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

[QUOTE=Homerrocks87;46322808]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[/QUOTE] I will also be really satisfied when this thread gets back to the subject the OP started. ;-)

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46323040]"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] Not if you still want, need or desire something else, i.e. the market place. The proper way to say what you mean is, "Rust provided or provides a satisfying expereince", i.e. currently meeting your needs. In the sense you are putting it in, you would have to say specifcally "Rust has satisfied my need for fun and happiness right now or last night". You would need to qualify a specfic time for it to be correct usage, normally some time in the past. Its difficult when you ignore certian aspects of the dicussion that we've belabored. Yes or no: Satisfaction is an evolving concept that changes based on the introduction and removal of variables? You can never really know if you are satisfied because you do not have perfect information, you can only guess based on the information you have. Once again, you may perceive you are satisfied with rust until some variable comes along and changes your satisfaction level that disprove or prove the previous knowledge. i.e. "I was satisfied with rust unitl they added x, y and z". Your argument would be I was still satisfied when it's obviously I'm no longer satisfied but you could not prove this unless you added a qualifcation based on a specfic time period or variable like x,y,z. I received new information and it changed my level of satisfaction. The new content may provide you with a greater level of satisfaction which would indicate your previous level of satisfaction was not satisfied. you have real problem distingishing the difference between perception and reality. You want me to believe that your preception is the reality. You can not discuss objective game design when you operate in a world where you think perception is the reality. You can not dicuss anything objectively if you base your entire argument on what your perception of something is. You have to be able to distingish between what is your perception of something and the actual truth or reality. Satisfaction level can never be objectively determined. You can never know if you are satisfied because you are not aware of every single variable possible. Its only a guess. This is why "satisfaction" has no place as a defintion in an objective discussion about game design.

[QUOTE=billy79;46323266]Not if you still want, need or desire something else, i.e. the market place. The proper way to say what you mean is, "Rust provided or provides a satisfying expereince", i.e. currently meeting your needs. In the sense you are putting it in, you would have to say specifcally "Rust has satisfied my need for fun and happiness right now or last night". You would need to qualify a specfic time for it to be correct usage, normally some time in the past. Its difficult when you ignore certian aspects of the dicussion that we've belabored. Yes or no: Satisfaction is an evolving concept that changes based on the introduction and removal of variables? You can never really know if you are satisfied because you do not have perfect information, you can only guess based on the information you have. Once again, you may perceive you are satisfied with rust until some variable comes along and changes your satisfaction level that disprove or prove the previous knowledge. i.e. "I was satisfied with rust unitl they added x, y and z". Your argument would be I was still satisfied when it's obviously I'm no longer satisfied but you could not prove this unless you added a qualifcation based on a specfic time period or variable like x,y,z. I received new information and it changed my level of satisfaction. The new content may provide you with a greater level of satisfaction which would indicate your previous level of satisfaction was not satisfied. you have real problem distingishing the difference between perception and reality. You want me to believe that your preception is the reality. You can not discuss objective game design when you operate in a world where you think perception is the reality. You can not dicuss anything objectively if you base your entire argument on what your perception of something is. You have to be able to distingish between what is your perception of something and the actual truth or reality. Satisfaction level can never be objectively determined. You can never know if you are fully satisfied because you are not aware of every single variable possible. This is why "satisfaction" has no place as a defintion in an objective discussion about game design.[/QUOTE] None of this affects my example. This issue has nothing to do with perception versus reality. It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either. If something provides me with a satisfying experience, I can declare myself satisfied. That is how those two words interact. It's quite simple. You're still trying to give the word satisfied some special, singular meaning, when it can be legitimately used in other ways.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46323442][B]None of this affects my example.[/B] This issue has nothing to do with perception versus reality. [B]It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either[/B]. If something provides me with a satisfying experience, I can declare myself satisfied. That is how those two words interact. It's quite simple. You're still trying to give the word satisfied some special, singular meaning, when it can be legitimately used in other ways.[/QUOTE] You: I am satisfied with rust. Me: They are not developing it anymore, its has all the updates it is ever going to get. You: Well, that sucks. Me: Are you satisfied with rust? You: No. Me: Yes you are, you said you are satisfied. You must be satisfied becasue you said you are satisfied. How can you not be satisfied? Rust provided you with satisfying expereince, you must be satisfied. You: blah blah blah. :suicide: Your next post will have all the qualifications that you think have nothing to do with your statement. Do you feel like a fool now? I fully expect another contortion of logic to explain away this rather convincing example of your ignorance and/or bullshit. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=pachorradas;46323179]I will also be really satisfied when this thread gets back to the subject the OP started. ;-)[/QUOTE] brand new thread on this topic if you dont like this one. No need for "really".

