Limit Theory

[Lucian]

I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time and I was curious as to just how much of an ogre he could be. After joining I became interested in "Distant Worlds", which I ended up buying. Since then I have bought "Advanced Tactics" and "Command: Modern Air Naval Operations" so I guess you could say that Kayoz's infamy is indirectly responsible for at least 3 Matrix sales since without him I would never even have seen or known about this site.

During all that time I have very rarely seen him become unpleasant towards anyone who was not unpleasant to him first. The only exception - apparently - is Josh Parnell who ended up getting the full Kayoz treatment for no reason that I can easily see. Also, although he can be quite caustic and often gives far better than he gets, I have never seen Kayoz descend into outright abuse, even when seriously provoked by people who are very abusive towards him.

I originally came to this forum to fight a troll but I have since been convinced that Kayoz is no troll. He believes wholeheartedly in what he says and while the case could certainly be made that his arguments could be put across more tactfully and pleasantly, he is certainly not an abusive poster and to my knowledge there is no forum rule about being blunt, direct or calling a spade a spade. And worst of all, he might actually be right.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Lucian

I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time and I was curious as to just how much of an ogre he could be. After joining I became interested in "Distant Worlds", which I ended up buying. Since then I have bought "Advanced Tactics" and "Command: Modern Air Naval Operations" so I guess you could say that Kayoz's infamy is indirectly responsible for at least 3 Matrix sales since without him I would never even have seen or known about this site.

During all that time I have very rarely seen him become unpleasant towards anyone who was not unpleasant to him first. The only exception - apparently - is Josh Parnell who ended up getting the full Kayoz treatment for no reason that I can easily see. Also, although he can be quite caustic and often gives far better than he gets, I have never seen Kayoz descend into outright abuse, even when seriously provoked by people who are very abusive towards him.

I'm originally came to this forum to fight a troll but I have since been convinced that Kayoz is no troll. He believes wholeheartedly in what he says and while the case could certainly be made that his arguments could be put across more tactfully and pleasantly, he is certainly not an abusive poster and to my knowledge there is no forum rule about being blunt, direct or calling a spade a spade. And worst of all, he might actually be right.

warspite1

Let's be clear here.

a) I certainly have not called him a troll. He is not trolling, but he is being unnecessarily unpleasant - and has been warned of such by Matrix staff.

b)

Also, although he can be quite caustic and often gives far better than he gets, I have never seen Kayoz descend into outright abuse, even when seriously provoked by people who are very abusive towards him.

Please see post 153. I do not know what you believe Twat to mean, but believe me, its about as abusive as you can get without using another 4-letter word that means the same thing.

c)

During all that time I have very rarely seen him become unpleasant towards anyone who was not unpleasant to him first

Please see your post 69 (and his comments about you when you first arrived).....in addition to his treatment of Mr Parnell.

d)

there is no forum rule about being blunt, direct or calling a spade a spade.

I believe you are right - however do you think it is acceptable to come onto a forum and consistantly trash someone and their work? And I do not just mean say your stuff and leave, I mean consistent trashing. You think that's okay?

e)

And worst of all, he might actually be right.

You said it. Might. Always best to shoot first and ask question later eh?

[budd]

I think the Illuminati sent him.

[Zap]

You know this thread was forgotten. It was a year and a half since the last post. Then Miklos, you had to resurrect this? You are to blame[:D]

@ Budd, Yes, the illuminati.[:D]I will take Slaakman any day over the depressing character that continues to post here.[>:]

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Please see post 153. I do not know what you believe Twat to mean, but believe me, its about as abusive as you can get without using another 4-letter word that means the same thing.

Lol, point taken, he does have a tendency to over-retaliate. I'm not sure of the context of the conversation that inspired the quote but I'd be willing to bet that whoever he was responding to did some abusing of their own beforehand.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Please see your post 69 (and his comments about you when you first arrived).....in addition to his treatment of Mr Parnell.

