Development team is gone.....

[HiAuntieヽ(ﾟ▽ﾟ)ノ]

Very disappointed Hope there will be new company acquisition and redevelopment I love this game so much

[ArcaneGamer]

Finished vs polished.
Can unpolished games be finished ones?

I consider Sea Dogs II, Guild II and Patricians III finished games, but they are definitely not polished. Kalypso halted development of Grand Ages: Medieval. GA:M is a finished game, but the studio was unable to continue planned features and testing, because the project sold few copies, and was no longer financially feasible.

Stonehearth was sort of successful, but the project had to end because it failed to sell enough copies to become self-sustaining. Most Steam games are like this. They sell enough copies for the devs to "finish," but not enough to fulfill all promises to ea buyers.

Early access does not legally entitle you to a "finished" game or the fulfillment of any promises. All other Steam games are sold as is with no promises. Hence, Steam's very generous two hour refund policy.

Much of the Steam store is junk inventory, but the recommendation system is very good at selling you ea games, most of which will never progress beyond a crude prototype. It's also good at hiding the store's junk inventory.

A suggested semi-effective heuristic: if you only want polished games, then only buy games that sold more than one million copies, reached full release, and have greater than roughly seventy percent positive reviews. Also, watch playthroughs.

We're all here because we believed in what Stonehearth could be, but now the project is at an end, and the game runs poorly on many systems. An example of a very successful, self-sustaining project is Factorio. If you don't own it, then I recommend playing the demo.

There is a long history of developers promising much more than they can reasonably deliver. I understand the frustration. There is little regulation preventing developers from intentionally or accidentally exploiting clients with empty promises. Unfortunately, this is a common problem in the software industry, especially among inexperienced or under-educated developers.

To clarify abandonware: at the very least, the copyright enforcement of the software has to be abandoned. Organizations legally provide access to some abandonware, not because it's public domain software, but because the copyright holder decides not to enforce their copyright. Stonehearth copyright enforcement is not abandoned. Any organization giving "free" access to Stonehearth is not providing you with a legal copy.

It is reasonable to claim that Stonehearth was abandoned before all promises were delivered. It's important not to conflate the two concepts. Some people may get the wrong idea and do something illegal.

[DeadMechGaming]

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

The Roadmap is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. The Kickstarter goals are what people paid for. Radiant moved the goal posts because they made promises they could not keep. They were way in over their heads. They took the features that were either completed or headed for completion and called that their roadmap. It made it easier to claim the game was finished so they could drop it and move onto working for Riot Games. ACE is looking to complete the Kickstarter goals and possibly beyond that. Like I told YetiChow, I'd rather the money goes to ACE. They deserve it since they are actually putting in the effort to get the real "roadmap" completed.

Already squashed that argument earlier in the thread. Try again.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

As for the issues; many people reported having them over and over. Congrats if you had no problems but that does not mean they do not exist. Also I never claimed that a game should have zero bugs. I said no MAJOR bugs. Minor bugs however will almost always exist, but should still be few in number for a completed game.

Well I haven't seen any major bugs, and I've seen very few reports on major bugs. But please, present this massive amount of major bug reports. Make sure they are actually major bugs that don’t have a posted fix or related to crappy computers before you present your evidence.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

I hate to break it to you but Merriam-Webster happens to be a reputable source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abandonware

This game is no longer supported by Radiant. It was not finished according to the kickstarter (The "roadmap" that people invested in. Not the bs Radiant used as an excuse to abandon the game). The key word in the definition is the word "Or." Even if Steam is still publishing Stonehearth it still counts as abandonware. This is a fact since only one of the conditions needs to be true (No longer published OR supported by the creator). Copyright is not mentioned whatsoever in the official definition. Of course you could consider the IP holder to be the creator. In which case Riot Games would be the creator. However Riot Games is not supporting Stonehearth either. No updates or patches. No Support. Its still abandonware. Now if the ACE team were to acquire the IP, it would no longer be abandonware. But as of right now we don't know if Riot will sell the IP.

Again, already squashed the kickstarter argument earlier. Go read their actual FAQ's page on what a game has to do to be considered finished.

