Giving up on first person shooters

When I was a youngling around 14-18 my young adult mind was subjected to the golden age of PC gaming. The majority of my personal gaming time was spent honing my excellent skills at Quake 3 to a level of folktale heroism. Eventually I became part of the official "Mplayer" UK clan. Being very skilled, it was impossible for anyone to beat my Hercules like sense of timing with rockets. A personal favorite "Q3DM17" highlighted my reprehensible inhuman like timing with rocket projectiles. Even commencing a battle was an exercise in frustration and futility. It ultimately served as my own personal gratification while my opponent would quickly come to the realization of his own irrelevance within the world as we know it. Regularly child like minds suffocated and shielded from moral values would accuse me of cheating and rage quite. This was delightful and vindication of my skills as a pro PC gamer.

Nowadays the nature of the gaming landscape has changed. These high paced skill based shooters relying on individual talent as the sole means of personal gratification have experienced a cretaceous paleogene extinction like event. With titles such as "Tribes Ascend" represented a K–T boundary of a largely extinct bygone era. Pc gamers such as myself are survivors, crocodiles and alligators sitting idle in the waters putting up with whatever nonsense this corrupt age of gaming presents.

I believe this short term incorrigible change is to do with consoles taking over the realm of first person shooters. Particularly that of Call Of Duty. I do not like to admit it, as do other hardcore longer PC gamers but first person shooters are now home to this "xbox360". A sad painful fact I and many others have come to recognize with contempt and resentment. The fast paced skilled based twitch shooters of my era have been replaced with slow and mindless "play to unlock stuff". Everytime I bring this up "troll is cried". "noob" the usual derogatory remark. People mistake "skill based" for saying a game has "no skill requires" To explain. a game that is not "skill based" can obviously require skill. However at it's core it should be noted Call Of Duty is not about a basic twitch based skill or tactical thinking.

What makes Call Of Duty popular unlike Quake 3 of shooters of the golden age, anything and everything you do in Call Of Duty is skill rewarded regardless of winning or failing. It's formula is similar to that of world of warcraft and other MMO's. A carrot is dangled and you are incrementally rewarded for grinding, constantly throwing peanuts at player in order to give gratification. A guitar rift plays with +50Xp or some sort of in-game item reward.

Quake 3 was the humanist opposite to Call Of Dutys shallow self-congratulatory nature. The design of the maps, weapons represented a elemental level of skill idiosyncratic of hardcore PC gaming. A multiplayer playground deprived any dissent corruption or subversion of the games core values in order to appeal to the now broken and corrupt gaming culture we currently inhabit (and happily embrace). I can understand this phenomenon. However being a primarily skill based player I tend to loath and view Call Of Duty as something similar to an an aids epidemic in Uganda that has rapidly spread. Games like Tribes: Ascend being "red cross" fighting the problem yet it remaining overwhelmed and underfunded. All leading towards a futile yet valiant attempt that can never be changed due to the broken culture cultivating such horrible conditions.

Call Of Duty did not invent this idea of "play to unlock". Many games prior such as Battlefield 2 (a PC game) had unlocks. However these where used in moderation. A pepper over the main course. At the end of the day it was predominantly skill based similar to Tribes: Ascend. Now, through the modern age corruption Battlefield 3 is not about in individual and coordinated self expression through skill, it is peanuts being thrown at the player. EA's increasingly laughable and pathetic attempt to chase after Call Of Duty. Battlefield 3 is predominantly concerned with a shopping basket rewarding the player with slot machine coins for playing pandering towards an outwardly apathetic, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism rewarding without requirement or merit. For the most part, I now mainly play skill based strategy games. Since these are mostly wholly ignored by consoles and the mainstream gaming media they have yet to be engulfed by the cynical burger in a bag design. However, I doubt this will be the case forever. With motion controls and increasingly higher sales on consoles and much lower sales on the PC platform first person shooters serve as a cautionary cultural prognosis of what is to come.

