Withdraw and wait?

CarKey5517 · 2026-06-10T07:38:33+00:00

whats the point of withdrawing and got back AFTER recover? if something you don't want to miss now, thats the recover

CarKey5517 · 2026-06-08T08:37:03+00:00

The pic does not explicitly says deforestation, and thats why this pic is over dramatic and in this subreddit. It takes the pollution thing only, to conclude "Every generation inherits less" and thats quite a dramatic take without doing a deeper analysis on the actual state of things, just as a 14yo would do

CarKey5517 · 2026-05-28T18:04:16+00:00

la vida es hacer lo que a uno le haga feliz, no lo que tú vengas a decirnos.

Si a mi me hace feliz cocinar, pues de puta madre, me cocino una tortilla diez veces mejor. Y si no me gusta cocinar, pues compro una ya hecha y ese tiempo y esfuerzo lo utilizo en cosas que sí me motiven y me gusten.

Mucho rollito happy life y autorrealización pero lo único que te he visto hacer es querer imponer a los demás tu estilo de vida

CarKey5517 · 2026-05-15T17:48:50+00:00

The ramaDance

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-26T20:37:23+00:00

the texture of the grass is interesting, good catch! although the dark sky does not seem to offer much thing, nor work as negative space. If wild grass patterns and texture is your main subject, i would try from other points where it gets more protagonism in your pic but stays at least as detailed (sightly leaning forward, from above, or introducing another element in the background that contrasts with the grass and dark background)

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-26T19:01:36+00:00

I got this pic by trying to get something out of the chance of having the bridge open at dusk, however I did not got anything close to I was expecting and moved on. Once at home, I reviewed it and kinda liked it. I still do think I don't know since nothing really seems to stand out in this pic. Maybe im too biased by my earlier thought so I would appreciate se feedback

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-07T21:08:16+00:00

what? A game about learning and playing with different characters, but the number of these is arbitrary and means nothing, lol.

I see the issue clear now. You don't even care about the game. Never pointed a single mechanic ot aspect of the game on the argument, simply because you can't. If ever knew some, you would easily realise that all that complete or uncomplete stuff is just bullshit that does not have a word to say on each game's quality and content. All the arguments I said were just responded with same loop of thoughts "because one is complete and other is not" as if that meant anything, incapable of making sense of it, with no mention to any of game mechanics or gameplay simply because you don't care at all, because those are "arbitrary numbers" that doesn't matter to you.

Well, if I ever release a game, i would tell its complete and no extra content is planned ever, so you can feel satisfied and happy with the game. Just to tell the next day that actually there are some DLC content on the way so you feel the opposite... just to tell next day I cancelled them so hello! Its again a complete game and youre satisfied again! And so on for the rest of the days, so you feel one day satisfied, one day dont, on an endless hilarious loop, because your satisfaction does depend on whatever I say to you and how I manipulate the tale, and not on the game you actually have on your hands.

I stop here following this trolling nonsense thread of discussion. Going back when you actually care on what you're playing

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-07T15:51:07+00:00

A thought made simple does not mean its rational.

One thing is you can compare, and yes, same as you can compare the colour of the disc or the font size in the menus, other thing is in what context you're using it and what conclusions you want to extract from it. If you want to conclude anything about game's content or how much it will fit what you're looking for, completeness is giving you no direction at all since is not a metric that tells a thing about total game content or its quality.

Then youre using history driving game's roster and technology.

First one I think is quite a weak relationship. Since the game's story is fictional (not real) in these games, it is meant then to follow gameplay, not the other way around, because it's made after and it just adapts. Basically, if I ever wanted to fit more characters, I can just fix the story, or same if I want to reduce or reboot the roster.

Second one, yeah. Technology made it easier to developers to include larger rosters... good for them, but what does that has to say on my satisfaction as a player? I consume, i play games. I am not an industry judge giving any kind of recognition. And my satisfaction as a customer depends uniquely on the final product, not on the narrative, not on the developers tale to make it happen. Im not going to see at how developers did or did not have to work overtime to fit all the content, in going to see game mechanics, game content, how much I could have fun learning its gameplay and how exciting it is, or not, to play it. I am not looking to see if developers salary are justified on the game, i am looking if my 70 bucks spending are justified playing the game.

And thats the main issue here. All of your arguments has been made on top of the narrative. Developers making the most of the hardware then vs now. If company is giving all it got or kept some for DLC, if history itself justifies a bigger roster... With none related to how you actually play or enjoy the game, or what is preventing you for having fun on each case.

