The same quote that is always quoted on this topic, Rag. You can interpret it the way you want and call it the 'correct' interpretation if you want to; that's your opinion, you're welcome to it, and I don't agree with it. I interpret it the way it came across to me, accounting for language dissonance and advertising intention and tone, compared against reality. I believe that my interpretation is the most accurately descriptive of what they intended to say and what they hoped to advertise to people at the time, and I have not yet encountered any explanation from you or anyone else that reasonably shows their words to mean what you've said in the past they ought to be taken to mean - it always comes across as a stretch, to me. That your explanations of what they are supposedly intended to mean is an acrobatic act of bending over backwards to tie up what was said with the currently delivered reality in order to justify them - a manoeuvre that should not ever be necessary if active misrepresentation has not taken place.

It's really that simple, and unless you have something new to say that you feel is legitimate and convincing, repeating the things you've said in the past aren't going to be any more convincing to me now than they were then - which is, to be clear, that they are not, at all.

==

There is no 'out of context' here, Wormerine - this is what was said, and it is at worst directly false and at best deliberately misleading. What context are you supposing that changes this? If you are asking that we functionally disregard the words that were actually said, in favour of making assumptions about what they theoretically mean to communicate instead, based on pre-marketing footage, that's not good enough... what was said matters, and what was said was both clear in its intention, and also inaccurate to what was then presented.

The game engine is somewhat different from D:OS2, Now... however it is still incredibly clear and obvious that what we have right now started AS the D:OS2 engine, was build out of it, and remains, to this day, built upon the scaffolding of it - i.e. that this game that we have now was built in an existing engine that was not at all suited for the type of game system it is supposed to be running. It did not, at any point where game implementation is concerned, ever start out as a meticulous setting out of 5e, was not, ever, tested as such to determine what did and did not work in a video game format - and to claim otherwise, or to word your language in a way that insinuates otherwise deliberately, as they did, is misleading and dishonest.

So yes. Misrepresentation.

EDIT: I am very tired, and I apologise if this sounds aggressive. It's not my intention to be argumentative or disagreeable... but I do feel quite sure in my rationality and reasoning here, based on the evidence we have, and I'm prepared to talk firmly about it. Again, not my intention to come across harshly.

Last edited by Niara; 11/04/22 07:00 AM.