IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH ME? AM I JUST NOT A GOOD DEV?

I wanted to find out what all the fuss was.

If you open RPG Maker, or any software, you have one of two reasons: Love of RPGs, or Desire to make a game.

Either way, no matter how you swing it, making games is a skill. Like every skill, you can only get good at it by doing it. You're going to suck, and REALITY CHECK SON do suck. Everything you do is garbage. But it is your garbage. How do we learn? We fail. The best way to learn is to make mistakes. Learn from your mistakes, and become BETTER. So, guess what buttercups; you all suck. Until you don't.

I couldn't draw worth shit when I was a kid. And I'm not going to delude myself into thinking I have it down pat even now. I'm better, but can always improve.

LockeZ getting a warn for an albeit poorly worded statement, is ridiculous. It may have sounded harsh; but it was real. I fully back what LockeZ said, and if that means I get my first warning, I welcome it.

edit:
For the mod argument; being a mod does not omit you from being a human being. I saw far worse from WIP and others before this.
editedit: I did not read the OP, and am only replying to the LockeZ situation. :P

-_-

Statements like that are what I mean. But yeah, this thread is derailed enough.

LockeZ's warning was unwarranted. Everybody who read his post correctly interpreted what he really meant.
If anything, the fact that he was given a warning should be considered a direct insult on pianotm, because it implies that pianotm's ego is so fragile that it needs to be sheltered by mod action.

author=Sated
Legion was also banned because he "derailed" threads. Don't think that I don't see through the bullshit :)

Whatever the on-paper reason is, the actual reason people get banned is because they reach a state of determined immaturity and become unconstructive nitwits with no redeeming qualities. The latest example would be Euphonic, his crusade against certain staff members for supposedly playing favorites, and the less-than-diplomatic way he went about petitioning for redress of grievances. His was a Banne well dispensed.

There's nothing "wrong" with you, Sated. Lots of people disagree with your style, but you haven't exactly been persecuted apart from the odd verbal abuse and pages and pages of heated discussion.
But here, in this particular thread, you're straddling that line where your behavior is becoming determinedly immature and nothing you say is constructive. So far it's just been a handful of "woe is me, I'm misunderstood and mistreated" posts. Time to click the 'X' in the top right and think about breakfast. Maybe today is a six slices of Bacon day.

author=Sated

author=halibabica
Maybe it's been too long since I last saw your work. I always got the impression you were an intelligent member with high standards that avoided sugar-coating things by acid-coating them instead. But changing and growing is what we try to encourage, and I can't deny it's been a while. If you've gotten better about it since, more power to ya.

The moderators made it clear that my work isn't welcome here, but they're too dumb to distinguish the good from the bad so I had to do it for them. I should be thanked, but talent isn't welcome amongst a sea of nepotism...

You sound exactly like those people who submit babby's first game to the site and then get upset when it gets rejected and have to rage over it. You are not some unappreciated genius. You're a guy on a hobbyist site who can't get over the fact that a cute but admittedly flawed game about a dog got popular. You wanna talk nepotism? The only reason your review for said game was accepted in the first place was that you were on staff and thus it bypassed the review process. That's the only reason.

The fact that you dish out so much bile but can't accept the fact that your own reviewing has flaws and have to keep constantly banging on about it is getting tiring. Move on, please.

And thus the thread became about reaming Sated.

I'm locking this, but not for censorship. I just don't see it going anywhere constructive beyond this point.