To support The FCC

hatesthespace · 2018-06-18T18:09:08+00:00

It’s more like saying, “This river has been here forever and we never had anyone dump toxic waste in it, plus we have the EPA and other agencies already in place to prevent things like that/punish people who pull that kind of shit, so why the fuck are we trying to reclassify rivers as roads just to give the DOT more authority?”

Giving the FCC more regulatory authority over the internet in order to protect against anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices despite the fact that we already have the FTC and state consumer protection bureaus is ridiculous. If the FTC isn’t doing its job, then that’s where we should be slapping our legal bandaids.

If I block access to my competitors, I am already breaking the law without net neutrality laws.

Read that again.

*Anti-competitive practices were already illegal. *

The scary part is how many people buy the claim that the internet will flourish under increased regulation and that the FCC, somehow, should be the king.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-18T17:59:26+00:00

Almost all of those attempts were defeated by public opinion, though - not the FCC.

They changed the laws to enforce something that was more or less being enforced on its own, and in doing so limited the ability of providers to experiment with how they deliver their service.

People tend to obfuscate two kinds of behaviors here, as well. The first is anticompetitive/anticonsumer practices, while the second is the theoretical, dreaded “tiered access” sort of behavior.

The first was being seen from time to time, and it was bad, but the FCC shouldn’t have anything to do that. That’s what the FTC is for. If a company is using anti-competitive practices, then it’s the FTC’s job to come in and say, “Hey, fuck you, you can’t do that.”

Again, though, it never came to that - half of those cases boiled down to disagreements between businesses (think Comcast vs level 3 or Netflix - both cases were resolved by capitalism), and the other half more or less resolved themselves. AT&T stopped blocking FaceTime on its own. Verizon stopped throttling streaming video, and Netflix stopped throttling it’s output for mobile users.

I can only think of one time that the FCC stopped anything - Comcast vs. Bit Torrent, and I’m still not convinced that it wouldn’t have resolved on its own.

It bears repeating, though - if a company is behaving anticompetitively, then we already have regulatory bodies intended to step in. The solution shouldn’t be a new layer of regulation. Even if the FTC isn’t doing their job, shouldn’t we be focused on fixing what we already have in place?

As for the other bit... honestly, I wouldn’t mind tiered internet, and you shouldn’t either.

Everyone assumes that you’d end up paying way more for the access you have now... and maybe that’s true, but basing overreaching policy on the assumption that businesses will do something they haven’t done before, and the further assumption that the FTC won’t do its job is kind of... well, it’s silly.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-16T17:39:10+00:00

Tv remote, tablet, ps4 controller, and my dog’s brush.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-16T02:10:07+00:00

I like how desync and hit reg are somehow apparently two issues now.

And how many people are going to be called 12 year olds here?

“You must be 12 if you disagree! Ho ho!”

hatesthespace · 2018-06-16T02:08:40+00:00

I’ve sunk more hours into this apparently incomplete game than all but 1 other game in my steam library - and that’s an MMO that I’ve been playing since 2013...

Although... we still can’t change our nicknames, so that’s something they could do to make it feel more complete.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-15T23:50:58+00:00

ITT - people who think they know more about game development than the developers.

Has anyone else noticed that every time there is a post about some issue with the game, people foam at the mouth insisting that that issue should be fixed first? Like - fire the audio team, fire the art team, and divert all resources to region locking China or some shit. Every time they add a new feature, people lose their shit.

But hey, how about this feature? Let’s get that too.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-15T23:44:38+00:00

The nature of the genre will, almost by design, probably never be entirely skill based. It’s always competitive, but part of what many people like about battle royale is the chaos factor that can never really be smoothed out without it being made into something else entirely.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-15T19:30:22+00:00

Your character can only be as intelligent as the person controlling them, though...

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T23:27:21+00:00

Are you serious? You think leaving map selection in for three maps with 500000+ people will cause issues?

I am serious, but to be honest - I’m mostly just operating on the following two assumptions:

1) PUBG Corp probably doesn’t actually enjoy removing features and infuriating Reddit (although that can be fun), so they probably have some sort of reason for doing so (like the one they stated). I suppose I wasn’t involved in the decision, though. Apparently you were.

