Grand Theft Auto V

Users who are viewing this thread

Well I tried several times and the parachute wasn't there. My dude would assume the freefall posture, but the parachute wouldn't open. I can't tell you any more than that. :neutral:
 
Ringwraith #5 said:
See, that's something I just don't get. I never understood why some people derive fun from ruining other people's efforts and making them angry. If it's someone who wronged me, sure, I get that. That's revenge. But trolling some random dude on the internet that I've never even met? I just don't see the point.

It's less deliberate trolling and more me doing whatever it takes to win the race. If it pisses people off to the point in swearing in foreign on the mic, then that's a happy side effect.

Never understood why people are so against full-contact races. If you're trying to overtake that insurgent in a motorbike, then you should expect to get rammed off the road if you are almost scraping the side of it.
 
Um, except for the fact that there aren't any races that involve both motorbikes and insurgents. I think it's pretty obvious why people are against ramming. It's the the tool of a cretin, which the cretin uses to sabotage the better player. You're skilled. You get a perfect turbo start, you ace the first few corners, and you're leading the pack. A sharp turn is coming up. At this point you have two options:

Option A, you brake for the corner and take the ideal line to keep your lead. The cretin behind you, not knowing how to drive, piles right into the back of you and sends you (and possibly himself) off the track. You're now last, and you have to battle your way up through about a dozen cretins to get back in the lead. Which you can't, because as soon as you pass one, you're once again in front of a cretin and you're going to get rammed off the track again at the next corner. You have now lost the race.

Option B, you take the corner wide, knowing that there are cretins behind you aiming to ram you. In this case you get passed by half the pack and rammed by the other half anyway, because they're cretins who don't know how to drive and they're taking the corner wide even though they don't need to because they're at the back of the pack with nobody behind them. You're now last, etc., etc., you have now lost the race.

It's a no-win situation. Skill is completely irrelevant in standard races, victory is determined purely by whether you happen to come out of a collision better than the person who collided with you and whether the people ahead of you happen to ram each other out of your way or into your way. Or to put it another way, there's a very good reason why in real motorsport intentionally ramming other racers gets you disqualified.

As for people getting mad about it over voice chat, yeah, that is pretty pathetic, I'll give you that. The correct response is to host your own races and set them to non-contact, thereby depriving the cretins of their only tool and assuring easy victory.
 
There are races with bikes and insurgents. Offroad races. As for ramming being the "tool of a cretin", that's a pile of crap. If it's a contact race, then you should be prepared for collisions. It's not an unfair advantage or anything like that, it's just another obstacle that everyone needs to look out for. If I'm the only one who actually weaponises it, it's not my fault.
 
I already explained it in as simple and easy to digest English as I could muster. I'm not going to repeat myself. Feel free to keep re-reading that post until it gets through. If you have any actual rebuttals to the points I made, please, share. "No it isn't" doesn't cut it, I'm afraid.
 
You just didn't read ringwraith's post properly. Read it again. Read it every day. Pin it up on your wall and digest its wisdom, then come back in a year once you realise that ringwraith was objectively 100% right, as usual, and you were fundamentally, pitifully wrong before you even began typing.

For such is the law of Other Games.
 
K-64 said:
So I give a proper response, and you're only reply is "no u"? Nice. Real nice.
The problem with your response is that it is refuted by the points you posted it in response to. Learn elementary logic, that's all I have to say about that. What you're doing is the conversational equivalent of ramming. I very carefully lay out my argument and you think you refute it just by saying "everyone can ram so it's fair". I'm sorry, but that doesn't refute the point I made. I already addressed that in the very post you responded to.

I said I wouldn't repeat myself, but I see I have no choice. Very well, I will spell it out. Again. Yes, it would be fair if there were only two people in the face. You get rammed and passed, you ram and pass to get back where you were. There's an equilibrium. But most of the time there aren't only two people, there's anywhere from five to fifteen. Therefore, being rammed means you lose about ten places. Ramming means you (maybe) gain one place, then immediately lose it again when you get rammed by the cretin you just passed at the next corner. Being rammed is unavoidable and it means you've lost, and no amount of subsequent ramming on your part will reverse that and assure victory (in contrast to skilled driving, which is the only determining factor in non-contact races without traffic). Now do you get it? If you answer no or continue to argue using stupid, already refuted points, I'm going to assume you're either really unable to understand it or trolling, in either case there will be no point in continuing to talk to you.
 
