SoulCraft for Windows Phone 8
112

Action RPG game, Soulcraft, lands on Windows Phone 8

The insanely awesome Windows 8 Action RPG game, Soulcraft, has finally landed on Windows Phone and is available for purchase.  Play through various dungeon quests as an angel with vengeance and fight evil demons back to where they came from.

Soulcraft is developed by small indie game studio, MobileBits, and is one of the more exciting games we have had a chance to play in the Windows Store. Now that that the title is available on my Lumia, I personally fear for my productivity.

Check out the video trailer and Store link after the break...

What would an action RPG be without a lengthy description from the developers? That's right, just an action game. Bring on the awkward words!

"With humans on the brink to discover the secret of eternal life, angels and evil demons make a pact to proclaim the apocalypse to be able to materialize into the real world, fight the humans for victory and keep the circle of life intact. SoulCraft lets you play as an angel – it is up to you who will win this fight. May it be diablo in hell, god in heaven or the human race in this war of heroes directly on earth.   SoulCraft is being developed by the small indie game studio MobileBits. The game is still in development and we hope you will take this chance to shape this game with us together to make it a real top pick and award winning game with lots of prizes. We will use your feedback to decide what to do next. "

SoulCraft

The game costs $1.49 and is available for Windows Phone 8 devices only. Go grab the game now and I’ll see you in the apocalyptical style dungeons!

QR: SoulCraft

Click here to be directed to the Windows Phone Store.

via: MonWindowsPhone

2
loading...
0
loading...
35
loading...
0
loading...

Comments

There are 112 comments. Sign in to comment

revolvet says:

Why it is not free ?

Zokudu says:

Because developers deserve to get paid for their work?

smeshko says:

I think he meant, that it's free on Win8 and Android, but not here.. ;( But anyway, have it on my Android Tablet and it's AWESOME, probably gonna buy it for my WP too, to support the devs !

Spedez says:

Android version will have a lot of ad junk popping up there. Something that nobody wants.

revolvet says:

On Win8, there's in-app coin purchase. I already upgraded my account to VIP status by purchasing coins. I don't think I should pay twice. On Win8, there's no ads.

KrightonX says:

You will not be receiving a paycheck this week at your job. Because...free.

Daylife says:

He probably doesn't have a job, he's probably like 14.

Zamir Yusof says:

it's a small studio so that's the only way to make sure they're getting more revenue. plus a mere $1.49 for a good game is not too much right?

jlynnm350z says:

Same reason you don't go to work for free. Think about it. I want you to write a two page report on why people get paid for work, or else they would call it charity.

Visual360 says:

I agree. It's free on Android.
 
And you guys bashing him for asking a fair question. smh.

TechAbstract says:

This is ad-free version.

Visual360 says:

Don't seem to be true as some reviews mentioned Ads are still showing up.

RayWP7 says:

Well, it wasn't really a fair question absent context. But agreed, bashing isnt necessary.

Paul Acevedo says:

Context is key, which so many commenters and people on the internet in general often forget.

ajvanbreen says:

I don't mind that it's not free, but I always dislike when there's no trial option.

majohnny says:

Agreed. Trials really are essential for me nowadays.

for the guys saying support the developers, then why its free in Android and not here??? can you answer this questions please

Micah Dawson says:

Does it have ads on the android version. Someone said this version is adfree.

Zulfigar says:

Was wondering the same, unless there's not IAP on here like there is on Windows 8.

Daylife says:

Nothing in life is free, do you know how hard it is to develop an app? especially  game?

Zulfigar says:

That's why in Windows 8, there's in-app purchaes, is there some here (sadly, I'm still rocking my Lumia 710)?

Zamir Yusof says:

thanks for the information. been waiting for this game to make it way to wp8. already played on my win8 pc, my lil bro enjoy it more than me

Bigsro says:

Its £1.29? Cheap as chips ya tightarse! ;-)

Warren Dance says:

There's still IAPs though right?

masterdam95 says:

Fuckk, why no WP7?

TechAbstract says:

The graphics on this thing won't play on a Snapdragon S2 of WP7. Like original Xbox and Xbox One apart.

Zeeshan360 says:

WP7 has WinCE , Windows 8 and WP8 has Win NT core so porting is easier plus u get better hardware too

masterdam95 says:

Many posts before said both wp7and wp8 able to play this game although the graphic seem too much for wp7. That's why I surprise when it not release for wp7.

