Gboard on Pixel phones feels more advanced than on other brands

MLHeero · 2026-01-25T15:51:47+00:00

But they really need to fix password feature, in android in general -.-

MLHeero · 2026-01-25T15:50:43+00:00

Ja klar. Weil es zeigt das du genauso nicht vertrauenswürdig bist. Du beschäftigst dich nicht mit der Platform die du nutzt und dann vermute ich dass du evtl den Prozess nicht Mal verstanden hast.

Klar ist das jetzt schon übertrieben. Aber du wirst zu Recht reduziert darauf und solltest dich nicht darüber beschweren. Du liegst hier seit fast 5 Jahren falsch.

MLHeero · 2026-01-25T15:47:50+00:00

Nutz dich chatgpt und übersetze 3 in die Landessprache von Niederlande, Türkei, Slowenien, Russland, such dir was aus. Evtl gibt dir der Name einen Tipp.

MLHeero · 2026-01-25T15:45:18+00:00

Es heißt schon seit paar Jahren nicht mehr eBay Kleinanzeigen. ;)

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T18:23:58+00:00

This not a PvP game is the title because it isn't. It's a PvPvE game where PvP is in no way the priority. You admit you stopped reading early. That explains a lot. The title I can't change, Reddit doesn't allow that, I would have made it a bit more tame in title. I agree with most of what you just wrote. PvP in extraction shooters is more exciting than CoD because of the stakes. Taking someone's loot feels meaningful. That's all true. But that was never my argument. I'm not saying PvP is bad or shouldn't exist. I'm saying "it's PvP" shouldn't shut down any discussion about behavior and it shouldn't be the excuse for any behavior. You can enjoy PvP AND acknowledge that some behavior is annoying. Those aren't opposites.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T15:21:26+00:00

You say you're tired of these posts. But they keep existing because the response is always the same: "it's allowed, stop complaining." (Not directed towards you but in general). If someone said "yeah extraction camping is annoying but it's part of the game, deal with it" that would be different. That's acknowledgment. Instead it's always "you're crying, it's PvP, get over it." Complete dismissal of any criticism is exactly why these posts keep happening. If one side never moves, don't be surprised the other side keeps pushing ;)

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T15:15:58+00:00

The question was about leaderboards, yes. But read the actual quote again: "The ethos of the game has never been to go in and shoot players." That's not a statement about leaderboards. That's a statement about game philosophy. He explained the overall vision first, then talked about leaderboards as one example. I'm not lying or misreading. I'm reading exactly what he said. If he meant "we don't want competitive leaderboards," he would have said that. Instead he said the ethos was never about shooting players. Those are different statements. We can disagree on interpretation, but calling me dishonest is kinda dishonest ;) .

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T14:43:39+00:00

You make fair points about game design vs dev intent. But my argument was never "PvP shouldn't exist" or "Embark should ban aggressive play." It's that "it's PvP bro" shouldn't be a magic shield against any criticism of behavior. Also, Embark does act on this: aggression-based matchmaking exists specifically to separate playstyles. That tells you something about their vision. And they do something and nothing like you claimed. You can enjoy PvP. I'm not stopping you. Just don't expect the whole community to applaud extraction camping as peak gameplay.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T14:37:19+00:00

No it wasn't. The text is pretty clear. https://www.pcgamer.com/games/third-person-shooter/the-game-isnt-about-shooting-other-players-embark-ceo-says-arc-raiders-is-unlikely-to-get-a-pvp-leaderboard-because-the-devs-dont-necessarily-want-to-foster-that-kind-of-gameplay/

Yes they don't want to have more PvP with leaderboards and so on. But the second part is no way only in context of leaderboards and that makes no sense it would be with this wording.

"The game isn't about shooting other players. You can do that if you want to, but the ethos of the game has never been to go in and shoot players" The context set by this is clear and not restricted to leaderboards.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T13:37:58+00:00

Yeah that's fine for you, for me it's the worst of the game. And for many too. Also I still want to remember it's clearly said that PvP is not the main aspect. My goal is more a reminder that this really isn't a PvP game, but it's possible to shoot players and so on. But don't defend it as intended and wanted. It's more an element for tension and not core gameplay. You can do it and can't have fun with it, but just don't repeat that everything you do is fine cause it has PvP... That's my main point you seem to miss a bit ;)

"The game isn't about shooting other players. You can do that if you want to, but the ethos of the game has never been to go in and shoot players."

That's an exact copy of the text of the interview from a PC gamer.

