Difference between revisions of "Talk:FATALReviewRebuttal"
(JhmxoxTTq) |
(→2020: new section) |
||
| (15 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | =2005= | |
| + | Hoo, yuck. | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is a resurrection of a copy of Hall and "Burnout"s rebuttal to MacLennan & Sartin's review of their precious "game". Actually I suspect it's a copy of it, which makes the formatting look even worse... lots of blockquotes and special margin tweaks involved. I didn't remove those because 1) it might detract from how they specifically wanted it to look, and 2) it would have been even ''more'' of a pain in the ass. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Of course, I didn't put in any comments of my own, except strictly editorial stuff. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Here is a good place to put those comments on the text, assuming you don't want it to go too far. If you want extensive discussion, it might be better to start a thread on RPOpen. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Have ''loads'' of fun with this..... --[[User:Knockwood|Lord Knockwood the Mad]] 04:39, 18 Jun 2005 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Reading part of this shows two things: | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1: That Hall and his fanboi friend are like most other people - they've taken their position and refuse to budge, preventing any rational discussion and turning it into an exchange of insults. (their rebuttals amounts to "no, you") | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2: That Hall and his fanboi friend are also probably brain-damaged. They show absolutely no signs of knowing what humor and sarcasm are while making several patently absurd arguments and throwing accusations everywhere. - Oddsod {{Unsigned|24.176.86.200|01:01, 19 June 2005}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Joke is on us? == | ||
| + | I downloaded the FATAL "sample" last night, thinking that the stuff mentioned in the review was hyperbole and satire and was shocked to find that...well, it actually is in the book. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Going over this in my head for a few hours, I came to the conclusion that this whole thing ''has'' to be a joke. A gag, a put-on, a prank. Seriously, has anyone inquired into this line of thought before?--[[User:Illuminarch|Mike]] 17:31, 31 Jul 2005 (PDT) | ||
| + | :If that's the case, Byron Hall and Burnout are the greatest trolls in the world, hands down. (insert self-aggrandizing claim about their troll bandits having survived to the Twelfth Echelon of Plundering, Both Literal and Figurative) [http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/User:Kalir Kalir] 16:25, 4 August 2009 (PDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | =2010= | ||
| + | == Simple Point == | ||
| + | I understand their desire to include every horror imaginable on Earth for "completeness" and "realism", but it's one thing to use rape/abuse/racism as a story-telling mechanic to display suffering and tragedy, and it's another to include a ruleset in order to exploit and benefit from these acts. Yes, rape/abuse/racism occurs and it is real and horrible, but enabling a player to do it doesn't promote any sort of freedom or completeness. Thoughts? [[Special:Contributions/66.212.163.146|66.212.163.146]] 22:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Enabling a player to do something doesn't promote freedom? Sounds like BS to me. The more options players have, the more freedom they have. [[User:Tyciol|Tyciol]] ([[User talk:Tyciol|talk]]) 22:29, 7 July 2014 (PDT) | ||
| + | ::I don't think that's what they meant… [[Special:Contributions/24.150.34.173|24.150.34.173]] 18:28, 3 December 2019 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | =2016= | ||
| + | ==Wayback== | ||
| + | http://tinyurl.com/FatalReviewRebuttal could also be useful, it was archived in June, August and November. I guess it was posted April 10 and removed April 13 that might not help though. But it shows the URL was being passed around, at least. [[Special:Contributions/184.145.18.50|184.145.18.50]] 21:05, 24 February 2016 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | =2019= | ||
| + | ==RPG.net link== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The original RPG.net review has a new link: https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/14/14567.phtml | ||
| + | No need for the Wayback version anymore! [[Special:Contributions/24.150.34.173|24.150.34.173]] 18:28, 3 December 2019 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == 2020 == | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===I only just found out about this game=== | ||
| + | If you ask me, [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=7ixhxjqoe9swz1xv4bxgw5h0 this TVTropes forum thread]] has been more educational to me on this game than any review (Wraith_Magus' posts especially thoroughly tear into the system). Byron Hall must be a hack in his own class to devise something so filthy, convoluted, blatantly offensive and ill-thought-out. Worse yet, he tries to pass himself off as an educated man but he has no fucking idea how to defend his work other than playing tennis with the things other people say. He must've been the kind of guy even old-school nerds wouldn't hang around in school. The kind of kid who read Witchblade thinking it was the greatest gift to art since the Mona Lisa. However, since it's been over 15 years, I hope (against hope) that he has matured and if he ever looks back on the horror he wrought, it's in shame.[[Special:Contributions/189.95.17.94|189.95.17.94]] 11:36, 30 June 2020 (PDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 11:44, 30 June 2020
Contents
2005[edit]
Hoo, yuck.
