EVE is an excellently designed MMORPG, it does what it sets out to do very well and executes like a well oiled machine. It is very hard to argue that EVE does what it sets out to do poorly in any way.
However, that doesn't mean that because it is a beautiful and well executed Sci-Fi MMORPG there can't be another. Not everyone enjoys the hyper-capitalism and severe risks of the game. Those aren't flaws of the game, but features that can turn around certain kinds of people. They may still want a Sci-Fi MMORPG, a position EVE can not fill for them.
I beg to differ, here is your opening statement from the post I replied to.
a/0 is undefined. The end.
Your point appears to be that a/0 is not infinity but undefined.
Shortly thereafter you supply the following proof.
If 1/0 == inf, then inf * 0 == 1, but any number multiplied by 0 is 0, so inf * 0 == 0, therefor 0 == 1. It just doesn't work. a/0 is undefined.
In logic and in math, if the premises and steps of a proof are correct and lead to the conclusion, it is an undeniably correct proof. Your proof, in the case that the premise 1/0 == inf is a true premise, is not correct because one of your steps is flawed. This I pointed out in my previous post.
So is yours. It's wrong starting with the assumption that 1/0 == inf.
Attacking the premise of a proof whose conclusion follows from the premises and correct steps is the only way to defeat such a proof. However, the issue I have with this is that your initial proof was obviously meant to support your assertion that 1/0 =/= inf. It was meant to show that because you could prove that 1 == 0 with the assumption 1/0 == inf, that 1/0 == inf could not be a true premise otherwise all of Mathematics would be wrong. The problem is your proof is wrong for a completely different reason, namely the bad step you took.
Because of your mistake, your proof doesn't prove what you intended. That's not to say you proved the opposite, but
I highly doubt we'll be losing high profile characters such as Ness. At the moment the only characters confirmed to be dropped are the Ice Climbers, Mr. Game and Watch, and Young Link. While forums relating to the game are rife with threads claiming everyone from Captain Falcon to Luigi and characters already revealed will be axed, it seems unlikely with a planned roster of 40 combatants that we'll lose anyone as important as Ness.
The characters we've actually seen are probably the ones which are complete. I highly doubt with only a half year to go they wouldn't have prototypes for most if not all of the remaining characters. For all we know the movesets are finished, they're just waiting on art resources (or vice versa, or even a mix of both).
That's why I very much dislike both Microsoft and Sony when it comes to reporting their console numbers. Even assuming all 100 million PS2s last generation were only shipped once, there could be 20 million PS2s that haven't been bought. As you pointed out, there are any number of underhanded ways to bloat the number.
Nintendo's somewhat more honest, stating actual sales instead of shipped.
Even looking at sales we can't really get a good idea what the market share actually was. How many sold Xboxs and PS2s were to replace disk read errors, hard drive failures and other wear and tear? What about the extremely durable Gamecube?
I'm not going to claim that the PS2 wasn't dominant last generation or anything regarding where Nintendo or Microsoft stood, but the whole deal would have been a lot easier to understand if we could get better numbers from these companies.
10 million consoles first? I thought their major claim was that they'd reach 10 million consoles by the end of the year. The article summary seems to have the importance of each backwards. That said, they've got less than a month left. It will be interesting to see how close they come.
That said, Nintendo also has a ways to go before they reach their 4 million projection. They haven't launched everywhere yet, but still have just shy of 3 million to go before they hit their mark.
In fact, it's hard to say if any of the three will actually make it. Maybe it's because this is the first console generation that I haven't declined into a rabid fanboy, maybe it's because I'm a sucker for mathematical analysis, or maybe it's just because I'm highly excitable, but I'm watching all this with great interest.
I can't wait for when 3 years from now we have a good idea how it all turns out (and also have that many more juicy games, mmm).
I am sorry to report that my next action was to post on Slashdot. As you were unable to express what my next action would be, I can not give you the million dollars.
Mine transgressions are arrayed before me, a terrible countenance of my crimes wherein no petition or pennance could redeem so corrupt a soul as mine. Surely there is no forgiveness for one such as I......what is this? Some visage descends from the hills proclaiming my salvation! It's.... it's......what the hell God? Why is a SatanicPuppy telling me to go and sin no more?
(The irony was too much for me, -1 Offtopic I think, but worth it)
I heartily agree. Game companies should be moving away from loading screens as it is (to the best extent they can). To use them as billboards would only serve as an excuse to use sloppy code requiring an excessive number of loads.