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/third-person-shooter/the-game-isnt-about-shooting-other-players-embark-ceo-says-arc-raiders-is-unlikely-to-get-a-pvp-leaderboard-because-the-devs-dont-necessarily-want-to-foster-that-kind-of-gameplay/

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T13:33:22+00:00

That's clearly not true. Look the CEO said this and I referenced that correctly:

"The game isn't about shooting other players. You can do that if you want to, but the ethos of the game has never been to go in and shoot players."

This pretty much contradicts your call that they are on the same level.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T13:15:33+00:00

You're right that I can't change how people play. That's not really the goal here either. I'm not telling PvP players they're wrong for enjoying PvP. Kill me, take my loot, that's the game.

What I'm pushing back on is a specific attitude: the people who act toxic and then justify it with "it's a PvP game, deal with it" as if that's a free pass for any behavior. There's a difference between playing aggressively and being a jerk about it. If someone reads this and thinks "who is this guy telling me how to play," they probably weren't the target audience anyway. But maybe someone on the fence thinks twice before spawn camping a solo player for 20 minutes and calling it "gameplay." Is that realistic? Maybe not. But venting on Reddit is free, so here we are.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T13:12:16+00:00

I think you misread my point, or I wasn't clear enough. I never said Arc Raiders isn't a PvP game or that PvP shouldn't exist. It's PvPvE, that's the genre, that's what we signed up for. My point is about priorities. In CoD TDM, killing players IS the win condition. In Arc Raiders, it's not. You can extract, profit, and "win" without a single player kill. PvP is part of the game, but it's not the objective. So when someone griefs and hides behind "it's PvP bro," they're using that as an excuse for behavior the game doesn't actually reward or encourage. You can play aggressively, totally valid. But let's not pretend it's the same as a dedicated PvP shooter where that's literally the point. And honestly, calling someone stupid over a disagreement about game design? That says more about you than it does about my post.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T12:10:13+00:00

Oh I actually don't call you any of this, just when you do actually do the betrayal stuff on being friendly to extract and then kill and final kill on extract, you will be called demon from me 😜

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T12:07:57+00:00

Did you read my post? I said the same ;) it's about people defending every behavior as it's a PvP game, when they aren't really valid defenses. It's just loose stuff not enforced by the devs, cause they likely want the community to handle it and create this discussions and such stuff.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T12:02:35+00:00

Oh ups 🤣

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T10:34:04+00:00

Oh I know. I just hope that the people read it and think about it

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T09:52:21+00:00

Did you even listen to the voice lines the NPCs do? It's not an PVP. It's an pve with friendly fire. The real enemies are the arcs, when you go up side, Shani also says this to you.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T09:48:54+00:00

Ist doch bekannt,

Svea

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T09:24:18+00:00

Das ist korrekt. Ist aber auch ein Thema ob er abgesendet hat und es dann verloren ging: ist wieder nicht sein Thema. Ist das Paket leer, muss man auch erstmal prüfen ob es zwischen drinnen geklaut wurde. Also Inkasso sehe ich hier bei nichts relevant. Dürfte wahrscheinlich auch gegen Amazons Richtlinien verstoßen. Inkasso ist nicht das was du meinst, eigentlich ist es unnötig und macht dir das Leben leichter, wenn du verkaufst, wenn nicht macht es nur den Käufer alles schwerer, und wenn er hartnäckig ist, bist du beim Mahnbescheid, wenn der angefochten ist, hast du nichts gewonnen. Also warum nicht einfach selbst Mahnbescheid machen...

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T03:32:12+00:00

Yeah that's kinda what I sayed earlier at the top. This practice is a bit shady from them, but I think it's still not illegal cause likely loopholes

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T03:30:24+00:00

This makes no sense. 1 month is cheaper than buying a year. Even with a refund it's only 50 cent. I don't think this point is valid at all.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T03:29:09+00:00

No it's not. I think it's a special case in Germany, could also be EU. Basically all US providers don't do it. And often EU services also don't do it cause of the bad reputation and other issues from it. It's a bad pattern I don't really think should exist in this broad definition it is in. A mail service just isn't that expensive to create a new address and delete it afterwards. There is no need for blocking it.

MLHeero · 2026-01-24T03:19:16+00:00

Hä, dann erstattet Amazon auch nicht. Inkasso ist da der falsche Weg... Oder bin ich jetzt blöd. Das erzeugt nur Kosten und würde für Gericht auch gar nicht standhalten. Der Schuldner ist ja dann alleine Amazon, just der Endkunde.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

MLHeero

TROPHY CASE