[QUOTE=billy79;46323458]You: I am satisfied with rust. Me: They are not developing it anymore, its has all the updates it is ever going to get. You: Well, that sucks. Me: Are you satisfied with rust? You: No. Me: Yes you are, you said you are satisfied. You must be satisfied becasue you said you are satisfied. How can you not be satisfied? Rust provided you with satisfying expereince, you must be satisfied. You: blah blah blah. [/QUOTE] I might still be satisfied with Rust though... Simply change my response to 'yes' in your scenario and you have no point. Therefore, that scenario doesn't do anything for you. I also never said that if you are satisfied, you are therefore satisfied forever. I can be satisfied with Rust and yet still want to use the Steam Market. In the hypothetical future, I may become dissatisfied with Rust, but that doesn't change the situation regarding the Steam Market. Also, do you really think that continuing to insult me will accomplish anything? I'm not sure why you're so bitter and angry, but there's no reason to be disrespectful, especially without provocation. It just makes you appear pathetic.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46323978]I also never said that if you are satisfied, you are therefore satisfied forever. .[/QUOTE] Ahem, let me remind you what you stated in your post that preceded this one: [QUOTE]It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either[/QUOTE] This makes at least three times you've contridticted yourself. Timeframe is irrelevant, when you are satisifed, you are satisfied. This is your logic, not mine. Now you are starting to qualify your responce with a timeframe. Your statement in my example is non-sensical and can easily be proven to be stupid with out qualification which you've said do not affect your statement. [QUOTE]Also, do you really think that continuing to insult me will accomplish anything?[/QUOTE] I'm not insulting you. Insulting you would be calling you an asshole or dumbass. I've described your logic and asked if you felt like a fool. [QUOTE]I'm not sure why you're so bitter and angry, but there's no reason to be disrespectful, especially without provocation. It just makes you appear pathetic.[/QUOTE] I'm not bitter or angry. I'm clearly demonstrating why someoene who uses foolish logic should not say "You are wrong" nor should they say "I've proven you wrong using an opinion". I'm actually having a blast and killing time. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] You can simply end your embarrassment by admitting you have an invalid defintion of game design and conform to the commonly accepted defintion and we can bypass the subjectivness satifaction brings. Then, you'd have to all but admit you were using a strawman in your rebuttal of my "bad design" comment. I'm not sure you can handle that.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324075]This makes at least three times you've contridticted yourself. Timeframe is irrelevant, when your satisifed, your satisfied. This is your logic, not mine. Now you are starting to qualify your responce with a timeframe. Your statement in my example is non-sensical and can easily be proven to be stupid with out qualification which you've said do not affect your statement. I'm not insulting you. Insulting you would be calling you an asshole or dumbass. I've described your logic and asked if you felt like a fool. I'm not bitter or angry. I'm clearly demonstrating why someoene who uses foolish logic should not say "You are wrong" nor should they say "I've proven you wrong using an opinion". I'm actually having a blast and killing time.[/QUOTE] I haven't contradicted myself. Timing in the way that you brought it up wasn't relevant, and that was clearly what I was commenting on. Context is everything. One can be satisfied for a moment, for a significant period of time, or forever. Changing circumstances in the form of other needs or desires [I]can[/I] change whether you are satisfied, or it might not. It does not have to. I've been articulating that idea for quite some time. There has been no contradiction; you were simply confused by the different contexts of the discussion. You may think that you've "clearly demonstrated" something, but it hasn't been any flaws in my logic. And you have insulted me numerous times, including the uses of profanity and derogatory language. Maybe you should read through the posts again. The whole short-term memory issue that you mentioned sheds a lot of light on your erratic posts in this thread. Furthermore, your hostility suggests to me that you are either angry, or bitter, or both, despite your denials.