Quick-Time-Event is managerial speak so they sound like they know what they're talking about 'Oh, so its like quick time?'
'Yes' (no, you fucking tard)
Usually after not having played the game mechanic in question.

Limiting the players input and the good/bad results of input reduced the amount of gameplay in the game.

This is not a good thing. 

"Quick-Time-Event is managerial speak so they sound like they know what they're talking about 'Oh, so its like quick time?'
'Yes' (no, you fucking tard) "

Where on earth are you getting that from? 

The silent hill fight sequences described above are excellent gameplay mechanics, but they will be labeled as quicktime, which has a shitty, shitty reputation.

Quick Time Event is a modern phrase that has little meaning. What people mean when they say it is limited player input. 

Ahh OK, sorry. I over reacted. 

"Make the funnest of the funnest game and make it really fun and super great!"

Same level of usefulness.

Well... No. Not really. While I could write an entire design doc on how the system should work, I'm not actually a professional games designer (unlike yourself (as you are so often want to remind us)). However, if GTA can manage to have different control systems for driving/flying/walking/swimming/cycling/pogo-sticking and not confuse players then I'm sure you can construct some kind of useful system to allow the player to actually climb a giant statue and stab it in the eye without resorting to 'press X now!' every minute or so while pretending it's not just a more annoying version of a cutscene.

Of course if you actually meant 'unfortunately it's unfeasible to create 200 different control/gameplay systems within the restricted budget/development time of a modern game' then that would be more understandable (and a seperate discussion on the problems symptomatic of the modern games industry). But that's not what you actually said, is it? 

driving / flying / walking / swimming / cycling / pogo-sticking / fuck your auto abrv. system metl ;p 

write a whole statue-climbing system and simulate the whole affair...you'd pretty much have to make your entire game just about climbing statues and stabbing them in their sensitive bits.

FYI: he's talking about Shadow of the Colossus. 

I assumed this board was games-are-art enough to get the reference tbh...

And statue of the colossus was more interactive levels taken to extreme than statue climbing really. Also they were stone mechs.

But yeh, good game, prefered Ico tho. 

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS2/Games/Shadow_of_the_Colossus/OGS/

Did you honestly not catch the reference? 

Quicktime events sort of make me feel like i'm being forced to take a creamy facial from the lead cutscene animator. It's all about him stroking his ego (cock) in my face whilst he's forcing me to keep my eyes open all the way through it. Meanwhile, I've got no choice but to keep hammering away at my joypad so I can pretend to myself that I'm at least getting something out of it (but I'm just going through the motions at this stage; it's a pretty fucking shallow, soulless affair) and to be honest I don't give a fuck how visually impressive it is, all I know is that it gets up my nose and leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and at the end of the day he's getting far more out of it than I am. 

Quicktime events sort of make me feel like i'm being forced to take a creamy facial from the lead cutscene animator.

'Everything goes better with cock.' 

"Did you honestly not catch the reference?"

No, it was fairly obvious. I'm confused now. Did you write that whole post to drop that single reference? 

but you behaved as if you completely missed it. You know, equating my sardonic but exact description of the game's core mechanic with unachievable fantasy, as if in defiance of the fact that such a game was out and well received. Which I guess in a way indirectly supports my point about huge developers making safe games as a means of hedging the huge up-front investment.

Does the Colbert Report confuse you too? 

The Colbert Report is witty. That's the difference. 

The Colbert Report is irony?

d/l Brass Eye Lun, you'll like it. 

I mean buy, dammit, buy. Purchase. Consume. Buy in.

And for reference;

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118273/ 

But I can recommend SPAM. Not quite the same thing, much more twisted.

It's a common belief that American humour doesn't have much irony.

Lun, what's that smiley symbol you used there? Never seen it before, from you at least. 

It's a common belief that American humour doesn't have much irony.

Like raaaaiinn on your wedding day? No, wait, that is Canadian. Unless you mean North America in general then that totally over looks the brilliant irony of Spies Like Us, which is also pretty much Canadian (peeps from SCTV involved). I mean, when Akroyd and Chase jump out from behind the bushes dressed as aliens yelling 'beep-beep-beep-beep-beep' didn't your spinal cord rivet with delight at the sophisticated and dr�le irony of the humor. Okay, who am I kidding, still would prefer Fletch over Brideshead Revisited any day of the . . . . going to go sulk in my bottle now. 

is Alanis Morissette has a huge but awesome gaggle of hair down there in her lower extremities. 

"Does the Colbert Report confuse you too?"

OK, let me just state this for the record and then we're done. Once I write this, I'm not replying to you any further.

You are the worst thing about this place. You're insulting, you're patronizing, and you bring down my good mood whenever I come here. I can come here totally pumped up on Quake level design and after reading your posts I end up annoyed and unmotivated.

You are poison to this community.

Preach, negke, Kell, and others are the exact opposite. They share information, they help people, and they're interesting to talk to. You're none of those things.

I think you COULD be those things but you choose not to. I also believe that you have interesting insights to share but you won't share them. Instead, you choose to project this edgy 'jaded and bitter' persona, which is unfortunate.

I used to do the same thing. I used to be you when I was younger. And trust me when I say - it's not worth it.

I know you don't care about what I'm saying and I also know that it will have no effect whatsoever on your behavior. I understand that and it's fine. I just wanted to get it off my chest and now I can move on.

We're done.

Pretend you don't see my posts in the future so you won't be tempted to reply to them. I'll be extending you the same courtesy. 

It's spelled 'patronising' 

All people are not either black or white... do you see what I mean ?? People share information, are smart, are cool, when they want to...

Unfortunately, there are lots of morrons onto the internet, and sarcasms are over-used for sure, I agree with you on that point... It is human being to be "nasty" in general... and when people are furthermore stupid, it does not help...

However, you should not take all these sarcams as personal attacks.. I did the same mistake some years ago but afterall, why should you care ? Aren't you mapping for fun ? Are you waiting for any recognition by others here ? Come on, you'll never get that ! I personnaly just want people to have fun with my maps...

an even if Quake purists are always proud to piss off new people that joins the community, and also to drag your maps into mud because they don't like small details, it is just because they don't want newbie to walk on their grass... like primates they are pissing around their territory :P

In anyway, let them for what they are, and keep mapping please: We need more map and more commitment from mappers to make this community still existing... otherwise, we will stay here endlessly with dinosaurs that will not make Quake spirit evolve in anyway...

And now go map !! 

It is human being to be "nasty" in general...
It isn't. It's just that the internet is quite attracting to lonely, sad, non-social people.

Normally humans learn and socialise. Someone who constantly talks bad about others or the world in general is avoided by others. Now he either changes his behaviour or gets lonely (and probably even more bitter).

But on the internet there is always the illusion of having friends, an audience or whatever. So they never learn how bad such behaviour is even for themselves and continue being idiots. 

Give lun a break. He's a bit edgy at times but he's a good guy. If you write over the top, the points become easier to demonstrate.

And thanks Willem for your sincerity. Such is rare.

Sarcasm often sucks on the internet since it's so hard to read into it. Actually, a lot of sincere stuff is read as having insulting sarcasm.

All responsibility should not reside on the reader. "Don't take it seriously, it's only the internet" is not a solution for every problem with messaging here. 

Right on. I have followed some blogs for years and the writing has deteriorated, getting more extreme and marginalized while the writer's personal life is going somewhat worse and worse.
(Not any people you know or related to func or tf in any way.)

Very much simplified, the temptation of not doing anything about it but just go and complain and lecture about something is a projection too...

That said, there ARE lots of things that are worth lecturing on, and criticizing vigorously, and I laud people speaking up their mind,