PinkTaco24

You have not once explained a single 'flaw' in my presented idea except 'BRO YOU SAID YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT REALISM HERE BUT SAID YOU DO CARE ABOUT REALISM HERE.' Solid argument. Solid.

We don't have a flagging system. Yet' date=' the game hasn't devolved into a deathmatch. Going to say it every time you post it. [/quote'] and im going to tell you every time you try and say its not deathmatch. it is.

Yeah.. I guess you don't have any knowledge of software development do you? I ignored that idea because its practically impossible to develop. The only way to really handle that is to to keep track of EVERY person that has EVER fired in your general direction. That's a fucking nightmare. There are realistic design choices, and there are unrealistic ones. Not to mention, i can point out a million exploits in identifying your own enemies anyway. Plus, in a sense, this game does it already. You identify an enemy by anyone you shoot at. There. Identified. its not enough.

This is you, citing "realism", on this very subject. When asked how, realistically, those others would know what you had done, you revert to, "Whatever, it's a game, allowances must be made for gameplay!" get off the realism bandwagon man. its a stupid argument.

Whoa. Hold up skippy. Fact check. Now I know you're not reading posts. No I am. I'm simply reading between the lines. Think about it.. if everything is kill on sight as it is, or everything has literally no consequence to shooting other survivors.. what actual difference does my change make? Not one.. Except that people who kill people consistently become visually flagged as someone who kills people. But in the current state.. EVERYONE is pretty much flagged as someone that kills people. (because there is no way to distinguish them) So in reality.. who would actually argue against this change? People that kill others and want it to continue to be easy. The ones afraid of being marked criminal. Carebears too afraid to be marked for what they are. The little girls that have to attack and snipe from the shadows and guise of possible friendship. My change threatens the carebears abilities to get easy and free kills. They don't like that.

I did answer it. In all design in video games, there are realistic mechanics and there are core gameplay mechanics. starting without a weapon = realism. players running around like a deathmatch FPS goes against(what i assume) is core design. i proposed a system to bring things back to how they are intended. if a deathmatch system is what they want, then so be it. (i clearly outlined that in the OP) If not, then i suggested a change to fix it. and then all of you carebears got butthurt for being flagged criminal/murderer/bandit.

Then please give me a link to the response to that post, because never saw it. its like 2 posts down..

Criminals? Like people who commit crimes? Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority (via mechanisms such as legal systems) can ultimately prescribe a conviction. I thought you just got done saying this wasn't about imposing law? Maybe if you didn't constantly contradict yourself people might be able to construct a more cogent argument against you? bandit/criminal/murderer WHATEVER you want to call it. LOLOLOLOL wow man. all you got is semantic arguments now? you are just cherry picking because you got nothing left. Or just trying to be a dipshit. leave this thread already. openly admitting to 'killing idiots because they are idiots.' care to try again? You and I are of a like mind.

in the current system, you'd never get close enough to tell them to switch. You would already be dead or have killed them. its shoot on sight remember?

Because it DOES exist. You are just too blind to see it. The irony of course being the fact you partake in shoot on sight behavior CONSISTENTLY and have openly admitted to it. I literally have no words for that amount of stupidity.

I'm talking about the current game system... not the one you want to employ... Wut. No shit sherlock. So let me re-iterate with clarification since you didn't get it the first time. and people might actually comply(WITH MY SYSTEM) rather than just shooing you outright(LIKE IN THE CURRENT SYSTEM) with a flag system in place.

Okay. If your system isn't based on that' date=' what's it based on? The Bible? The Koran? What makes killing inherently wrong if not present day standards of morality? What makes a person "innocent" if not present day standards of law? Help me out. [/quote'] Its based on making the game not devolve into a system of simple deathmatch shoot on sight gameplay. By adding a risk to killing random people for no reason. Why in the fuck, do I even have to explain this? AT ALL. Even if it was some 'moral' design. WHO CARES. It fixes the issue of stopping mindless kill on sight deathmatch play. Nice ignore of my other shooters that allow you to survive for extended lengths btw.

I think he's asking about the realism argument you held in that topic' date=' but seem to deny in this one. But then again, you're notorious of not reading half the things other post (including yourself, here, apparently), so I can forgive you. [/quote'] I don't know why everyone is jumping on this stupid fucking 'realism' bandwagon. its a game mechanic to enhance gameplay. like finding bullets in an outhouse. There are some things in video games that add to a realistic aspect. There are others that are core 'gameplay' mechanics. Totally separate. How the fuck can you people not see this?

You might be the biggest fail troll ever. Please explain to me how starting with a weapon needing tweaked is related to rampant shoot on sight deathmatch style play this game has devolved to. Come on man... really?

To me, the carebears are the ones afraid of being flagged criminal. poor kiddies.

planetside dust514 APB reloaded move along chump