|
SomethingJones posted:There's a bit more to it than that, because Crytek built the early tech demos that were used in the kickstarter when Chris couldn't get publishers interested in the project. Bootcha exclusively and intentionally has given us blue balls awaiting the next chapter.
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 10:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:08 |
|
|
Ubik_Lives posted:Surely you can see how your defence of these two situations are completely different and contradictory? No 'Listen' and 'reveal' are both verbs for completely different actions therefore the adverb 'exclusive' works in conjunction with them to give you the meaning. The adverb tells you how the verb is happening. 'Exclusively listen' implies you listen exclusively to, at the exclusion of other things you could listen to 'Exclusively reveal' implies you have something exclusive to reveal, and with reveal being a verb that can mean to uncover or publish or show that implies that what is being revealed is therefore known only to you at the exclusion of others This isn't my opinion, this is how it works, I'm not defending it I'm doing my best to explain it. Adverbs and verbs, how the gently caress do they work
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:01
|
|
|
Abuminable posted:Bootcha exclusively and intentionally has given us blue balls awaiting the next chapter. Good god man I'm fully triggered enough already 'Fully' being the adverb there in case there's any confusion as to just how triggered I actually am discussing borderline illiteracy on the star citizen forum Release the video bootcha, release it How should you release it Release it proudly bootcha, proudly release it
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:04
|
|
|
grimcreaper posted:I feel like i need to explosively explain to everyone how i just taco belled my toilet and it hates me now. I heartily laughed at this, and seriously shitposted this response fully intentionally whilst completely naked
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:07
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:Good god man I'm fully triggered enough already Rush Limbaugh is the only person who can use Viagra: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:25
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:No "Exclusively [verb]" can mean different things given different contexts; the verb alone is not enough to decide the only possible interpretation. Let's say there is a machine capable of 3 actions: A, B, and C. If you set it to only do A instead of doing all of them, you could say the machine will now "exclusively do A" (exclusively meaning it will perform A to the exclusion of other actions). If there are 3 of those machines and you set them so only the first one will do A (but it will also still do B and C) you could also say that machine will "exclusively do A" to the exclusion of other machines. What you're saying about adding commas (i.e. instead saying "Machine, exclusively, will perform A") would not change the grammatical function of the adverb in that sentence as far as I can tell. "Exclusively" is an adverb either way, and is modifying the same verb either way. The commas would likely help in conversation, but not because of the grammatical nature of adverbs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:32
|
|
|
This is pretty boring but gives an idea of the current status, so many bug reports now from people not used to filing them that means a lot of duplication and crap/unfunny bug reports with few videos. 3.0 is hosed, npcs bug out, door/elevator issues, clipping issues, the inner thought system stops working, mobiglass gets stuck open, terrible FPS, very common bug of ships spawning without seats/weapons meaning you can't enter or use them, lots of issues with cargo, box placement, dropping etc. Struggling to think of one thing that actually works reliably. From a sample of the last 100 bugs there are a surprising number of people complaining about lighting issues with the ship HUD. EXPECTED RESULT Ship spawns with doors, elevators, functionality, etc. Filing an insurance claim due to a game bug / issue should not require paying and or waiting! NPC should not sit on invisible chair. NPC should stand up and walk away instead of vanishing. NPC should not get stuck behind obstacles and should not continue jogging in place over and over. I would expect a clearer view from the cockpit. I'd think that in the future, humans would be able to manufacture glass that can minimize glare... Normal keyboard functions. Dragonfly, or any ship, does not fall through floor, moon, or Levsky when powered on. Land on firm ground and not fall into abyss below Levsky. CPU usage in main menu should be relatively low. CPU usage in game should be dependant on the number of physics / AI calculations + game overhead. I am fully aware of the current issues of cargo being lost if disconnected but did not at all expect to lose the money I had just earned from a previous run that was over 15-20 minutes before server disconnect. To be able to open the closest airlock door, and not half to go to another door to open and run around. I should be able to set the flight recorder on the counter no crash  to fix broken ship guns If this area of the hangar is under construction applicable safety barriers and warning tape should be erected. players can see each other in the game visually payment for cargo to persist LOG IN. PLAY. Shouldn't have went through the ground ! :P Launch the game without crash. i guess character should sit in the Cockpit, right? mobiGlas closes when key is pressed Cockpit is designed like real world ones where glare is not an option for crucial instruments. This