In so far as ingame advertisements add to immersion and a feel of realism I can tolerate them. However, given that the adds mentioned in the article are "dynamic" I have severe doubts that they will be carefully chosen.
Does Take Two publish games of genres that might be defiled by attempts to throw in advertisements? I might have to take note and avoid them.
What is EA doing? Paying each football player to come into their motion capture studios to perfectly imitate the way each runs? Taking hi res photos of their faces to perfectly texture them?
There's a cost for HD games, and it isn't cheap. However, I think EA is calling sour grapes because companies like Capcom, Team Ninja and Square-Enix are able to make games that are stunning, fun, and wildly profitable while EA doesn't make the grade in any of those.
The sad truth of Spore is that it will be a great game, but in so being it will allow EA to continue their overbloated and inefficient methods.
My favorite parts were when he completely shot down the marketing drone standing next to him.
Marketer: "Blah blah blah marketing jargon blah blah blah battlerama blah blah"* Jaffe: "What the #@%*& did you just say? I don't understand what you just said!"*
Small world it is, I did a mix of Laurel Springs work through high school after my mom took up a job as a librarian to offset the coming costs of college for my sister. By that point my parents trusted we who were now getting close to adulthood with getting our work done on our own.
My siblings and I were taken out of public school for similar reasons. My older sister was coming home from 5th grade crying because of the things her peers were trying to get her to do. She didn't want a boyfriend, makeup, fancy clothes or the latest fads, she wanted to learn. I was ostracized for being different, for always wanting to answer questions, and for trying to learn more than the school curriculum said I should (got sent to the principle for signing my name in cursive before we officially learned cursive). My brother only did better because he was practicaly invisible, but that meant he didn't have friends for entirely different reasons.
My parents were Spock and McCoy. My dad was the stoic Math, Science and woodsmanship guy, while my mom taught English, History, and Art. There were plenty of other subjects they knew as well.
My homeschooling education wasn't perfect, nothing is. I could have applied myself better, my mom could have been more strict, we could have used more time with the other kids in the homeschooling group, but all of these are minor quibbles in an otherwise excellent education that let me graduate college with honors and get myself an interesting job that lets me sit at home with more money than I know what to do with.
There are schools in the public school system that are excellent, and there are parents who homeschool who do a very bad job. These example do not, however, validate generalizations that would indicated those are the only possible situations. There are also public schools that are horrendous wastes of money, and homeschoolers who do a great job of raising their kids in ways that promote critical thinking and not dogma.
I've written this post several times now attempting to reduce the previously monolithic rant. I think I need a lesson in terseness.
It's fine that you disagree, if you personally don't mind that's you, and I'm me.
However, you still have failed to address most of my points, especially as regards to games that are not attempting realism.
Were you to see Budweiser cans strewn about Orgrimmar after the orcs had an exceptionally long party at the death of the false warchief, would you think that it detracts from the game?
The advertisements don't have to stop the game to detract from it. They don't have to force me to view them to have their impact on the game world.
If there's a billboard on a road in GTA, I'm willing to wager I'll see it a lot. Unless they hid the billboard down some alley I'll never visit, I'm going to encounter said billboard. When I encounter said billboard, I am going to see it and whatever message it contains is going not going to interrupt the game itself, but it will interfere with my playing of it. Said advertisement will reference something in the real world otherwise the company wouldn't have paid to put it there. It will try to sell me Coke or WoW, and will try to get me to think about things other than the game. Whether I'm attempting to complete a mission, or just freewheeling, this is going to jive with what I am trying to accomplish.
Now, I do have the option of avoiding that road. However, this now presents two problems. The first is that I have just roadblocked myself from a potentially important and vital road the circumvention thereof will cost me in terms of my ability to get around and complete iportant aspects of the game. The second is that now whenever I come anywhere near the road I must remember the billboard is there or else be subjected to it again, which is in and of itself a form of being subjected to it.
Assuming there are multiple billboards around which I wish to avoid, I could be forced to quarantine half the city simply because of advertisements that disrupt my game.
The problem with advertisements are that, by nature, they want your attention. Chrysler isn't going to pay EA money to put advertisements into a game that will never be seen. They want return on their investment, they want their product to gain recognition. They don't want an obscure reference on a poster under a trashcan hidden in an alleyway between two buildings on an island you can only reach after stealing the helicopter. They want obvious, well placed advertisements where they can be seen. If avoiding them is a piece of cake, Chrysler isn't happy.