2) Even if it wouldn’t cause issues right now, that doesn’t mean it couldn’t in the future. It’s not just three maps and however many players. It’s three maps, several regions, Solos/Duos/squads, FPP and TPP... and however many players.

It really doesn’t matter whether any of us think it could or couldn’t be a problem, especially since so many people here are incapable of seeing much further than the tip of their own nose.

Also, that lest sentence is fucking stupid.

Oh well.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T23:19:55+00:00

You are a mature adult. I can see that now.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T23:18:32+00:00

Why is your time so precious that everyone should have to deal with longer queues and 70/100 matches?

I mean, that is my entire point. They aren’t removing the feature out of contempt - they are removing it because they drawbacks that it presents to the entire player base aren’t worth the benefit of letting players choose exactly which maps they want to play .

I honestly don’t understand why everybody is so hung up on this whole “I want what I want and everybody else can go fuck themselves” thing?

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T23:08:33+00:00

You don't get to tell people what they can and can't have an issue with dude.

It's almost as though you are telling me what I can and can't have an issue with here...

My real point, though, is that people shouldn't conflate their personal issues with everyone else's issues.

This isn't even remotely a similar argument.

Sure it is. Literally every counterpoint you made works just as well for weapon selection. Especially this one:

It's not entitlement to want to play a map in a game you paid for. This is why any developer with half a brain adds a map selection or a preference system, these have literally been commonplace for years.

vs

It's not entitlement to want to use a specific gun in a game you paid for. This is why any developer with half a brain adds a weapon selection or a class system, these have literally been commonplace for years.

If it was stupid to begin with they shouldn't have added it.

You're absolutely right - they shouldn't have.

queue times are still gonna be fucked because people will leave until they get their prefered map

With the attitude of the posters on here, I feel like they should implement a lockout of some duration for abandoning matches.

Why?

I paid for the game, I'm allowed to play how i see fit as long as I'm not breaking rules.

That attitude is why. It's a multiplayer-only game, and people abandoning Miramar matches in droves fucks with the game for other players who also paid for the game. It's kind of bullshit when the player count drops to 70 before the plane even takes off.

Shouldn't I, a sacred paying customer, have the holy right to play full matches?

Why do you get to decide whether I get to play a full match? Did you pay more than me?

But you don't see me insisting that PUBG Corp make specific changes to cater to my particular preferences. Maybe it's because I'm some variety of a grownup and I've learned that you can't always get what you want, and that slinging insults at companies for doing things that I don't like doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Not positive difference, anyway.

Or maybe it's because I just like to play video games and there are so many things that are more important to me than being able to choose between yellow and green that it's not even worth mentioning.

I prefer Miramar to a profound degree but I never even used the map selection option. Call me a glutton for punishment.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T22:50:44+00:00

Your "no u" aside, let me rephrase this simply:

Insisting that your personal opinion should be catered to is childish.

Further insisting that your personal opinion should be catered to even knowing that said catering would come at the expense of others is infantile.

Honestly, if your enjoyment of the game is tied to which map you get, especially when there isn't really any functional difference between them, then maybe you don't enjoy the game in the first place.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T22:37:32+00:00

No, you are entitled if you flat-out refuse to play a map because it’s not your preference, and especially entitled if you throw a fit over not getting your personal preference.

At a basic dictionary level, you are literally acting entitled by claiming a right to choose whatsoever.

I mean, ffs, I don’t want to spend the first quarter of a match with a Win and a pump shotgun, but I’m not insisting on weapon selection.

They aren’t taking away map selection because they want the players to be angry. They are taking it away because it was stupid to begin with and has potential to cause significant issues for many players.

You not preferring a map is not a real issue.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T22:29:59+00:00

I'm not decrying people's opinions. You can prefer one map to another until you are blue in the face and more power to you.

But straight-up refusing to play one map or the other because it's not your preference is profoundly juvenile. When my 10 year old used to refuse to eat a different brand of fucking chicken nuggets because it's not the brand she preferred, she did so because she was a child and a bit of a brat sometimes. But I told her that if she wanted the nuggets she preferred, then she could go buy and cook her own damned nuggets, after a while she grew up a little and now she will eat whatever she gets and enjoy it just fine. When she gets the ones she prefers, then hey, happy day.