Well if you examine the conversation you'll see that I wasn't exactly being the soul of pleasantness myself at the time. You'll notice though that neither of us resorted to outright abuse. With respect to his treatment of Josh, I admit that I'm at a loss to explain the source of the hostility there, possibly there's some history that neither of us know about. To my knowledge Josh has been nothing if not polite at all times, in fact I don't think I have ever seen a game dev actively defend themselves against such blatant public criticism. Kudos to Josh for handling it so well.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
I believe you are right - however do you think it is acceptable to come onto a forum and consistantly trash someone and their work? And I do not just mean say your stuff and leave, I mean consistent trashing. You think that's okay?

I don't think "acceptable" is the correct term. I certainly wouldn't behave that way myself but then I'm not him and I'm in no position to either accept or reject anything he does. A forum is composed of many people, all of whom see things differently and I think we should all be free to express our various viewpoints - however blunt and direct they might be - as long as no forum rules are broken. Of course that also means that you and I are completely free to criticize his comments and arguments to our hearts content.

I just completely disagree with Icemania's request to ban him for what amounts to the way he chooses to express his opinion. I may not agree with what he says, but I do feel compelled to defend his right to say it.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Lucian

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Please see post 153. I do not know what you believe Twat to mean, but believe me, its about as abusive as you can get without using another 4-letter word that means the same thing.

Lol, point taken, he does have a tendency to over-retaliate. I'm not sure of the context of the conversation that inspired the quote but I'd be willing to bet that whoever he was responding to did some abusing of their own beforehand.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Please see your post 69 (and his comments about you when you first arrived).....in addition to his treatment of Mr Parnell.

Well if you examine the conversation you'll see that I wasn't exactly being the soul of pleasantness myself at the time. You'll notice though that neither of us resorted to outright abuse. With respect to his treatment of Josh, I admit that I'm at a loss to explain the source of the hostility there, possibly there's some history that neither of us know about. To my knowledge Josh has been nothing if not polite at all times, in fact I don't think I have ever seen a game dev actively defend themselves against such blatant public criticism. Kudos to Josh for handling it so well.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
I believe you are right - however do you think it is acceptable to come onto a forum and consistantly trash someone and their work? And I do not just mean say your stuff and leave, I mean consistent trashing. You think that's okay?

I don't think "acceptable" is the correct term. I certainly wouldn't behave that way myself but then I'm not him and I'm in no position to either accept or reject anything he does. A forum is composed of many people, all of whom see things differently and I think we should all be free to express our various viewpoints - however blunt and direct they might be - as long as no forum rules are broken. Of course that also means that you and I are completely free to criticize his comments and arguments to our hearts content.

I just completely disagree with Icemania's request to ban him for what amounts to the way he chooses to express his opinion. I may not agree with what he says, but I do feel compelled to defend his right to say it.

warspite1

I just completely disagree with Icemania's request to ban him for what amounts to the way he chooses to express his opinion. I may not agree with what he says, but I do feel compelled to defend his right to say it.

I would agree I don't think I have seen anything in this thread to warrant that.

But as I said, my beef with him stems from the fact that I have been on the side of the fence that Mr Parnell sits on - albeit as an unpaid Beta tester with a passion for a project and not as a developer himself - and to have someone constantly bitching and moaning adds nothing to a project that people are working hard on, and just brings everyone down.

But I've had my say and frankly I'll leave him to this thread where he can continue to bitch and moan and state that he knows everything about everything to his little heart's content bless him.

[rhondabrwn]

I thought that Matrix had a policy against use of their forums to attack non-Matrix games, publishers, or services. I know I've seen warnings when discussions got heated about Paradox and Steam as an example. I noticed a statement by Lucien that "I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time".

I don't think this is the kind of notoriety that Matrix/Slitherine wish to see.

Like politics, maybe this thread would be more appropriate to see over at Mad Cow's Steakhouse forums instead.

Just my opinion, but I suspect I'm not alone.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

I thought that Matrix had a policy against use of their forums to attack non-Matrix games, publishers, or services. I know I've seen warnings when discussions got heated about Paradox and Steam as an example. I noticed a statement by Lucien that "I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time".

I don't think this is the kind of notoriety that Matrix/Slitherine wish to see.

Like politics, maybe this thread would be more appropriate to see over at Mad Cow's Steakhouse forums instead.