Additionally, advertising companies aren't likely to care about how their work influences the game, only in how much mindshare and revenue they can get for the price. Anything to increase those numbers will make them happy, even if it turns Grand Theft Auto into Grand Theft Advertising.
I encourage you to look at and respond to more of the points I made in my previous rant. You haven't really addressed most of them, and seem to be nitpicking rather than responding. I can understand that it's a long rant, but if you don't want to put the effort in to respond to it in full, I would suggest that you simply don't respond.
I like the mock advertisements because often they are funny and entertaining. Anything that adds to my gaming experience is a good thing.
It is true that no advertisements force us to buy anything, so obviously our aggression towards them can not be that watching those millions of car commercials on TV forces us to buy cars. What then offends those of us who are disturbed by advertisements in our video games?
The problem is not that advertisments can not fit in a game. As noted many times, certain genres of games actually benefit from them. Sports games attempting to be as realistic as possible benefit from having sponsors like Coke, Nike or Fujifilm. While my preference is with joke companies such as "Nuclear Dentures" and "Chunky Soda", I can see that true advertisements in these places can actually benefit the game experience and the gamer.
The problem is that like many things I don't see this being left at that. While there are many other useful and beneficial applications of advertisements in games, neither I nor anyone else who is concerned about this believe those are where advertising in games will stop. There may be a way to integrate Coke into WoW, or Ferraris into Zelda, but I doubt it will benefit the world or the gamer. Barring perfection, such juxtapositions will destroy an otherwise cohesive and engaging world.
We have a complete lack of faith in the restraint of advertising companies because they have only rarely shown any. There was a day where the internet didn't have banner ads, popups, popunders, cookies etc. When each of these features came to be added to the internet, they were not in any way bad things. Banner ads supported websites that otherwise couldn't function, and at the same time were not intrusive because there was only one. Popups originally were simply used to pop up new windows, or to pop up a window for an advertisement you did click on. However, the internet now is a slimy morass of marketing.
How many times on Slashdot have we seen complaints about how submitted articles were drawn out to 12+ pages when they could have been a mere 2 simply for the sake of subjecting us to the 5 banners, 2 sidebars and 3 popups 10 additional times? At the same time, we have critiques of said websites noting how completely uninformative said articles are. The summary of all this being that on the internet today we receive largely inferior products while at the same time being subjected to incredible amounts of advertising.
Now we don't pay these websites to do their spiel, it's free. We pay a service provider to give us access to the internet, but that money goes to the provider and not the internet. The same goes for most TV. We pay for cable, but that money goes to the cable company. We can't complain too much because we aren't paying them anything and they have to make their money somehow. (Overly simplified here to be sure)
The problem with video games is that we are paying them. We're going to be paying them $60 or more for next generation games. When we walk into a store and browse the cover of the game, it tells us great things like "Multiplayer Mayhem!" and "Hi Definition Experience!" It will never say "For full access to things this same exact game on seperate consoles has by default you must pay us another $40 in microtransactions" or "We offset the cost of making this game by filling it with advertisements". Unless you're an extremely tech-savvy person paying hideous amounts of attention to the industry you aren't going to be aware of any of that until after you've already parted with your money.
That is what offends us. It is the degredation of the gaming experience for the sake of providing better margins for gaming companies. Perhaps were it Capcom, Nintendo, Rockstar or some other big name we know makes quality games that pushed for this I wouldn't feel so uneasy. I'd have some level of hope they knew what they were doing, and it wasn't going to destroy the hobby I love. Unfortunately they aren't the ones championing this. In fact, t
I'll give you a point for capitalizing on a overly general statement. Let me respond by assuring you that I will give you a million dollars. Unfortunately I can't give you an estimate on when at this time. But rest assured that at any moment, I could appear on your doorstep with a million dollars in hand.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree, there's plenty of market.
EVE is an excellently designed MMORPG, it does what it sets out to do very well and executes like a well oiled machine. It is very hard to argue that EVE does what it sets out to do poorly in any way.
However, that doesn't mean that because it is a beautiful and well executed Sci-Fi MMORPG there can't be another. Not everyone enjoys the hyper-capitalism and severe risks of the game. Those aren't flaws of the game, but features that can turn around certain kinds of people. They may still want a Sci-Fi MMORPG, a position EVE can not fill for them.
