardless if your stupid ass never wanted to play sandbox and just wanted to play CoD. You can't say any feature of anything "doesn't matter," because it affects the way the game is played.

Im going to humor your raccoon ass and give you some examples to make it harder for you to inevitably flame again for this post. What if you just like survival games, and didn't really care to play with people, but are worried about being griefed? Or excited to find someone? Or your end game goal is to find someone? Looking forward to running into people in the center of the galaxy? Maybe just knowing its a part of the game changes your perspective and mentality lets you enjoy and immerse yourself in the game more? All this completely excusing the fact that you could easily party up with someone you found and stick together, which has literally already almost happened.
User avatar
#275 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
I'm defining based on what the game IS and what the DEVELOPERS defined the Multiplayer (if it was in it) TO BE. There is no and never promised any form of Party system. no way to keep track of who you're with. no rhyme or reason to continue on with someone.

Let's use a similar example to your COD example. Battlefield Hardline. Considering we're going to compare a space exploration game to COD i figured Battlefield isn't far off here... You know those secret fancy reloads you have once in a million chance of finding? They're now gone. ho-hum i guess the game is unplayable. that's essentially the weight of "feature" not being promised

Again, when i say that they lied and it should be dealt with. it's correct. they shouldn't have lied. but how weight fully that feature effects the game is about the same as Easter egg reloads on BF:HL being promised, then ditched upon release

Inb4 you claim me for not stating facts and telling things how it should be. considering you have absolutely no facts to your statement and you're trying to tell me what i meant when i said what i said

What i'm basically saying, is if you're buying No mans sky for it's multiplayer, You're essentially buying World of warcraft to participate in their pet-battle system
User avatar
#277 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Okay. Alright. Lmfao, I dont even know what to say. You just compared a few second animation to an entire games lack of multiplayer, I don't even know what to say to that. Thats some next level autism my friend.

Also, ill add tu quoque to your list of logical fallacies, and yes, you don't have any facts. You want a fact? Google the word center, and educate yourself. Because you must have a fundamental misunderstanding of what center means if you don't think people aren't going to run into eachother going to the center of the galaxy, something that has been a core part of the game all along. And your retarded party system strawman is just as irrelevant, you don't need a party system to interact with other people. A better wow example would be buying it to find out it has no endgame.
User avatar
#285 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
Source on the galaxy information, I'm a fucking first year astronomy student and that's literally the first thing you learn
User avatar
#284 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
OH, and also. he never stated that getting to the center of the galaxy was the "objective" of the game, or Core. he had stated multiple times that "yeah i suppose it's a goal. but it's not like that's the end of the game"

Paraphrasing of course
User avatar
#283 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
"buying wow and finding it has no endgame" you're placing way to much emphasis on what multiplayer was supposed to be in this game. you do realize the center of the galaxy does increace the proximity of the stars. but there is no center "point" the "center point" is a fucking event Horizon that, depending on the size of the galaxy can range from a few miles. to thousands. not to mention the Density of stars near the center of the galaxy increase exponentially meaning that you'll have an even TOUGHER time finding other people



The game at it's core. (assuming multiplayer was implemented IN WHAT WAS PROMISED, where you can simply see other players) has NO multiplayer elements or implications. you see someone, you wave. you peace. hardly considered End-game level. Now, if say. you could pary up. fight shit. share shit. and get better shit cause you had help. different story and that would be end-game. You're literally complaining that Blizzard removed pet-battles from WoW and therefor the game is unplayable. when that's just an extra feature that has no effect on game play in any realm of physical possibilities.

Keep crying and whining. It's terrible that he lied. i would like either a formal apology or at the very least a statement explaining their side. but to call a game bad because it doesn't have a Nicety, basically cosmetic feature. is just plain dumb
User avatar
#286 - theacespecialist (08/12/2016) [-]
Yeah, I'm totally done with you, you're basically talking to yourself at this point. Lets count it off here, never said it was bad, strawman, strawman, I don't give a shit that you know what an event horizon is but somehow don't understand basic geometry, stop forcing this wow meme, stop flaming... did I miss anything? Oh yeah, and I know for a fact you DON'T have any idea what you're talking about because they specifically stated you could harm grief and interact with other players. But its cool dude, keep talking out of your ass. Here, ill even end this how you like to end yours to make you feel better.

You clearly have zero idea what you're talking about and are here to force your narrative. Go bitch and whine to another shill who'll defend anything with no vetted interest just for the sake of it, maybe they'll buy into your nonsense.
#67 - Picture  [+] (1 reply) 08/12/2016 on Swag Level: Infinite +2
User avatar
#69 - nITE (08/12/2016) [-]
The video is from 2015 so there can be old information, the sticker deal can just be like what happened with WWE's Sting collection where they put the fake Sting on the back instead of the actual Sting. All and all No Man Sky is a jumbled up mess of over-hype, backtracking from statements, overlooking statements, and statements made without the creators knowledge. I believe just try to play the game for oneself. Who knows? Maybe i'll wake up the next day and see that No Man Sky pulled the wool over us and activate the online servers, or that No Man Sky pulls a EA and announces DLC for stuff.
#63 - The creator himself said there's multiplayer. but the chances …  [+] (4 replies) 08/12/2016 on Swag Level: Infinite +3
User avatar
#66 - nITE (08/12/2016) [-]
I remember a interview but that was back in 2014, i've been told that you can get coordinates to visit other peoples planets.
User avatar
#68 - ilcecchino (08/12/2016) [-]
Link includes a video that has the creator saying you can meet others
User avatar
#69 - nITE (08/12/2016) [-]
The video is from 2015 so there can be old information, the sticker deal can just be like what happened with WWE's Sting collection where they put the fake Sting on the back instead of the actual Sting. All and all No Man Sky is a jumbled up mess of over-hype, backtracking from statements, overlooking statements, and statements made without the creators knowledge. I believe just try to play the game for oneself. Who knows? Maybe i'll wake up the next day and see that No Man Sky pulled the wool over us and activate the online servers, or that No Man Sky pulls a EA and announces DLC for stuff.
#25 - i dont see it at all, lol  [+] (1 reply) 08/07/2016 on The upgrade -1
User avatar
#26 - machiavellianhumor (08/07/2016) [-]
ones fat. ones asian. on has glasses the other has poofy hair
#40 - if 70% of the fish were one color and the rest were another, y…  [+] (2 replies) 08/07/2016 on Diversity +1
#45 - anon (08/07/2016) [-]
you're getting way to lost in metaphor, purposefully i think, just so you don't address the underlying point
#48 - justtocomment (08/07/2016) [-]
No, he's got a point.
If 70% of the population is plain cheddar goldfish, then Hollywood would be right to cast more cheddar goldfish than purple or green by a sizable margin.
#21 - I don't get it  [+] (3 replies) 08/07/2016 on The upgrade 0
User avatar
#23 - machiavellianhumor (08/07/2016) [-]
squad from american dad. these are 4 youtuber friends who resemble the american dad kids grown up
User avatar
#25 - ilcecchino (08/07/2016) [-]
i dont see it at all, lol
User avatar
#26 - machiavellianhumor (08/07/2016) [-]
ones fat. ones asian. on has glasses the other has poofy hair