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324198][U]Changing circumstances [/U]in the form of other needs or desires [B][I][U]can change[/U][/I] whether you are satisfied, or it might not[/B].[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322691]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.' [B][U]Anything[/U] that happens later [I][U]will not change[/U] [/I]that fact[/b].[/QUOTE] I declare victory. You've been arguing against this concept from the start and finally seen the light and for at least the fourth time, contradicted yourself. There is no me "confusing" your context....its you outright changing it on the fly. :dance: Now, I'm done with you. I've used your own words to demonstrate that you obviously have no qualms saying one thing then pretending you were saying something else at a later time when confronted with the utter ignorance of what you are saying. In my world we call that being disingenious, manipulative and ignorant. If i want to hurt your feelings or insult you, I'd use much more descriptive words than obsenities. Do not call a guy who likes to debate "wrong"...or "I've proven you wrong", you just may end up looking like an imbecile.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324218]I declare victory. You've been arguing against this concept from the start and finally seen the light and for at least the fourth time, contradicted yourself. There is no me "confusing" your context....its you outright changing it on the fly.[/QUOTE] The statements that you quoted are not contradictory, just as my others were not. You're wrong for the umpteenth time. Once again you've demonstrated your lack of understanding of context. When I said that anything that happens later will not change that fact, I was clearly referring to the fact that the person was satisfied. If you were satisfied at one point, later changes in circumstance won't change the fact that you were satisfied earlier. In addition, changing circumstances absolutely can change whether you are satisfied or they might not. Let's take two scenarios. In one, I play Rust and am satisfied. Then they add something to the game that makes me no longer satisfied. I was still satisfied at one point. In the second, I play Rust and am satisfied. Then they add something to the game and I am still satisfied. Both scenarios are possible. My previous statements were not contradictory as a result. You have no victory, and you also continue with the petty insults. How many times do I have to destroy your sad attempts at rebutting my arguments? Those attempts are getting feebler and feebler, by the way.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324198][U][B]Changing circumstances [/B][/U]in the form of other needs or desires [B][I][U]can change[/U][/I] whether you are satisfied, or it might not[/B].[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322691]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.' [B][U]Anything[/U] that happens later [I][U]will not change[/U] [/I]that fact[/b].[/QUOTE] This is a conclusive contradiction.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324735]um....[/QUOTE] I explained exactly why those two statements are not contradictory. See my above post for clarity.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324749]I explained exactly why those two statements are not contradictory. See my above post for clarity.[/QUOTE] Its 100% incorrect to say those two statements are not contradictory. There is nothing you can say. I'm done arguing with you.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324735]This is a conclusive contradiction.[/QUOTE] It isn't. You fail to see or understand the context of the second statement. Again, please read the above explanation. If you can't understand why it isn't a contradiction, maybe try asking someone to help you. [editline]24th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=billy79;46324760]Its impossible to say those two statements are not contradictory. There is nothing you can say. I'm done arguing with you.