Hi FG15,
Thanks for your response. It is okay that you could not get what I "exactly" "want" as I did not "want" a "specific" thing. I just "offered" an idea that releasing a demo which includes what you can or want to put among what you did so far. I can not say put this and that because it would not be a proper request, that's why I gave examples. I can give more detailed one;
For example, you can include all faction updates together with siege ones so we can see multiplayer experience. Decision would be what to put in order to make such a demo playable.
I should say that it was just a suggestion which grounds on the though that you are already making tests so we can test the multiplayer part. If it is not convenient to release a demo or it is not a fit occasion for you or even you don't want to release one you can say "It is not convenient because of bla bla bla." I can understand. But the tone was used makes a person feels that there is no interest on the idea but there is an effort to refute it. An example of this is that after I gave examples, the definition of demo was written as a response. What is this? It makes this conversation argumentative but even if you make it argumentative it should be in an appropriate tone.
Since we already have come this far, I should also say that throughout 3 years we just read and I think it is normal to seek a playable version of it. Just relax. Nobody is here to judge you. There is an appreciation. Do not reverse it by writing that kind of responses or keeping people waiting too much. 
Cheers.
I don't think that asking clarifications about the release or bringing proposals to the public's attention is a bad thing at all. I love when the forum actually performs its imperative function: answering people's doubts in the best of the ways. That's our task, after all
Therefore, I personally believe you need not assume such a defensive approach, if I may call it so, nor have I felt attacked or criticised by your comments either. The whole debate just gives me the impression that you're maybe over-complicating things too much, and said development of the discussion has probably diverted the focus from the main issue that was being addressed: irrespective of labels or terminology, only by sticking to the usual 'procedure' will the team accomplish each objective of their plan and, finally, hand to the community a fairly decent patch. Other alternative paths, whether it be a demo, a mini-demo, an open-source Beta, or a myriad of different options, would instead prove highly counterproductive and, methinks, illogical. People being eagerly awaiting the next revolution and every major overhaul embedded therein, is to me a quite self-explanatory reason not to present the Edain community with a flawed, half-completed update. I guess this is the point that Gnomi and FG were trying to explain to you.
Beside that, any further consideration on words or double meanings would simply result in an unproductive 'semantics game'; not really useful, I daresay. The same regarding the argumentative nature of a post or not. In other words, some convoluted, contrived, and theoretical constructions which only lead us astray and very far from what might otherwise be a noteworthy thread. It's similar to the response I gave you in the other topic, which was never meant to be an excuse or self-serving reminder. I've only noted how yours was just a plain direct statement, which neither specified nor provided many in-depth hints; it was a mere reaffirmation of the obvious, and the sheer passing of time is not an argument in itself, I think. Anyway, I'll close that twin-thread.
Thema: Edain 4.5 Demo (Gelesen 2832 mal)