Blueprints on the steam store? A bad idea or the Baddest idea? - Rust

[QUOTE=utilitron;46321802]No. You are using a plural in a singular case. Being satisfied indciates you no longer have a need, want or desire for whatever the specific thing that you needed, wanted or desired..[/QUOTE] This is nitty. [QUOTE]No, satisfied is not a global state of being, unless directly specified as the subject.[/QUOTE] Exactly. I'm satisfied with rust. [QUOTE]But there are 2 aspects at play here, there is the gameplay aspect, and there is the customization aspect. You can be satisfied with the way the game is played and still want to modify it.[/QUOTE] Goal post shift. You can not say you are satisfied with rust then pretend you are talking another specific aspect of the game at a later time. If you are not satisfied with the in game content alone and want to get more stuff to customize, you are not satisfied with rust, you are only partially satisfied. [QUOTE]By saying adding the ability to customize your experience makes it bad design, you would then have to include any other modification [B]from outside the created game environment[/B] [B](FYP). [/B][/QUOTE] That is correct with my amendment. [QUOTE]The fact they are adding an API to customize individual servers means the game was badly designed, the fact you can change settings would mean the settings were badly designed. [/QUOTE] No, the rules and mechanics of the game allow you to adjust the settings. This kind of getting into the weeds. [QUOTE]Customizability is actually a caveat of [B]good[/B] design.[/QUOTE] If i have to go outside the game to customize the game.... [QUOTE]Wow, so you think because some test showed you have a high level of understanding of vocabulary and comprehension means you are somehow the end-all be-all here?[/QUOTE] Wow, so you and intrepidenigm post a bunch of stupid arguments then claim I'm wrong like you are both the end-all be-all in this here? . [QUOTE]I have proved your arguments wrong using your own stated definitions.[/QUOTE] Wow, so you and intrepidenigm post a bunch of stupid arguments then claim I'm wrong like you are both the end-all be-all in this here? You only think you've proven me wrong. Your preception of whats "wrong" and whats "correct" is something to be desired. ----------- . [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322071]Um, okay. That doesn't mean anything to me in the context of this argument, even if it is true. I have my own "authority" resume that I could certainly type out too, but I won't, because it doesn't actually matter. I'm starting to think you're actually a troll. "I'm right and your wrong."* Really? You type something as ghastly as that and still think you have some greater authority in the subjects you mentioned? You're either a troll or delusional. *For those who didn't understand why that statement was so horrible in the context of this discussion, it's because billy79 committed the cardinal sin of using 'your' where he should have used 'you're'.[/QUOTE] Stop stone walling...or STFU. Yes or no, when you are satisfied, all your needs, desires and wants have been met. **for those of you who do not understand, my grammar and spelling is shit and has no relevance to the issue of context and disucssion. My aguments are entirely coherent. (entirely being added for ephasis)

[QUOTE=billy79;46322102]Wow, so you and intrepidenigm post a bunch of stupid arguments then claim I'm wrong like you are both the end-all be-all in this here?[/QUOTE] No. Only you have created that impression throughout this thread, and especially when you cited your "authority" as a reason for why you are right and we are wrong (which, incidentally, is an argument flaw). Utilitron (correct me if I'm wrong) and I have let our arguments stand for themselves, and we cite only them as to why we are right and you are wrong.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322160]No. Only you have created that impression throughout this thread, and especially when you cited your "authority" as a reason for why you are right and we are wrong (which, incidentally, is an argument flaw). Utilitron (correct me if I'm wrong) and I have let our arguments stand for themselves, and we cite only them as to why we are right and you are wrong.[/QUOTE] Your arguments are flawed. Citing and leaving flawed arguments does nothing. Your continued insistance that your arguments are right or correct, is appealing to your own authroity.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322170]Your arguments are flawed. Citing and leaving flawed arguments does nothing.[/QUOTE] Try that one again in English?