Here, I'll help you and go even further, this comes from the Kickstarter TOS.

https://www.kickstarter.com/section4?ref=faq-basics_creatoroblig

"When a project is successfully funded, the creator must complete the project and fulfill each reward. Once a creator has done so, they’ve satisfied their obligation to their backers."

"If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement. To right this, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers. A creator in this position has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if:

*they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;

*they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;

*they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;

*they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and

*they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

The creator is solely responsible for fulfilling the promises made in their project. If they’re unable to satisfy the terms of this agreement, they may be subject to legal action by backers."

And as far as the definition, read it again.

": software that is no longer sold or supported by its creator"

It's still being sold, and the devs left instructions on how to fix any issues after their last update so it's technically still supported since nothing has changed. Unless you really expect every game to have a constant support team years after it's been released? That’s unrealistic.

They did at least one of the requirements per the rules; so to put it plainly, per the kickstarter rules, per the actual roadmap, and per definition, it's finished. Admit it or not, doesn't matter. The legal terms of this says it's done. As I stated earlier, read the fine print next time.

So again, as I promised, what was promised on their actual roadmap and not added? And is the copyright expired or forfeit?

P.S. The reason the kickstarter roadmap doesn’t count is quite clearer stated in the TOS. They are only obligated to fulfill the rewards, not the goals. Two completely different things.

[The Savage OJM]

Originally posted by ArcaneGamer:

Finished vs polished.
Can unpolished games be finished ones?

I consider Sea Dogs II, Guild II and Patricians III finished games, but they are definitely not polished. Kalypso halted development of Grand Ages: Medieval. GA:M is a finished game, but the studio was unable to continue planned features and testing, because the project sold few copies, and was no longer financially feasible.

Stonehearth was sort of successful, but the project had to end because it failed to sell enough copies to become self-sustaining. Most Steam games are like this. They sell enough copies for the devs to "finish," but not enough to fulfill all promises to ea buyers.

Early access does not legally entitle you to a "finished" game or the fulfillment of any promises. All other Steam games are sold as is with no promises. Hence, Steam's very generous two hour refund policy.

Much of the Steam store is junk inventory, but the recommendation system is very good at selling you ea games, most of which will never progress beyond a crude prototype. It's also good at hiding the store's junk inventory.

A suggested semi-effective heuristic: if you only want polished games, then only buy games that sold more than one million copies, reached full release, and have greater than roughly seventy percent positive reviews. Also, watch playthroughs.

We're all here because we believed in what Stonehearth could be, but now the project is at an end, and the game runs poorly on many systems. An example of a very successful, self-sustaining project is Factorio. If you don't own it, then I recommend playing the demo.

There is a long history of developers promising much more than they can reasonably deliver. I understand the frustration. There is little regulation preventing developers from intentionally or accidentally exploiting clients with empty promises. Unfortunately, this is a common problem in the software industry, especially among inexperienced or under-educated developers.

To clarify abandonware: at the very least, the copyright enforcement of the software has to be abandoned. Organizations legally provide access to some abandonware, not because it's public domain software, but because the copyright holder decides not to enforce their copyright. Stonehearth copyright enforcement is not abandoned. Any organization giving "free" access to Stonehearth is not providing you with a legal copy.

It is reasonable to claim that Stonehearth was abandoned before all promises were delivered. It's important not to conflate the two concepts. Some people may get the wrong idea and do something illegal.

As of 2015 due to the State of Washington vs Altius Management, anyone who starts a Kickstarter is legally bound to fulfill goals/rewards that were funded. They received over $750,000 and failed to deliver the finished product by the stated release date. According to the precedent set by The State of Washington vs Altius Management, the IP holder could be sued for failure to deliver the product as promised. The game is unfinished and the devs broke their promises:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1590639245/stonehearth/description

"If we achieve these goals, you are guaranteed to see these features in the game, but they will come in through a free update that ships sometime after our initial release in September 2014."

The team at Radiant promised a Full Release in 2014, and all goals would be added post launch. It didn't happen and Radiant even admits to screwing up:

https://www.pcgamer.com/stonehearths-development-will-end-this-month-without-meeting-all-its-kickstarter-goals/#comment-jump

In its farewell post, Radiant described three "major mistakes" it made while developing Stonehearth. Firstly, the studio said, it underestimated how difficult it would be to make an ambitious sandbox game with a small team. Secondly, at times it allowed "technical things" to overshadow game systems, "which leads to a campaign and core loop that feel at times, uneven and clunky." Thirdly, it created and used its own game engine rather than an existing engine, which piled on yet more technical issues.