When I was a youngling around 14-18 my young adult mind was subjected to the golden age of PC gaming. The majority of my personal gaming time was spent honing my excellent skills at Quake 3 to a level of folktale heroism. Eventually I became part of the official "Mplayer" UK clan. Being very skilled, it was impossible for anyone to beat my Hercules like sense of timing with rockets. A personal favorite "Q3DM17" highlighted my reprehensible inhuman like timing with rocket projectiles. Even commencing a battle was an exercise in frustration and futility. It ultimately served as my own personal gratification while my opponent would quickly come to the realization of his own irrelevance within the world as we know it. Regularly child like minds suffocated and shielded from moral values would accuse me of cheating and rage quite. This was delightful and vindication of my skills as a pro PC gamer.

Nowadays the nature of the gaming landscape has changed. These high paced skill based shooters relying on individual talent as the sole means of personal gratification have experienced a cretaceous paleogene extinction like event. With titles such as "Tribes Ascend" represented a K–T boundary of a largely extinct bygone era. Pc gamers such as myself are survivors, crocodiles and alligators sitting idle in the waters putting up with whatever nonsense this corrupt age of gaming presents.

I believe this short term incorrigible change is to do with consoles taking over the realm of first person shooters. Particularly that of Call Of Duty. I do not like to admit it, as do other hardcore longer PC gamers but first person shooters are now home to this "xbox360". A sad painful fact I and many others have come to recognize with contempt and resentment. The fast paced skilled based twitch shooters of my era have been replaced with slow and mindless "play to unlock stuff". Everytime I bring this up "troll is cried". "noob" the usual derogatory remark. People mistake "skill based" for saying a game has "no skill requires" To explain. a game that is not "skill based" can obviously require skill. However at it's core it should be noted Call Of Duty is not about a basic twitch based skill or tactical thinking.

What makes Call Of Duty popular unlike Quake 3 of shooters of the golden age, anything and everything you do in Call Of Duty is skill rewarded regardless of winning or failing. It's formula is similar to that of world of warcraft and other MMO's. A carrot is dangled and you are incrementally rewarded for grinding, constantly throwing peanuts at player in order to give gratification. A guitar rift plays with +50Xp or some sort of in-game item reward.

Quake 3 was the humanist opposite to Call Of Dutys shallow self-congratulatory nature. The design of the maps, weapons represented a elemental level of skill idiosyncratic of hardcore PC gaming. A multiplayer playground deprived any dissent corruption or subversion of the games core values in order to appeal to the now broken and corrupt gaming culture we currently inhabit (and happily embrace). I can understand this phenomenon. However being a primarily skill based player I tend to loath and view Call Of Duty as something similar to an an aids epidemic in Uganda that has rapidly spread. Games like Tribes: Ascend being "red cross" fighting the problem yet it remaining overwhelmed and underfunded. All leading towards a futile yet valiant attempt that can never be changed due to the broken culture cultivating such horrible conditions.

Call Of Duty did not invent this idea of "play to unlock". Many games prior such as Battlefield 2 (a PC game) had unlocks. However these where used in moderation. A pepper over the main course. At the end of the day it was predominantly skill based similar to Tribes: Ascend. Now, through the modern age corruption Battlefield 3 is not about in individual and coordinated self expression through skill, it is peanuts being thrown at the player. EA's increasingly laughable and pathetic attempt to chase after Call Of Duty. Battlefield 3 is predominantly concerned with a shopping basket rewarding the player with slot machine coins for playing pandering towards an outwardly apathetic, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism rewarding without requirement or merit. For the most part, I now mainly play skill based strategy games. Since these are mostly wholly ignored by consoles and the mainstream gaming media they have yet to be engulfed by the cynical burger in a bag design. However, I doubt this will be the case forever. With motion controls and increasingly higher sales on consoles and much lower sales on the PC platform first person shooters serve as a cautionary cultural prognosis of what is to come.