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322180]Try that one again in English?[/QUOTE] Yes or no, when you are satisfied with something all your needs, desires and wants are met in relation to what ever specific object/concept you are refering too.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322170]Your arguments are flawed. Citing and leaving flawed arguments does nothing. Your continued insistance that your arguments are right or correct, is appealing to your own authroity.[/QUOTE] No it isn't. I think my arguments are correct. I have not, in a god-like manner, insisted that they are correct just because I think they are, as you have for yours.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322199]No it isn't. I think my arguments are correct. I have not, in a god-like manner, insisted that they are correct just because I think they are, as you have for yours.[/QUOTE] "I think my arguments are correct" "I have proven you wrong" [QUOTE]prove/pro͞ov/ verb 1.demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument.[/QUOTE] You are now a lying.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322192]Yes or no, when you are satisfied with something all your needs, desires and wants are met in relation to what ever specific object/concept you are refering too.[/QUOTE] No. Utilitron and I have already explained that to you numerous times. "I am satisfied with this cheesecake, because my desire for it has been met, but now I want some chocolate cake." Perfectly acceptable. "I am satisfied with Rust, because my desire for playing it has been met, but now I want to buy something on the Steam Market." Also acceptable. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=billy79;46322207]"I think my arguments are correct" "I have proven you wrong" You are now a lying.[/QUOTE] No. I have proven you wrong by supplying arguments that show yours to be incorrect. That's not relying on authority, that's relying only on the arguments that [B]I[/B] wrote.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322218]No. Utilitron and I have already explained that to you numerous times. "I am satisfied with this cheesecake, because my desire for it has been met, but now I want some chocolate cake." Perfectly acceptable. "I am satisfied with Rust, because my desire for playing it has been met, but now I want to buy something on the Steam Market." Also acceptable.[/QUOTE] Then you are an idiot...your buddy agrees with me: ME: You can not indicate you are satisfied in a limited way with out adding a modifier...(i.e. I'm somewhat satsified, I'm kind of satisfied, I'm mostly satisfied, I'm almost satisfied, etc, etc). When you state you are satisfied, all your needs, desires and wants have been met. HIM: No, satisfied is not a global state of being,[B] unless directly specified as the subject[/B] (Rust). ME: Then you are only somewhat satisfied with rust, not satisfied. HIM: True.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322245]You can not indicate you are satisfied in a limited way with out adding a modifier...(i.e. I'm somewhat satsified, I'm kind of satisfied, I'm mostly satisfied, I'm almost satisfied, etc, etc). When you state you are satisfied, all your needs, desires and wants have been met. No, satisfied is not a global state of being,[B] unless directly specified as the subject[/B] (Rust). Then you are only somewhat satisfied with rust, not satisfied. True.[/QUOTE] I can indicate partial satisfaction without a direct modifier on satisfied. I can say, in terms of eating cheesecake, I'm satisfied. I'll have that piece of chocolate cake though. I can also say, in terms of playing Rust (to be more specific, playing Rust in-game) I'm satisfied. I'll go buy something on the Steam Market though.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322218]No. Utilitron and I have already explained that to you numerous times. "I am satisfied with [B]this[/B] cheesecake, because my desire for it has been met, but now I want some chocolate cake." Perfectly acceptable. "I am satisfied with Rust, because my desire for playing it has been met, but now I want to buy something on the Steam Market." Also acceptable. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] No. I have proven you wrong by supplying arguments that show yours to be incorrect. That's not relying on authority, that's relying only on the arguments that [B]I[/B] wrote.[/QUOTE] Your arguments are flawed. You are using your own authority to decide whether or not your flawed arguments are proven. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322287]I can indicate partial satisfaction without a direct modifier on satisfied.[/QUOTE] You can do it all you want. No one is aguing that. It Does not mean its correct.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322291]Your arguments are flawed. You are using your own authority to decide whether or not your flawed arguments are proven.[/QUOTE] No...I'm not. I don't think my arguments are flawed. I do use my mind to make that judgment, but that does not mean that I am relying on my authority to prove them. The arguments themselves either do that or they don't. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=billy79;46322291]You can do it all you want. No one is aguing that. It Does not mean its correct.[/QUOTE] What's not correct?