"By the time we noticed these were major issues, we were so deeply invested that fixing any of them would have taken a rewrite and maybe years to address, and so we built the best thing we could out of what we had," Radiant said. "So one overall conclusion to all of this is that this was our first game, we were really naive *and* really ambitious, and as a result, the final game was flawed in proportion to our ambition."

My issue comes from Radiant claiming the game is finished when it clearly was not. This reinforces the idea that game studios can make impossible promises (going so far as to guarantee features), get funded, and then just walk away without consequence. It makes people less likely to back projects. The results of which will make independent publishing even harder. It is already difficult for independent devs to make and sell their games. Radiant contributed to increasing that difficulty.

As for the definition of abandonware, I don't need clarification. I trust the Merriam-Webster definition over your personal take. What exactly are you implying when you say "do something illegal?"

[The Savage OJM]

Originally posted by DeadMechGaming:

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

The Roadmap is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. The Kickstarter goals are what people paid for. Radiant moved the goal posts because they made promises they could not keep. They were way in over their heads. They took the features that were either completed or headed for completion and called that their roadmap. It made it easier to claim the game was finished so they could drop it and move onto working for Riot Games. ACE is looking to complete the Kickstarter goals and possibly beyond that. Like I told YetiChow, I'd rather the money goes to ACE. They deserve it since they are actually putting in the effort to get the real "roadmap" completed.

Already squashed that argument earlier in the thread. Try again.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

As for the issues; many people reported having them over and over. Congrats if you had no problems but that does not mean they do not exist. Also I never claimed that a game should have zero bugs. I said no MAJOR bugs. Minor bugs however will almost always exist, but should still be few in number for a completed game.

Well I haven't seen any major bugs, and I've seen very few reports on major bugs. But please, present this massive amount of major bug reports. Make sure they are actually major bugs that don’t have a posted fix or related to crappy computers before you present your evidence.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

I hate to break it to you but Merriam-Webster happens to be a reputable source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abandonware

This game is no longer supported by Radiant. It was not finished according to the kickstarter (The "roadmap" that people invested in. Not the bs Radiant used as an excuse to abandon the game). The key word in the definition is the word "Or." Even if Steam is still publishing Stonehearth it still counts as abandonware. This is a fact since only one of the conditions needs to be true (No longer published OR supported by the creator). Copyright is not mentioned whatsoever in the official definition. Of course you could consider the IP holder to be the creator. In which case Riot Games would be the creator. However Riot Games is not supporting Stonehearth either. No updates or patches. No Support. Its still abandonware. Now if the ACE team were to acquire the IP, it would no longer be abandonware. But as of right now we don't know if Riot will sell the IP.

Again, already squashed the kickstarter argument earlier. Go read their actual FAQ's page on what a game has to do to be considered finished.

Here, I'll help you and go even further, this comes from the Kickstarter TOS.

https://www.kickstarter.com/section4?ref=faq-basics_creatoroblig

"When a project is successfully funded, the creator must complete the project and fulfill each reward. Once a creator has done so, they’ve satisfied their obligation to their backers."

"If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement. To right this, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers. A creator in this position has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if:

*they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;

*they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;

*they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;

*they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and

*they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

The creator is solely responsible for fulfilling the promises made in their project. If they’re unable to satisfy the terms of this agreement, they may be subject to legal action by backers."

And as far as the definition, read it again.

": software that is no longer sold or supported by its creator"

It's still being sold, and the devs left instructions on how to fix any issues after their last update so it's technically still supported since nothing has changed. Unless you really expect every game to have a constant support team years after it's been released? That’s unrealistic.

They did at least one of the requirements per the rules; so to put it plainly, per the kickstarter rules, per the actual roadmap, and per definition, it's finished. Admit it or not, doesn't matter. The legal terms of this says it's done. As I stated earlier, read the fine print next time.