So you're saying I have to adhere to some ridiculous code of honour or something even if it's a full-contact race? And you call me stupid?

Let's put it this way: I'm not using exploits, bugs or injecting scripts into the game to give me an unfair advantage over everyone else. I'm doing something that's perfectly within the bounds of the game. Anyone can do it, anyone can also avoid it if they're skilled enough. It's a ****ing competetive mode, no way am I going to be all "Ooh, you go first m'dear" if someone tries to overtake me. No, I'm going to show that ****er that I am going to do what it takes to stay ahead of the game because that is what it takes.

Also as another point, stop trying to make yourself appear as a cool, rational debater. It doesn't fool anyone.
 
K-64 said:
So you're saying I have to adhere to some ridiculous code of honour or something even if it's a full-contact race? And you call me stupid?
Well gee, am I saying that? Maybe you should read my post and see if you can find an instance of me saying that. Go ahead, quote me where I said that. Oh, that's right, you can't. Because I didn't say that. That's it, this is the last straw. I tell you to not come up with stupid arguments and you vomit out a straw man the size of ****ing Godzilla. I don't even care if you're doing it on purpose or if you're just mentally incapable of comprehending plain English. Conversation's over.
 
So saying I'm a bad man for doing things perfectly within the confines of the game is not telling me that I'm doing something that's frowned upon by your holiness? News to me!

But sure, go pout.
 
K-64 said:
saying I'm a bad man for doing things perfectly within the confines of the game

I'm sorry, I just can't resist. Again, QUOTE ME WHERE I SAID THAT. I. Did. Not. Say. That. Learn to read plain English, I beg you!
 
Ringwraith #5 said:
It's the the tool of a cretin

So unless the definition of cretin has changed to mean "Wonderful person of great glory as befitting a wondrous being as K-64", I think that suffices. It's nice to have you beg for me though. Not enough people do that.
 
K-64 said:
Ringwraith #5 said:
It's the the tool of a cretin

So unless the definition of cretin has changed to mean "Wonderful person of great glory as befitting a wondrous being as K-64", I think that suffices. It's nice to have you beg for me though. Not enough people do that.

cre·tin
ˈkrētn/Submit
noun
noun: cretin; plural noun: cretins
1.
informaloffensive
a stupid person (used as a general term of abuse).
2.
MEDICINEdated
a person who is deformed and mentally handicapped because of congenital thyroid deficiency.

That's the definition of "cretin", you ****ing cretin. I don't see a word about the person's skill at video game racing anywhere in it. If you can find a reference for a definition of the word "cretin" that does include that... actually I'm not even going to bother finishing that sentence. Of course you can't find that, because that doesn't exist.

**** it. **** this. **** you. **** this forum and every single one of its braindead inhabitants. I try to teach you something you don't understand and I get scorn and ridicule for thanks. I don't ****ing need this in my life. I hereby declare that this account is a sockpuppet of Erwin, banned in 2008, who was a sockpuppet of Sordid Sinister, banned in 2007. Here's a bigger version of Erwin's avatar, drawn by me, to prove it.

pYQOxj1.jpg

Once again, **** you all. Especially you, mods. You banned me twice for things I didn't ****ing do, and I ****ing told you back then you can only ban an account, not a person. You laughed at me. Well here I ****ing am! I was ****ing right, so suck my cock. And you know what? I was actually really proud of being an upstanding member of the TW community who never received even a warning before I received that first unjustified ban. And as I'm sure you can tell from my record, I didn't really give a **** as Ringwraith. So in the end your inept attempts at moderating the forum had a completely opposite effect and transformed someone who was proud of being well-behaved into, well, me. So good ****ing job, you morons. Now you get to ban me for something I actually did do. I'm ****ing done.
 
Dodes said:
He was the hero Other Games deserved, but not the one we needed right now.

:lol:

EDIT: I like how he calls dupe account a sockpuppet. But I now know he's 31 and from Prague. I did know the Czech part but I thought he was 25ish. Interesting! Well, not particularly. Why was he banned the second time around? Anyone remember? Probably not.
 
Back
Top Bottom