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

Cool dude.

Good luck with that.

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

Don't worry, that's just a phrase he uses as an insult. I don't think he knows what either word really means.

I try my best to be abrasive on these forums but... god your fucking stupid. Like, you make Jay's threads look intelligent.

I hated first person shooters before it was cool. Now that hating first person shooters is cool, I kinda like them. I'm playing Crysis for the first time on my new PC, and it's excellent.

@TooWalrus said:

I hated first person shooters before it was cool. Now that hating first person shooters is cool, I kinda like them. I'm playing Crysis for the first time on my new PC, and it's excellent.

Altough the story telling is terrible and that flying section (towards the end of the game) is both terrible and out of place. I somewhat enjoyed this game. The series became dead with it's sequel though. Symptomatic of console focus it became more linear, less interactive. Full of low quility FMV's, a Call Of Duty cloned multiplayer and a simplification of game controls. It's a very cynical game and I have no interest in the third installment regardless of Crytek punting "uber graphics" in order to seduce pc enthusiasts.

@MariachiMacabre said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

Don't worry, that's just a phrase he uses as an insult. I don't think he knows what either word really means.

He doesn't know what a lot of his words and phrases really mean. He's, simply put, a self-entitled dipshit with a god complex and a penchant for insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

Either that or a troll, but for some reason I don't think he's a troll.

Your first paragraph is filled with so much purple prose I could barely make sense of what you were saying. Is there a reason you feel the need to pad perfectly functional sentences like that? Just say what you want to say, holy crap. Maybe less time spent stroking your ego in a tangential aside and you could get to the point before everyone loses interest.

Also, el oh el at "I'm an idle alligator!"

I don't really agree with what you claim makes Call of Duty so habit forming. I'd say it's because it's a well made game, with plenty of modes and well designed maps. People play to get better, not necessarily to improve their rank. In short, it's fun. I tend to get addicted to TF2 for long stretches of time. I don't care about the unlocks, I just play because it's fun. I don't really know how CoD works online, though, so I could be totally wrong.

@believer258 said:

@MariachiMacabre said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

Don't worry, that's just a phrase he uses as an insult. I don't think he knows what either word really means.

He doesn't know what a lot of his words and phrases really mean. He's, simply put, a self-entitled dipshit with a god complex and a penchant for insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

Either that or a troll, but for some reason I don't think he's a troll.

He's a hipster nihilist is what he is!

@believer258 said:

insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

What makes you think I hate controllers? At no point have I said that or even indicated this. I play plently of titles on my Xbox360 pad. Why my dear fellow just yesterday I was enjoyed Street Fighter X Tekken.

This... persecution complex is not beneficial and holds no place in reality. By rights I shouldn't even have to defend myself in this regard since you are essentially just making shit up to dismiss my personal feelings regarding first person shooters now primarily aimed at the Xbox360 as opposed to the pc as it use to be during the 90's and early 2000's.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

@believer258 said:

insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

What makes you think I hate controllers? At no point have I said that or even indicated this. I play plently of titles on my Xbox360 pad. Why my dear fellow just yesterday I was enjoyed Street Fighter X Tekken.

This... persecution complex is not beneficial and holds no place in reality. By rights I shouldn't even have to defend myself in this regard since you are essentially just making shit up to dismiss my personal feelings regarding first person shooters now primarily aimed at the Xbox360 as opposed to the pc as it use to be during the 90's and early 2000's.

Console FPS games should really take a lesson from the Total War series, is what you're saying. Right?

Ctrl+F "Hipster nihilism" check success.

Yep, it's a whyareyoucrouchingspock post.

One that rather inappropriately compares a video game franchise to an epidemic that has claimed millions of lives. Classy.

I don't ever think i've seen anyone use the phrase "hipster nihilist" Also, Shogun 2.

please don't use the terms "pro gamer" and "hardcore", nobody likes them

Happy Birthday Spray! I'm disappointed in you.