Just my opinion, but I suspect I'm not alone.

Whether you are alone or not, I for one would strongly disagree with you. This is NOT politics or religion, it is a game thread in a game forum and I honestly cant think of a more appropriate place for it. The only difference is that one of the posters here has been openly critical of the particular game dev who has been good enough to respond personally and defend himself (quite well in my opinion) against what many prospective customers would consider valid questions about his experience and ability to meet his commitments.

I think that most LT customers and backers who may have doubts and read this thread would come away reassured that Josh knows exactly what he's doing and will be able to deliver what he promised. That's something they wouldn't have if the thread didn't exist and is 100% game related.

[rhondabrwn]

ORIGINAL: Lucian

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

I thought that Matrix had a policy against use of their forums to attack non-Matrix games, publishers, or services. I know I've seen warnings when discussions got heated about Paradox and Steam as an example. I noticed a statement by Lucien that "I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time".

I don't think this is the kind of notoriety that Matrix/Slitherine wish to see.

Like politics, maybe this thread would be more appropriate to see over at Mad Cow's Steakhouse forums instead.

Just my opinion, but I suspect I'm not alone.

Whether you are alone or not, I for one would strongly disagree with you. This is NOT politics or religion, it is a game thread in a game forum and I honestly cant think of a more appropriate place for it. The only difference is that one of the posters here has been openly critical of the particular game dev who has been good enough to respond personally and defend himself (quite well in my opinion) against what many prospective customers would consider valid questions about his experience and ability to meet his commitments.

I think that most LT customers and backers who may have doubts and read this thread would come away reassured that Josh knows exactly what he's doing and will be able to deliver what he promised. That's something they wouldn't have if the thread didn't exist and is 100% game related.

It is a MATRIX game forum and we didn't used to be about beating up on Indie developers or Matrix competitors. If that is no longer the policy, then have at it everybody.

I have nothing more to say.

[Lucian]

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

It is a MATRIX game forum and we didn't used to be about beating up on Indie developers or Matrix competitors. If that is no longer the policy, then have at it everybody.

I have nothing more to say.

I'm not sure if you actually bothered to read the thread but it contains a good deal of useful information from the developer of Limit Theory himself in response to the criticism he received.

The information he gives is quite well-argued and reassuring to anyone in doubt who might be considering purchasing his game. Just because many people don't voice criticisms on public forums doesn't mean that they don't have worries or concerns that they would like to see addressed.

If Matrix were to muzzle any form of criticism, then all we would end up with is a lot of doubt and silence. Josh has been good enough to step in and address many of those doubts and I can only see that as a good thing, both for him and his potential customers.

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

ORIGINAL: Lucian

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

I thought that Matrix had a policy against use of their forums to attack non-Matrix games, publishers, or services. I know I've seen warnings when discussions got heated about Paradox and Steam as an example. I noticed a statement by Lucien that "I actually joined the Matrix forums because I heard on another forum that there was this Matrix guy who was giving the Limit Theory dev an unnecessarily hard time".

I don't think this is the kind of notoriety that Matrix/Slitherine wish to see.

Like politics, maybe this thread would be more appropriate to see over at Mad Cow's Steakhouse forums instead.

Just my opinion, but I suspect I'm not alone.

Whether you are alone or not, I for one would strongly disagree with you. This is NOT politics or religion, it is a game thread in a game forum and I honestly cant think of a more appropriate place for it. The only difference is that one of the posters here has been openly critical of the particular game dev who has been good enough to respond personally and defend himself (quite well in my opinion) against what many prospective customers would consider valid questions about his experience and ability to meet his commitments.

I think that most LT customers and backers who may have doubts and read this thread would come away reassured that Josh knows exactly what he's doing and will be able to deliver what he promised. That's something they wouldn't have if the thread didn't exist and is 100% game related.

It is a MATRIX game forum and we didn't used to be about beating up on Indie developers or Matrix competitors. If that is no longer the policy, then have at it everybody.

I have nothing more to say.