KQ17 says:

Because you need to stop whining and upgrade.

masterdam95 says:

Just bought for 9 months and now you tell me to buy another phone. No, thanks.

mase123987 says:

Why did you buy a wp7 phone that late when wp8 was right around the corner?

Eas195 says:

+1 for it's bought before the release of WP8, but it's people's choice, back again.

buggyglint says:

If this game had online co-op I would instantly buy it. 

"Action Role-Playing Game game?" This is an example of how acronyms are used too frequently and their meanings get ignored as a result.

I dunno, seems accurate to me. Most RPGs are turn-based and a lot less graphic intensive. This seems like an melding of a top-down action game with RPG.

Borderlands 1 and 2 has also sort of redefined its genre, which is a mix of various formats.

schlubadub says:

Daniel, he's actually talking about saying "RPG game" in the article which is like incorrectly saying "ATM machine" as the last word of the acronym is the same as the next word... i.e. "Role Playing Game game" & "Automatic Teller Machine machine" :P

GrandBoss says:

i agree, its a hack'n'slash, with RPG elements, but still. In my eyes RPG has an open world, NPC-s you can talk to buy from get quests from and so on, i would love to see something like that in WP (correct me if im wrong but i think Gameloft is going  to have something like that).
I still think that this is a fairly good game,definitely worth the money, the best hack'n'slash,and even maybe one of the best RPG on WP right now (which fact is kinda sad for me) but imagine it with open world, character creator, invertory... and without mini transaction(words cant describe how much i hate it :D )

danj210 says:

RPG- we are playing the role of this guy with upgrades and enhancement to his abilities that we choose. So we choose the role he follows. 3D world or not, we are role playing.

MarkAllett says:

What acronym?
 

MarkAllett says:

RPG isn't an acronym.

schlubadub says:

RPG = Role-Playing Game. If that's not an acronym then what is it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym_and_initialism

MarkAllett says:

RPG is an initialism, not an acronym. Something which your link sometimes seems to understand and then starts to get confused. I guess that's reflective of just how many people seem to be awfully confused these days.Also, try referring to a proper source, not Wikipedia:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/acronym
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/acronym
 
 

MarkAllett says:

In fact the Wikipedia article seem to understand the difference with:
"In such cases, examples found in dictionaries include NATO /ˈneɪtoʊ/, scuba /ˈskuːbə/, and radar /ˈreɪdɑr/ for acronyms, and FBI /ˌɛfˌbiːˈaɪ/ and HTML /ˌeɪtʃˌtiːˌɛmˈɛl/ for initialism"
 
Yet then bizarrely decides to disregard the actual correct distinction with this gem
"In the rest of this Wikipedia article, this distinction is not made"

 

schlubadub says:

Okay, I understand the difference now. It would've been good to have had that link in the first place :P Let us never speak of this again haha ;)

Eas195 says:

"RPG game", see on the beginning of the article.

MarkAllett says:

But RPG isn't an acronym.
 

MarkAllett says:

Your link uses the term acronym incorrectly, as a lot of people and sites do these days.

ikissfutebol says:

Please explain the difference for us that are not so high on grammar. Based on the very links you supplied, it would seem that RPG uses the initials just like in your definition that you supplied for us. Additionally, I'm not sure why you dismiss Wikipedia. I haven't viewed his page, however, I can tell you PhDs suggest to college students that it is an excellent resource. Assuming it is cited, this could be better than certain books and other resources that lack any citing. Of course, if the sources cited are crap, you are getting crap information. That's where having anal retentive people come on handy to epeen it out over having quality sources. So if it comes to some random person on the internet or Wikipedia, I'll take Wikipedia by virtue of it having a much larger number of people checking it than one.

MarkAllett says:

I thought the links I supplied explained it well enough really. An acronym spells out a pronouncable word. Think about the difference between how you say AIDS and HIV. Both stand for something, but in the case of AIDS, you don't say each individual letter A-I-D-S, you pronounce the whole thing as a word. That's an acronym. RPG therefore isn't an acronym, it's an initialism. Of course, both acronyms and initialisms are types of abbreviation.
 