So again, as I promised, what was promised on their actual roadmap and not added? And is the copyright expired or forfeit?

P.S. The reason the kickstarter roadmap doesn’t count is quite clearer stated in the TOS. They are only obligated to fulfill the rewards, not the goals. Two completely different things.

Originally posted by DeadMechGaming:

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

The Roadmap is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. The Kickstarter goals are what people paid for. Radiant moved the goal posts because they made promises they could not keep. They were way in over their heads. They took the features that were either completed or headed for completion and called that their roadmap. It made it easier to claim the game was finished so they could drop it and move onto working for Riot Games. ACE is looking to complete the Kickstarter goals and possibly beyond that. Like I told YetiChow, I'd rather the money goes to ACE. They deserve it since they are actually putting in the effort to get the real "roadmap" completed.

Already squashed that argument earlier in the thread. Try again.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

As for the issues; many people reported having them over and over. Congrats if you had no problems but that does not mean they do not exist. Also I never claimed that a game should have zero bugs. I said no MAJOR bugs. Minor bugs however will almost always exist, but should still be few in number for a completed game.

Well I haven't seen any major bugs, and I've seen very few reports on major bugs. But please, present this massive amount of major bug reports. Make sure they are actually major bugs that don’t have a posted fix or related to crappy computers before you present your evidence.

Originally posted by The Savage OJM:

I hate to break it to you but Merriam-Webster happens to be a reputable source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abandonware

This game is no longer supported by Radiant. It was not finished according to the kickstarter (The "roadmap" that people invested in. Not the bs Radiant used as an excuse to abandon the game). The key word in the definition is the word "Or." Even if Steam is still publishing Stonehearth it still counts as abandonware. This is a fact since only one of the conditions needs to be true (No longer published OR supported by the creator). Copyright is not mentioned whatsoever in the official definition. Of course you could consider the IP holder to be the creator. In which case Riot Games would be the creator. However Riot Games is not supporting Stonehearth either. No updates or patches. No Support. Its still abandonware. Now if the ACE team were to acquire the IP, it would no longer be abandonware. But as of right now we don't know if Riot will sell the IP.

Again, already squashed the kickstarter argument earlier. Go read their actual FAQ's page on what a game has to do to be considered finished.

Here, I'll help you and go even further, this comes from the Kickstarter TOS.

https://www.kickstarter.com/section4?ref=faq-basics_creatoroblig

"When a project is successfully funded, the creator must complete the project and fulfill each reward. Once a creator has done so, they’ve satisfied their obligation to their backers."

"If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement. To right this, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers. A creator in this position has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if:

*they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;

*they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;

*they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;

*they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and

*they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

The creator is solely responsible for fulfilling the promises made in their project. If they’re unable to satisfy the terms of this agreement, they may be subject to legal action by backers."

And as far as the definition, read it again.

": software that is no longer sold or supported by its creator"

It's still being sold, and the devs left instructions on how to fix any issues after their last update so it's technically still supported since nothing has changed. Unless you really expect every game to have a constant support team years after it's been released? That’s unrealistic.

They did at least one of the requirements per the rules; so to put it plainly, per the kickstarter rules, per the actual roadmap, and per definition, it's finished. Admit it or not, doesn't matter. The legal terms of this says it's done. As I stated earlier, read the fine print next time.

So again, as I promised, what was promised on their actual roadmap and not added? And is the copyright expired or forfeit?

P.S. The reason the kickstarter roadmap doesn’t count is quite clearer stated in the TOS. They are only obligated to fulfill the rewards, not the goals. Two completely different things.

As of 2015 due to the State of Washington vs Altius Management, anyone who starts a Kickstarter is legally bound to fulfill goals/rewards that were funded. They received over $750,000 and failed to deliver the finished product by the stated release date. According to the precedent set by The State of Washington vs Altius Management, the IP holder could be sued for failure to deliver the product as promised. The game is unfinished and the devs broke their promises:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1590639245/stonehearth/description

"If we achieve these goals, you are guaranteed to see these features in the game, but they will come in through a free update that ships sometime after our initial release in September 2014."

