the original trilogy was for kids, too, but didnt have these wild narrative inconsistencies. am i not allowed to critique a director for making a few shitty movies?

I literally just said that it's your prerogative. lol

I just don't personally see a point in that, considering that I still find the prequels entertaining.

Quote from: Verbatim on April 22, 2015, 08:23:48 PM

Caring about Anakin's seduction is, in my opinion, a nitpick, and something that can be overlooked very easily.

its the single most important plot point of the entire series! it should be harshly criticized for being poorly thought-out.

If you want to take a kid's film that seriously, I guess that's your prerogative.

i care because vader was the exact opposite of stupid. thats an inconsistent character. you dont just magically stop being an idiot once you get sith powers.

He's also how old in the original trilogy? Seems like he would have wizened up a little to me.

Unless you're referring to sources outside of the movies, in which case, I couldn't give the most miserable fuck.

So, you're saying that if you were in the position you wouldn't find it at all incredibly odd or suspicious that the Supreme Chancellor starts telling you some ancient Sith mythology that's relevant to a problem you're dealing with when you just came by to watch the opera with him?

I'm saying I don't know what the fuck I'd do, or how the fuck I'd react. I'm also in a universe filled with weird fucking aliens and laser swords and shit. A universe where the "good" and "evil" are bluntly defined, and there is little to no ambivalence whatsoever. So I wouldn't exactly be living in a rational universe to begin with.

Anakin wasn't even slowly pulled to the Dark Side

>Episode II

Yes, he was.

You can like something and still recognize that it has faults and problems that can either be fixed or improved.

And it should be the developers' job to fix them. Not ours.

I would not be able to get this same mileage out of vanilla Skyrim.

You probably shouldn't.

300 hours of one game? I'm not saying I haven't done that before, but that's still excessive.

First off, I honestly don't feel that life is imposed on me.

I mean, it is, just by definition.

Perhaps yes, my initial conception wasn't formed of my own volition, but that occurred before I had a will of my own.

Well, then I'd just make the argument that your will was imposed upon you. If sentience wasn't a thing, procreation wouldn't really be a problem, in my opinion.

But now that I am capable of rational thought, I have opted to continue my existence. If I truly had no wish to continue living, I could literally walk down stairs, take a knife from the kitchen, go back upstairs and draw the knife vertically down my wrists and be dead long before anyone would even know about it. Secondly, if it's good enough for me, why question it?

Because the universe doesn't revolve around you.

I mean, that's literally the answer to that question. You like your life? You're okay with existing? Fine.
That doesn't give you the right to impose it on others, though.

What need is there for a grand purpose? If you enjoy life, live it, if you don't, you're free to off yourself, for the most part.

No, you're not. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries. Maybe I want to make sure my death is

1. painless
2. peaceful
3. quiet
4. organized
5. humane
6. successful

etc. etc. etc.

Maybe driving a kitchen knife down my wrist doesn't seem like a very pleasant way to go.

And either way, it doesn't solve the problem of procreation. Suicide does not undo your birth, which is the root of the problem. Instead of having people painfully commit suicide if they don't want to be here, why not make the rational decision to not impose life on people in the first place?

Oh, and give us the legal precedent to administer euthanasia. That too.

Wouldn't you agree that because those soldiers did what they did in WWII, that we're in a better way now? They did a lot of terrible things. Both sides did. But the conflict, eventually ended. It stopped.

Yeah. I would argue that the voluntary human extinction movement is just that, however. We fight wars to end them.

Okay, that's not true at all.

But let's pretend it was. Anti-natalism is another war, essentially. It's a war against the human condition--a war to end all wars. And you know that, that's what this whole discussion has basically been about. Ending all conflict. If there are no sentient beings to suffer, there are no sentient beings to be responsible for. No sentient beings to be accountable for.

So if we or anything else stands a chance to reach an end to conflict, or in your case, an end to misery, should they not try their absolute hardes to get there? To succeed?

Am I not?

This idea that anti-natalism is about being a quitter is simply a misunderstanding. An understandable one, but one nonetheless.

Quote from: Voro 'Cinotai on April 22, 2015, 06:49:06 PM

Oh my God he's back.

gOD's not real, stop shitting up this thread.

happy birthday m8

Because perhaps while he likes playing Skyrim, he wants to tweak it so it doesn't become repetitive,  or see what the modding community has in store, i.e. quests, Loch Wraith form, etc.

Personally, I would recommend to stop playing Skyrim, because it's bad.

Why would I do that when the dev gives me the tools and support to change their game to play and look the way I want it to?

Why would you do that when you could play a different game instead, so you don't get bored?

Modding also extends a games life time way past what it would originally be and helps support the devs. The Imperial Civil War mod team essentially gave us Empire at War 2 for example and it came at no extra cost to those who already owned the base game and its expansion.

So they gave you a shitty RTS game. Great.

A logical statement by tenuous means, sure.

You've yet to demonstrate how it is tenuous. Just like literally everyone I've ever discussed this subject with.

"Humans need to exist because _________________."

Fill in the blank.

Make whatever analogies you please but choosing absurd ones or incomparable ones doesn't help your argument as much as you think it does.