When I was at university, I'd get laughed at for citing Wikipedia rather than proper established reference documents and books. The fact that they choose to disregard the difference between acronyms and initialisms despite initially appearing to understand it, just shows how it cannot be treated as serious reference material.
 

ikissfutebol says:

The technicality you are speaking of fails the spirit of its purpose. I have a friend that says the entire alphabet as a word- does that mean ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ is now an acronym? No. It means some people may use something one way while others use it another way. You talk with a kid these days and they might say L-O-L or say that as a word. Does that mean it's one or the other? No. There are tons of rules, laws, etc. that do this and the only people that it bothers are those that are too uptight to recognize that rules from 50+ years ago need to evolve. Heck, 50 years ago we did not have text messaging shorthand that was widely understood.
Of course dictionary.com also has inaccuracies, according to you, as it defines an initialism as an acronym. I suppose it's no better than Wikipedia and should be not trusted.
I would suggest it speaks volumes for the professors you had if you were laughed at for citing Wikipedia. Sure, I had a couple that said it was a poor source because they did not understand its power. Those same professors were terrible and stuck in old fashion ways. I had others that would readily cite it themselves, suggest to use it for further reference, etc. Now, if you were citing this forum as your source, sure- you should get laughed at. Wikipedia does an excellent job of making it clear if a particular page should not be taken seen as necessarily reliable. Perhaps that occurs more for your field of study than mine. Ignorance of a tool does not make it bad. If you REALLY felt strongly enough about the "inaccuracies" on the Wikipedia site, you are completely in your right to make the necessary changes and cite your sources for making the changes. If you are apathetic about it, it shows you really do not care about anything other than attempting to correct people that really could careless.
Again- nothing is perfect. I remember going on a field trip to Fort Malden in Ontario during elementary school (grew up in Detroit so it was a rather short drive) . When I saw my grandmother afterwards, I told her where we went. We consulted her Encyclopedia Britannicas (she had a pair of older sets) and dictionaries as she had never heard of it. Since we found nothing, she thought I was mistaken of the name. As we had just done a puzzle of Detroit, I went to consult that. Would you believe their was a little old school military man with a fort that was properly labeled just on the other side of the Detroit River (where it was actually located)? It is a historic landmark in Canada so I would hardly consider that something that should be omitted in a complete encyclopedia- perhaps it only requires a minor entry, but it should at least be found in something widely considered to be a reliable source. A quick check shows that the Encyclopedia Britannica website still has it omitted, yet Wikipedia has a fairly short blurb. Why in the world does a national landmark NOT show up in a "reputable" source, yet it appears on a caricature puzzle of a city?

MarkAllett says:

Well I enjoyed your essay, but regardless of all that you say, despite all your efforts, RPG still isn't an acronym. People who get this wrong out of sheer ignorance aren't at the forefront of language mutation, they're just wrong. Their understanding is wrong and they need correction. That's all. The language doesn't "evolve" on a person by person basis to encompass their mistakes.
Wikipedia has the "power", to be hilariously wrong, opinionated and vandalised. It might be useful for a bit of pop-culture info, but as a serious academic reference? Hardly!
 
 
"The technicality you are speaking of fails the spirit of its purpose"
Er.. what?
 
 
"I have a friend that says the entire alphabet as a word"
No you don't.
 
"does that mean ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ is now an acronym? No."
Indeed no. If you have to start making stuff up to make your point, I'd be questioning the validity of your point.
 
"It means some people may use something one way while others use it another way"
Indeed. They're known as *correct* people and *wrong* people.
 
"You talk with a kid these days and they might say L-O-L or say that as a word. Does that mean it's one or the other"
It means that L-O-L *isn't* an acronym and *LOL* is an acronym (if pronounced as a word/acronym). This isn't difficult, the rules are pretty simple. There are many instances of abbreviations where some people pronounce them as acronyms and some pronounce them as initialisms. SQL is a common example. The only complication comes when there are hybrids, such as JPEG.
 
"Of course dictionary.com also has inaccuracies, according to you, as it defines an initialism as an acronym"
Where does it do that? I actually said "both acronyms and initialisms are types of abbreviation".
 
