Tazer or Flamethrower? Vote Please.

[Farley4Fan]

I went on to explain that I did accept the idea was not liked and that it may not be a great idea.  Again, all I was doing was pointing out that you are a hypocrite.  Stop acting like a douche.

And wtf is wrong with you?  Ignoring my post and focusing on meaningless things just so you can keep this pointless flame war going??  And I'm 12?  lol

[Spark Mandriller]

If you accept that it wasn't a good idea then why have you gone on for seven pages defending it?

Oh right because you can't accept that it's anything but a great idea. The only problems you can see are that it might be difficult to implement.

[Blank Man]

I likey him  :)

[VaNilla]

Right okay lets stop reasoning here and make this a bit more simple for you, your idea would look like shit, and really doesn't fit the kind of style people WANT to have on Project Stealth, accept it, I don't know why you keep defending this idea, it sucks to be frank and there's whole 7 pages about why we think so, don't you understand that?

By the way I really did reasons about why it would be bad for 'the lethal as hell mercenaries who would rather carry a tazer than a flamethrower'. I think anyone with some slight intelligence can work out a flamethrower is in a different league to a tazer. Tell me why your 'lethal as hell mercs' would take a flamethrower that they can't use effectively and does the same as a tazer does anyway.

I assume you made the poll to find out whether people wanted to include your idea, by a ratio of 8:1, we don't.

[AgentX_003]

Right okay lets stop reasoning here and make this a bit more simple for you, your idea would look like shit, and really doesn't fit the kind of style people WANT to have on Project Stealth, accept it, I don't know why you keep defending this idea, it sucks to be frank and there's whole 7 pages about why we think so, don't you understand that?

By the way I really did reasons about why it would be bad for 'the lethal as hell mercenaries who would rather carry a tazer than a flamethrower'. I think anyone with some slight intelligence can work out a flamethrower is in a different league to a tazer. Tell me why your 'lethal as hell mercs' would take a flamethrower that they can't use effectively and does the same as a tazer does anyway.

I assume you made the poll to find out whether people wanted to include your idea, by a ratio of 8:1, we don't.

even tho im for the tazer i will say this, merc's arent supposed to have concealed weapons, they are a matter of brute force, that spies should fear.

[Farley4Fan]

Right okay lets stop reasoning here and make this a bit more simple for you, your idea would look like shit, and really doesn't fit the kind of style people WANT to have on Project Stealth, accept it, I don't know why you keep defending this idea, it sucks to be frank and there's whole 7 pages about why we think so, don't you understand that?

By the way I really did reasons about why it would be bad for 'the lethal as hell mercenaries who would rather carry a tazer than a flamethrower'. I think anyone with some slight intelligence can work out a flamethrower is in a different league to a tazer. Tell me why your 'lethal as hell mercs' would take a flamethrower that they can't use effectively and does the same as a tazer does anyway.

I assume you made the poll to find out whether people wanted to include your idea, by a ratio of 8:1, we don't.

Reasoning?  You think that the last couple pages you've all been reasoning?  On the contrary, all I've gotten (mostly) are a bunch of one liners that don't do anything except show the inability to have a discussion.

Fucking joke.

No.  And I should rephrase.  The style doesn't change with a flamethrower.  It's just a visual difference.  The style can be the same.  Why would it look like shit?  It's not like I'M the one doing the animations and fire effects.  If those 2 things are impossible to do without looking bad, which they aren't, then screw this idea.  But why is it so friggin hard to imagine this?  Why does a flamethrower not fit MERCENARIES who come from an anonymous group of hired guns?  Is it really not plausible?  Sheesh.  Open your minds.  This little flamethrower gives more contrast between mercs and spies.  The little flamethrower gives more contrast between Chaos Theory and Project Stealth.  If Ubisoft continued to do SvM and replaced a dinky tazer with a bit more intimdating gadget (flamethrower) would you honestly be against it? 

I know the SvM atmosphere.  I know what it's like.  I've been playing in it for years.  It's really not that hard to imagine a narrow quick flame shooting from the merc's gun.  It's about as easy to imagine a bolt of lightning (current) erupting from it.  Or even a bit easier to imagine than a spy killing a merc by jumping on his head like mario.  My point is that the flamethrower I'm proposing (shouldn't even call it that) is much more believable than a lot of things in the game. 

For the record I'm not going to continue to argue for this for long.  It's useless, I know.  I am just starting to feel that people are thinking that this IS going to be Chaos Theory.  Even a slight and plausible VISUAL change for the mercs equipment is not welcome.  I haven't even gotten a reason WHY it would not fit, just countless complaints that it WOULD NOT fit.  How?  Friggin mystery.  Explain your case, don't just state your case.  This is how a discussion works.  We argue eachothers points.  That's impossible to do if I only get a bag full of opinions, right?  It's arguing opinion with opinion not points with points.  A circle.

[Farley4Fan]

I likey him  :)

I honestly thought you were him for a second there. ;)

[Spark Mandriller]

I haven't even gotten a reason WHY it would not fit, just countless complaints that it WOULD NOT fit.

No, that's just you pretending that the complaints don't exist.

Valid complaints:

1. The flamethrower wouldn't act like a flamethrower, it would act like a tazer. Since when have flamethrowers knocked people out?
2. Maps wouldn't burn. Last time I checked, fire burned things. Except your fire. Just because.
3. Security guards carrying flamethrowers is stupid. Wall mines are pushing it, but at least they could stop intruders. Flamethrowers? Useful, because the guards frequently need to run right up to people and set them on fire? What?