Even if you were better at posting people here would whine at you because you don't kowtow at the altar of low skill, low gameplay modern games. Sorry big guy but you're not long for this boring new world.

You just made me shed a tear of manlyness OP, I still love Unreal 2k4 and hate the hell out of modern shooters.

/Fistbump

I still don't get why no FPS games have touched on how great a future warfare setting could be. I don't mean shitty Ghost Recon that is set what, 20 years in the future? Big whoop.

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

@Sooty said:

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

Oooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhh SICK BURN!

Hey OP, instead of just giving up like a pussy why don't you play more games like Tribes and get more people on-board so that skill based shooters come back in style?

@Vinny_Says said:

@Sooty said:

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

Oooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhh SICK BURN!

Booom!!!!!

The over use of wordy and flowery language in your posts does not make you intelligent it makes it seem like you’re trying to be intelligent and are failing miserably at it I might add and the elitism that you give off is repulsive.

Or your trolling for fun which seems more likely because no one could possibly write any of that and think that someones going to take them seriously

@artgarcrunkle said:

Even if you were better at posting people here would whine at you because you don't kowtow at the altar of low skill, low gameplay modern games. Sorry big guy but you're not long for this boring new world.

Yeah, it's not because he is always 100% right. It's because games suck.

It just seems like you really don't enjoy call of duty. They are well made games as there s no way to get over that. I myself am not a huge fan of the multiplayer either but I still think te reward system was smart ( at least in cod4). To my knowledge quake is still active so play that or play tf2. Also your point would be better if you didn't sound like you just really wanted to shit on consoles

Most people seem to be crucifying the OP or claiming he's a troll, but I think he's right. Modern multiplayer shooters are awful. They hold your hand and give you shiny new things as rewards to come back for instead of giving you truly rewarding gameplay that makes you actually want to play the game. Then again, the whole trend of having to have incentives built into games so people will continue to play them is why I haven't almost any new games to come out in the last year or so. If the multiplayer in your game is good I will keep playing it, if you have to give me a reason to come back other than good gameplay then you are doing it wrong.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

@believer258 said:

insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

What makes you think I hate controllers? At no point have I said that or even indicated this. I play plently of titles on my Xbox360 pad. Why my dear fellow just yesterday I was enjoyed Street Fighter X Tekken.

This... persecution complex is not beneficial and holds no place in reality. By rights I shouldn't even have to defend myself in this regard since you are essentially just making shit up to dismiss my personal feelings regarding first person shooters now primarily aimed at the Xbox360 as opposed to the pc as it use to be during the 90's and early 2000's.

Have you ever played Halo 3 or Halo Reach? Serious question, and I'm not trying to prove much of a point here, but have you? They're exactly what you're looking for. No unlocks, you play the game because it's good, not because of unlocks. Well, OK, there are cosmetic unlocks like customizable armor but that's not really an incentive to play. Worth mentioning are all the insane number of options in the menus and the crazy things you can do in the Forge.

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

When they started thinking their opinions should be everyone else's opinions.

@JasonR86 said:

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

When they started thinking their opinions should be everyone else's opinions.

So the same time they started being elitists then?

@AlexW00d said:

@JasonR86 said:

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

When they started thinking their opinions should be everyone else's opinions.

So the same time they started being elitists then?

Pretty much.

@Sooty said:

I still don't get why no FPS games have touched on how great a future warfare setting could be. I don't mean shitty Ghost Recon that is set what, 20 years in the future? Big whoop.

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

Battlefield 2142?

@JasonR86 said:

@AlexW00d said:

@JasonR86 said:

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

When they started thinking their opinions should be everyone else's opinions.

So the same time they started being elitists then?

Pretty much.

You guys are so elitist hipster nihilists!

@MariachiMacabre said:

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

@believer258 said:

insulting anyone who prefers controllers.