 

ikissfutebol says:

Actually, my friend does. Thanks for trying though. Believe it or not, Big Bird taught him. I suppose Sesame Street is a big flat lie, too. Note that the upload date is WAY after this episode aired. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrjNv-u0-Rc
 
If you want to dismiss something that is constantly evolving with information and stick to your old fashion, rarely updating ways, be my guest. You are correct- language doesn't evolve on a person by person basis. It does, however, evolve, unlike your thinking. The word acronym is actually a fairly new word dating back to WWII. Initialism dates back a bit further (1900). So, given the age of the majority of English, I would have to say that these are both relatively young words. Clearly, someone came up with the need to name something. Similar to the nature of many unnecessary things, humans want names for every variation of every little thing. In both instances, you are accomplishing the same goal. I suppose you need to start a rant on how the word cola is completely misused, too. The definition of that of course is referring to a drink in which kola nuts are used where as maybe a tiny portion, if any, major vendors use that today. Once again, no one flipping cares. They know what the word is referring to and that is the main purpose of common language. This isn't a college class on language semantics. It's a forum for people interested in Windows Phone to discuss current Windows Phone events and trends.
 
From dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/initialism?s=t

in·i·tial·ism
  [ih-nish-uh-liz-uhm]  Show IPA

noun

1.

name or term formed from the initial letters of a group of words and pronounced as a separate word, as NATO  for North Atlantic Treaty organization;  an acronym." (bolded, itialicized, and underlined for effect)

 

Just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean that it isn't. If I can define initialism as an acronym, which I can as per dictionary.com (used as YOU originally referenced it), I believe we are at a crossroads. Either "reliable" sources are not much different than "unreliable" sources or this whole debate is worthless. By trusting dictionary.com, by the very definition of the word initialism, acronym and initialism mean the same thing. I'm not claiming this to be the case. I'm going with the idea that you put too much trust in things that have far fewer editors. Yes, you can vandalize Wikipedia. Does that mean everything should be 100% trusted? No. Does that mean dictionary.com should always be trusted? No. Does the fact the Encyclopedia Britannica is missing information that other sources contains mean that those topics do not exist? Of course not.

MarkAllett says:

Firstly, I particularly enjoyed how you claimed that "no one flipping cares", while writing a massive post on the subject. I also enjoyed how after citing Wikipedia, you've now moved onto Sesame Street. I'm not sure what point you think you're making with that, but you seem to have lost sight of the fact that the alphabet isn't an abbreviation for any particular (presumably 26 word) phrase. So regardless of whether Big Bird (lol), pronounces it as a word or a string of letters, it isn't an acronym. You're going off on a nonsense tangent with that.
The dictionary.com page backs up what I'm saying. I suggest you learn to read a dictionary properly and understand when it is referring to associated words. It doesn't define "initialism" and "acronym" as the same thing. You even bolded the point where it explains that NATO is an acronym!!
 

ikissfutebol says:

Since apparently you feel it matters that the formatting of the source is plain, I shall try this again.
Initialism

1.

a name or term formed from the initial letters of a group of words and pronounced as a separate word, as NATO  for North Atlantic Treaty organization;  an acronym.

 

I don't see any mention of this being synonymous, related, associated, or anything else. I see a long definition followed by a shorter one. Let's try this again.

 

Ignorant

 

1.

lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.

 

You are claiming that I can't define ignorant as unlearned. Interesting. Let's look at the third definition.

 

3. 

uninformed; unaware.

 

I guess you are going to say that uninformed and unaware are associated words. Why, then, are the words used soley as the definition? I would hope you can also regonize that inform and learn mean virtually the same thing. The difference is I can inform you all day of something, but you do not necessarily learn it.

 

Back to my initial point. People, yourself included, have supplied numerous references to RPG being called an acronym. Just because a source doesn't meet your all mighty definition of the English police doesn't mean people do not understand the context of what is going on. Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster, despite your hopes, have it listed within the defition, which is what normal people read to be the definition. I bet the Urban Dictionary really upsets you. Guess what... that's the purpose of ANY dictictionary- to make sure people are all more or less on the same page when we use a word. If Keith wanted to say, Action Role Playing Game... "the initals", people would have still knew what he meant. If he wanted to call it the definition, initialism, phrase, whatever, so long as people knew what he was referring to, it doesn't matter. This is a forum, not English Semantics 600.

 

I give up. There is no point in talking with someone that is locked in. I just hope you can heed my message- language is used to communicate something with one another. If it is clear what is being implied, you don't need to go correcting people. Language served its purpose. Move on. All you have said to anyone so far is that they are wrong and here's my proof. I pointed out one of your sources seems to support the notion that it doesn't matter. Apparently you need to write to Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster. If you don't, you are going to have millions of kids writing definitions incorrectly as hardly anyone writes out the long form of a definition if they know the words used in the shorter form.