This is a resurrection of a copy of Hall and "Burnout"s rebuttal to MacLennan & Sartin's review of their precious "game". Actually I suspect it's a copy of it, which makes the formatting look even worse... lots of blockquotes and special margin tweaks involved. I didn't remove those because 1) it might detract from how they specifically wanted it to look, and 2) it would have been even more of a pain in the ass.
Of course, I didn't put in any comments of my own, except strictly editorial stuff.
Here is a good place to put those comments on the text, assuming you don't want it to go too far. If you want extensive discussion, it might be better to start a thread on RPOpen.
Have loads of fun with this..... --Lord Knockwood the Mad 04:39, 18 Jun 2005 (PDT)
Reading part of this shows two things:
1: That Hall and his fanboi friend are like most other people - they've taken their position and refuse to budge, preventing any rational discussion and turning it into an exchange of insults. (their rebuttals amounts to "no, you")
2: That Hall and his fanboi friend are also probably brain-damaged. They show absolutely no signs of knowing what humor and sarcasm are while making several patently absurd arguments and throwing accusations everywhere. - Oddsod —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.86.200 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 19 June 2005Please use four (4) tildes (~~~~) to date & sign your post in the future!
Joke is on us?[edit]
I downloaded the FATAL "sample" last night, thinking that the stuff mentioned in the review was hyperbole and satire and was shocked to find that...well, it actually is in the book.
Going over this in my head for a few hours, I came to the conclusion that this whole thing has to be a joke. A gag, a put-on, a prank. Seriously, has anyone inquired into this line of thought before?--Mike 17:31, 31 Jul 2005 (PDT)
- If that's the case, Byron Hall and Burnout are the greatest trolls in the world, hands down. (insert self-aggrandizing claim about their troll bandits having survived to the Twelfth Echelon of Plundering, Both Literal and Figurative) Kalir 16:25, 4 August 2009 (PDT)
2010[edit]
Simple Point[edit]
I understand their desire to include every horror imaginable on Earth for "completeness" and "realism", but it's one thing to use rape/abuse/racism as a story-telling mechanic to display suffering and tragedy, and it's another to include a ruleset in order to exploit and benefit from these acts. Yes, rape/abuse/racism occurs and it is real and horrible, but enabling a player to do it doesn't promote any sort of freedom or completeness. Thoughts? 66.212.163.146 22:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Enabling a player to do something doesn't promote freedom? Sounds like BS to me. The more options players have, the more freedom they have. Tyciol (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2014 (PDT)
- I don't think that's what they meant… 24.150.34.173 18:28, 3 December 2019 (PST)
2016[edit]
Wayback[edit]
http://tinyurl.com/FatalReviewRebuttal could also be useful, it was archived in June, August and November. I guess it was posted April 10 and removed April 13 that might not help though. But it shows the URL was being passed around, at least. 184.145.18.50 21:05, 24 February 2016 (PST)
2019[edit]
RPG.net link[edit]
The original RPG.net review has a new link: https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/14/14567.phtml No need for the Wayback version anymore! 24.150.34.173 18:28, 3 December 2019 (PST)
2020[edit]
I only just found out about this game[edit]
If you ask me, [this TVTropes forum thread] has been more educational to me on this game than any review (Wraith_Magus' posts especially thoroughly tear into the system). Byron Hall must be a hack in his own class to devise something so filthy, convoluted, blatantly offensive and ill-thought-out. Worse yet, he tries to pass himself off as an educated man but he has no fucking idea how to defend his work other than playing tennis with the things other people say. He must've been the kind of guy even old-school nerds wouldn't hang around in school. The kind of kid who read Witchblade thinking it was the greatest gift to art since the Mona Lisa. However, since it's been over 15 years, I hope (against hope) that he has matured and if he ever looks back on the horror he wrought, it's in shame.189.95.17.94 11:36, 30 June 2020 (PDT)