The team at Radiant promised a Full Release in 2014, and all goals would be added post launch. It didn't happen and Radiant even admits to screwing up:

https://www.pcgamer.com/stonehearths-development-will-end-this-month-without-meeting-all-its-kickstarter-goals/#comment-jump

In its farewell post, Radiant described three "major mistakes" it made while developing Stonehearth. Firstly, the studio said, it underestimated how difficult it would be to make an ambitious sandbox game with a small team. Secondly, at times it allowed "technical things" to overshadow game systems, "which leads to a campaign and core loop that feel at times, uneven and clunky." Thirdly, it created and used its own game engine rather than an existing engine, which piled on yet more technical issues.

"By the time we noticed these were major issues, we were so deeply invested that fixing any of them would have taken a rewrite and maybe years to address, and so we built the best thing we could out of what we had," Radiant said. "So one overall conclusion to all of this is that this was our first game, we were really naive *and* really ambitious, and as a result, the final game was flawed in proportion to our ambition."

My issue comes from Radiant claiming the game is finished when it clearly was not. This reinforces the idea that game studios can make impossible promises (going so far as to guarantee features), get funded, and then just walk away without consequence. It makes people less likely to back projects. The results of which will make independent publishing even harder. It is already difficult for independent devs to make and sell their games. Radiant contributed to increasing that difficulty.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Seriously, anybody who claim that SH is ridden with bugs is an idiot who create their own problems out of thin air, much like people who think they magically get to own the studios simply because they buy the game. SH is part of my top 5 games I played the most hours of in my personal list and I have had a GRAND TOTAL OF A SINGLE BUG ever showing up to me. And you know what? That bug was a LUA scripting error that I could simply hit the "ignore" button on the crash report and continue playing as if nothing ever happened.

What a pile of nonsense when I hear people complaining about this. Make me shake my head in shame every. Single. Time.

Edit: Okay, I just checked and a lot of other games overcame SH in my list by now. It is right now my top 13. But I hope you get what I'm saying here. 180h played total. Just saying.

[ArcaneGamer]

Okay, I may be confusing abandoning a copyright with releasing a copyright into the public domain. Abandoning copyright enforcement of software (aka abandonware), is not legally recognized. It's still technically copyright infringement under law, but without legal risk if you do copy. It's important to distinguish abandoning a game from abandonware. Violating the copyright of Stonehearth carries significant legal risk, whereas violating the copyright of abandonware, such as games on abandonware.com, does not carry any meaningful legal risk.

Abandonware is a portmanteau, and there is no universally accepted definition. However, I would avoid conflating abandonware with abandoned. There is a difference in legal risk if you violate copyright law. Abandonware.com faces no significant legal action, because they abide by this distinction of terms. Many criminal websites do not.

Also, online dictionaries are rarely an authoritative resource. Most dictionaries are mostly useful for understanding a word in a very general context, and nothing more.

If anyone wants to sue the copyright holder of Stonehearth for damages, by all means, but I doubt any legal firm or court will take this seriously. Courts are making big distinctions between fraudulent software practices and failing the promises of kickstarters. And the fine print of a kickstarter likely does not promise any compensation for failed promises, only for damages incurred by fraud with evidence. Stonehearth development did not involve defrauding anyone.

A kickstarter, legally binding, contract, likely only guarantees to provide you updates (promises) at an agreed upon price (often no additional cost) if there does exist any updates (fulfilled promises). It does not guarantee updates (promises). It does guarantee access to the product in whatever minimally viable state the latest version is. The legal problem appears to be access to a minimally viable product, not failing to keep promises. We have access to a minimally viable state of Stonehearth, at the very least.

If anyone can't play Stonehearth the way they want to, or their PC does not have the dependencies to execute Stonehearth effectively, that is not in violation of existing agreements. Often, EULAs declare no responsibility for damage, performance issues, and maintenance. Software is almost always delivered as is. EULAs are implicitly agreed upon when delivering software like games through platforms like Steam.

TL;DR It's definitely nuanced, but development and support for Stonehearth is at an end. The devs fulfilled the legal requirements for the agreement. They are not legally obligated to satisfy the client. Plus, game development, and software development in general, is very technically challenging. -- A software developer in training.

[WabbaCat]

they up and left smack dab in the middle of active development,... after making plans apparent, more promises, and showcasing their work towards that.
Are you people stupid?
Some of these comments I am seeing do not even make sense having been here when it happened.