MarkAllett says:

Holy crap, you still haven't understood? Any acronym can also be an initialism. It totally depends on how you pronounce it. Remember the SQL example from a while back? Lots of people pronounce that "sequel" - ie as an acronym. Lots of other people hate that, and pronounce by its initials S-Q-L and therefore as an initialism. So you can see how any acronym can also be an initialism – it has to be, that’s just plain logic.
However, it doesn't work the other way around since an initialism isn't necessarily pronounceable as an acronym. Generally speaking (though there are exceptions), for an abbreviation to work as an acronym it requires the presence of vowels to make it pronounceable, such as in AIDS, RADAR and NATO. If there aren’t any vowels such as in RPG for example, then generally it’s tricky to pronounce it as an acronym and our instinct is to spell out the letters instead. Of course were we to take Role Playing Game and insert some other words such as Role Action Playing Online Game, its initials would be RAPOG and instinctively you’d pronounce it as an acronym.
Your misunderstanding of the above point is leading you to misinterpret what the dictionaries are telling you. Go back and read them again.
And yes, I know there are references out there to people getting acronyms wrong. That’s because a lot of people are wrong and people simply care not to learn the difference. You want to make out that I’m “locked-in”, yet that’s exactly how I see someone who, when they are shown to be wrong, rather than take it on board, choose to go on about language “evolving”, as if it evolves to encompass their mistakes. It doesn’t.
RPG isn’t an acronym.

ikissfutebol says:

You still haven't gotten it either. I have two different well trusted dictionary sources using both within the realm of their definition. If you want to argue with the publishers at Merriam-Webster, go for it. That would at least put you back into realm of being right and the English police.
Regardless of whatever point you are continually trying to make, the fact of the matter is someone knows what is implied when they call RPG an acronym. The whole purpose of the very definitions you have been objecting to were clearly met when people knew what was being said. That is the very DEFINITON of DEFINITION- people had acknowledged an understanding of the term being used. To go and correct people on a Windows Phone forum over this is childish. This isn't someone referring to a part on a device and you are informing them of the proper name. This isn't poor grammar where the typo or misused word/contraction makes it so the sentence potentially has more than one meaning. This is someone going out of their way to correct someone of English semantics when the whole purpose of those semantics were already rendered moot.
Given that you can write SQL as an acronym or as an initialism, the argument can be made that anyone can pronounce any phrase turned initals that they wish... oh wait, this gets back to the ABCs example I made early. You don't have to like it, but you are admitting it's true by using it as an example. People can say a series of letters if they want or say them individually. Calling people out over English semantics on a technology forum is pointless and annoying. That is my point and has been my point. Take your definition policing to Yahoo or CNN comments... at least it's not so one sided of you against everyone else.

MarkAllett says:

Reading between the lines and noting your change in tack, I'm guessing the penny has finally dropped with regard to the relationship between acronym and initialism. Good, we're getting somewhere.
 
"Regardless of whatever point you are continually trying to make, the fact of the matter is someone knows what is implied when they call RPG an acronym"
Sure, but that doesn't make them correct! When people say "would of", I know they mean "would have", but that doesn't make them correct, they're still wrong.
 
"Calling people out over English semantics on a technology forum is pointless and annoying. That is my point and has been my point."
Nope, your 'point' has been to try and prove me wrong when I'm not.
 
"Given that you can write SQL as an acronym or as an initialism"
In the case of SQL as "sequel", people largely don't like it because you have to pretend that there are vowels there that aren't in order to make it pronouncable. Pronouncing SQL as a true acronym sounds stupid.
 
"the argument can be made that anyone can pronounce any phrase turned initals that they wish... "
The argument can be made, sure - but it'd be wrong. I wish this was an audio medium, I'd *love* to hear your efforts at pronouncing RPG as an acronym. If you can host them online *please please* do.
 
"oh wait, this gets back to the ABCs example I made early. You don't have to like it, but you are admitting it's true by using it as an example.
Do I really need to explain how SQL can be pronounced as an initialism *and* an acronym again?
 
People can say a series of letters if they want or say them individually."
Er... isn't that the same thing?
 
