Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Slartibartfast]

quote:Originally posted by Sean Mirrsen:
<STRONG>The only truth is the real truth found by measuring and observation, and debates are only to pass time until that happens.</STRONG>

But "that" can't ever fully happen, because there's no such thing as an absolute proof. There maybe an answer that is true, but there's no way to be absolutely sure.

quote:Originally posted by Sean Mirrsen:
<STRONG>As for human rights, they were created by society, they are not any kind of innate property of a human being. From the point of view of a lion in the wilderness, you're breakfast, and there's no point in debating, his opinion is just as valid as yours. Human rights are merely laws set by the human to guard himself as a species. And they are, in fact, subject to debate. Any soldier on the battlefield will tell you that he doesn't care about the rights of the gunner in that tank across the street, he just needs to blow him to bits.
You could also ask the current US president that question, and get a conspicuosly similar answer regarding certain 3rd world countries..  

[Sean Mirrsen]

Well, look at it this way. I take a coin, and to my eyes, it's perfectly round and flat. That is my truth, but only until I take a micro-measurement tool and find out that it's diameter varies through some micrometers, and it's actually 36.049 nanometers thicker at the bottom. Now that will be the scientific truth, and it will not be subject to debate, because there is no other way to make a more detailed examination of the coin.

If you take the Earth as an example, there's still a lot to discover, but we already know it's not a perfect sphere (a spheroid) and that it travels in an orbit around the Sun. Finding any other truth would take a new form of observation other than what we used to discover the previous one. Until our means of measurement are advanced enough to gather all the data we can, any point of view contradicting the existing proven one is a guess and has no power.
Therefore, no matter what arguments you wield in a debate that discusses a point, if they do not include observations by the most accurate means, the debate is pointless and will only provide an "educated guess" that may or may not have anything in common with the real truth.

Right now, I'm doing nothing but proving my own point, because I have no idea about the basics of philosophy or theories of debate, I'm basing my arguments on personal observations that are by far not the most accurate out there.  

Edit: By the way, not only is it pointless, but it also is quite a blatant thread hijack. It's June 22nd, the game should have been out by now, any news, impressions?

[ June 22, 2007: Message edited by: Sean Mirrsen ]

[Slartibartfast]

quote:Originally posted by Sean Mirrsen:
<STRONG>...it also is quite a blatant thread hijack...</STRONG>

Actually, you're right, we'd better stop :|

I was going to put up a nice reply for what you said, but then that would be rude of me (because by breaking up the hijack and replying to you, it is as if I'm forcing you to accept my word as the last word on the subject).
So instead I just wrote the previous sentence  

[ June 22, 2007: Message edited by: Slartibartfast ]

[Arehandai]

I come check on this little guy after a few days thinking some people have the game now and are discussing it and all I can say is hahaha oh wow.

[ June 22, 2007: Message edited by: Arehandai ]

[qwertyuiopas]

About the win condition:
A game that didnt have as much of a problem was the old rollercoaster tycoon games.
They gaave you the option of playing after you won.
But, they lacked much content, and the levels started getting repetitive.

So, the best games give a win condition but let you contine playing after you win, but give you more challenges if you choose to continue. Has anyone gotten bored of ADOM? probably, but like DF, its fun to die, and IF YOU WIN, YOUR CHARACTER IS STILL THERE. until you die or quit  
So, make quitting after the win condition an option, but keep the game detailed enough that many people would want to continue. If you dont like the game, make your own.

[Faces of Mu]

I think that's what makes the persistant world thingy so fascinating. It creates such an interesting gaming experience after you win or lose because everything you did is still there when you go and start again. In a way it creates a self-perpetuating continuous challenge after you have won. I'd like to see a lot more of this in RPGs and other simulators. I hear GW2 is gonna try for this, the persistant world thing.

ANYONE got any player feedback on the OP game?