EPTRazzia of the Blizzsters - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Warning for everyone in this thread: I WILL moderate your posts very harshly from now on if you can't have a civil discussion. | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
| ||
|
Nezgar
Germany534 Posts
On April 11 2015 23:13 TheDwf wrote: I like your metaphor. Vomitting is what happens when you can't digest something. You, as a reader, felt nauseous in front of what you perceive as logorrhea. But is it because the food was bad, or because you ate too fast? Wasn't your indigestion too a time razzia? Who forced you to read everything all in one piece? I certainly didn't. Maybe the food was poisoned, maybe you overestimated the strength of your stomach. Contraction of time works in mysterious ways! Get off your high horse, you are acting like an asshole. Your post was bad because you felt the need to unnecessary obfuscate things behind flashy phrases that have neither place nor substance. Your points are few and far between, most of the things you wrote serve only to show people how smart you are without adding anything to your argument. I don't know who you want to impress that hard but it's certainly not the intellectual people who can see through your writing fairly easily. As someone else already said, you probably just like the sound of your own voice... | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On April 11 2015 23:54 Nezgar wrote: Get off your high horse, you are acting like an asshole. Your post was bad because you felt the need to unnecessary obfuscate things behind flashy phrases that have neither place nor substance. Your points are few and far between, most of the things you wrote serve only to show people how smart you are without adding anything to your argument. I don't know who you want to impress that hard but it's certainly not the intellectual people who can see through your writing fairly easily. As someone else already said, you probably just like the sound of your own voice... People are so funny when they take things litterally and without thinking twice  | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On April 11 2015 23:54 Nezgar wrote: Get off your high horse, you are acting like an asshole. Your post was bad because you felt the need to unnecessary obfuscate things behind flashy phrases that have neither place nor substance. Your points are few and far between, most of the things you wrote serve only to show people how smart you are without adding anything to your argument. I don't know who you want to impress that hard but it's certainly not the intellectual people who can see through your writing fairly easily. As someone else already said, you probably just like the sound of your own voice... Pretty sure real "intellectual people" wouldn't be so angry about something written in a way that needs you to read carefully, taking the time to understand and think about what you're reading^^ | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 11 2015 23:16 solidbebe wrote: While I agree with you points, won't you admit you are a little verbose? That's perfectly possible. Publishing this text is an interesting experience for me because of the cultural shock. I imagine the average profile of a forum user is certainly a male between 15 and 25 years old, give or take a few years. Most of the time they use forums to communicate, often using no more than a few words or lines. Most of them live in the “TL;DR” culture. Most of them have a utilitarist approach of language. Time is money. Be straightforward. Most of them think words are cubes without nuances. Most of them are readsters committed in "sense razzia". And yet: (1) Why is “SMS language” forbidden in all respectable forums? (2) Take your favorite movie or book and picture mentally what happens when you try to sum it up in decreasing formats: 10 pages, 5 pages, 1 page, 20 lines, 10 lines, 1 line. | ||
|
Thaniri
1264 Posts
You describe perfectly the errors that blizzard commit consistently while balancing SC2. You put into words why SC2, while potentially the best RTS on the market today, felt slightly wrong. Even to people who have never played BW or WC3. I've been quietly saying that the queen patch was the worst thing to happen to SC2, but never decided to back that opinion up because I couldn't make a single simple statement of why it was bad design. I could tell you that Zerg players were now able to get too much map control, thus too much safety to drone. "Contraction of Time" is that magic bullet of a phrase that brings together all of the individual poor unit designs into one simple camp. Let's see where Blizzard decides to take LoTV. | ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
That said, good work. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