should play smoother. My ship should have been spawned and ready for racing. More realistic scenery where no direct starlight also does not create distracting illuminations by night. The pickable object should update it's state so that if it's dropped it should be able to be picked up again. Flash should not be so blinding and distracting when i park the ship correct, i want to come back to it and have it be in the same and enter-able position as before Firing missiles probably shouldn't kill you. Fix the problem of the door Enter the Hornet using the ladder Fly to Port Olisar without any incident. Expect spawned ship to have all components visible and functional. press button ride elevator have fun Salute in your pilots seat. when you press self destruct the ship should blow up as intended. Missile lock Inner-thought dialogs should appear as expected Load in to game and have a mouse cursor to interact with menus Ship STOPS when you stop it The cockpit should not be on fire when it spawns For a game in full screen mode to actually be full screen. Be able to purchase items for cargo run. For the sound to not be interrupted Hold F for inner Focus, select Place, Put Box down. to be able to select and wear different armour should be able to read the screen with less difficulty. Ship should spawn right side up HUD should not be so blurry Missile should only lock on when I tell it to, and should fire when i tell it to. cutlass too big since rework for small landing pads? Close the mobiglass
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:32
|
|
|
It's funny because the prevailing opinion of Star Citizen in the FS2 modding community is pretty much the same as it is here. Also he's the guy who wrote the tool used to port models into the game. Said tool is complete poo poo and it being poo poo is the driving force behind efforts to get the game to accept new file formats for models. Aesaar fucked around with this message at 11:36 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
I speak English exclusively I, exclusively, speak English
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:I speak English exclusively I didn't tell her to shitpost
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:39
|
|
|
Debating the meaning of exclusivity in the GLA feels useless. Regardless of the ruling on that point, filing an MTD is par for the course and I'd be surprised if a firm like Skadden would build a case around something as flimsy as that. They're asking for a jury trial, so if they're not bluffing we'll probably be seeing e-mail conversations and poo poo that would make Don Jr shake his head in disbelief. At least backer faith is restored for the time being, so the pledging can resume. EDIT: Hahaha, thanks for the new avatar, I guess!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:40
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:I speak English exclusively
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:40
|
|
|
SomethingJones posted:I speak English exclusively Star Citizen: Exclusive dose of Skadden-freude
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:41
|
|
|
Ultimately, the interpretation of this phrase is probably inconsequential. As someone else mentioned, it's more likely that the ambiguity of the phrasing in this section is being used as a battering ram to get this case in front of a court, where the truth about CIG's phony switch to lumberyard can be revealed in discovery and Crytek can draw their damages from there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:47
|
|
|
Also regarding the "lay people interpreting the contract" stuff, I once served on a jury regarding a contract dispute case where the judge basically told us "As a matter of law I've determined that the contract means [x]. You are here to decide factual issues surrounding this contract, not its meaning." This is not how such trials always play out by any means as far as I'm aware, but it can happen!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:47
|
|
|
 owns e: the real translation is I don't give a gently caress Truga fucked around with this message at 11:56 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:50
|
|
|
Star Citizen exclusively uses CryEngine Star Citizen, exclusively, uses CryEngine
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 11:55
|
|
|
Enchanted Hat posted:It's totally irrelevant to debate some kind of strict grammatical interpretation of how the exclusivity clause should be read (you are all wrong, by the way). Ubik_Lives posted:Then why does "I can exclusively reveal that Gail shares a birthday with Rod Stewart" work? Should it not be "I can, exclusively, reveal that Gail shares a birthday with Rod Stewart"? I hate myself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:00
|
|
|
The SC laughter well never seems to run dry. Here's to another year rich in amusement. With the court case we may get some of the best material yet. Also glad someone remembered the Chris-mas tree I made the year before 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:01
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Ultimately, the interpretation of this phrase is probably inconsequential. As someone else mentioned, it's more likely that the ambiguity of the phrasing in this section is being used as a battering ram to get this case in front of a court, where the truth about CIG's phony switch to lumberyard can be revealed in discovery and Crytek can draw their damages from there. I too hope so. I want it to come out that some original Cryengine code is still in the Star Engine, and it to be conclusively proved, that it couldn't have been introduced by Lumberyard because the logic knots CIG & Citizens will then use to justify it will be absolutely hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:01