RPG isn't an acronym.

ikissfutebol says:

I asked  the most knowledgeable source of English rules, semantics, grammar, etc. that I know and they weren't even very familiar with the word initialism and wrote "initialism/acronym" as in they were one in the same.  She agrees with me that the most important part of calling something a name is that the people reading it understand it. This is coming from a retired English teacher with decades of experience. Sorry... I'll take her word over a dictionary that she has likely corrected, some random self-appointed forum police officer, or anything else you are going to say. You don't have to, but that's not the point. The point is, when asked if there is a difference, she was unaware of one. That's all I need to know.
That said, I have no change in tact. I just know when someone is too damn stubborn to admit they were mistaken. The best part is that you started recognizing that I read the definitions correctly, but only addressed the one that supports your agrument. Still have that Merriam-Webster thorn, eh?
I have my doubts, but one thing you should be able to admit is that a definition is only good as its recognition among its users. Not only is this the purpose of a definition, but it's also the only way people can communicate. I'm sure you'd have a fun time moving to a different English speaking country where the words mean something different than your beloved bible/dictionary.
 
Two things you need to prove- Merriam-Webster's definition of acronym is wrong and that the purpose of a definition is to be anal retentive as opposed to have an argreed upon meaning so both parties have an understanding of what is being said. I think the odds of either happening are the same of me responding to any more of this - zero. Best of luck to your future English policing.

MarkAllett says:

I asked the most knowledgeable source of English rules, semantics, grammar, etc. that I know and they weren't even very familiar with the word initialism and wrote "initialism/acronym" as in they were one in the same. This is coming from a retired English teacher with decades of experience.
Then she too is wrong, about a pretty basic concept too. We’re not exactly arguing split infinitives here. As soon as she admitted that she “[wasn’t] even very familiar with the word initialism”, did you not start to suspect that perhaps she’s not as enlightened as you previously thought? Did she perhaps learn her English from Big Bird and Wikipedia too? Is she really “the most knowledgeable source of English rules, semantics, grammar, etc. that [you] know”? It’s no wonder you’re struggling.
 
She agrees with me that the most important part of calling something a name is that the people reading it understand it.
Certainly, I’ve never disputed this. However, that doesn’t make people right when they are wrong. Just like I already explained in my “should of”/”should have” example. If I explain a problem with my car to the mechanic and I use all the wrong terms but the mechanic figures out what I mean, that doesn’t mean that all-of-a-sudden I was using the right terms and that somehow the terms have just “evolved”.
 
Sorry... I'll take her word over a dictionary that she has likely corrected
She’s corrected a dictionary now?! Yet she “[wasn’t] even very familiar with the word initialism”. Which dictionary was this? Or was this just a fantasy scenario of yours?
 
some random self-appointed forum police officer,
You see this is the problem. You’re angry. You’re angry that I bothered to make the point here. This has clouded your mind and made you determined to prove me wrong and shout me down rather than just take on board some new knowledge.
 
The point is, when asked if there is a difference, she was unaware of one.
Ahh… so “unaware” now? Not telling you that there isn’t one, but admitting that she doesn’t actually know..
 
That said, I have no change in tact.
Yes you do. You’ve shifted to a heavy emphasis on the ‘if someone understands it, that’s enough’, angle rather than suggesting I’m wrong. You’ve realised I’m right because you finally understand what the dictionary is telling you, so you’ve switched to saying that it doesn’t matter. You’ve even done so in this latest post, multiple times.
Secondly, you mean “tack”, not “tact”. I know what you meant, but it doesn’t make you any less wrong.
 
I just know when someone is too damn stubborn to admit they were mistaken.
Oh the irony… LOL!
 
The best part is that you started recognizing that I read the definitions correctly
Where did I do that? Please quote me.
 
Still have that Merriam-Webster thorn, eh?
Er.. no. I quickly pointed out that it agrees with what I was saying. It’s a bit clunky in its presentation, but it’s pretty clear that it says that NATO, radar and laser are acronyms (or “a *word* formed”), yet something such as FBI is an initialism.

I have my doubts, but one thing you should be able to admit is that a definition is only good as its recognition among its users. Not only is this the purpose of a definition, but it's also the only way people can communicate.
Again, this is an example of your shift in tack - to argue that it’s only important whether something is understood or not. What I would say is – when do you stop? When do you decide that your English is of an acceptable level? After you’ve finished watching Sesame Street? My kids are perfectly capable of communicating with me (both < 10 years), so should we stop teaching them language? Should I stop bothering to correct them when they get things wrong just because I know what they meant? Clearly not.
 