[ArcaneGamer]

Originally posted by WabbaCat:

they up and left smack dab in the middle of active development,... after making plans apparent, more promises, and showcasing their work towards that.
Are you people stupid?
Some of these comments I am seeing do not even make sense having been here when it happened.

So definitely, the Stonehearth team could have managed the project better. They should have communicated more clearly with the community, albeit they are under no legal obligations to do so. The dev's behavior is frustrating. They dissed the community. Early access titles can be disappointing, but I am continually finding new ea's to support, because I love it when they do succeed. -- Happy backer of KSP, Factorio and DRG. Disappointed backer of many more ea titles.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Originally posted by WabbaCat:

they up and left smack dab in the middle of active development,... after making plans apparent, more promises, and showcasing their work towards that.
Are you people stupid?
Some of these comments I am seeing do not even make sense having been here when it happened.

All I ever did with SH is get here after 1.0 hit and thus evaluate the game itself at face value. This mean after any kind of drama or nonsense may have happened during EA, which is totally common for any EA titles. There is only a very small handful of developers I've known to be so professional in their way of handling an EA game to have the full support of their player base for the duration of development, which incidentally always have been more than 5 years. Sometimes way longer than that. They are always the exception, like Factorio or Klei. Can't really think of any other which fit this description.

When you look at SH at face value like I do then you realise that this game is great. It is still right now, years after release, one of the top leader of its genre. Without much competition at all might I add. And I actively seek new titles like this, strategy and survival/base building/simulation being part of my forte in game genre. A lot of other titles promised way more than SH and fell flat way earlier in their development. Can't even name you a single game which get to SH level which is still being actively developed right now.

You could try to name example of games which even come close to SH. I've asked such question in the past without getting a valid answer. I'll way.

[WabbaCat]

Its done and over. Don't really care what they are obligated to do at this point.
My only concern were these lies about rather or not it was abandoned.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

With the lies being it has never been in reality.

[WabbaCat]

Originally posted by Eagle_of_Fire:

You could try to name example of games which even come close to SH. I've asked such question in the past without getting a valid answer. I'll way.

you are plainly and simply wrong... so instead of accepting that,.. you lash out?
I don't care to engage in a battle of subjective tastes... which is all that would be. There is no valid answer to what you ask. Thats stupid.
No one can reach a bar you yourself arbitrarily set. It wouldn't matter what I named off, if it reached it in my opinion, you'd hand wave it away.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Originally posted by WabbaCat:

Originally posted by Eagle_of_Fire:

You could try to name example of games which even come close to SH. I've asked such question in the past without getting a valid answer. I'll way.

you are plainly and simply wrong... so instead of accepting that,.. you lash out?
I don't care to engage in a battle of subjective tastes... which is all that would be. There is no valid answer to what you ask. Thats stupid.

Would you care to elaborate on this instead of simply calling me stupid? That a perfectly valid question for me.

[WabbaCat]

I didnt call you stupid. I called your proposal stupid. Reading comprehension much?
And no... that was not a question. It was a challenge. One that I already explained why it is stupid.
And quite pointless.

It's also a fanboy response if I ever saw one. "Show me a game that reaches the lofty bars of my beloved!"
I could list plenty. But its a matter of perspective and tastes at that point.
As I said... I have no intention of engaging in a debate that has no real answer that could satisfy both parties.
You do know what subjective means I hope?

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Originally posted by WabbaCat:

I didnt call you stupid. I called your proposal stupid. Reading comprehension much?
And no... that was not a question. It was a challenge. One that I already explained why it is stupid.
And quite pointless.

It's also a fanboy response if I ever saw one. "Show me a game that reaches the lofty bars of my beloved!"
I could list plenty. But its a matter of perspective and tastes at that point.
As I said... I have no intention of engaging in a debate that has no real answer that could satisfy both parties.
You do know what subjective means I hope?

What I understand is that your arguments have absolutely no weight and that you are simply dodging the question while calling names.

Not the kind of discussion I like I engage with myself as I hate politicians trying to push their own agenda. So I'm going to do what I always do in such situations. Have a nice day.