{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Editado por zNapSack:
11/30/2017 4:12:43 AM
1
I don't know. Hence my edit. They should have clarified what they meant if they intended it to mean a new layer of complexity for example. That said, I still believe that is what they meant. If not then it may have been an auto-correct error, a typo, or they need a better copy editor.
English
-
and yet, there are other people in this thread, who are defending the professionalism of IGN in its writing procedures... While I would honestly like to believe that it was one of the things you mentioned, I just can't get around the notion that the blunder was made because of stupidity, rather than accident. Anyway, in my opinion, the issue isn't that there is a grammatical error in the post, it's that the post even exists as it does in the first place. Gaming outlets have a right to flame games ONLY if they are proven to be worthy of being flamed. But, we are talking about an upcoming dlc. CoO isn't even out yet, and we already have this kind of derogatory content marring its reputation.
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 4:39:43 AM[quote]we are talking about an upcoming dlc. CoO isn't even out yet, and we already have this kind of derogatory content marring its reputation.[/quote] Good point. And I agree a game or DLC that has yet to be released shouldn't be judged by reviewers such as IGN for example, prior to its release. It's why embargoes exist. A YouTuber on the other hand can say anything they want since they're not a professional news source, per se.
-
embargoes, are a point i referenced in some other comment i responded to... we have only been told by the people who know what they are talking about (the people who were invited to Bungie), what they are able to tell us. (did that make sense?) likewise, we have only been shown/ allowed to see a small portion of what the update entails. For example; the comments about having two strikes retooled as single player story missions, instead of having "actual" story missions, is a load of bollocks. Bungie clearly stated in their second (and I gues final CoO reveal stream) that the strike idea was something they came up with after they had hashed out the CoO story. the strikes "are not implemented in place of 'story content,' but were added on afterwards so that solo players could better experience the world of Destiny" or words to that effect. (feel free to like the actual quote if you feel the need) point being, parts of the IGN article are straight wrong, and based on things that we haven't even seen or heard about other than that they exist in the first place.
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 4:54:54 AMPerhaps that is due, at least in part, by what the author claimed to be their source of information. That being the YouTube video Slayerage made. So in essence, the IGN writer was simply parroting (and agreeing with) what he said in his video. And that's not journalism. Btw, I've always found IGN to be a reasonable source of information but this was simply a repeat of what the writer watched on YouTube after they were informed about it. At least that's the impression I had when reading it. In either case, it's still a matter of opinion and whose opinion one trusts more. The issue being one has to pay money to verify said opinions. At which time they may agree and feel they wasted their money or disagree and be glad they spent it.
-
Um.. Slayerage was never referenced in the article. In fact, the main issue I have with the article is that it references exactly 0 people by name who have actually played the dlc. it literally has no reference at all to sources other than to say "according to the people who played the story..." which doesn't mean anything in the context of a review. For all we know, they only watched the first video they saw about CoO, and that video might have been by someone like angryjoe or something silly... XD
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 4:58:19 AMI thought he mentioned him. If not, my bad. I know a post here did and also linked to the article. That may be the source of my confusion. I'm often easily confused. ;)
-
no worries, and yeah that was me XD I quoted having watched Slayerage, Arreks (Arakks/ Arrakks? ffs I need to look up his name...) perspectives on the CoO. While the article has no mention of actual sources for its information.
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 5:05:03 AMYes, I went and looked again. He said, "According to impressions from those who completed the campaign in Curse of Osiris, there's not a whole lot there." The point being, the author had not yet played it, yet reviewed it so to speak.
-
exactly, it's sooo intentionally ambiguous and makes no mention to quotes from the players who have actually played CoO.
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 5:13:03 AMIndeed, as you said so yourself... [quote]The only people who can reliably tell us what they think of CoO are the individuals like Slayerage, who have actually played it through first hand.[/quote] Excellent point btw. I frequently deal with people who think they know far more than they do simply because they watched a lot of YouTube videos or have a 'friend' who knows and told them what they needed to 'know'. And they're often the most difficult to explain things to.
-
Case and Point. A pleasure speaking to a fellow human for once, rather than the apes who generally populate forums :D
-
Editado por zNapSack: 11/30/2017 5:21:03 AMLikewise, I was going to send you a PM saying as much but this will serve as well or better (If anyone bothers to read it.) ie: 'How to have a reasonable and intelligent conversation - 101' ;)
-
We'll just be an example of what forums could be if people weren't so caught up with being toxic to each other. Anyways, as I said; t'was a pleasure :)
-
[quote]We'll just be an example of what forums could be[/quote] Scary thought! ;)
-
sad but true ;)