Two things you need to prove- Merriam-Webster's definition of acronym is wrong
It isn’t wrong, I never said it was. I stated that it agrees with me. I said this days ago when you first posted it. It pretty clearly says that NATO, radar and laser are acronyms (or “a *word* formed”), yet something such as FBI is an initialism.
 
and that the purpose of a definition is to be anal retentive as opposed to have an argreed upon meaning so both parties have an understanding of what is being said.
Another example of your change in tack. You’ve got defensive and want to make out that it’s “anal retentive”, to be correct about the definition of a word. It isn’t, it’s just being correct. Being told you’re wrong, in any forum or scenario, shouldn’t really be met with such resistance and anger as you’ve shown here.
I think the odds of either happening are the same of me responding to any more of this - zero.
We both know the chances of you replying are far higher than that. LOL!
RPG is not an acronym.
 
 

schlubadub says:

Well this is a fun conversation that I keep getting notifications for :P
Speaking of the Webster dictionary... If only Noah Webster had died of dysentery instead of afflicting the world with his bastardised version of English :P

ikissfutebol says:

And oh by the way... I just checked Merriam-Webster. You're going to be PISSED. The dictionaries are not in your favor man.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/acronym?show=0&t=1371563918

Definition of ACRONYM

: a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : initialism

 

Definition of INITIALISM

: an abbreviation formed from initial letters

 

MarkAllett says:

What are you talking about? That definition agrees with what I've been saying!

ikissfutebol says:

Wow...
So you know all this about English and yet you fail to read the full definition?! The definition of an acronym IS initialism. Clearly stated and even written as a blue link. This is clearly NOT what you have been saying. If you want to argue that it is, please stop posting on internet forums as we have proof to the contrary by simply scrolling up.
Either I need to stop listening to you or stop listening to dictionaries. I think I will opt to stop listening to you. People can call an RPG whatever the heck they want to call it because we know what they are talking about. I have never heard of someone being a definition troll, particularly when their own sources prove them to be wrong! By your logic, I'm not sitting on my tushy/tush right now as tush/tushy isn't a word in the Oxford dictionary... a 3 year old will look at you shaking your head. At least Wikipedia recognizes that tush is a slang term for buttocks, of course... you can't trust that because Wikipedia is useless and dictionaries are the letter of the law.
 
Your current argument is based on ignoring data that is presented before you that you do not want to accept. I believe we call those that manipulate and/or ignore data to be bad sources of information.

MarkAllett says:

"The definition of an acronym IS initialism. Clearly stated and even written as a blue link. This is clearly NOT what you have been saying"
 
See above where I clearly explain how every acronym can also be an initialism (but not the other way around).
I think you've misunderstood this, then misunderstood the dictionary, and then got the entire wrong end of the stick making the rest of your rant (which is frankly too stupid to even address), rather unnecessary.
 
RPG isn't an acronym

JKOgden says:

I may have to get this game, it looks really good. Another game I'd love to have is Bastion.

Zeeshan360 says:

Bastion is great for XBLA .. They are indie developers , might not be having enough manpower to port the game

danj210 says:

Some good bugs that they gotta fix but with a little love this game is on to somethin!

Zeeshan360 says:

Dammit man .. So many good games coming out now .
A year back my WP7 used to be dry , now I don't have time to complete them :P

jhoff80 says:

One thing you neglected to mention that people might want to know is that this game syncs to an online account, so your progress is shared between Windows 8 and WP8.
 
Edit:  Never mind (I previously said sync is manual), sync is automatic after beating levels and before loading the game.

DreadVenom says:

Seriously, the 29GB of my 920 is almost gone, saving last remaining space for you know what. If only we could save games to SkyDrive and access similarly to how X1 will function. Ohwel, one can dream.

jasonnovak says:

Since this is free to play supported by in-app purchases on other platforms but needs to be purchased on WP8, have they done away with in-app purchases?

Nope.  I am kind of upset about that.  The game keeps saying it is going to show me ads as well and I have to buy gold to not see the ads.  I haven't seen an ad yet but if I do I will be mad.  If a pay for a game I expect it to not have ads. 

dpiranda says:

Almost bought this game. If I buy I don't want to see any ads...