Your only response to these points has been to claim that games are games and therefore unrealistic, which isn't a counterargument at all. Stop dreaming that the world is different just because you love your idea too much to let it go.

[Farley4Fan]

I haven't even gotten a reason WHY it would not fit, just countless complaints that it WOULD NOT fit.

No, that's just you pretending that the complaints don't exist.

Valid complaints:

1. The flamethrower wouldn't act like a flamethrower, it would act like a tazer. Since when have flamethrowers knocked people out?
Ugh.  Realism.  Since when has elbowing someone in the shoulder, jumping on someone's head, or anything of the like knocked people out?  Just for the sake of realism, it could be explained like this:  The pain of being burned alive causes the spy to be knocked out after he puts the fire out.  People can pass out from pain or shock.  Happy now? 
2. Maps wouldn't burn. Last time I checked, fire burned things. Except your fire. Just because.
Who said maps wouldn't burn a little bit?  I don't remember anyone complaining about the LACK OF REALISM in games like GOW2 or halo when the maps didn't burn to a crisp everytime you set a flame to them.  Jeez.  It's already been said that it would be possible to make maps burn.  Not burn like burn the map down burn.  No, like a small ash mark and maybe a bit of tiny flames would dance around it.  Who cares?  This is a terrible argument, if you can even call it one.
3. Security guards carrying flamethrowers is stupid. Wall mines are pushing it, but at least they could stop intruders. Flamethrowers? Useful, because the guards frequently need to run right up to people and set them on fire? What?
So, why dont' you apply that same friggin logic to the tazer?  Dee dee dee....  Like the guards need to frequently run up to people and jolt them with electricity?  Terrible argument, again.  Wall mines are pushing it?  WHAT?  I've never heard of anyone complaining about the realism of wall mines.  Mainly because no one cares.  Period.  That's a flaw in your imagination.  This is not a sim.

And what's with the security guard crap?  They are a group of hired guns from a currently anonymous mercenary group.  Who's to say they don't like burnin bitches to a crisp?  They can be anything.  They shouldn't be cigar smokin' beer bellied hilly billies or robotic, but something in between.  That's a pretty big range.  And if a little type of flamethrow doesn't fit in there somewhere I don't know where to put it.

Notice how everything so far is different visually?  Just trying to suggest an alternative visual for the tazer weapon.


Your only response to these points has been to claim that games are games and therefore unrealistic, which isn't a counterargument at all. Stop dreaming that the world is different just because you love your idea too much to let it go.
What points?  Oh, you mean the bitchin and moanin about realistic crap?  Your biggest flaw is your imagination which for some reason doesn't let you imagine a random group of HIRED GUNS who carry flamethrowers (which are far different from your traditional flamethrower).  Yet you'll accept all the bogus in this game that would never ever be plausible.  Spies don't bring at least a knife or pistol to a mission with heavily armed mercenaries?  But then you'll say, "but that's their mission".  What if I say, "the mercenaries like to watch their enemies burn."?  The point is, the game is filled with things you'd look at and see that it would never happen.  Flamethrower possibly being one of them.  But who cares?  IT'S A G-A-M-E...

I'm done explaining it to you.  I do appreciate you posting in a more mature manner though.  Sorry for not returning the favor (maybe) in this last post.  :P

If we don't reach some kind of common ground in these next couple posts between us then I say we put it all behind us, I lock the thread, and we just get along for the rest of our discussions.   :)

[Spark Mandriller]

This game should have power swords. They're totally cool in Warhammer 40000 and they'd be totally cool here. Guards could like swords so they'd be suitable for this game.

[frvge]

Lightsaber-like swords have been considered, but the framerate was too low when you removed certain walls that were necessary for the structural support of the building. Building collapses eat FPS.

[Spark Mandriller]

It's alright, you couldn't destroy the walls in Jedi Academy either. Nobody complained about it there, so obviously it's fine to copy for PS.

On further thought, though, a power sword might be too deadly. Oh well, we can just make it knock people out when it hits them. It's alright, realism sucks anyway.

[Westfall]

this topic is still stupidly progressing. Papa, while the idea is interesting, it is still stupid, not classifiable in this game, and idiotically thought. What part of "doesn't fit the playstyle" do you not get? Maybe we should tell you it's awesome and PM the devs the exact opposite, because it's stupid.

Sorry man, but it's not worth it.

[VaNilla]

Papa, why do you think you get one liners. People had started off trying to explain but as soon as you start ignoring our points that generally goes out the window. Reasoning, I've tried with you. You don't seem to be able to accept valid points.

[Farley4Fan]

Let's review that shall we.  I JUST gave a valid response to Beetle.  What did I get?  A fucking one liner.  Why do I think I get nothing in return?  Because I don't.  Please.  Show me your points, stone.  I'm sure you and I would be able to have a better conversation than this new guy, hyper stag beetle. 

If you don't want to, I understand.  This thread needs to stop especially if everyone refuses to have a conversation.

I think I don't understand why you guys say it doesn't fit the playstyle.  Obviously.  It would be much appreciated if you would tell me HOW it doesn't.  Again, you can't just argue with opinions back in forth.  It's a circle.