[/QUOTE] It is possible, and I have said it. If you're done, then you admit defeat, not victory. I've very sad for you. If you want to learn something, perhaps have someone read through the thread with you to show you exactly how many times you were wrong.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324761]It isn't. You fail to see or understand the context of the second statement. Again, please read the above explanation. If you can't understand why it isn't a contradiction, maybe try asking someone to help you.[/QUOTE] Once again, you said conclusively anything that happens will not change it from being satisfied, you then said it can be changed. This is indisputable.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324773]Once again, you said conclusively anything that happens will not change it from being satisfied, you then said it can be changed. This is indisputable.[/QUOTE] I actually didn't say that "anything that happens will not change it from being satisfied." I said that anything that happens after being satisfied does not change that fact that you were satisfied. The fact that at some point in the past, you were satisfied cannot be changed in the future. The fact that you are satisfied currently can be changed minute to minute, or it might not. This is simple.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324786]The fact that at some point in the past, you were satisfied [B][U]cannot be changed [/U][/B]in the future. The fact that you are satisfied currently can be changed minute to minute, or it might not. This is simple.[/QUOTE] You did it again! [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324198][U][B]Changing circumstances [/B][/U]in the form of other needs or desires [B][I][U]can change[/U][/I] whether you are satisfied, or it might not[/B].[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=billy79;46324798]You did it again![/QUOTE] There is no contradiction. It has to do with the context of which satisfaction we're talking about, past, which is fixed, or present, which can change (keeping in mind that it doesn't [I]have[/I] to change). Again, simple.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324806]There is no contradiction. It has to do with the context of which satisfaction we're talking about, past, which is fixed, or present, which [I][/I][U][/U][B]can change [/B](keeping in mind that it doesn't [I]have[/I] to change). Again, simple.[/QUOTE] Wow! [QUOTE]The fact that at some point in the past, you were satisfied [B][U]cannot be changed [/U][/B]in the future.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=billy79;46324858]Wow![/QUOTE] Yes...that fact, which is that you were satisfied, can never be changed, if you were in fact satisfied. You could become not satisfied, but you would still have been satisfied in the past. That is a fact. Your present state of satisfaction can change. That is not a contradiction. I'm not sure how many times I'll need to explain this to you, but this is getting ridiculous now.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324875]Yes...that fact, which is that you were satisfied, can never be changed, if you were in fact satisfied. You could become not satisfied, but you would still have been satisfied in the past. That is a fact. Your present state of satisfaction can change. That is not a contradiction. I'm not sure how many times I'll need to explain this to you, but this is getting ridiculous now.[/QUOTE] In case you missed, it, I've won...and all you are doing is going back and forth between "it can change" and "it can not change", I'm just pointing it out the absurdity of it.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324893]In case you missed, it, I've won...and all you are doing is going back and forth between it can change and it can not change, I'm just pointing it out the absurdity of it.[/QUOTE] It's not absurd...and you haven't won anything, except perhaps in your own mind. You should ask someone to help explain to you why it isn't a contradiction, because I can't get through to you.