This post signifies a lot about what is wrong about today's culture of internet discussion - it is people like TheDwf who refuse to discuss in an upright and rational manner and their followers who try to turn their willingness to participate in extremely bloated reiteration of irrelevant jibberish into their advantage, because anyone who doesn't is "ignorant" and "uniformed" - while this "information" one is supposed to posses caries no factual weight, but has been created solely as a tool to establish superiority of its possesors, or - in worse cases - is just pure propaganda. Think about it, it's highly ironical that while often one-line responses are seen as rude and impolite, here the same qualities stem from the completely opposite quality of the post. edit: On April 12 2015 00:26 Zealously wrote: A very good post, but you need to stop using verbosity as a weapon. That's so perfectly said. | ||
|
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
On April 12 2015 00:15 TheDwf wrote: That's perfectly possible. Publishing this text is an interesting experience for me because of the cultural shock. I imagine the average profile of a forum user is certainly a male between 15 and 25 years old, give or take a few years. Most of the time they use forums to communicate, often using no more than a few words or lines. Most of them live in the “TL;DR” culture. Most of them have a utilitarist approach of language. Time is money. Be straightforward. Most of them think words are cubes without nuances. Most of them are readsters committed in "sense razzia". And yet: (1) Why is “SMS language” forbidden in all respectable forums? (2) Take your favorite movie or book and picture mentally what happens when you try to sum it up in decreasing formats: 10 pages, 5 pages, 1 page, 20 lines, 10 lines, 1 line. It depends on what your goals with this piece are. If you want to deliver an interesting story to read then I'd say you have succeeded and there's nothing more to it. If you want to convince people of your opinion however (which I'd assume you are, with a passionate opinion piece on a forum) you have to impress a wider audience. Writing such a long and wordy piece might be good for people who appreciate such things, but most people are just here to listen to your opinion. And when your opinion is spread throughout such a mass of words it turns people off. You do whatever you want to, but if you want to convince people you have to accomodate them, it's a simple reality. | ||
|
Nezgar
Germany534 Posts
On April 12 2015 00:07 OtherWorld wrote: Pretty sure real "intellectual people" wouldn't be so angry about something written in a way that needs you to read carefully, taking the time to understand and think about what you're reading^^ Indeed, they are just annoyed at how hard certain people try to impress them with fancy wording without focusing on the most important part: Getting your point across without wasting time and space unnecessary. They only get angry when said person then tries to talk down to people who (rightfully) criticize them for their poorly constructed post. Most points are fairly straight forward and you usually don't need much time to understand them. As I said: I agree with quite a few points made in the post. It's just a damn shame that TheDWF felt the need to hide them behind a forest of phrases that fulfill no purpose AND then decided to attack anyone who criticizes his style of writing. I know a lot of people like that who are not that great at making a valid point and defending it but instead try to dazzle people with their fancy wording to distract them from that flaw. You could probably convey the same points in a more clear fashion with only using half the words. If you sacrifice utility for the sake of looking smart then you have a clear problem and should be criticized for it accordingly. And I have a lot of experience with intellectual works, thank you very much for your badly hidden stab in my direction. | ||
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
This "article" just screams "OMG everyone look at how SMART I am!" without really saying much of substance. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On April 12 2015 00:34 solidbebe wrote: It depends on what your goals with this piece are. If you want to deliver an interesting story to read then I'd say you have succeeded and there's nothing more to it. If you want to convince people of your opinion however (which I'd assume you are, with a passionate opinion piece on a forum) you have to impress a wider audience. Writing such a long and wordy piece might be good for people who appreciate such things, but most people are just here to listen to your opinion. And when your opinion is spread throughout such a mass of words it turns people off. You do whatever you want to, but if you want to convince people you have to accomodate them, it's a simple reality. Exactly: you perfectly nailed why the quote Barrin mentioned in his post, though interesting, was a bit off for the present case; or why I'll have to face tactful delicacies such as “using verbosity as a weapon,” being a pedantic guru, a condescending fraud, etc. Thanks.  Well, getting myself understood by people despite deliberetely trying to smoke them out is strenuous work; I have other unnecessary rivers of words to write in order to expand such a bankable cult. Good day to you folks! | ||
