Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
It was however supposed to have been fixed in the latest patch.
One, my game just crashed and I lost an hour and a half of work, so yeah, I was pretty mad. Two, the crash is only predictable AFTER you've had it happen to you and/or are aware of it. See point number one. So, next time do some thinking before calling someone out for their gamer rage. I think my reaction was pretty much dead on.
See, I'm actually an older gamer. I remember a time when video games released without these types of crashes in them. I remember when a publisher had only one opportunity to get a game right. So, I still find it pretty damned annoying when a game crashes. Especially when it's a crash that was supposed to have been fixed last patch, I find. Thus, if you feel offended by my sense of entitlement, you're kindly invited not to post to this thread.
I'm an older gamer, too, and I literally can't think of a single time period where games didn't have bugs. And older games were way more simplistic and way shorter making them much easier to bug test. Most old games were brutally difficult to mask the fact that they had about an hour's worth of gameplay if it weren't for game overs sending you back to the start of the game.
Just be thankful that these days we can communicate them better and devs can often patch them.
Ahh, another product apologist, I see. "The game didn't perform as intended, so it's your fault." Good on you, mate. You've been well inculcated by the video game industry. It's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ amazing to me that of all the different industries selling products, only video games seem to get a pass for not performing as claimed. If any other product worked like this, I'd be taking it back and getting a refund. Yet somehow the collective industry has pulled the wool over the collective consumer's eyes, and it's "Caveat Emptor" all the way down. Your mindset is a poison.
Not really an apologist so much as a realist. Games have bugs and crashes, it's nothing new or surprising, so you should save.
Are you 10 and only have experience with video games? Making frequent saves and backups isn't just games industry propaganda, once you go to school and start doing projects you'll realize even word processors have bugs and crash. Your "apologist" teachers will probably even tell you to save often!
Welcome to computers, nothing is perfect so save.
It can be any bookshelf so be sure to save often.
You know, that argument might work if this game had anything truly innovative. Given it's just a rehash of features already present in Iga games, and that they were able to get those working just fine in the past, I do expect this game to run and not crash, and that's not an unrealistic perspective. The bookshelf mechanic is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ textbox overlay with an unlock flag to the Archives feature, for crying out loud. Yeah, I expect it to work.
There's nothing new here, and definitely nothing complex enough for you to drag out the tired excuse that poor programming is some sort of industry standard, that mediocrity is all designers strive for. You insult me as a coder, and any other developer who has pride in his or her work with your perspective, frankly.
Ad hominem is rather sad from someone who thinks he's actually trying to make an argument.
I get it, you just learned about fallacies in middle school and want to show how smart you are by using a latin term. Unfortunately, ad hominem is not the same thing as insulting someone, it's specifically avoiding the debate by attacking someone.
When someone insults you in addition to making a point, it isn't ad hominem and it doesn't invalidate the rest of what they said. It's just an insult. Ironically enough, by pointing the finger at me and yelling "ad hominem" and attacking the way I made my points instead of the points I made, that is ad hominem.
I'm sorry I insulted you as a middle school coder, when you actually start working in the field you'll look back on this and realize how silly you sound.
I just did. The only Castlevania games that CRASHED were the "Lord of Shadows" games.
Where in here did engage in ad hominem myself? In fact, it looks like I engaged with the points of the argument you were trying to make, and refuting them. You claim that "programming is hard, dur," but I disagree with respect to this particular feature. The feature is quite simple, and shouldn't be causing crashes.
As far as the other pretentious crap you talked, maybe "ad hominem" was a bit pretentious myself, but your whole reply just reeks of smarmy, self-satisfaction.