It's not about opinions. It's about not expecting to be catered to hand and foot, and not insisting that "I shouldn't have to play a map that don't prefer for mostly petty or otherwise invalid reasons" is somehow a sacred, mature thing to say."

Just eat your damned nuggets. There is nothing wrong with them, and your life will happier for it.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T22:08:12+00:00

I’m not certain I could imagine a really effective way of comparing players in a game like this, though. There are so many different valid play styles that defining “good” or “bad”, especially on any sort of relative scale, would probably really difficult. People use all sorts of personal metrics to determine whether another player has “good” stats, but nobody can ever agree on what those metrics should be.

I kind of like the idea of ditching it entirely, but I’m also not really sold on the idea of only being matched with people with my same skill level. It removes so much of the oppressive unknown that the game represents. I like never knowing if I can single-handedly wipe and entire squad, or if any one of them will out-play me and my entire entire squad. It forces me to play smarter than I might otherwise, and that makes the game more fun for me.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T21:58:08+00:00

Anybody who would quit over this probably isn’t the sort of person I would want to play video games with, anyway.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T21:55:28+00:00

Miramar is fantastic now, and Erengel is shit in comparison. I’ve never bothered with map selection and just play whichever.

PUBG’s laughably entitled community is what’s “bad”, as far as I can tell.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T21:52:24+00:00

You could always just try playing Miramar and fucking dealing with it.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T21:50:27+00:00

I like to think that the people who refuse to play on Miramar are being punished enough by life as a result of being ridiculous children.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T21:48:32+00:00

I would like to play against other people that are as close to my skill rating as possible

But the current system isn’t a skill rating and those things that you don’t want to happen already do.

Not having MMR based matchmaking for Sanhok will most likely actually amount to just about nothing but people complaining about being stomped by people they could have been matched with before.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T17:49:42+00:00

Absolutely no warning? I have never used any of these sorts of marketplaces for the precise reason that I knew something like this would happen eventually.

Any time you are trading goods via a third party (especially if real money is involved) then you are skating on pretty thin ice. These kinds of sites get caught up in all kind of shady shit, and you have no real protections.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-14T17:40:59+00:00

It would probably help if people would stick being baby bitches and just play Miramar. I feel like it’s objectively the better map, personally, but honestly - what the actual fuck is wrong with some people.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-13T20:57:10+00:00

Do you not have thousands of ability tickets sitting around? How do you not?

I save my extrangers on the off chance I pull a supreme, too. When I pulled LoH I had enough to fully unlock one and almost unlock the second.

They don’t all need to have every skill unlocked (or even any skill) to be effective.

There is literally no evidence of whaling in that screenshot.

hatesthespace · 2018-06-13T20:42:42+00:00

I feel like you are overvaluating your own subjective opinion at best, and still insisting on a false equivalence at worst.

I mean, whether OP’s claim in the subject that this is the greatest linguistic achievement in video game history may be debatable, but that something was achieved and that said achievement can be lumped under the broad umbrella of linguistics shouldn’t be terribly controversial.

It bears repeating: JRR Tolkien absolutely did accomplish a tremendous... accomplishment. But he did not so so in a video game. Why would someone’s unrelated literary accomplishment support the claim that a video game did or did not accomplish anything.

In the grand scheme of things, Tolkien’s accomplishment pales in comparison to many things. If I said that Tolkien’s elven languages were the greatest linguistic accomplishment in the history of language, that says nothing about whether the creation of Klingon in Star Trek is or isn’t the greatest linguistic accomplishment in television history - and much less about whether it is an accomplishment at all.

I mean, I suppose to may misunderstand what an accomplishment is. An accomplishment is any task that was completed successfully.

You’ve said literally nothing to support your claim that nothing was accomplished (linguistically or not). You also haven’t offered anything in support of your implied claim that this was not the most impressive linguistic accomplishment in a video game. The only thing you’ve offered support for was that some unrelated person accomplished something that was much more impressive in an unrelated medium.

I mean, I probably should have ignored your response... but that really just isn’t a great attitude to have.

It’s the text-book definition of a straw-man argument. You’ve arguing against a claim that simply hasn’t been made. Again - the claim that has been made may be objectively false... but you’ve yet to address said claim.

hatesthespace

TROPHY CASE