Traditional, pre-2006, beta tests were bug hunts in feature complete software. Then public beta tests became a thing that rapidly evolved into marketing for a finished game. Most public betas don’t see any bugs fixed on launch.
Generally, devs have felt very pressured when given multiple release date goals. By that I mean getting out a playable E3 demo, a “beta”, a demo, an early access for preorders…
It means if, say, the character has always had a clipping issue with their holster but it’s not a priority, the team can focus on important work/bugs first and their QA just kind of acknowledges the weird holster. But anytime they’re releasing, every detail like that has to be trimmed up for however many levels are coming out.
So yeah, I’m in favor of them avoiding any marketing betas if it helps them.
Destiny 1 was the first game that I can recall being shit on day 1. 10 years ago. Clearly Bungie had their hand forced after recently being acquired by Activision and forced to deliver a broken product.
It was also the first game I played that was almost completely unplayable without researching shit on the internet.
And it just got worse and worse as time went on. Eventually I got tired of constantly having to figure out how to play it over and over. I just wanted to play.
It says the beta was to test multiplayer so hopefully that means the PvP multiplayer mode and not the campaign co-op mode. If so, I’m fine with that; the pvp mode looked interesting but that’s not what I’m really buying it for.
My knee jerk reaction is that the rumors I heard that the game isn’t in a good place might be more then rumors. That sucks, I was really excited for this one, I hope it turns out great.
My guess is that the game gets really repative because that is kinda the Tyranid style. Waves and waves of teeth and claws. Maybe some variations, but how long can you send swarms of the same guy before its boring.
I guess Vermintide and 40k version (can’t remember name) make it work but they are very different games.
Dark Tide hardly works. The “cultists” that are everywhere are usually chaos and die to a stern glare. The game has serious grind problems. The over-the-top waves of 40k make for really boring gameplay.
The people behind those reverse engineered servers are legends. I recently was able to play through the original Demon’s Souls with fully working multiplayer which just blew my mind
Yeah, he is mainly a cheater on his wife. Not exactly great, but conversations on this sound like by people who never leave their basement and talk to people.
A pedophile predator is somebody who systematically texts underage people, and fishes out the vulnerable ones to exploit their weaknesses for their own satisfaction and exerts control over them. Speaking to a single, depending on the jurisdiction (±1 year), consenting adult (17 is young, but not completely stupid), with slightly flirty messages is absolutely not that. it isn’t even toxic. in fact, it devalues this tag for behaviour which is not cool due to the cheating and a bit skittish because of the age difference, but is otherwise kind of okay. See, next time somebody tells me about a pedophile predator I will be thinking about a conversation between two adults, or almost adult and not nasty abuse scarring people for life.
Have you talked to 17 year olds? They are far from developed in most cases. Anyone even in their late 20s should notice the difference in development and stay clear.
It is reprehensible and disgusting behavior, but it doesn’t mean we should universally apply labels across vast swaths of different issues, as it devalues said label and poisons future discussion.
Simple labels simplify discussion of course, but that runs the risk of losing nuance for the specific way someone was a disgusting creep.
Yeah I do. I disagree with most of their posts, but I agree with the motion that using the same labels indiscriminately is a problem in online discourse.
For example, far as I know so far, I’d call him a pedo, but I am unsure whether I’d call him a predator (of course, language differences apply, too). That’s just because I need words to express the predatory nature of people like Maxwell who prey on teens and YA.
That’s kinda what I meant, there’s too few words to just use the same label across the board sometimes. Doesn’t make something someone does less reprehensible. Rather i prefer to sometimes use full sentences instead of quick labels because it more accurately expresses the matter.
but I am unsure whether I’d call him a predator (of course, language differences apply, too). That’s just because I need words to express the predatory nature of people like Maxwell who prey on teens and YA.
What do you mean by this? Beahm was preying on a minor by sexting that minor and asking to meetup at twitch con. Are you specifically referring to people operating child sex rings? In either case, I don’t think anyone else uses your ultra-specific definition. For myself, and I assume most others, pedophiles are merely a type of predator. For example, the show, to catch a predator, was about creeps sexting kids online. This is precisely what Beahm was doing so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to call him a predator.
Not in the jurisdiction he was in, and that’s all that matters.
Also, while sending sexually explicit texts to minors (using only words) is not illegal, I’m pretty sure we can correlate what his intent was. What, do you think he’s going to come out and fully admit he’s a pedophile? No.
Also, nowhere in any of his statements has he clarified that he didn’t know they were underage. If it were the case that he didn’t know, that’s a pretty fucking big deal and he should know how important it is to explain that. He didn’t though.
I hate to get so semantical but using the word pedophile incorrectly just desensitizes the word. Pedophilia means being attracted to children, primarily meaning before or in the early stages of puberty, usually younger than 13. In fact, many pedophiles would not be attracted to someone aged 15+ because they are typically exclusively or primarily interested in prepubescent bodies.
That doesn’t mean this guy isn’t a total asshole, but he’s not a pedophile, and I think anyone can understand an adult sexting an older teen, while still absolutely horrid, is quite different from sexting a child.
Once again, absolutely not defending this guy, I don’t even know who he is… but I think it’s important not to desensitize the word.
Yeah I would totally agree with this if the word wasn’t already desensitized a very long time ago. The language has changed. (I’m assuming people were ever differentiating, I don’t really know/remember the history.) Colloquially it means interested in teens unless it’s clarified to be worse than that.
I recommend not trying to make this argument, anywhere. It will not change the way people use words, even if it could there would not be a point (attraction to pre-teens is so egregious that it will always be clarified), and a lot of people will assume that someone who doesn’t accept the colloquial usage is themselves interested in teens and in denial about how the public actually views that to the point where they think only interest in prepubescent children is problematic and handwave everything else away as a language issue.
Colloquially, it’s a catch-all nowadays. Like I said in another reply, we don’t need to differentiate between lowest common denominators. That gets into sounding sympathetic to these fucks, and anyone who sympathizes might as well be one themselves.
I’ve attended a seminar for child protection before that was delivered by a former cop (that worked in the sex crimes division) and they said the exact same thing - in the context of correctly making the distinction between paedophile and sex offender.
kotaku.com
Active