The analogy was neither absurd, nor was it incomparable. They were perfectly equatable.

That fact that you think that's what I'm getting at is rather amusing, my point was that you drew a silly analogy when a more suitable one would have sufficed instead of something that's bordering on an appeal to emotions.

>a more suitable one

Like what. What better example could I have possibly given other than slavery. One of the biggest progressive movements in history compared with an even more ambitious progressive movement (the voluntary extinction of the human race). There is nothing quite like a movement like that, so I went with the closest possible thing. But apparently you have more suitable examples.

No fucking shit, talk about preaching to the choir there. People who make the decision to end their lives are either A) Mentally Ill or B) Have a set of life circumstances that causes them to make said decision, either to escape shame or debt or whatever myriad cause it can be.

Or because they don't want to live anymore. You forgot that really basic part that no one else would have ever missed.

My point there was that no person of sound mind is going to want to kill themselves simply because they hate the fact that they were born, if they do then there is something wrong with their psychology and they need treatment.

Why? Why must you force people to continue living if they don't want to?

People who wish to end their lives must be of a sound mind and not afflicted with delusions or mental illness.

Again, why? Who cares?

Hating the idea that they were born without consent isn't sufficient grounds to end your life unless they have another affliction that is tainting their mind.

Totalitarian. Fascist.

No, if I want to die, it shouldn't matter what my circumstances are. They're my business. If someone doesn't like it, tough. It's my life. I didn't choose to be born, and it's completely rational for someone to be upset about that. So if they want to kill themselves, give them the legal precedent to do so.

By the way, you look extremely disingenuous when you say stuff like this when just earlier, you were saying shit like, "If you want to kill yourself, go right ahead." But when it comes to giving people a fair chance to do that legally, you're against it. Hypocrite. Liar.

Nice to see your reading comprehension goes down as your blood pressure goes up. To spell it out, read the above again.

I did.

Nothing changed.

It's not a matter of my reading comprehension. It's a matter of you being inarticulate.

Quote

Oh, and I'd just like to thank you, Sandtrap, for not only having the patience to take a discussion like this seriously, but for presenting a wonderful example of how to converse with me. Not through slander or insults, but through rational insight. Thank you for that.

The irony is delicious

There is nothing ironic about it.

You insulted me, so I insulted you back. That's how it works.
Sandtrap did not ever insult me, so I never insulted him.

You act like there is something I need to get over here

There very much is.

Again with the platinum mad, this is really rather tiresome.

I meant every last thing that I said.

Once again getting too wound up over some simple questions, the purpose isn't to determine whether you believe what you spout which you clearly do, but to follow through with the logic of whether you question your own beliefs, which thankfully you claim to do so.

I don't question my beliefs. I question other people about my beliefs. Again, I wouldn't subscribe to a philosophy that I didn't personally feel was logically sound. Even a little bit. The instant it starts seeming like bullshit, the instant I drop it from my mind, or at least, make some subtle alteration/variation of it. And thus far, no people have convinced me that having children isn't wrong. Zero.

Anyway, good lord you get so emotional over a simple discussion on a forum.

The question of whether or not we should continue to exist is kinda the most important question EVER. You can't afford to be wrong. And if you are wrong, you should be treated harshly.

Once more for highlighting it

Hypocrisy stage 1

Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2015, 01:37:58 PM

Quote from: Mr Psychologist on April 20, 2015, 11:43:19 AM

by the way, way to blame me for bringing the subject up when it actually wasn't me at all

i stated my opinion on the subject, which indeed was rooted in my philosophy, because why the fuck wouldn't it be
and then people started asking me questions about it

so i answered them
which sort of requires that i bring up anti-natalism

you're basically telling me that i should have never stated my opinion in this thread
to which i say, go fuck yourself, you totalitarian piece of shit

Hypocrisy stage 2

Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2015, 02:45:40 PM

Oh, and I'd just like to thank you, Sandtrap, for not only having the patience to take a discussion like this seriously, but for presenting a wonderful example of how to converse with me. Not through slander or insults, but through rational insight. Thank you for that.

Zero hypocrisy.

My original query with you was regarding your apparently dour view of the lives of the disabled to which you of course started on about anti-natalism, hence this little chitchat.

Yeah, because recognizing that having a disability would suck is such a dour outlook.

Or, you could play a different game.

That also implies that most people mod games as soon as vanilla gets stale, and not before they even beat the damn game.
Which is so unbelievably stupid.

anyone with half a brain could pick that out and say "uhhhh you what now?" but nope. not anakin.

Do you realize how easy that is to say as an audience member?

Seems like you've been watching too much Mr. Plinkett.

basically, i was expecting anakin to turn to the dark side for some extremely intimate, nuanced, morally-grey reasons. but no. its flat out selfishness, naivete, and stupidity that turns him.

Who cares? This doesn't make me enjoy the film any less.

Honestly, whoever opposes modding is either an idiot, a troll or a copyright lawyer on steroids.

Or a rational individual who respects art rather than tarnishes it.

Of course modding is terrible and devs that support it don't know what artistic integrity is though.

Correct. And your post only proves my point.