User information for Matthew Ardill

Real Name
Matthew Ardill
Nickname
commonperson
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
Signed On
September 18, 2008
Supporter
-
Total Posts
152 (Novice)
User ID
54267
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
152 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 6.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older
127.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 30, 2012, 22:47
Re: etc. Jan 30, 2012, 22:47
Jan 30, 2012, 22:47
 
My question is RailWizard's post calling a person a "fucking moron" stays and other FAR more balanced FAR less hate laden and offensive stuff gets trimmed. Funny that.
126.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 30, 2012, 22:40
Re: etc. Jan 30, 2012, 22:40
Jan 30, 2012, 22:40
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 22:35:
Wooo! Are we having fun yet? Cuz DAMN not one single person here has presented an argument worthy of debate. Is there none up to the challenge? Surely you can do better....

You still haven't illustrated any proof of a gay gene to allow for your gene therapy thing to work out. So I'm waiting, once you actually back some stuff up with facts then it's worthy of discussion. :-)
65.
 
Re: they are all over the place
Jan 29, 2012, 11:49
65.
Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 11:49
Jan 29, 2012, 11:49
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:43:
commonperson wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:34:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:19:

What would be super awesome is to have a cadre of elite gay gamers go up against some of these people spouting hate. I'd love to watch the gay gamers own them but that's just an aside.

Thats fine but its not hate. You must think I hate people in a wheelchair too, right? I have compassion and sympathy for those that are unable to have children as easily as a heterosexual can.

Given the wonders of science anyone can have children now adays. So that's a moot point. Childbearing and the ability to raise a child has nothing to do with the argument here. And if anything this world could do with a few fewer babies being born, we're overpopulated with millions of unwanted children who are orphans. They need homes before we need to bring new babies in to the equation. As for wheelchairs, I have no idea what you think. I just know what you post and I don't dare assume anything.
63.
 
Re: they are all over the place
Jan 29, 2012, 11:34
63.
Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 11:34
Jan 29, 2012, 11:34
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:19:

You're not making a strong argument at all. Gay clans/guilds are advertised because it lets gay people know where they can go to play with others that aren't going to bash them for their sexual preference. Anyone who's played online for more than a few hours knows that the Internet is rife with homophobia, and you'll hear more anti-gay slurs than anything else usually. I don't see any problem with them looking for a group to play with where they don't have to deal with that.

To comment on your point regarding the web and homophobia one sad element is many people don't even realize they are being homophobic. It's like the "Fag" episode of Southpark where the kids were calling Harley Bikers Fags (who then went on to "reclaim" the word.) To a kid today saying "Gay" and "Fag" while on the surface relates to homosexuality deep down has nothing to do with it. It's more just a general condemnation of a person based on a stigma. It's like a lot of words that transmute meaning over time. While what they are saying may appear to them just a easy jibe they don't understand the power of those words which is kind of sad.

I had a friend who's Asian, when I was younger I used the word Oriental because there was a time that wasn't considered racist and it wasn't that long ago. I used that word in front of her and she flipped. I explained I didn't know and she explained why it was racist. I stopped using that word, I think using words like gay and fag fall in to that same category we need to educate. What makes me sad is not that there are "Gay Clans" it's that there has to be "Gay Clans" really we should all just be able to play together. People shouldn't catch flack for their gender or orientation.

What would be super awesome is to have a cadre of elite gay gamers go up against some of these people spouting hate. I'd love to watch the gay gamers own them but that's just an aside.
62.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 11:28
62.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 11:28
Jan 29, 2012, 11:28
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:21:
commonperson wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:15:
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 09:40:
commonperson wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 08:58:

Scientific proof please. I'm not obtuse, I'm just educated. There is in fact NO concencus on why homosexuals are born homosexuals. There are a combination of factors considered by medical professionals (which I am guessing you are not) ranging from the geneitic (nature) to an environmental (nurture) source. Common concencus is it's a bit from column a and a bit from column b but the reality is there no evidence of genetic code that creates homosexuality. For gene therapy to work you need to have a gene to isolate and target. Furher the only claim of the gene being found was disproven and the claimant (who was funded by Christian groups) disappeared and the APA (Amarican Psychological Association) has gone on record saying that it does not exist. So, unless you have inside knowledge of the human genome which was fully mapped in 2003 you're full of rubbish.