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322316]No...I'm not. I don't think my arguments are flawed. I do use my mind to make that judgment, but that does not mean that I am relying on my authority to prove them. The arguments themselves either do that or they don't.[/QUOTE] You ever hear of circular reasoning? You are deicding that your arguments have met the criteria of it being proven. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322316] What's not correct?[/QUOTE] As I told you before, being satisfied about something indicates all your needs, wants and desires have been met concerning that paricular concept/object. You disagree with this definition, which is the commonly accepted meaning of satisfied. Common synomnyms. Fufilled, contented, completed, etc, etc. Satisfied the requirements....means there are no more requirements.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322321]You ever hear of circular reasoning? You are deicding that your arguments have met the criteria of it being proven.[/QUOTE] Yes, I have decided that. It's my opinion. Saying "I have proven you wrong" implies that it is what I think, not an objective fact.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322341]Yes, I have decided that. It's my opinion. Saying "I have proven you wrong" implies that it is what Iprove/pro͞ov/ verb[/QUOTE] think, not an objective fact. 1.demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument. You have decided, not your arguments. You can not "prove" an opinion. OMFG... LOL all this time you think you've "proven" me wrong by basing it entirely on an opinion.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322321]As I told you before, being satisfied about something indicates all your needs, wants and desires have been met concerning that paricular concept/object. You disagree with this definition, which is the commonly accepted meaning of satisfied. Common synomnyms. Fufilled, contented, completed, etc, etc. Satsified the requirements....means there are no more requirements.[/QUOTE] Even if it is [I]the[/I] commonly accepted meaning (and who says it is, other than you?), you are continuing to ignore the other meanings. Go back in the thread, and you will find them, or you can try looking up satisfied in more dictionaries. Your insistence on using only your cherry picked definition is the only way you've stayed afloat in this discussion. I also don't disagree with that definition. My responses take it into account. Perhaps try reading them again. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=billy79;46322351]all this time you think you've "proven" me wrong by basing it entirely on an opinion.[/QUOTE] No. I think my arguments have. Simple.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322377]Even if it is [I]the[/I] commonly accepted meaning (and who says it is, other than you?), you are continuing to ignore the other meanings. .[/QUOTE] Becasue they have no bearing when discussing satisfication level. Not that I agree satisfied has any other meaning but I'm not going to argue that. [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322377]I also don't disagree with that definition.[/QUOTE] yet, you did. [QUOTE]No. Utilitron and I have already explained that to you numerous times[/QUOTE] And you have explained this many times, now you agree with the defintion. My work is done here :eng101:

[QUOTE=billy79;46322102]Goal post shift. You can not say you are satisfied with rust then pretend you are talking another specific aspect of the game at a later time. If you are not satisfied with the in game content alone and want to get more stuff to customize, you are not satisfied with rust, you are only partially satisfied.[/QUOTE] It's not moving the goalposts. I am not satisfied with rust, its in alpha. Its still being developed. There will be many many major changes to the way the game works. Lets not forget we are arguing over a system that hasn't even been designed yet. It's all hypothetical. That being said, you defiantly can be satisfied with one aspect of the game and still want different aspects to the game. Rust is not the sum of it's content. The idea of using modified content doesn't detract from the core playability of the game. Gameplay and cutomization ARE two separate aspects of the game. You don't have to customize it to play. [QUOTE]No, the rules and mechanics of the game allow you to adjust the settings.[/QUOTE] Just like the new feature will let you customize your character. [QUOTE]If i have to go outside the game to customize the game....[/QUOTE] So, if they add pressing f4 as the method of opening up the loadout screen instead of escape to get the the menu screen and then options? Then it's great design? [QUOTE]You only think you've proven me wrong.[/QUOTE] So disprove it. Where is your counter argument other than to [I]say[/I] I'm wrong? You haven't actually established a counter argument.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322395]Becasue they have no bearing when discussing satisfication level. Not that I agree satisfied has any other meaning but I'm not going to argue that.[/QUOTE] They do have bearing. If I can satisfy someone by causing them to happy or pleased, they are then in a state of being satisfied. That's how the words work. [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satisfied[/url]