There's plenty of room for everyone.
... to finish what I was going to say before I accidentally hit submit... ...but your point is lost in a poorly executed proof.
I beg to differ, here is your opening statement from the post I replied to.
Your point appears to be that a/0 is not infinity but undefined.
Shortly thereafter you supply the following proof.
In logic and in math, if the premises and steps of a proof are correct and lead to the conclusion, it is an undeniably correct proof. Your proof, in the case that the premise 1/0 == inf is a true premise, is not correct because one of your steps is flawed. This I pointed out in my previous post.
Attacking the premise of a proof whose conclusion follows from the premises and correct steps is the only way to defeat such a proof. However, the issue I have with this is that your initial proof was obviously meant to support your assertion that 1/0 =/= inf. It was meant to show that because you could prove that 1 == 0 with the assumption 1/0 == inf, that 1/0 == inf could not be a true premise otherwise all of Mathematics would be wrong. The problem is your proof is wrong for a completely different reason, namely the bad step you took.
Because of your mistake, your proof doesn't prove what you intended. That's not to say you proved the opposite, but
Actually, your proof is wrong.vStarting with 1/0 == inf...
1 / 0 == inf
0 * 1 / 0 = inf * 0
0 / 0 == 0
0 == 0
It can also be resolved this way.
1 / 0 == inf
0 * 1 / 0 = inf * 0
0 * inf == 0
0 == 0
By skipping steps, you made the erroneous assumption that 0/0 == 1.
I highly doubt we'll be losing high profile characters such as Ness. At the moment the only characters confirmed to be dropped are the Ice Climbers, Mr. Game and Watch, and Young Link. While forums relating to the game are rife with threads claiming everyone from Captain Falcon to Luigi and characters already revealed will be axed, it seems unlikely with a planned roster of 40 combatants that we'll lose anyone as important as Ness.
The characters we've actually seen are probably the ones which are complete. I highly doubt with only a half year to go they wouldn't have prototypes for most if not all of the remaining characters. For all we know the movesets are finished, they're just waiting on art resources (or vice versa, or even a mix of both).
That's why I very much dislike both Microsoft and Sony when it comes to reporting their console numbers. Even assuming all 100 million PS2s last generation were only shipped once, there could be 20 million PS2s that haven't been bought. As you pointed out, there are any number of underhanded ways to bloat the number.
Nintendo's somewhat more honest, stating actual sales instead of shipped.
Even looking at sales we can't really get a good idea what the market share actually was. How many sold Xboxs and PS2s were to replace disk read errors, hard drive failures and other wear and tear? What about the extremely durable Gamecube?
I'm not going to claim that the PS2 wasn't dominant last generation or anything regarding where Nintendo or Microsoft stood, but the whole deal would have been a lot easier to understand if we could get better numbers from these companies.
It was, I was just confused as the summary on slashdot emphasized reaching 10 million first as opposed to 10 million before next year.
Yeah, Sony and Nintendo should get on that. Both of them have zero users of Xbox Live! ZERO! What's with that?
10 million consoles first? I thought their major claim was that they'd reach 10 million consoles by the end of the year. The article summary seems to have the importance of each backwards. That said, they've got less than a month left. It will be interesting to see how close they come.
That said, Nintendo also has a ways to go before they reach their 4 million projection. They haven't launched everywhere yet, but still have just shy of 3 million to go before they hit their mark.
In fact, it's hard to say if any of the three will actually make it. Maybe it's because this is the first console generation that I haven't declined into a rabid fanboy, maybe it's because I'm a sucker for mathematical analysis, or maybe it's just because I'm highly excitable, but I'm watching all this with great interest.
I can't wait for when 3 years from now we have a good idea how it all turns out (and also have that many more juicy games, mmm).
I am sorry to report that my next action was to post on Slashdot. As you were unable to express what my next action would be, I can not give you the million dollars.
Mine transgressions are arrayed before me, a terrible countenance of my crimes wherein no petition or pennance could redeem so corrupt a soul as mine. Surely there is no forgiveness for one such as I... ...what is this? Some visage descends from the hills proclaiming my salvation! It's.... it's... ...what the hell God? Why is a SatanicPuppy telling me to go and sin no more?
(The irony was too much for me, -1 Offtopic I think, but worth it)
Did someone give EA mod points, or was I really an idiot?