You're educated? I refuse to a respond to someone that can't even spell check. Seriously, you misspelled further as Furher.

Ah so due to a spelling error you will not justify your stance. I see how it works, so class if you can't use a spell check you don't get to know the secret information that TangledThorns knows about the human genome. He will hold the rest of you up from your gene therapy for your mystery ailment due to a spelling error. You want to know why I don't bother with a spell check? Because this is a forum, I don't really care. If I honestly cared about what people said on video game forums I'd have hung my self YEARS ago. So, yeah, don't provide that non-existent proof. Good for you, enjoy that pulpit that you stand behind and preach hate. At least the one good thing I've seen from this is there is only one other person supporting you and the rest actually seem to be calling you on your balogna. A rare instance of reason in the video game community.

Oh and by the way, how did you know I wasn't addressing you directly and forget my umlat? ;-)

This comment was edited on Jan 29, 2012, 11:36.
60.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 11:24
60.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 11:24
Jan 29, 2012, 11:24
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:16:
commonperson wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 11:09:
I DARE you to approach a homosexual and tell them they are handicapped. I actually KNOW homosexuals, sommething you either do not or you obviously hide your feelings regarding as frankly as a heterosexual if you came up and spoke like this to a homosexual friend of mine I'd be sorely tempted to belt you. Any how, if anyone knows what it is to live with a handicap it must be you, how is it being an ignorant fool who can barely understand the concept of tying one's own shoes?

Are you that dense? I won't tell a person that has any handicap that they are, that would be rude. Wow, you know homosexuals? That must make you an expert on all things minority. If it was up to you there would be no prenatal care. Just let babies be born however ill they may become, we'll accept them as is. Am I right??


"straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."

That's what you just did. Actually I am a person with a disability, so I can speak about living with a disability. I also am a person who has friends who are homosexual so I can speak to what it is to live in a community where you were until recently hunted down and demonized and still face extensive persecution from intolerant bigots.

So, as a thinking member of one minority, a friend of members of another minority, and a human being with an ounce of compassion yeah I would say that makes me a bit of an expert at least on some aspects of your argument. Try and keep it on topic, you're saying that homosexuals are sick genetic deviants. There is no scientific proof, the only proof was thrown out and disavowed by the American Psychiatric Association in 2009 due to it's faulty origins. Gene therapy (as there is NO GAY GENE) will not work. If you wanted to use aversion therapy or some other method than that may work due to it's essential similarity to "torturing it out of some one" but it's not treating a disease, that would be treating a compulsion or act and would not in essence cure anything.

So, unless as I asked elsewhere you have inside knowledge of the genome that no other scientest or organization in the WORLD has you do not know what you are talking about.

Oh and for the record, I'm an epileptic and have been living with it since I was 11, I would have loved gene therapy to treat my condition to exist but at the time it didn't. There's a big deal about enjoying a little boy on boy action and being disabled. Trust me on that.
56.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 11:15
56.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 11:15
Jan 29, 2012, 11:15
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 09:40:
commonperson wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 08:58:

To use gene therapy you need a gay gene this is the same kind of master race crap white supremacists use

You're very obtuse. Gay people are born that way for a scientific reason.

Scientific proof please. I'm not obtuse, I'm just educated. There is in fact NO concencus on why homosexuals are born homosexuals. There are a combination of factors considered by medical professionals (which I am guessing you are not) ranging from the geneitic (nature) to an environmental (nurture) source. Common concencus is it's a bit from column a and a bit from column b but the reality is there no evidence of genetic code that creates homosexuality. For gene therapy to work you need to have a gene to isolate and target. Furher the only claim of the gene being found was disproven and the claimant (who was funded by Christian groups) disappeared and the APA (Amarican Psychological Association) has gone on record saying that it does not exist. So, unless you have inside knowledge of the human genome which was fully mapped in 2003 you're full of rubbish.
55.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 11:09
55.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 11:09
Jan 29, 2012, 11:09
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 10:56:
CommunistHamster wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 09:40:
Gene therapy? Seriously? Just accept that people are different, and that just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's objectively bad. Don't fix what isn't broken.

Oh wow you are dumb and obviously take good health for granted. Get it through your skull that some people would rather not live life handicapped.