[QUOTE=utilitron;46322418]It's not moving the goalposts. I am not satisfied with rust, its in alpha. Its still being developed. There will be many many major changes to the way the game works. Lets not forget we are arguing over a system that hasn't even been designed yet. It's all hypothetical. .[/QUOTE] I agree. [QUOTE]That being said, you defiantly can be satisfied with one aspect of the game and still want different aspects to the game. [/QUOTE] I agree. [QUOTE]Rust is not the sum of it's content.[/QUOTE] Yes, it is. [QUOTE] The idea of using modified content doesn't detract from the core playability of the game.[/QUOTE] To each his own. I'm not arguing it detracts from the core playability of the game. [QUOTE]So disprove it. Where is your counter argument other than to [I]say[/I] I'm wrong? You haven't actually established a counter argument.[/QUOTE] I'm not trying to prove anything wrong. I'm merely saying that when you design something for someone to be in, and you create a mechnism so they can get out, its bad design. You've defeated the purpose of designing something to keep people in. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322420]They do have bearing. If I can satisfy someone by causing them to happy or pleased, they are then in a state of being satisfied. That's how the words work. [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satisfied[/url][/QUOTE] Has no relevance to the context we are dicussing. We are dicussing satisfcation levels. The top being satisfied, the bottom being not satisfied. Besides thats a forced way to say that, You would simply say you are providing them a satisfying expereincing. Working with you so far has been a satisfying expereince. You are missusing satisfied.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322435]Has no relevance to the context we are dicussing. We are dicussing satisfcation levels. The top being satisfied, the bottom being not satisfied.[/QUOTE] It has always been relevant...lol. You just refused to consider it until now for some unknown reason. If Rust satisfies me in the sense that it causes me to be happy or pleased, then it has satisfied me, regardless of other needs or desires. That is an acceptable way to use those words.

what a dick size comparing contest this has become. seriously, i'm all for a logical debate, but this is becoming pathetic guys. not only are you no longer on topic, you have spent the last 3 days spamming this thread with opinionated crap about the way your "opponent" has structured his argument. nobody cares how "smart" you are. proof is not as subjective as "i said this, and i am right". it requires testing, experimentation. and even then it is just a proposal/hypothesis about a specific situation.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322455]It has always been relevant...lol. You just refused to consider it until now for some unknown reason. If Rust satisfies me in the sense that it causes me to be happy or pleased, then it has satisfied me, regardless of other needs or desires. That is an acceptable way to use those words.[/QUOTE] JFC, not if you need want or desire something else. If I've satisfied the requirements and come to find out there are more, I've no longer satisfied the requirements, I've only thought I did. That is a correct and proper example of use for "satisfied".

[QUOTE=billy79;46322472]JFC, not if you need want or desire something else. If I've satisfied the requirements and come to find out there are more, I've no longer satisfied the requirements, I've only thought I did. That is a correct and proper example of use for "satisfied".[/QUOTE] You're again relying on your cherry picked definition as the only one. Who says you can't be satisfied if you still want something else? That is only one way to use that word. Read my example again, it illustrates my point rather well.