|
|
|
Baxta posted:Is German your first language by any chance? I have actually had this discussion with native German speakers before as it seems exklusiv and ausschliessend can be used in the ways you are referring to. No, it's English. I'm just bemused by this. Both exclusive and exclusively have two meanings, with my reveal example coming from the Oxford Dictionary. With two definitions you'd have to look at the better fit. Or not, because we all know the English language has no issues with homonyms and stressing changing meaning. Then it became something of a weird brain teaser where people were saying the two definitions were the same, only they clearly resulted in different outcomes when you swapped the examples around, and their definitions for the "same" definition weren't universal and are clearly unique to each example. If someone were to say that you shouldn't use the "only source" definition of exclusivity in formal documents or whatever, I'd be cool with that. But instead I get "Nah mate, it just works the way I say it does, so how about you take these extra commas and give yourself a semi-colon?" I mean, we didn't even get into how different stressing changed the meaning. Taking an exclusive action approach, there's still a difference in meaning between: "exclusively embed CryEngine in The Game" "exclusively embed CryEngine in The Game" and "exclusively embed CryEngine in The Game" This isn't even changing the meaning of words, but the first line stresses that you must embed CryEngine into Star Citizen, i.e.; this game is a CryEngine exclusive. The second stresses that Star Citizen is the only game you can embed CryEngine into, i.e.; this CryEngine license is exclusive to Star Citizen and nothing else. The final one stresses that embedding CryEngine into the game comes at the exclusion of other engine embedding into games you might do, i.e.; this prohibits you from any other game development. It's like one of those lines where you can get seven meanings out of one sentence. Though to be fair to SomethingJones, this is totally what commas are for. English is crap and designed to make lawyers rich is what I'm saying. SomethingJones posted:'Listen' and 'reveal' are both verbs for completely different actions therefore the adverb 'exclusive' works in conjunction with them to give you the meaning. The adverb tells you how the verb is happening. So the word has two definitions and requires a contextual reading to derive the correct implied meaning? Ubik_Lives posted:exclusively I loving CALLED IT
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:05
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:That's not how a jury works at all. The lawyers argue to the judge, who then instructs the jury as to the correct legal meaning. Juries don't determine the law, or interpret the law, they only deliver the verdict to be reached from the legal facts. OK, I'm wrong on that point. I have no idea how a jury trial works other than what I've seen in films.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
Ramadu posted:anime owns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_f2p9rICs (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:39
|
|
|
Crytek intentionally let CIG mess up the contract so Crytek can exclusively gently caress CIG
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
Anything new over the night are we exclusively arguing about exclusivity?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:45
|
|
|
Indy game Starsector indicated that it might get an update in 2018, which is a hilarous contrast with Star Citizen because it's been in development much longer with no budget and every update has delivered an almost entirely new game that's extremely fun to play. Not all early access goes to poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 12:50
|
|
|
Imagine beeing a judge...
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
AP posted:EXPECTED RESULT Beautiful. Have high fidelity post... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:08
|
|
|
Speak like Yoda, CIG must, if confusing the courts, exclusively they want to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:09
|
|
|
tuo posted:Imagine beeing a judge... Imagine beeing Ben.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:12
|
|
|
please don't bee people
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
i'm the chamoix leather fashion accessory
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
Enchanted Hat posted:It's totally irrelevant to debate some kind of strict grammatical interpretation of how the exclusivity clause should be read (you are all wrong, by the way). Going to jump in on this. In front of a jury, the contact is nowhere as strong as supporting narrative from email and testimony. I always, always advise the uninitiated to write what they mean in emails alongside contracts as though it's going to be read by normal people. Because, if something goes tits up, it will be. "Chris, my license guy wants to include the fact that you'll only use Cryengine, that alright? See attached" "Yeah we've discussed this, I'd sign it" If there are any emails between Crytek and Chris Robert(s) discussing the exclusivity section like this, it's best that CIG not bring up any legal grammar nazi games because arguing against the plain meaning of the language before a jury will piss them the gently caress off and make them far less likely to believe everything else you're asking them to take on faith or good intentions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
tuo posted:Imagine beeing a judge... We joked about what happens if the judge is a backer What if the judge is a goon...