I DARE you to approach a homosexual and tell them they are handicapped. I actually KNOW homosexuals, sommething you either do not or you obviously hide your feelings regarding as frankly as a heterosexual if you came up and spoke like this to a homosexual friend of mine I'd be sorely tempted to belt you. Any how, if anyone knows what it is to live with a handicap it must be you, how is it being an ignorant fool who can barely understand the concept of tying one's own shoes?
47.
 
Re: they are all over the place
Jan 29, 2012, 09:06
47.
Re: they are all over the place Jan 29, 2012, 09:06
Jan 29, 2012, 09:06
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 05:39:
Draugr wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 05:14:
RailWizard wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 04:13:

Family <-Hey look! It's an anti-gay smilely! lol...

How is a family anti-gay? Families and homosexuals can and already do coexist. Gay people have families, and belong to families.

I can see you are quite dense, or maybe my joke was just over your head, so I'll explain.

As you noted, that is the smiley for 'family' and you can see it's a male, a female, and a child. There are no 'gay family' smileys, so it was a sarcastic way of saying that this is something that gays would be upset about because they are clearly not being represented. Get it now?

How do you know it's a family? Maybe it's a bear, a transvestite and their think buddy on the way to a disco. You make LOTS of assumptions.
46.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 08:58
46.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 08:58
Jan 29, 2012, 08:58
 
TangledThorns wrote on Jan 29, 2012, 08:39:
I can't believe liberals with all their 'understanding' of science don't see homosexuality as a reproductive birth defect.

I know if a parent has a choice of protecting their child from birth defects like blindness, development issues and even homosexuality they'd use gene therapy to stop it when it becomes widely available.


To use gene therapy you need a gay gene this is the same kind of master race crap white supremacists use
20.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 29, 2012, 00:07
20.
Re: etc. Jan 29, 2012, 00:07
Jan 29, 2012, 00:07
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 23:18:
Cutter wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 23:12:
Well they do harp on about how they are 'born that way', and if that is so, then it is indeed a defect. Logic wins this argument every time. You mad?

Actually it's a naturally occuring phenomenon in multiple animal speicies running from higher primates down to avian groups. Invariably in the animal kingdom the relationship is no different from that of a "heterosexual" relationship with the same level of devotion and fidelity as seen in the cross section of the heterosexual group of the same size. In all liklihood it's a combination of factors most likely due to population relief in the species allowing an outlet for sexual releif and companionship when population density exceeds certain levels. In higher lifeforms you have more complex social interactions so it goes beyond a simple matter of biology in to a combination of nature, nurture, and environment.

Homosexuality simply is what the person or animal is. It's not a "deviation" it's nature, and for the Christians if God is perfect and god created man then he created homosexuality as well because it's been around since before the Christian god even existed (or the Jewish god for that matter.) In essence "RailWizard" you appear to be hiding an agenda of hate and bigotry behind a thinly veiled illusion of reasonableness. Stop pretending you are using logic, science or even reason. For what ever reason you hate homosexuals and are attacking them. Your first ammendment right in the US and according to the UN your human right but guess what's also protected under human rights laws and the US constitution, a human's right to their own sexuality. So just be sure to realise you may be allowed to spout hate (to a certain degree) but we can also call you on your shinanigans.
19.
 
Re: etc.
Jan 28, 2012, 23:59
19.
Re: etc. Jan 28, 2012, 23:59
Jan 28, 2012, 23:59
 
RailWizard wrote on Jan 28, 2012, 22:41:
When is the last time you saw a "Straight people only." group in game? I'm sure they exist, but there are not advertised that way, are they...

What are you talking about? Bioware are looking to include (due to feedback probably from 13 year old males trying to live out lesbian fantasies) same sex sex relationships ALONG SIDE heterosexual ones. Just like in ALL THEIR OTHER GAMES, have you played any of the Mass Effect or Dragon Age games? What you are saying has nothing to do with the point of the post and makes no sense. Frankly I don't really care about same sex or heterosexual relationships. My character is a Jedi and unlike catholic priests he can keep it in his pants but I think if they can they should let people play how they want to play. Try and at least make sense when you are commenting though.
15.
 