FYI: You do not tell a fighter "i'm going to kick your ass", just as you do not tell a guy who likes to debate, he's "wrong". If, intrepidenigm wanted to simply disagree with an opinion, he should say that instead of saying stuff like "you are wrong" or "I've proven you wrong". It seems this is what he intended to do in the first place and has backed himself in a corner where he is contridicting himself and making some foolish arugments. If you say I'm wrong and use poor logic, I'm going to troll the fuck out of you. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322513]You're again relying on your cherry picked definition as the only one. Who says you can't be satisfied if you still want something else? That is only one way to use that word. Read my example again, it illustrates my point rather well.[/QUOTE] No, I'm not. If you played rust and came away with the imrpession that you were satisfied and later found out that something existed that would increase your satisfaction level, you were never satisfied but maybe partially satisfied even though with all the available information you had at the time it seemed to indicate you were. My use of "requirements" in my previous post demonstrates this. You would have to qualify your satisfaction level...i.e. "with what we had yesterday, I [I]was[/I] satisfied (which means you are not satisfied anymore given new the information) but knowing this, its going to make it so much better" . [QUOTE] Who says you can't be satisfied if you still want something else?[/QUOTE] You. [QUOTE]I also don't disagree with that definition.[/QUOTE] To be satisfied all your needs, wants and desires are met.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322552]No, I'm not. If you played rust and came away with the imrpession that you were satisfied and later found out that something existed that would increase your satisfaction level, you were never satisfied but maybe partially satisfied even though with all the available information you had at the time it seemed to indicate you were. My use of "requirements" in my previous post demonstrates this. You would have to qualify your satisfaction level...i.e. "with what we hadyesterday, I [I]was[/I] satisfied (which means you are not satisfied anymore given new the information) but knowing this, its going to make it so much better" .[/QUOTE] Just because you might end up being more satisfied later, does NOT mean that you were not satisfied to begin with. Again, if Rust caused me to feel happy or pleased, then it satisfied me. It doesn't have to be partial, it can just be 'satisfied.' Anything that happens later will not change that fact. Even when I want to go to the market, in that moment, I can still feel as if Rust satisfies me, because it causes me to feel happy or pleased. I can use the word that way according to the definition of says one is satisfied if one has been made happy or pleased by something.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322691]Just because you might end up being more satisfied later, does NOT mean that you were not satisfied to begin with.[/QUOTE] I have satisfied the requirements. I find out later there are more requirements. Are the requirements still satisfied? Were they ever satisfied? This first sentence is an incorrect statement becasue there are more unknown requirements. Comically, intrepidenigm would insist the requirements were satsified upon learning of the new requirments, despite the requirement not being satisfied. You continue to equivocate "satisfying, satisfy" with satisfied. I played rust last night and it was a satisfying expereince. It does not mean I was satisfied.

Guys Can you carry on your Little disagreement elsewhere? This thread has gone way off track with you trying to prove the other one wrong…..I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t really care if you are satisfied or not and I don’t care how much or how little you are satisfied. I will be really satisfied when this thread gets back to the subject the OP started. Thanks

If the mods want me to shut up, I will shut up about, otherwise you can post in another one of the several threads created on this topic if you are not interested in following our childish antics. FYI: majority of the post in this thread is only a few guys and despite it not being seemingly obvious we are into the nitty gritty of some specfiic dialouge in regards to the prints dicussion.

[QUOTE=billy79;46322710]I have satisfied the requirements. I find out later there are more requirements. Are the requirements still satisfied? Were they ever satisfied? This first sentence is an incorrect statement becasue there are more unknown requirements. Comically, intrepidenigm would insist the requirements were satsified upon learning of the new requirments, despite the requirement not being satisfied. You continue to equivocate "satisfying, satisfy" with satisfied. I played rust last night and it was a satisfying expereince. It does not mean I was satisfied.[/QUOTE] Your example helps to prove that your definition is acceptable. I do not dispute that it can be used that way. I would not insist upon what you are suggesting that I would. However, satisfied can also be used the way that I have described previously. If you played Rust last night and it was a satisfying experience, you are correct to say that it does not mean that you were satisfied. But it COULD mean that you were satisfied according to acceptable definitions of that word. Therefore, I can reasonably use this example: "If Rust satisfies me in the sense that it causes me to be happy or pleased, then it has satisfied me, regardless of other needs or desires. That is an acceptable way to use those words."