|
KrO_
England7 Posts
| ||
|
v_lm
France202 Posts
This is why people involved in games of pure chance systematically develop absurd habits and beliefs in order to recreate the control they no longer have. Control should not be absolute, but there are thresholds to respect Yeah. If you have total control then the habits to recreate control disappear, and they are very important. In fact the habits to recreate control = technique. I think units should be designed with a) advanced techniques and b) interaction with other player in mind. The medivac is a perfect example. You can do so many advanced things with it (microing, scouting, positionning, breaking siege), all of them being linked to the other player. The msc is the counter example. You can do many things with it but none of them are advanced (hitting a button) , and none of them are interaction with the other player. If the interaction is baiting a spell then it's bad. Baiting forcefields, overcharge, storm, fungal, abduct etc. is bad interaction because either not relevant or luck based. I'm not talking baiting a positionning (baiting into a baneling trap, baiting a drop and blinking underneath...) : those are in fact great interactions. I really liked the concept of "hyper development". your study of TvZ WoL --> HoTs is brillant. The 1?1 cooking thing is not necesserarly bad though. Can lead to interesting games. But I think the big rule should be that there is non all iny ways to control the gaem and make it a proper 1v1 and not a 1?1. In each MU both sides should have ways to prevent a 1?1. Current TvP with the oracle threat and the overcharge barrier is indeed complete 1?1 for the T with no alternative, this needs to be addressed. Overall great article. This gives me faith in our community. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On April 12 2015 00:42 Nezgar wrote: Indeed, they are just annoyed at how hard certain people try to impress them with fancy wording without focusing on the most important part: Getting your point across without wasting time and space unnecessary. They only get angry when said person then tries to talk down to people who (rightfully) criticize them for their poorly constructed post. Most points are fairly straight forward and you usually don't need much time to understand them. As I said: I agree with quite a few points made in the post. It's just a damn shame that TheDWF felt the need to hide them behind a forest of phrases that fulfill no purpose AND then decided to attack anyone who criticizes his style of writing. I know a lot of people like that who are not that great at making a valid point and defending it but instead try to dazzle people with their fancy wording to distract them from that flaw. You could probably convey the same points in a more clear fashion with only using half the words. If you sacrifice utility for the sake of looking smart then you have a clear problem and should be criticized for it accordingly. And I have a lot of experience with intellectual works, thank you very much for your badly hidden stab in my direction. Come on, he wasn't attacking anyone just like I wasn't doing a "hidden stab" at you. Stop taking things literally, and abandon a bit of this utilitarian conception of words to enjoy a looser and more laid-back approach to what one is saying. And I don't think he was sacrificing utility for the sake of looking smart, he was more sacrificing utility for simple pleasure. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7291 Posts
On April 12 2015 00:15 TheDwf wrote: That's perfectly possible. Publishing this text is an interesting experience for me because of the cultural shock. I imagine the average profile of a forum user is certainly a male between 15 and 25 years old, give or take a few years. Most of the time they use forums to communicate, often using no more than a few words or lines. Most of them live in the “TL;DR” culture. Most of them have a utilitarist approach of language. Time is money. Be straightforward. Most of them think words are cubes without nuances. Most of them are readsters committed in "sense razzia". And yet: (1) Why is “SMS language” forbidden in all respectable forums? (2) Take your favorite movie or book and picture mentally what happens when you try to sum it up in decreasing formats: 10 pages, 5 pages, 1 page, 20 lines, 10 lines, 1 line. Wouldn't someone who COULD sum up a picture or book in few words and do a good job be considered an excellent writer? People don't like to slog through reading something like this, being a strong writer means using the correct language at the correct time, at least in my opinion. | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
Pursuit_
United States1330 Posts
On April 12 2015 01:55 Zambrah wrote: People don't like to slog through reading something like this, being a strong writer means using the correct language at the correct time, at least in my opinion. This is also an opinion, one I highly disagree with. | ||
| ||