Re: More Diablo III Cuts
Jan 27, 2012, 21:41
15.
Re: More Diablo III Cuts Jan 27, 2012, 21:41
Jan 27, 2012, 21:41
 
Honestly, this is sounding more and more like they're losing control of the project. Looking at Blizzard they put out one game (that they chopped in to pieces to monotize on componants) other than that they've been building extensions on to a now admitedly old house. I'm starting to fear Diablo is going to turn in to a Duke Nukem.
11.
 
Re: Steam Grows: Eyes Your Television
Jan 6, 2012, 11:56
11.
Re: Steam Grows: Eyes Your Television Jan 6, 2012, 11:56
Jan 6, 2012, 11:56
 
I've been having problems over the last six months mainly circling around big releases but some times just at random and for days at a time where the store just doesn't work. The page refuses to load or loads jumbled or broken. I think their growth is outstripping the infrastructure in place mind you it's pretty stellar growth but they have to get their house in order and keep it in order. Time for infrastructure upgrades so your "big daily sales" don't break your system. :-)
13.
 
Re: Firefly and Buffy MMOG Developer Closed
Jan 4, 2012, 17:54
13.
Re: Firefly and Buffy MMOG Developer Closed Jan 4, 2012, 17:54
Jan 4, 2012, 17:54
 
Gas Bandit wrote on Jan 3, 2012, 23:36:
CommunistHamster wrote on Jan 3, 2012, 22:56:
Phew, two licensed MMOs aborted. Close save for gamers everywhere.

Yeah! Just like that Star Wars Old Republic abomination! Isn't it just a shame that horrible idea came to fruition! I can't seem to find a positive review for it anywhere!

You sir are a funny man. ;-) Honestly a Firefly game COULD be very good or very bad. You'd just have to have people behind it who love it. Already the factions are pretty clear and easy Browncoats versus Alliance if you set it during the unification war so that way you don't mess with continuity and do some interesting setup. Or set it post Serenity and have some kind of revolt after Miranda hit the Signal. Lots of options. I just don't trust most people to do the vision right. Buffy, I don't see that as an MMO or at least not an MMORPG maybe some kind of action hibred. You could be a Watcher or a Slayer on one side or Vamp or Demon on the other. Playable but I don't know. Sadly Fox probably owns the rights to these not Joss so I doubt quality product would ever happen.
33.
 
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics
Nov 30, 2011, 00:32
33.
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics Nov 30, 2011, 00:32
Nov 30, 2011, 00:32
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 30, 2011, 00:05:
Hardly, just the obvious and trite stuff that idiots like you, Drezden, et al. all like. Then again, you morons don't seem to think there's anything wrong when you gripe about stuff but you sure do love to point out when other people do it. gg hypocrites.

And seeing as this game has been in development for about 5 years and given its size and scope 300 million is more than fair and that was a number given 2 years ago. And we're not even talking the maketing budget here which will easily be 100 million, so yeah somewhere in the 300-500 million ballpark is a pretty fair guess.

Wow, I have to say why all the hate? People need to relax, it's a game. Patcher estimated more at around 80 Million and the numbers vary from 100 to 300 in general but calling people idiots really lowers the tone of conversation. It's no wonder people don't take gamers seriously when in the course of 30 odd comments it's already degraded to name calling.
30.
 
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics
Nov 29, 2011, 19:35
30.
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics Nov 29, 2011, 19:35
Nov 29, 2011, 19:35
 
Creston wrote on Nov 29, 2011, 19:18:
Cutter wrote on Nov 29, 2011, 18:36:

Please do the math for me. Explain how 350k subs are going to recoup 500 million and counting? I'll be really surprised if this isn't F2P inside of 2 years, probably less.


Every time you post about the game, the amount of money sunk into it goes up... 500 million... Really?

Most game review sites place the money anywhere between 100-300 million, and the 300 million is solely and alone because one guy blogged that he worked on it and it had cost "LIKE 300 MILLION DOLLARS, MAN!" And all they're doing is guessing, because no official figures have ever been released.

So now it's gone to 500 million? Come on. Even EA's marketing department can't spend money THAT fast.

Creston

Also current numbers are pegging around 900k of units in the USA alone, that's not even North America. That's AMERICA (http://www.vgchartz.com/charts/preorders.php)week ending November 26th.

