Commercial Games

[wermy]

Posting a new thread about something that has been previously mentioned is fine as long as the user wants additional knowledge or feels that his question wasn't fully answered and as long as they link to the previous topic to show that they understand it exists and that they have read it. This is also assuming that the topic they are linking to is old enough that it would be considered gravedigging to revive. (Your X as you call it, which is a number >= 1 month)

It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is.

-God Ginrai

I tend to agree with Grench, and God Ginrai, your response only ratifies that for me. The rules you just talked about seem pretty arbitrary -- especially your definition of gravedigging to be reviving threads of 30 days or older (which, by the way, the "LIST OF THINGS YOU DON'T DO" post states is actually 3 months -- and even then, is ok if you have a good reason). I'm not trying to start a flamewar with you -- I've found you often have good input on a variety of subjects. But you do tend to have seemingly pointless, one or two sentence responses which could be considered rude (such as "I will call it gravedigging, because it is blatantly so. You should have just started a new topic."). Just my .02.

Now, back on topic, I'm curious where all this ended up as well.

edit: removed excessive quoting.
edit 2: fixed something I left out.

 

[God Ginrai]

Posting a new thread about something that has been previously mentioned is fine as long as the user wants additional knowledge or feels that his question wasn't fully answered and as long as they link to the previous topic to show that they understand it exists and that they have read it. This is also assuming that the topic they are linking to is old enough that it would be considered gravedigging to revive. (Your X as you call it, which is a number >= 1 month)

It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is.

-God Ginrai

I tend to agree with Grench, and God Ginrai, your response only ratifies that for me. The rules you just talked about seem pretty arbitrary -- especially your definition of gravedigging to be reviving threads of 30 days or older (which, by the way, the "LIST OF THINGS YOU DON'T DO" post states is actually 3 months). I'm not trying to start a flamewar with you -- I've found you often have good input on a variety of subjects. But you do tend to have seemingly pointless, one or two sentence responses which could be considered rude (such as "I will call it gravedigging, because it is blatantly so. You should have just started a new topic."). Just my .02.

Now, back on topic, I'm curious where all this ended up as well.

edit: removed excessive quoting.

I say >= 1 month because that is the general trend I see that people ont hese forums consider gravedigging. (I was giving him a number for his X) I know that the official number is 3 months. And to tell you the truth, I gave up on responding to the people who were gravedigging and just reported their posts as gravedigging with that nifty little report post button. However, when I see someone blatantly disregard how old the topic was and say that he knows he is doing it, with a topic this old, I had to respond. I don't care if you do think that response was rude, because it's just as rude as gravedigging a topic and basically saying: "I know I'm gravedigging and I don't give a damn." (which is what he did with his post)

-God Ginrai

 

[alucart1984]

Call it dead thread revival or necro-posting if you want. I recalled this thread and was curious where we're at 7 months later.

I will call it gravedigging, because it is blatantly so. You should have just started a new topic.

-God Ginrai

Obviously, since I did it, I disagree. I am asking if the OpenPandora team has any followup information for a topic that was opened by the team leader. Yes, I revived the original subject matter thread to do so. It places the question in the appropriate context.

Side note...
These forums have some of the most difficult to work with unwritten flame-enforced rules I have ever seen.
-New topics about status updates of any kind tend to get closed before any official response can be made. Most of them rightly so.
-Posting a new thread to update, ask about or address a previously addressed topic gets flamed for asking about a topic that already has a thread. Regardless of if it is a new take on it or the age of the previous thread.
-Retrieving an on-subject thread to request additional information gets flamed if it is over X days old where X is an indeterminate value.
-Posting off topic drivel, profanity and pointless flame posts seems to be OK.
The above are a bit annoying for anyone who wants to ask a legitimate question that might expand or update a previously discussed topic.

Posting a new thread about something that has been previously mentioned is fine as long as the user wants additional knowledge or feels that his question wasn't fully answered and as long as they link to the previous topic to show that they understand it exists and that they have read it. This is also assuming that the topic they are linking to is old enough that it would be considered gravedigging to revive. (Your X as you call it, which is a number >= 1 month)

It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is.

-God Ginrai

Guess its a good thing you are NOT a moderator.

 

[God Ginrai]

Call it dead thread revival or necro-posting if you want. I recalled this thread and was curious where we're at 7 months later.

I will call it gravedigging, because it is blatantly so. You should have just started a new topic.

-God Ginrai

Obviously, since I did it, I disagree. I am asking if the OpenPandora team has any followup information for a topic that was opened by the team leader. Yes, I revived the original subject matter thread to do so. It places the question in the appropriate context.

Side note...
These forums have some of the most difficult to work with unwritten flame-enforced rules I have ever seen.
-New topics about status updates of any kind tend to get closed before any official response can be made. Most of them rightly so.
-Posting a new thread to update, ask about or address a previously addressed topic gets flamed for asking about a topic that already has a thread. Regardless of if it is a new take on it or the age of the previous thread.
-Retrieving an on-subject thread to request additional information gets flamed if it is over X days old where X is an indeterminate value.
-Posting off topic drivel, profanity and pointless flame posts seems to be OK.
The above are a bit annoying for anyone who wants to ask a legitimate question that might expand or update a previously discussed topic.

Posting a new thread about something that has been previously mentioned is fine as long as the user wants additional knowledge or feels that his question wasn't fully answered and as long as they link to the previous topic to show that they understand it exists and that they have read it. This is also assuming that the topic they are linking to is old enough that it would be considered gravedigging to revive. (Your X as you call it, which is a number >= 1 month)

It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is.