I got it, no adds it seems... But I only played 3 levels...

Ascriab says:

I haven't seen any ads, but see the message saying "become a gold member to remove ads". Maybe it is leftover from something?

Nakazul says:

Game crashes everytime I am to move. What's up?

Nakazul says:

L920. The device goes unresponsive. I have to soft reset to get it back. It kept crashing, and i restarting. Instead of doing as the game suggest when it starts, to move, I press pause and then resume and it seems to be working... for now, just tried and I could move. So I will try again soon when I find the time again. B.T.W. The game is not butter smooth as they say either so something is not exactly as it should.

Bob Tabor says:

OMG ... Same situation!  Lumia 920, device is frozen.  Can't even do a soft reset!  Can't accept a phone call.  Waiting for the battery to die in hopes it will reset.  I've never had this experience with *any* device or game.  If anyone has a recommendation, I'm all ears!

Edit: Soft reset finally worked. Will uninstall immediately. Save your money until they work out the bugs.

Nakazul says:

Press power + volym down
... hold like that for 5 secs +

Edit...aha, great.

Eas195 says:

exactly is for 10 seconds ;)

I had a crash today, after 30 minutes of play, but the graphics are cool and it is easy to play.

hahabowen says:

I've got into the same situation twice..in 10min game plays. Hope they fix it fast

Nakazul says:

Your on a Lumia alså?

ogracia says:

It crashes my Lumia 620 too...

I love this kind of games. It just looks and plays fantastic on my Ativ S.

Oxymoron428 says:

I usually don't buy apps that don't have trials, but since can try this out on windows 8, I'll try it there first.

Edit: played it on Windows 8, and the game play isn't that bad. But it's too sacrilegious for me :/

majohnny says:

Is there some kind of multiplayer?

Aggemam says:

Damn it... I want this game. Is there any way to get around the WiFi only DL? I have a data plan for a 100 GB per month, so this is lame...

Malron says:

I feel your pain. Unfortunately there is 50 MB restriction that can't be changed.

schlubadub says:

Who doesn't have WiFi though? I wonder if you could set up a phone as a WiFi hotspot and bypass the download restrictions that way?

Eas195 says:

No, you can't, unless you have another phone (either iP, Android, or WP) that can be used as mobile hotspot.

schlubadub says:

Yeah, sorry that's what I meant. Connecting to your own hotspot on the same device would be weird :P

Aggemam says:

I do (usually) have WiFi. But the apartment building I live in are offering fiber optic cable 50/50 mbit, but due to a misunderstanding I terminated my contract with my previous ISP too soon. So 4G for another one and a half months for me. - It's worth the wait though. :-)

dlelacheur says:

I've been playing this on my surface RT....great game, I wish they utilized the 360 controller like the GBA/SNES emulators!

Mooncow27 says:

I'm missing out due to having wp7. See you in 3 months I imagine.

Cruzer1 says:

Things I've noticed. Camt buy ingame coins. I bought the $4.99 option to give me 1000 game coins but that didn't do anything, even tho there was some synchronizing involved. I did it again with the same results. Also when I registered in the game using my email and creating a password, it doesn't allow me to log in as a registered user. But the game itself is fun. Worth the $2. Just hoping I don't get some future charge off my credit card due to me trying twice to purchase in game coins

Not too big on RPG though a huge fan of borderlands. Will add this to my May Be pile.

chucky says:

Wow I've never though this game would hit the windows phone store.. Nice! wp8 keeps getting better everyday.

pkvillager says:

Played a couple of the beginner levels. Fun and good graphics. No performance issues on my 920.

chezm says:

Watched a couple of videos on YouTube looks awesome, been waiting for this type of game so I bought it. Excited to give it a go.

Cruzer1 says:

Update since my last post, game has started crashing a few times from around level 8-9. Tho seems to have fixed itself now.

The W8 version is full of adds. The WP8 version free of them at this stage.

dee_R0w says:

Very buggy on 8x. Constant crashes and sync issues. Usually requires me to power cycle my device. Would really like a refund at this point.

I don't have that issue at all maybe you might need to free up some space?

Nakazul says:

Michael Archambault, can you ask the developer if there aware of any bugs or how to send in and report them?