I do believe there is a difference between "bashing" and "constructive critisism". But, most don't know the difference and if you say anything bad about one of their game companies or games they take offense and start flaming. Take of course Paradox games. Now I don't really see them as wargames as much as strategy games in the times of wargames and such. Some take offense to that when they aren't called wargames. Bashing? or just merely a constructive critisism of the types of games they make?

I think we can all see the "good" and "bad" in most all games and they all have it. Some are just more specific about one or the other. I play CKII religiously, does that make me a Paradox lover? fan? what? I just like CKII. I on the other hand detest HOI. Does that make me a hater? desenter? troll? lol But, in all honesty I do not see CKII as a wargame. So, in that light I feel Paradox makes strategy games and Matrixgames makes wargames. Of course not all of their library are wargames as we know but the "majority" are.

Now I'm not arguing with you or disputing any of your words. I have great respect for you and several others here, including "Wodin" hehe But, of course we are all like family here, a group of siblings with various opinions and ideas. I try not to get involved in flaming wars anymore either. But, I still like to read the threads and posts and make up a few of my own. I've just pretty much learned to ignore the trolls and still get involved in the threads and posts. [:)]

I'd hate to see you leave the thread or forum because someone got under your skin though. [:(]

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

No, why don't you spend less time looking up big words and more time understanding simple facts.

No, I'm not using "big words". This is how I normally write and how I normally speak. Please be so kind as not to try to use your limited vocabulary as an excuse to try to force me to lower my manner of writing to your level.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
They are not out of pocket in the sense that you are trying to marry it to.

I quoted the dictionary definition, which is consistent with the way I've used "out of pocket". If you have issue with the declared definition of the word, take up your concerns with the publishers of the dictionary.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
What MWIF is, is irrelevant as it was brought up only because of the similarities with LT

We can't continue this aspect of the discussion till you answer the question I asked quite explicitly.

That you refuse to answer it is a very good indication of just how disingenuous you are and how weak your whole reference is. 'nuff said. Answer the question.

ORIGINAL: warspite1
When MWIF was underdevelopment, people like you, were

Must I say this again? It wasn't me. I don't know what MIWF is. I had nothing to do with any dispute on its forums. And since you refuse to identify what the heck it is, I have no means of assessing the accuracy of your claims.

Once again, you're dodging the question and asserting statements as fact that can't be verified.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I've been here longer than Josh. He came here (Matrix forums) and pandered his game - I was already here.

Yep, that comment shows a mental age of about 10. Next.

No, it's merely a question of the order of events. I didn't "come here to slaughter" his game. I was already here. I didn't "come here to" do anything, any more than your presence in your own home is an indication of having "come there" to cause trouble.

Check your grammar. The implication that my presence here is to denigrate his game is not supported by the record.

Or better yet, following your own suggestion - get a 10-year old to check your grammar. I think you could benefit from the critique.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Schadenfreude

I know exactly what it means thank-you. You could always take your multiple conflating statements and shove them somewhere?

No confusion here at all.

You referred to my statement on a slow-motion traffic accident. That's schadenfreude. Once again, I strongly advise you to actually look up the definition of schadenfreude before spouting any more nonsense. You clearly don't know what it means.

[Icemania]

ORIGINAL: Lucian

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Please see post 153. I do not know what you believe Twat to mean, but believe me, its about as abusive as you can get without using another 4-letter word that means the same thing.

Lol, point taken, he does have a tendency to over-retaliate. I'm not sure of the context of the conversation that inspired the quote but I'd be willing to bet that whoever he was responding to did some abusing of their own

I just completely disagree with Icemania's request to ban him for what amounts to the way he chooses to express his opinion. I may not agree with what he says, but I do feel compelled to defend his right to say it.

I was the recipient of much of the abuse in Post 153. The fact is that at no stage was I abusive either initially or in response, despite a tirade of repeated abuse. There is a pattern here beyond my conflict with Kayoz, and he's been warned more than once as well.

I share some of Kayoz's concern on LT and fully agree he can express that. That is not an issue. I posted because once again he was abusive and I'm appalled to see that it is being tolerated.

[VPaulus]

OK, I will lock this thread for now.
Some people here don't know how to be civil.