-God Ginrai

Guess its a good thing you are NOT a moderator.

Why? Because I prefer a decent respect for forum etiquette?

-God Ginrai

 

[wermy]

it's just as rude as gravedigging a topic and basically saying: "I know I'm gravedigging and I don't give a damn." (which is what he did with his post)

-God Ginrai

But he WASN'T gravedigging, by the definition of gravedigging in this forum. On top of that, they even say "It's okay if you have a good reason" -- a stark contrast to your "It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is."

 

[God Ginrai]

it's just as rude as gravedigging a topic and basically saying: "I know I'm gravedigging and I don't give a damn." (which is what he did with his post)

-God Ginrai

But he WASN'T gravedigging, by the definition of gravedigging in this forum. On top of that, they even say "It's okay if you have a good reason" -- a stark contrast to your "It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is."

That simply means that the length that it would be considered gravedigging depends on the reason, not that gravedigging is acceptable with a good reason. Over double the allotted 3 months is very much a blatant gravedig, and his reason is hardly enough. Starting a new topic would have served him just as well.

-God Ginrai

 

[alucart1984]

it's just as rude as gravedigging a topic and basically saying: "I know I'm gravedigging and I don't give a damn." (which is what he did with his post)

-God Ginrai

But he WASN'T gravedigging, by the definition of gravedigging in this forum. On top of that, they even say "It's okay if you have a good reason" -- a stark contrast to your "It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is."

That simply means that the length that it would be considered gravedigging depends on the reason, not that gravedigging is acceptable with a good reason. Over double the allotted 3 months is very much a blatant gravedig, and his reason is hardly enough. Starting a new topic would have served him just as well.

-God Ginrai

What so he can get flamed saying that his topic was already there? Someone probably would of said the complete opposite of what you are saying now if he did that. Lets just drop the subject and move on to the topic at hand.

 

[God Ginrai]

it's just as rude as gravedigging a topic and basically saying: "I know I'm gravedigging and I don't give a damn." (which is what he did with his post)

-God Ginrai

But he WASN'T gravedigging, by the definition of gravedigging in this forum. On top of that, they even say "It's okay if you have a good reason" -- a stark contrast to your "It is never okay to gravedig a topic, no matter what your question is."

That simply means that the length that it would be considered gravedigging depends on the reason, not that gravedigging is acceptable with a good reason. Over double the allotted 3 months is very much a blatant gravedig, and his reason is hardly enough. Starting a new topic would have served him just as well.

-God Ginrai

What so he can get flamed saying that his topic was already there? Someone probably would of said the complete opposite of what you are saying now if he did that. Lets just drop the subject and move on to the topic at hand.

That is why you link to the topic which concerns your topic, to show that you are not a mindless idiot too stupid or lazy to use the search function or do any other kind of research.

-God Ginrai

 

[WizardStan]

What so he can get flamed saying that his topic was already there? Someone probably would of said the complete opposite of what you are saying now if he did that. Lets just drop the subject and move on to the topic at hand.

We've already HAD this flame war. You should have searched for it and posted to that if you had something new to say on the subject. Noob.

(This sentence serves to inform those whose sarcasm detectors are broken that, yes, this post is pure sarcasm, including this sentence)

 

[SirAileron]

Back on topic, I'd really love to see games like...

Bangai-O,
Radiant Silvergun,
MDK/MDK 2,
Cave Story,
Mega Man (Any, really),
Turok (the N64 ones),
Left 4 Dead,
Half Life,
The Elder Scrolls games,
Street Fighter (preferrably Alpha/Zero 3),
Monster Hunter,
Phantasy Star Online,
Zelda: Four Swords Adventures (A man can dream),
N+,
Halo,
Team Fortress (1 and 2),
Bomberman,


I dunno... there are a lot of games I'd want, if possible. Some first-person shooters, but my god... platformers would be so boss. Any MMO-type game would be so great.

 

[Prometheus]

Mega Man (Any, really),

I like this. :lol: Good to see others who like platformers.

Just to add to that, I wonder if there's any chance of getting Konami's new Rocket Knight title (download-only, scheduled for next year) on board? Probably not.

 

[jlepley]

What exactly is wrong with gravedigging? If the topic can be continued 6 months after the last activity, what's wrong with it if the post is relevant?

 

[Eso Rimmer]

Now I got idea. Typing of the Dead. Cool game which can't be on PSP because it lacks keyboard.

 

[God Ginrai]

What exactly is wrong with gravedigging? If the topic can be continued 6 months after the last activity, what's wrong with it if the post is relevant?

Well, the most popular reason against gravedigging (but definitely not the only one) is that people will resurrect topics that died for a reason, and it tends to clutter the space where more recent topics are being discussed. Let the dead be, and start a new topic. It's kind of like how if you didn't use all your bread and let it mold over, you should buy new bread instead of trying to make a sandwich from old bread.

-God Ginrai

 

[kloplop321]

Plus, honestly, people do not want to read 20+ pages to be caught up in context with the conversation.

 

[God Ginrai]

Plus, honestly, people do not want to read 20+ pages to be caught up in context with the conversation.

Indeed. Just imagine if someone gravedug the Our New Machine topic. Although I, having read the whole topic would have no problem knowing what state the current situation in the topic would be, I'm sure other people would not want to read through 200+ pages. In fact, people told me that very thing when I told them that the topic was a very good read.

-God Ginrai

 

[Squidge]

If you want to resurrect a topic, start a fresh one and reference the old one by adding a link to your post. Don't just start posting in the old one. That way, people who want to read the old posts can, and those that don't care about the old posts can easily ignore them.