These forums are poison

... child stereotype confirmed

Bad games have bad communities, nothing new here.

I try to only read the forums once a week just to see what the latest sentiments are. The rest of the time I only look at official responses.

The average perception of reality is pretty heavily skewed one way or another. Often on the same front page of the "what's new" page you'll see people say that infantry, tanks, and aircraft are overpowered. Zergs are too common and that there are aren't enough people in the game, and that a particular weapon is simultaneously underpowered, fine as is, as overpowered.

Obviously not all these sentiments can be true on the whole, but from the particular vantage points they appear to be true.

Yeah these forums are horrible, the worst I have posted on. But really I think it's more of the changing nature of the games and the players that play them. More players...more casuals...more whining...more entitlement. Then also a lot more companies are creating games and doing **** jobs at it because it seems to be more about making money than actually making a great game that the player base enjoys these days.

But really...back in '05 I don't remember forums on any game I played being so tainted.

I find it funny, one of, if not the, most whiny people on these forums talking about how they are poison. Please, do us all a favor and leave.

Decency in the gaming world seemed to stop after the fifth generation of gamers. Sixth generation onwards is a cesspool of children crapping their pants.

If I were to use this quote and compare it to Dota 2, that would be like you saying that games that take a high amount of skill and a very well balanced games are bad. Which I would completely disagree with. However, if you would say that in reference to recent CoD games, then I would agree with you. Due to that game not taking much skill nor is it a well balanced game.

Here's some of the great threads started by Pat:

Armored warfare is virtually destroyed in PS2.
Bravo SOE, you finally managed to kill off TR!
Who's more OP, VS or NC?
SolTech, same crap different day
Logged in, everything broken
[Suggestion] TR, do yourselves a favor. Ditch the prowler and cert a lightning.
Played with A2A last night for the first time. So cheap.

So long, we'll miss you.

I mean a dude who started a thread, in January, before any of the Vehicle nerfs, to declare the Prowler was the worst MBT, obviously has a lot of great, objective, and constructive views that will sorely be missed.

His contribution of making 30 posts a day about how OP NC is, and how bad TR gets it, despite the fact TR, averaged out, makes more Score an Hour than any other faction, is something that the community will just have to learn to live without.

The old saying "Physician, heal thyself" comes to mind.

Video games are sand boxes, do what you think is fun and the game will always be entertaining. PS buy a Phoenix I'll invite you to Phoenix squad

Since when did basic human decency and respect become a hand-holding hippy love fest?

I'd have to argue that CoD games are much more reasonably balanced than PS2. Everyone has access to the same weapons, upgrades, perks, etc. Once they are of level to attain them of course, PS2 is not built like that. CoD games are well balanced from the perspective that there is real parity between players and that nothing can be purchased which will grant any kind of advantage to the person doing the purchasing.

None of that is the case in PS2, not to mention that level progression is steady and fun in CoD, it doesn't take prohibitively long hours of gameplay to hit max rank, or even to prestige from there. PS2's gameplay progression system is extremely slow and monotonous, driven by a need to gain revenue from purchasable items and the fact that progressing without subscribing is next to pointless.

At least in CoD, I can pay 60 bucks per year to get a full AAA title in which everything that is required for me to compete comes straight out of the box with no additional charge. With PS2, you could spend the value of a year's worth of GOOD titles while only unlocking a small percentage of what the game has to offer.

Sorry to rant, but when someone makes the claim that this 4 month old, terribly optimized and terribly maintained and balanced game is "better" than games that repeatedly deliver a AAA experience while attracting a massive audience numbering in the millions of diverse gamers, without trying to suck a small % of their audience for as many post-release dollars as they can, I have to laugh. If SOE thought this game even had a small chance to compete with the likes of CoD or BF, they wouldn't have released it as a bare bones F2P cash grab.

Haha , or when you get a "love note" from a mod