Now add to that Europe and hell even the rest of North America and the Australia you are talking over a million (probably around 1.5 million if not more.) That's at launch. So let's make some estimates here, let's for simplicity sake say all 1.5 million people bought regular edition versions at 60 bucks. Not digital deluxe, not collectors, just plain brown paper normal that's 1500000 x 60 that's 90000000 just at launch. Now in reality you have digital deluxe and CE editions adding extra overhead and costs on top but really DE no reall cost CE it's really pennies as it's crap made in China by sweatshops so real overhead is low but they are getting 20 to 80 dollars on top of that.

Now that's 90 Million out of the gate, let's give it a TRAGIC drop off from 1.5 million users to say 750k even after first month (which I don't forsee but is possible) we're talking around a monthly take in of around 11 million and if it stabalizes there for a year we're talking around 113 million over one year. So if we see a 50% drop off over the course of the first year monthly subscriptions for that period plus initial buy in is aronud 200 million. Given the actual costs are subject to rumour and speculation (and there's no way it's 500 million at worst maybe 250 to 300 million and even 300's only source is a disgruntled former employee) they will have made their money back in the first year and a half and everything on top of that is pure cheddar.
29.
 
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics
Nov 29, 2011, 19:18
29.
Re: Kotick on SWOTR Economics Nov 29, 2011, 19:18
Nov 29, 2011, 19:18
 
Creston wrote on Nov 29, 2011, 16:00:

Flatline wrote on Nov 29, 2011, 15:08:
Also, I might catch flak, but more than once I found myself saying "wow... that's a little... sexist..." with the story. Two or three major NPCs and a minor one basically have harems and kept women and shit. One, maybe even two would have been unremarkable, but when you have the major enemy being a sleazy "lady's man", the first major NPC ally having a kept woman, a quest goal minor NPC having refugee women that he's basically keeping captive as a harem, and a second major NPC ally having literally a harem of admirers (all of these in the first 10 hours mind you), my creepy meter started going off. Then it just felt juvenile.

Star Wars is pretty sexist in and of itself, but yeah, that sounds rather over the top. Of course, with EA being behind it, all you can do is shrug your shoulders and go "Well, it IS EA, so it makes sense."

Queue Muzyka bleating that EA has nothing to do with Bioware's games.

Creston

This is nothing to do with EA it's the universe/time it's set in. You have to remember Star Wars is a pretty ugly universe in a lot of ways. During this period slavery, drug addiction and human trafficing are pretty par for the course. On Nar Shaddaa there's a guy in the background going on about his twilek fetish and the female concierge just simply says that they will be gald to please him at his Birthday Party on Nar Shaddaa. The world in the Extended Universe is a much more brutal and far more interesting one. The reality is, we live in a world where girls are swept off the streets in Europe, hooked on smack and sold to people in the U.S. and Canada to work in Strip Clubs. Human trafficing goes on on a daily basis. Addiction is common place. The game is more a reflection of our world than not and people are only so uncomfortable because it reminds them of truths they prefer to forget.
14.
 
Re: Steamships Ahoy - Hard Reset: Includes Changes Based on Demo Feedback
Sep 13, 2011, 19:47
14.
Re: Steamships Ahoy - Hard Reset: Includes Changes Based on Demo Feedback Sep 13, 2011, 19:47
Sep 13, 2011, 19:47
 
I felt it wasn't bad it just wasn't great. I'll wait for the inevitable steam sale dropping it to 5 dollars.
14.
 
Re: Richard Garriott on Ultima
Sep 3, 2011, 06:39
14.
Re: Richard Garriott on Ultima Sep 3, 2011, 06:39
Sep 3, 2011, 06:39
 
Garriott drives me nuts, people look up to him but really what has he produced since Ultima Online? One failed half assed project after another. I loved Ultima growing up, I played all of them even the 3D Eye of the Beholder-esque ones and I followed Garriot for years afterwards but with the disapointment of Tabula Rasa and his weird "showmanship" with his castle and whinging on about not being an Astronaut I realised he's just a really weird creepy and slightly sad man who's best work is behind him.

I wish EA would do something with Ultima, they could give it to freaking Bioware to make something interesting out of (since Bioware handle their RPG and MMO division) hell even something to go up against the Elder Scrolls but goodness knows if they will or not. EA make weird business decisions.
152 Comments. 8 pages. Viewing page 6.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Older