I'm sorry you feel this way but maybe you should go ask for help: [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324198][U][B]Changing circumstances [/B][/U]in the form of other needs or desires [B][I][U]can change[/U][/I] whether you are satisfied, or it might not[/B].[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322691]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.' [B][U]Anything[/U] that happens later [I][U]will not change[/U] [/I]that fact[/b].[/QUOTE] hint: your statement does not include "was". Your statement was made in the presense tense.

[QUOTE=billy79;46324915]I'm sorry you feel this way but maybe you should go ask for help:[/QUOTE] You can quote them as many times as you'd like, but that won't make your contention that there is a contradiction between them any more true. Why do you think pure repetition is valuable at this point? It's probably because you clearly have no argument, but you feel the need to keep posting what is essentially spam. [editline]25th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=billy79;46324915]hint: your statement does not include "was". Your statement was made in the presense tense.[/QUOTE] "It satisfied me" is [I]past[/I] tense...

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324944]You can quote them as many times as you'd like, but that won't make your contention that there is a contradiction between them any more true. Why do you think pure repetition is valuable at this point? It's probably because you clearly have no argument, but you feel the need to keep posting what is essentially spam. [editline]25th October 2014[/editline] "It satisfied me" is [I]past[/I] tense...[/QUOTE] I've told you many times I'm done arguing....I'll simply point to your contradiction, one that no amount of explaining will change: [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46324198][U]Changing circumstances [/U]in the form of other needs or desires [B][I][U]can change[/U][/I] whether you are satisfied, or it might not[/B].[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46322691]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.' [B][U]Anything[/U] that happens later [I][U]will not change[/U] [/I]that fact[/b].[/QUOTE] Its pretty clear... As I've explained before, in order for it take on the meaning you want, you must qualify it with a specific time frame.....which you indicated was not relevant. [QUOTE=Me]You can never really know if you are satisfied because you do not have perfect information, you can only guess based on the information you have. Once again, you may perceive you are satisfied with rust until some variable comes along and changes your satisfaction level that disprove or prove the previous knowledge. i.e. "I was satisfied with rust until they added x, y and z". [B]Your argument would be I was still satisfied when it's obviously I'm no longer satisfied but you could not prove this unless you added a qualification based on a specific time period or variable like x,y,z. [/B]I received new information and it changed my level of satisfaction. The new content may provide you with a greater level of satisfaction which would indicate your previous level of satisfaction was not satisfied.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=You] It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either.[/QUOTE] You continue to contradict yourself.

[QUOTE=billy79;46325120]I've told you many times I'm done arguing....I'll simply point to your contradiction, one that no amount of explaining will change:[/QUOTE] If you're making a statement that declares my ideas contradictory, that's an argument. It would be impossible to point out a contradiction that doesn't exist. You are the one trying to convince someone that it does. [QUOTE]Its pretty clear... As I've explained before, in order for it take on the meaning you want, you must qualify it with a specific time frame.....which you indicated was not relevant.[/QUOTE] A specific time frame was not relevant in the context in which you brought it up previously, which I reasonably pointed out. In this context, it is relevant. In the past, having been satisfied cannot be changed, in the present, the state of being satisfied or not being satisfied can be affected by various things. There is no contradiction.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46325181] A specific time frame was not relevant in the context in which you brought it up previously, which I reasonably pointed out.[/QUOTE] READ YOUR FUCKING WORDS! [QUOTE]None of this affects my example.[/QUOTE] Specifying time period. No other conclusion can be drawn other than specifying time a period does not affect your example. You pointed out specifying a time frame did not affect your example. Now you want to specify a time period in your example. [QUOTE]It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either.[/QUOTE] Please dear god tell me you are trolling. I swear to god that you are not this stupid.

[QUOTE=billy79;46325207]READ YOUR FUCKING WORDS! Specifying time period. No other conclusion can be drawn other than specifying time a period does not affect your example. You pointed out specifying a time frame did not affect your example.[/QUOTE] I did read my words. In the context in which you were suggesting time frame mattered, it didn't. It didn't affect the particular example that I gave, because while past satisfaction cannot be changed, it is also possible that present satisfaction will not change. My example did not need to include any time frame to be plausible.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46325227]I did read my words. In the context in which you were suggesting time frame mattered, it didn't.[/QUOTE] Dude, do you not understand the context was/is your statement? Which you acknowledged: [QUOTE]It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either.[/QUOTE] The context is your statement.

[QUOTE=billy79;46325247]Dude, do you not understand the context was/is your statement?[/QUOTE] No...the context was that my statement was made in response to a specific objection of yours. The statement, taken by itself out of context, is meaningless for this discussion.

[QUOTE=intrepidenigm;46325256]No...the context was that my statement was made in response to a specific objection of yours. The statement, taken by itself out of context, is meaningless for this discussion.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]None of this affects my example. This issue has nothing to do with perception versus reality. It doesn't have to do with establishing a specific time frame either.[/QUOTE] The context is your example to which you stated it having nothing to do with a specific time frame. In fact, you did not address my objections specifically, you dismissed them outright. A reasonable person can conclude you mean that your statement of "I am satisfied or Rust satisfied me" has nothing to do with qualifying it with a specific time frame.