What makes you think I hate controllers? At no point have I said that or even indicated this. I play plently of titles on my Xbox360 pad. Why my dear fellow just yesterday I was enjoyed Street Fighter X Tekken.

This... persecution complex is not beneficial and holds no place in reality. By rights I shouldn't even have to defend myself in this regard since you are essentially just making shit up to dismiss my personal feelings regarding first person shooters now primarily aimed at the Xbox360 as opposed to the pc as it use to be during the 90's and early 2000's.

Console FPS games should really take a lesson from the Total War series, is what you're saying. Right?

Hahaha, oh man. That caught me off guard.

It's true though, Total War is perfect after all.

@Icemo said:

@Sooty said:

I still don't get why no FPS games have touched on how great a future warfare setting could be. I don't mean shitty Ghost Recon that is set what, 20 years in the future? Big whoop.

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

Battlefield 2142?

I wish Battlefield 2142 had gotten a more positive reception. Still hoping for a sequel.

@Sooty said:

I still don't get why no FPS games have touched on how great a future warfare setting could be. I don't mean shitty Ghost Recon that is set what, 20 years in the future? Big whoop.

I have also mostly given up on them, I certainly won't be touching Call of Duty 4, or are they calling it Black Ops 2 this year? ;)

Easier said than done. Look at the COD and BF games, they have like a hundred guns in them, and that's what people want. It's easy for developers to look at a FAMAS and an UMP and model them in there games but when they have to create say 50 unique weapons on there own thats pretty tough. Look at the Halo games they've got probably 50 guns in the entire franchise and it took them 10 years to do it.

I'll just say there's a good reason that once I played a bit of the CS GO beta and some Tribes Ascend, I tend to agree with the OP but not completely. There's a place for games like CoD for players that simply can't compete in the twitch shooter environment but still want that kind of fun (I still find games like that fun though haven't touched any CoD game since MW2 and cautiously considering BO2). It's even there for people who simply don't want that kind of skill shooter and that is perfectly fine. However I do agree that devs focused on them too much that my preferred shooter became almost barren aside from CS and a few other games.

Games like Tribes Ascend and CS GO give me a bit of hope that my favourite kind of shooter can make a big comeback. Also might check out Nexuiz now that it came out on PC. At least it looks like a cool game to me so I hope there's a solid group of active players there.

@spartanlolz92 said:

The over use of wordy and flowery language in your posts does not make you intelligent it makes it seem like you’re trying to be intelligent and are failing miserably at it I might add and the elitism that you give off is repulsive.

Or your trolling for fun which seems more likely because no one could possibly write any of that and think that someones going to take them seriously

Winner winner chicken dinner!

I come from the same era as you, playing mostly UT, though, since I'm from Germany. Over 10 years active member of a Quake forum, went to LAN-tournaments, played against the best in the world, beat some of them sometimes and lookied down on Counter-Strike as being too casual. 
But you know what? I completely disagree with you, for several reasons. 
One is, that the reason these games were so popular back then are the same others are now. They wanted to kill dudes in the best looking game available, preferably those dudes were your friends. That is all. 
People that took it further, like us, were a extreme minority, even back then. You just didn't notice because you were in a pool of casuals playing the same game. Now you notice, because shooters that take alot of effort and let you dominate people are out there, but barely sucessful.
The only thing you can do about it is to go play these games. Play Quake Live, maybe CS, Nexuiz or UT2004, those still have active communities.  
Or maybe try a different genre, RTS are in that same area, fighting games definitely.
Another thing is, that your judgement is that of a Formula1 driver, watching cart racing. The skill is different. You call it "not being skillbased", which is probably the most empty phrase of your monologue, just because repeatable success exists in modern shooters. You don't get to decide what skill it is that matters. You can decide which criteria is your favourite, that's it. 
I had a short time from maybe 06-08 where I was really depressed about the state of FPS, but that's long gone, because the only thing that matters in the end is, that there's fun for everybody to be had. And there is.