I heartily agree. Game companies should be moving away from loading screens as it is (to the best extent they can). To use them as billboards would only serve as an excuse to use sloppy code requiring an excessive number of loads.
In so far as ingame advertisements add to immersion and a feel of realism I can tolerate them. However, given that the adds mentioned in the article are "dynamic" I have severe doubts that they will be carefully chosen.
Does Take Two publish games of genres that might be defiled by attempts to throw in advertisements? I might have to take note and avoid them.
What is EA doing? Paying each football player to come into their motion capture studios to perfectly imitate the way each runs? Taking hi res photos of their faces to perfectly texture them?
There's a cost for HD games, and it isn't cheap. However, I think EA is calling sour grapes because companies like Capcom, Team Ninja and Square-Enix are able to make games that are stunning, fun, and wildly profitable while EA doesn't make the grade in any of those.
The sad truth of Spore is that it will be a great game, but in so being it will allow EA to continue their overbloated and inefficient methods.
My favorite parts were when he completely shot down the marketing drone standing next to him.
Marketer: "Blah blah blah marketing jargon blah blah blah battlerama blah blah"*
Jaffe: "What the #@%*& did you just say? I don't understand what you just said!"*
Priceless.
*Quotes paraphrased and not exact.
I'm afraid I was never given the honor. It's a long way from Boston.
Small world it is, I did a mix of Laurel Springs work through high school after my mom took up a job as a librarian to offset the coming costs of college for my sister. By that point my parents trusted we who were now getting close to adulthood with getting our work done on our own.
Your story reminds me of my family.
My siblings and I were taken out of public school for similar reasons. My older sister was coming home from 5th grade crying because of the things her peers were trying to get her to do. She didn't want a boyfriend, makeup, fancy clothes or the latest fads, she wanted to learn. I was ostracized for being different, for always wanting to answer questions, and for trying to learn more than the school curriculum said I should (got sent to the principle for signing my name in cursive before we officially learned cursive). My brother only did better because he was practicaly invisible, but that meant he didn't have friends for entirely different reasons.
My parents were Spock and McCoy. My dad was the stoic Math, Science and woodsmanship guy, while my mom taught English, History, and Art. There were plenty of other subjects they knew as well.
My homeschooling education wasn't perfect, nothing is. I could have applied myself better, my mom could have been more strict, we could have used more time with the other kids in the homeschooling group, but all of these are minor quibbles in an otherwise excellent education that let me graduate college with honors and get myself an interesting job that lets me sit at home with more money than I know what to do with.
There are schools in the public school system that are excellent, and there are parents who homeschool who do a very bad job. These example do not, however, validate generalizations that would indicated those are the only possible situations. There are also public schools that are horrendous wastes of money, and homeschoolers who do a great job of raising their kids in ways that promote critical thinking and not dogma.
I've written this post several times now attempting to reduce the previously monolithic rant. I think I need a lesson in terseness.
If I had the ability to dedicate my next fifty modpoints to a single comment, it would go to yours.
Fair enough.
It's fine that you disagree, if you personally don't mind that's you, and I'm me.
However, you still have failed to address most of my points, especially as regards to games that are not attempting realism.
Were you to see Budweiser cans strewn about Orgrimmar after the orcs had an exceptionally long party at the death of the false warchief, would you think that it detracts from the game?
You're missing the point.
The advertisements don't have to stop the game to detract from it. They don't have to force me to view them to have their impact on the game world.
If there's a billboard on a road in GTA, I'm willing to wager I'll see it a lot. Unless they hid the billboard down some alley I'll never visit, I'm going to encounter said billboard. When I encounter said billboard, I am going to see it and whatever message it contains is going not going to interrupt the game itself, but it will interfere with my playing of it. Said advertisement will reference something in the real world otherwise the company wouldn't have paid to put it there. It will try to sell me Coke or WoW, and will try to get me to think about things other than the game. Whether I'm attempting to complete a mission, or just freewheeling, this is going to jive with what I am trying to accomplish.
Now, I do have the option of avoiding that road. However, this now presents two problems. The first is that I have just roadblocked myself from a potentially important and vital road the circumvention thereof will cost me in terms of my ability to get around and complete iportant aspects of the game. The second is that now whenever I come anywhere near the road I must remember the billboard is there or else be subjected to it again, which is in and of itself a form of being subjected to it.
Assuming there are multiple billboards around which I wish to avoid, I could be forced to quarantine half the city simply because of advertisements that disrupt my game.
