Cliffs of Dover, a Year Later

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Chivas, those in glass houses should not throw bricks. You have the grammar and spelling capability of a 14 year old boy. Common sence really.

And I am being sarcastic. But comments like this are spiteful, no? And serve no purpose to the debate at hand. Addman is right.

Whilst I find you one of the more level-headed posters, Falstaff is correct: you do act as though you have some inside knowledge none of us are aware about. Did you support Tree's posts pre-release? If so I would have to bow down to your current 'knowledge' and assume it's correct; but otherwise history shows that you've got no credible background to substantiate your allegations. I don't think any of us do really: just lucky (fluke-ish on some level; realistic on others) guesses.

CloD isn't a maturing baby. It's a late birth infected with a curable host of illnesses. And you are no doctor; nor are any of us. But at the end of the day, the illnesses are currently unshakeable.

And that may sound harsher than I intend it to be, because I do believe the game will mature into something great: be it through add-ons or community service.

Falstaff entered the thread quoting me and throwing the first brick. He has to expect content in kind.

I've had many agruments with Tree and can't remember them all. He seems to be getting respect from people for stating the obvious. That the sim will be delayed. As far as I'm concerned Tree is the poster child for developers not to include the community in the development process as some people just don't understand the process. Even to the point of calling the developer "liars" when they were just explaining what the development was trying to achieve. The developer continually stated there were "No Promises" The other argument was over UBISOFT no longer being involved and I said that wasn't necessarily so, shown by UBISOFT publishing every combat flight sim built by the developer.

As for your comments about my grammar and spelling. When you get older you'll find that common sense isn't necessarily the domain of the educated. Common sense should have told you that I have no inside information, but have a followed the series closely since the start, and know from the developers past comments, what they are trying to achieve. Which could change at any time. Many people still believe that BOM will be built on a different game engine and COD will no longer be supported.

Taildragger...no, I think you're trying to be too clever and picking holes in an argument that isn't there. Ego? Like Hayward's?

No champion of natural justice or anything of the sort, nothing so grandiose.

Posters such as Hayward should get a little back of what they put out, it's as simple and silly as that.

Trying to impute anything more to it is wasted energy and isn't going to get the big argumentative response that perhaps you hope it will?

Ben

Chivas,

It's *almost* nice to see you getting a little riled, instead of maintaining that holier-than-thou-all-seeing-eye response, when in truth you know precious little, and certainly less about complex software dev than I do. And I dont claim to know squat about this dev process, other than the obvious.

Your stock 'patience-grasshopper' responses and, failing that, attempts at mockery, fall short. They are not you. Don't forget, I've seen your posts of ryears, here and in the other place, as you well know.

As an apologist for the dev process you do more harm than good.

Like the devs, you show precious little contrition, except when you feel it is expedient.

Ben

>>I've had many agruments with Tree and can't remember them all. He seems to be getting respect from people for stating the obvious.<<

No, he was merely stating what I and many others have often said, in varying strengths. Ib=n fact, I can think of several posters who were earlier and as if not more accurate than Tree.

>>That the sim will be delayed.<<

No, he and I and others have said much more than that, in much greater detail.

>>As far as I'm concerned Tree is the poster child for developers not to include the community in the development process as some people just don't understand the process. <<

So once again, what *do you* understand about the process, Chivas? You with the inside track, the day-to-day knowledge, the probabilities, the likelihoods? And what is your own (nascent) experience of day-today software devlopment, management, testing, mangement? I've had some and can explain if you like, though it is peripheral - what is yours, exactly?

>>Even to the point of calling the developer "liars" when they were just explaining what the development was trying to achieve.<<

You are simplying and conflating several different arguments. If you like, I can spread them out and go them through them individually. They do not add up singly or collectively. Swiping them all together does not help your cause.

If you're going to evangelise on behalf of the devs, at least put their position coherently, and that of the critics. You may fool some of the younger members, you wont have such luck with older ones with actual experience in that field. You dont know what the devs think or what they're doing. You yourself have said so.

In short, I think you're full of it.

Ben

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

Taildragger...no, I think you're trying to be too clever and picking holes in an argument that isn't there.

Actually, it appears that he found a huge hole right in the middle of your posts. It was pretty funny.

>>Actually, it appears that he found a huge hole right in the middle of your posts. It was pretty funny. <<

Really? Where? I think your cackle may be sounding a bit hollow. Desperation? The old nastiness trying to find a bed for the night?

Unlike you, I do not need a nod from the peanut gallery. Stand on your own two feet, son.

Ben

[Chivas]

Falstaff you obviously know very little about how complicated this development is, but the sad part is you don't have enough common sense to figure it out.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

>>Actually, it appears that he found a huge hole right in the middle of your posts. It was pretty funny. <<

Really? Where?

Read his posts.

Chivas said, again:

>>Falstaff you obviously know very little about how complicated this development is, <<

I have an idea. Would you like to discuss core run-times, memoring handling and paging, asset libraries, DLLs or equivalents, optimisation, de-bugging?

Which of the above? Or the work-flow? The goals? The short-term? The inter-linked parts? The bug-fixing, stripping, occasional assembler routines, graphics card sub--routines and calls, hot-fixes? Project management? Time-scales, Scaleability? Funding? Contract nuances and penalities?

Enlighten me.

Granted, I'm going back a bit since I was involved but I bet the underlying principles are the same.

You?

>>but the sad part is you don't have enough common sense to figure it out. <<

So tell me, what commonsense is required? What don't I understand? Where do the specific conundrums lie, Yoda?

You're floundering, and still full of it.

Ben

>>Read his posts. <<

I have. I'm still at a loss.

And you're still piggy-backing his posts, having apparently lost faith in your own.

Ben