I disagree with you, so you think I don't understand? If I understand then I will automatically agree with you. Is that what you're saying? That's ridiculous isn't it? I will say it again. I understand what you and others mean. I disagree with it because I think it's wrong and biased to blatantly ignore the good and only focusing on the bad.
Are you serious? No, I think you don't understand because of your earlier post about me contradicting myself and etc proved that you did not, in fact, understand. Someone who understood would not think I was contradicting myself when the context had already been laid multiple times before, and not just by me. It has nothing to do with you disagreeing with me, and you know it.
Do you think you can reasonably explain why ignoring and or not discussing the good when discussing the bad makes it "biased" and "wrong"? Why should anyone baby it? Does not
saying "oh the graphics look great" somehow make the statement "the game has problems" any less true because they didn't lay down a poem about the good beforehand? In what world does that make sense to you?
This line of thinking is flawed. TW nor any other fan should have to have to hear the good to hear the bad, and the fact that people cannot even stand to see that, is revealing. You can certainly be toxic and unfair about a video game, but it has nothing to do with only
providing what's wrong with the game.
What's so bad about being immature? People make mistakes from time to time. Does it insult you so much when someone points out you're being immature? You can't accept the idea that you might be wrong? I mean, you and many people here seem to think that making mistakes is a big no-no. Being incompetent warrants a lashing. What's what I meant by toxic. It's a very toxic way of living.
You're the one insulting people and accusing everyone of being immature, biased or toxic, so clearly you are aware of what's wrong about it, otherwise you wouldn't be calling them to show how annoyed you are with them, now would you? And are you really asking why I'd take issue with you not only generalizing me, but slinging those insults and accusations at me when I never done any of that? You can't be serious with this. This is just delusional or some severe trolling, I can't tell which yet.
I'm more than capable of admitting when or if I am wrong, and have done so numerous times before, so if I am wrong here it is up to you to prove
it. Simply throwing your accusations at me or others or waving your arms around shouting "that's unfair!" because it irks you how they are voicing their complaints, doesn't make it so.
I did that to emphasize that I'm not taking sides in this nonsense. If I only say bad stuff about the game you will think I'm on your side, and if I only say good things you will think I'm a TW simp. Simple fact is, I'm not. I bring both good and bad to the table. Thing is, merely bringing the good immediately means simping it in people's eyes. I mean, didn't you say it's impossible to know someone's intention the other day? Yet you assumed I'm playing semantic and taking TW's side? Come on...
I wouldn't think a thing of it, because I've seen really big fans talk **** and I've seen haters talk positive about the game a lot. And you can bring "both sides" to the table without excusing away TW, but that's not what you've done at all.
And please don't start with this, Grank. This isn't about assumptions and it is painfully obvious it isn't. You were playing semantics with me earlier and you know
it. Also, I never said you're taking TW's side. In fact in numerous discussions you and I have had across the forums, I've acknowledged this of you multiple times. I just said you keep excusing away a lot of what they have done. Those two things can co-exist, do you realize that, don't you? And yes, you are very clearly doing that [excusing away the bad], even if you cannot admit to that or see it. Because when someone brings up something bad and you jump in and say, "Oh, it's only this way because this" etc etc, that's excusing it away. How do you not see that?
Funny isn't it? How it's basically the same as what people are doing here. Because they feel the game is bad, they think it makes sense to act like that?
If you find your behavior funny, good for you?
And no it isn't "basically" the same thing. How does that even make sense to you? Pointing out bad development or problems with the game is not the same as what you're doing and I refuse to believe you don't understand that. It's all about how you feel about them and being upset that they are saying mean things about Bannerlord without coddling the things it does right. And justifying your dismissive, rude, generalizing and excusatory behavior because you think the people complaining are "all toxic" or "unfair" only leaves one impression behind for readers and it has nothing to do with these people you're hell bent on marking as "toxic".
It literally is, buddy. One of the biggest arguments here is that "I paid so much money and the game is not worth that much". If you only point out the bad while pushing that argument, it becomes unfair. If you want to be fair when assessing the worth of something, you need to mention both good and bad. Otherwise of course the verdict is going to be "not worth it". You're just adding minus without the plus.
I think you need to learn what "literally" means.
One does not have to provide the good to provide the bad, and the lack of doing so does not make one "toxic" or "unfair". Instead of repeating yourself over and over again about how they are this and that, try to logically explain the nonsense that one most coddle the game to criticize it, or otherwise be "toxic and unfair".
The reason why people aren't doing that is because if they actually include the good, they will find that Bannerlord is not that bad of a product. Their argument is proven wrong. It's not unplayable garbage. It's just a video game that's not as good as its hype.
First off, for it to be "proven wrong" there would need to be undeniable proof, and there's not, nor will there ever be. Because the quality of the game stems entirely off individual opinion, which varies significantly by person. What you find to be a "good game" is not what I will find to be a "good game". So to you, the few things BL does right, makes it good. But to others, the few things BL does right, does not overshadow the numerous things it does wrong.
Secondly, that's your opinion, which you've built off your own admissions of not really caring about it because you got your money's worth etc etc. You feeling a certain way doesn't mean it's true, though, and yet you've convinced yourself that because that's how you
see the game, everyone else must see it that way too or
otherwise they are just toxic jerks being completely unfair about the game.
But the game in question passes the bare minimum and that is it. Even it's own creator said as much before TWs had to do severe back pedaling. Most features are poorly implemented or serve no purpose, the AI is atrocious still, there are comical amounts of bugs, ton and tons of missing features, lifeless NPCs, broken mechanics, a dead and completely terrible MP, and far more. You can consider that a "good game", but others do not, but that difference does not make them "unfair" or "biased" or "toxic". That's just in your imagination. Unless you see people like MostBlunted, which even most people complaining about Bannerlord knows is nothing more than a toxic troll 90% of the time he's on the forums.
It's not even a video game that accurately reflects what it advertised itself to. You sit here and talk to people about how unfair and biased they are, yet you can say that with a straight face?
The fact of the matter is, you can disagree with how they talk about the game all you want, but that disagreement doesn't mean they are toxic or unfair because they don't abide to your
way of criticizing the game.