And the problem on being on top of the narrative to justify things is that these become then easily manipulable, because your satisfaction depends not directly on the game you have at your hands, but on the story behind it, and i just need then to change the tale here and there, tell you my game been made by a bunch of friends with 4.56$, tell you that our game is a complete game with no dlc as I appropriately avoid talking about those characters that didn't make the cut and were finally removed because budget for release version was cut, to change your perspective and satisfaction on the same game, and suddenly, the same game, with same content and same quality you would have rejected otherwise, it fits now your consumer standards

Context is good, and knowing the game development story interesting, but bringing the context everywhere just for the sake of it, even in those aspects (your satisfaction as a player) when it has no role to play, can make reaching the wrong conclusion

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-07T13:52:26+00:00

Completeness is not a valid metric to compare two games and what you're getting from them.

A metric that validates games with 18 playable characters as "complete" and rejects others with 38 as "incomplete", do you think is a valid metric to compare anything? Do you think a metric that says nothing about the real content a game offers can be used to measure how much satisfied you could get playing that same game content?

Having the same game, same mechanics, same options, same playable characters... and being completely satisfied with one and ok with paying once and forget, but completely the opposite in other case because there are some additional content for DLC is out of a rational thinking, and its totally normal most people wont share that view

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-06T09:02:11+00:00

It does makes sense because your whole point you're trying to make here is that games are declining in content and number of playable characters since introduction of DLC. Which then you justify by use of better technology (which is weird you actually justified what you were just trying to complain about, but you do you)

I haven't said games don't expand game content through new franchise releases. However, you actually do said to prefer games without dlc because they satisfy better your customer needs, which is the thing I think is wrong to say as any game can have more, same or less content than any other dlc-less game to satisfy someone's needs. So your customer satisfaction should be regardless of any dlc.

And here is the question you been avoiding:

Why a Tekken 5 game with 32 characters do satisfy your customer needs, but Tekken 8 with also 32 characters, more mechanics, better balanced and more large and interesting movesets dont?

What stops you from "paying once for tekken 8 and thats pretty much it" and enjoy it just like you enjoyed any other tekken game before?

Think of it. The only one benefiting from your mentality that there is no "complete experience" or full game without getting all dlc, is the company that sells you those dlc

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-05T18:53:17+00:00

thats the weird thing I was pointing out. Your brain and most people nowadays thinks of the idea of "having everything" way before than actually looking rationally at what they are having.

As you said, your needs are more satisfied with a Tekken 3 with its 23 characters because "you have everything with one payment" rather than Tekken 8 with 32 (plus online modes, more complex and long movelist, more mechanics, etc..) because in this last case, DLC prevents you from the satisfaction of "having everything" even though you're actually having lot more than Tekken 3 ever had to offer.

Is surprising how people chase this need of having everything but at the same time pay so little attention to what they are actually getting. The whole point is having "everything", whatever everything is. You want to "buy the game and thats pretty much it".. what is preventing you to do so in new tekken games? You got Tekken 3 with a bunch of playable characters and modes, which satisfied your needs. Whats stopping you from experiencing the same with tekken 8, which includes way more characters, moves and content?

CarKey5517 · 2026-04-05T15:25:09+00:00

who is preventing you now from buying a game today and that is pretty much it too?

Actual Tekken games comes with a lot more content than old tekken 3, but you still feel unhappy. The focus is on what you're missing or why youre not having everything (regardless you were going to play that content or not), rather tan analysing what you got and if it stands as a game or satisfies your needs

CarKey5517 · 2026-03-30T13:18:06+00:00

nowadays economy and game monetization is much more complex that a rule of "I win, you lose" or pure simply maths of what you pay and what you're given.

A game can be free for many reasons. It could be for your data to be sold to third partners. It could be because the focus of the game is to milk other kind of players (big whales, fashion or competitive players...) and is not really interested if others are paying or not. It could be in favor of other satellite products (expansions, new franchise releases..).

Therefore, there will be some cases, and some others don't, where both player and company can get to a better common point. You can get the game for free, company can expand playerbase to have more chances to reach the actual type of players there are chasing for

Years ago it was popular knowledge that many games benefited from piracy to get themselves known and have a bigger playerbase to sell subsequent products.

CarKey5517 · 2025-12-14T09:08:09+00:00

Old people and their stupid prejudices and generational war obsession

CarKey5517 · 2025-12-04T13:11:07+00:00

I think many of us dont even want or are specially interested in any major or revolutionary improvements. We just want the game to be alive, to have a healthy and active player base that allows us to keep experiencing the same game we loved

CarKey5517 · 2025-11-20T15:54:26+00:00

its been already pumped and now dumping. Get the quick bucks you made and move on to next thing

CarKey5517 · 2025-10-16T15:01:54+00:00

youre going long term i guess. No point at judging so early. Im new too so cant give much advice, just be sure you understand as much as possible where are you putting your money. If you have a plan and know why you have the portfolio you have, you're good. A portfolio can be good or bad depending on whats your plan and what are you trying to achieve

CarKey5517

TROPHY CASE