The problem with advertisements are that, by nature, they want your attention. Chrysler isn't going to pay EA money to put advertisements into a game that will never be seen. They want return on their investment, they want their product to gain recognition. They don't want an obscure reference on a poster under a trashcan hidden in an alleyway between two buildings on an island you can only reach after stealing the helicopter. They want obvious, well placed advertisements where they can be seen. If avoiding them is a piece of cake, Chrysler isn't happy.
Additionally, advertising companies aren't likely to care about how their work influences the game, only in how much mindshare and revenue they can get for the price. Anything to increase those numbers will make them happy, even if it turns Grand Theft Auto into Grand Theft Advertising.
I encourage you to look at and respond to more of the points I made in my previous rant. You haven't really addressed most of them, and seem to be nitpicking rather than responding. I can understand that it's a long rant, but if you don't want to put the effort in to respond to it in full, I would suggest that you simply don't respond.
I like the mock advertisements because often they are funny and entertaining. Anything that adds to my gaming experience is a good thing.
It is true that no advertisements force us to buy anything, so obviously our aggression towards them can not be that watching those millions of car commercials on TV forces us to buy cars. What then offends those of us who are disturbed by advertisements in our video games?
The problem is not that advertisments can not fit in a game. As noted many times, certain genres of games actually benefit from them. Sports games attempting to be as realistic as possible benefit from having sponsors like Coke, Nike or Fujifilm. While my preference is with joke companies such as "Nuclear Dentures" and "Chunky Soda", I can see that true advertisements in these places can actually benefit the game experience and the gamer.
The problem is that like many things I don't see this being left at that. While there are many other useful and beneficial applications of advertisements in games, neither I nor anyone else who is concerned about this believe those are where advertising in games will stop. There may be a way to integrate Coke into WoW, or Ferraris into Zelda, but I doubt it will benefit the world or the gamer. Barring perfection, such juxtapositions will destroy an otherwise cohesive and engaging world.
We have a complete lack of faith in the restraint of advertising companies because they have only rarely shown any. There was a day where the internet didn't have banner ads, popups, popunders, cookies etc. When each of these features came to be added to the internet, they were not in any way bad things. Banner ads supported websites that otherwise couldn't function, and at the same time were not intrusive because there was only one. Popups originally were simply used to pop up new windows, or to pop up a window for an advertisement you did click on. However, the internet now is a slimy morass of marketing.
How many times on Slashdot have we seen complaints about how submitted articles were drawn out to 12+ pages when they could have been a mere 2 simply for the sake of subjecting us to the 5 banners, 2 sidebars and 3 popups 10 additional times? At the same time, we have critiques of said websites noting how completely uninformative said articles are. The summary of all this being that on the internet today we receive largely inferior products while at the same time being subjected to incredible amounts of advertising.
Now we don't pay these websites to do their spiel, it's free. We pay a service provider to give us access to the internet, but that money goes to the provider and not the internet. The same goes for most TV. We pay for cable, but that money goes to the cable company. We can't complain too much because we aren't paying them anything and they have to make their money somehow. (Overly simplified here to be sure)
The problem with video games is that we are paying them. We're going to be paying them $60 or more for next generation games. When we walk into a store and browse the cover of the game, it tells us great things like "Multiplayer Mayhem!" and "Hi Definition Experience!" It will never say "For full access to things this same exact game on seperate consoles has by default you must pay us another $40 in microtransactions" or "We offset the cost of making this game by filling it with advertisements". Unless you're an extremely tech-savvy person paying hideous amounts of attention to the industry you aren't going to be aware of any of that until after you've already parted with your money.
That is what offends us. It is the degredation of the gaming experience for the sake of providing better margins for gaming companies. Perhaps were it Capcom, Nintendo, Rockstar or some other big name we know makes quality games that pushed for this I wouldn't feel so uneasy. I'd have some level of hope they knew what they were doing, and it wasn't going to destroy the hobby I love. Unfortunately they aren't the ones championing this. In fact, t
I'll give you a point for capitalizing on a overly general statement. Let me respond by assuring you that I will give you a million dollars. Unfortunately I can't give you an estimate on when at this time. But rest assured that at any moment, I could appear on your doorstep with a million dollars in hand.
The joy of the situation is that I both must and cannot give you a million dollars, as your prediction is simultaneously correct and incorrect.
Sophisms and paradoxes... so fun.