So...you dont like call of duty?

wait, did he seriously compare CoD's popularity to the AIDS epidemic in Africa? REALLY?

whats wrong with people....

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

In a way hipsters do tend to have elitist attitudes towards whatever they're not currently into - not always though.

Either way I wish we could all agree on a single phrase like "self absorbed hipster Total War nihilism" that everyone would just copy and paste every time this user made a thread. Sure there is that stance that "hey if you don't like these trol lbait threads just ignore them" but it's just the principle that with all the other rules to keep the forums a civil place this sort of stuff is allowed to go on and on.

With Bioshock Infinite and Borderlands 2 on the horizon, I still plan on playing FPS games. Also, I'm curious to see what 343 does with the Halo franchise. I don't play competitive multiplayer, though. I've got no interest in that kind of self-abuse.

@Cloudenvy: the titan game mode was probably the most fun ive had with an online FPS

We have a PC elitist here guys:

Exhibit A:

" incorrigible change is to do with consoles taking over the realm of first person shooters."

"Since these are mostly wholly ignored by consoles and the mainstream gaming media"

"increasingly higher sales on consoles and much lower sales on the PC platform first person shooters serve as a cautionary cultural prognosis of what is to come."

"Symptomatic of console focus it became more linear, less interactive. Full of low quility (quality) FMV's."

Exhibit B:

"hardcore PC gaming."

"...as do other hardcore longer PC gamers..."

Exhibit C:

"...first person shooters are now home to this "xbox360". A sad painful fact I and many others have come to recognize with contempt and resentment..."

This is simply my opinion of a specific genre on consoles. Not a exemplified enumeration of the entire platforms parts as a subject for conversation.

Unless I choose to change the original post this topic shall retain it's immutability and refuse to bend to the will of verbal based demeaning from those who seek to spread ill intent through unified party based narcissism.

I think it is rather naive that you make the assumption that PC FPS games would not have followed the same development path. The truth is, the entire gaming industry has changed a lot and will continue to change for the foreseeable future. This is not specifically the fault of any one thing, but because of many different factors. Accessibility, broadband, mobile phones, consoles, etc. Do not forget that the gaming industry is a business. It was not created only to serve your personal opinion. The fact that many people are now playing games more than they ever have been in the past means that things are going to evolve. And it appears that you've made it clear that it's time to jump ship. But I think you're overlooking the fact that games are much more vastly complex than they were in the past. First person shooters in particular. The incentives for experience and point systems, as long as they aren't monetarily exploited, only serve to build a sustainable community. Examples of this are seen in games like Battlefield 3, which actively reward you for not playing as just a lone wolf in ways past team based shooters did rather poorly.

I think you're missing the complexity of many modern shooters by holding them to the simplistic standards of the genre's beginning. It's so easy to be nostalgic about things, but often times more rewarding to actually give something new a chance.

@CommonReason said:

But I think you're overlooking the fact that games are much more vastly complex than they were in the past. First person shooters in particular.

@whyareyoucrouchingspock said:

However being a primarily skill based player I tend to loath and view Call Of Duty as something similar to an an aids epidemic in Uganda that has rapidly spread.

Besides the various affronts to the English language: Wait, what?

@Dagbiker said:

@believer258 said:

, inwardly self-absorbed self entitled hipster nihilism

How aren't you the gaming equivalent of a hipster?

When did hipster become the new elitist.

In a way hipsters do tend to have elitist attitudes towards whatever they're not currently into - not always though.

Either way I wish we could all agree on a single phrase like "self absorbed hipster Total War nihilism" that everyone would just copy and paste every time this user made a thread. Sure there is that stance that "hey if you don't like these trol lbait threads just ignore them" but it's just the principle that with all the other rules to keep the forums a civil place this sort of stuff is allowed to go on and on.