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:41
|
|
|
Hobold posted:Soo much I True of contacts, big time. Everyone has mental equations or weights for eliciting meaning from legalese differently because we all have such incredibly broad expectations for what the practice of law entails. This is very much not the case when you show someone a natural language letter, especially if it's part of a longer conversation that can provide context. We're really good at eliciting meaning from a conversation chain, to the extent that you'll have jurors you'd otherwise hold as contemptuous dipshits outside the court accurately pick up on double meaning and unspoken intent. There is a reason so many states have draconian renter agreement or auto purchase language enshrined as law -- sleasy salespeople saying one thing and putting another into the fine print keept getting punished by normal people in court who empathize with the victim despite the phrasing of a contact. I am wondering how many people worried about the grammar issue have ever seen a contract get picked apart before a jury. There is a reason there's so much fighting over disclosure of discovered email. A jury seeing that you knew and agreed to one clear interpretation can make a strong legal defense evaporate utterly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 13:58
|
|
ANAL.
|
Write every email, professional and personal, as though it's going to be printed in the news tomorrow. Accompany every understanding you come to with a contractor or plumber (if you're bad and can't do your own plumbing) or a $175m game development operation with a summary of your mutual understanding and include it in the chain of re: email. It can save your butt cash and trouble later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 14:06
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Going to jump in on this. In front of a jury, the contact is nowhere as strong as supporting narrative from email and testimony. Yeah, the clause has a range of potential meanings, but the only one that fits in with a coherent narrative is 'Crytek gave CIG a discount and did produced promotional material on the basis of Star Citizen using CryEngine'. Stopping production several years in, dumping all progress, and porting onto a new graphics engine probably wasn't explicitly addressed by the contract because no sane developer would do something so incredibly wasteful and damaging to the project. Well there is a narrative that says 'Crytek bargained poorly in 2012 and are trying to retrospectively rewrite the contract for a payout'. I think that outcome is legally possible, but it seems more likely that the guy with a history of being sued for failing to meet long-term contractual obligations he incurred in order to gain an immediate benefit might have done it again. e: the point's been brought up before but worth reiterating - in addition to the contract being ambiguously worded on it's own terms, if it's a direct translation of a standard GLA Crytek drafted in German then that causes even more issues of interpretation (but that's getting into exam question time as to whether Crytek can sue their US lawyers for negligence etc etc). e2: holy poo poo which one of you is paying for promoted adverts for online therapy sessions on the Star Citizen reddit Alchenar fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 14:08
|
|
|
The redditors jumping on the exclusivity grammar nazi bandwagon have either never gone to court or have done so with bad representation Good legal talent wields natural language when it's advantageous. I'm not taking about "but he said..." or "I thought he meant..." bullshit that demonstrates you shouldn't have signed something without counsel. I'm taking about using your own paper trail to Target discovery and prove the other party knows exactly what they understood as terms upon signing. Juries absolutely operate on the principle of parsimony, and showing a jury email containing "Yeah lets do X" that contradicts the other party's "Uh actually X means Y" game is almost as dramatic as that moment in court movies when one party breaks down and confesses in open court. For a jury, it's a "you tried to lie to us" moment that will close their minds to any further debate and any further even remotely speculative arguments from the grammar nazi party. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:The redditors jumping on the exclusivity grammar nazi bandwagon have either never gone to court or have done so with bad representation If you have to go down this path then someone hosed up at the contract drafting stage. A good contract should mean what it says in plain language without the need to refer to anything else. Now that doesn't always happen and is why Commercial litigators earn enormous sums of money, but there's plenty of blame to go around for an unclear contract.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:08 |
|
|
Combat Theory posted:We joked about what happens if the judge is a backer  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 14:42
|
|