Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MoriartyL
No, it most certainly would not.
Beginning - End
Get your facts straight.  |
I stand corrected. I don't have time to read every thread (and the Battle thread didn't interest me in the slightest) so I guess I missed those. Sorry about that.
That's missing the point though. What I meant was some people won't respond because that's not the way they express their creativity. That doesn't make their lack of repsonse bad which is what you seemed to be saying.
Quote:
|
But "enthusiastic about AG innovation"? Ha! I'd prefer to be talking about platformers, or tactical RPGs, or metaludes! As far as my preferences go, AGs (with the exception of pure exploration) are pretty far down on the list. I started sharing AG ideas for one and only one reason: I thought the people here would want to share AG ideas more than anything else (because I assumed that they were enthusiastic), and I wanted to get it moving in a direction my fellow forumers would be most comfortable in. This was never for myself.
|
Then I hope you won't take it too hard when I say you're a fool.
If people wanted to share innovative ideas about games then someone would have done it already. As your thread has indicated people either don't have any ideas to share or (as others have pointed out) would prefer to keep those ideas to themselves and make games from them.
Essentially by creating this thread you've decided what other people on the forum think solely because they PLAY AGs. What's more you've also decided that none of them are smart enough to think of setting up a thread themselves to discuss ideas. What were you expecting? Waves of gratitude for you having been clever enough to think of creating the thread. That's pretty insulting really.
In future stick to creating threads about things that really interest you. Trying to second-guess a world-wide community can only lead to disappointment.
