This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - πΊπππππ
πͺππππ
Pages: 1 ... 418419420 421422 ... 1001
12571
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:37:10 AM »
I don't get car people
you don't see house people or boat people, yet it's so popular to be obsessed with cars
12572
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:35:17 AM »
tbh
I'm.not.shitting.you.it's.pissing.me.off
SO
FUCKING
MUCH.
you could always copy/paste preexisting spaces
......oh
I was just joking, that would be so tedious
12573
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:34:42 AM »
kinda weird "extremely autistic" is the term you're looking for
Pretty sure he's actually autistic so can't really fault him for that
12574
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:32:51 AM »
Journey
Call of Duty Blops 3
FF8
Just Cause 3 (just flying around the map is so relaxing)
12575
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:30:41 AM »
Why are you copying Verb?
It's his thing I guess, did it with Fruit too kinda weird but really not a big deal, did you miss the thread where verb freaked out over it, though? Really funny stuff.
12576
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:26:19 AM »
tbh
I'm.not.shitting.you.it's.pissing.me.off
SO
FUCKING
MUCH.
you could always copy/paste preexisting spaces
12577
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:23:02 AM »
Not sure if I agree with the way you use immersion. One can be immersed in a book with a defined character. The problem is that many games just don't have great stories in the first place so they have to cover it up with non-choices and other things to distract you from it.
Although it's not like the story is THAT important in a game; the story is an excuse for the game to unfold, not the other way around.
Maybe I'm using the wrong word. I'm talking about immersion in the sense of "being" your character. In a game like Fallout New Vegas or Halo, the player character is more or less a surrogate for the actual gamer. This allows the gamer themselves to artificially "be" in the game, making choices and decisions that they would make. That kind of personal attachment can't happen in a game tailored for narrative integrity like Spec Ops: The Line, because it would be too open to variables. When you're reading a book, you don't see yourself as the main character like you do in video games that allow it, I guess is my point. It seems we're moving away from a surrogate kind of take on game protagonists and more into a narrative one.
12578
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:09:18 AM »
I guess it depends on what those people were guilty of.
Not really. A criminal not being in jail is a far less immoral state than an innocent person being in jail.
So what if they're all bloodthirsty killers who are very likely to go back out and just slaughter a bunch of people?
You can recapture criminals, issue a public alert, put cities under lockdown. You can't unruin the life of someone who was wrongfully convicted. "Exoneration packages" are a joke.
12579
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:07:31 AM »
12580
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:04:33 AM »
I guess it depends on what those people were guilty of.
Not really. A criminal not being in jail is a far less immoral state than an innocent person being in jail.
12581
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:03:29 AM »
sucks to suck
Not really. Quite enjoyable.
Yuck
12582
« on: April 22, 2016, 10:00:42 AM »
Stop
lmao inglorious sucks to suck
12583
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:51:40 AM »
There isn't a short-haired girl that exists who wouldn't look better with long hair.
to be fair you're comparing an 11 year old version of her to a 21 year old one some girls do look better with short hair, though. Like Natalie Portman.
12584
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:42:12 AM »
No one mentioned that they want to put someone on our currency who broke the law... is this their way of encouraging their citizens to ignore the rules and do what they think is right?
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
I'm against changing the currency, but this should be encouraged.
12585
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:40:28 AM »
Immersion usually. "Choice" often just leads to breaking investment and immersion when you learn to see the seams of the game, places where they had to make sure the character was bottle-necked through some event or sequence and their choices ultimately can't effect. Because some events are paramount and core to a story.
Often times a game being "off the rails" just means having to walk through a zoo, if you get the analogy.
Immersion and choice go hand in hand, that's the problem. To play a truly immersive game you need to sacrifice story, and a game that has a plot as concise and well-told as a novel can have practically no immersion. A game like Last of Us might let you be immersed in the world, but you're not immersed as the character.
12586
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:31:08 AM »
r/shittytumblrgifs
the best kind of gifs
12587
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:28:41 AM »
yeesh
12588
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:28:25 AM »
12589
« on: April 22, 2016, 08:56:25 AM »
Michael Caine
12590
« on: April 22, 2016, 07:57:51 AM »
Because he isn't Marty
Yeah, but I meant change the heart from being based on nameplates to based on whatever the Marty symbol is. Doesn't seem like it should be that much of a stretch to do.
12591
« on: April 22, 2016, 07:40:11 AM »
I didn't really do that much "bad" stuff during school, really just skipping third period nearly every day in junior year because the teacher never took attendance.
12592
« on: April 22, 2016, 07:36:46 AM »
Why not just use whatever's used for the Marty symbol? That's compatible with custom nameplates.
12593
« on: April 22, 2016, 07:15:09 AM »
This is something that I've been thinking about while playing Fallout 4. Obviously, no book has a "silent protagonist"; the protagonist is always a well defined character with set motivations, flaws, etc. This is the root of any character based story.
But with writing video games, you're not just telling a story, you're letting the player themselves discover the story through their perspective as a character in it. Since the player controls a central figure in the plot, developers have two choices: allow the player to legitimately feel like part of the story, like they themselves have agency and weight within it, or to merely allow the player to control a pre-defined character. Both have obvious advantages and disadvantages, the latter generally allowing for a more concisely told experience, the former allowing for a more immersive one. These two things are mutually exclusive because no two players are the same. For the main character to be an immersive one, they need to have as little personal traits as possible, so the player can attach their real life traits to them.
So, in terms of what you want out of a video game, what do you think is the better approach?
12594
« on: April 22, 2016, 07:04:57 AM »
lmao Kid you can say whatever you like, your holier than thou posts do all the explaining for you.
I'm honestly sorry if I give off that impression, I don't mean to. It's the last thing on my mind when I write about my beliefs, sometimes I just get really emotionally invested in them. Anyway, I did derail this thread, it's obviously not about vaccines. I'm just going to end it here.
12595
« on: April 22, 2016, 06:57:42 AM »
I've been thinking I'm better than people in this thread? Newsflash, asshole: I don't think I'm better than anyone, and every single time you criticize me, you throw that accusation in there. Because you do.
The flu vaccine doesn't save lives, I don't know why you're so insistient that it has any utility as a routine injection. It's far worse to give your child annual flu shots than a circumcision, but yeah, neither should be routine. It's a breach of consent either way, and not a neccesary one like the measles or polio vaccine.
I'm "insistient" because it does save lives. Babies can't give consent, so we do what is best for them while minimizing pain.
You're hilarious, dude. I'm actually laughing out loud at these replies.
No, I don't. I literally think the opposite. But thanks for telling me how I feel, next time I'm confused about an emotion I'll be sure to check in with you first. Since we've already clarified that I'm not actually for straight up routine circumcisions, and this is just turning into another thread for people shilling for vaccines, I'm done. Sure people will spin this as me being "btfo"d or whatever, idc.
12597
« on: April 22, 2016, 06:49:36 AM »
I've been thinking I'm better than people in this thread? Newsflash, asshole: I don't think I'm better than anyone, and every single time you criticize me, you throw that accusation in there.
The flu vaccine doesn't save lives, I don't know why you're so insistient that it has any utility as a routine injection. It's far worse to give your child annual flu shots than a circumcision, but yeah, neither should be routine. It's a breach of consent either way, and not a neccesary one like the measles or polio vaccine.
12598
« on: April 22, 2016, 06:41:16 AM »
yet there's people serving decades in prison for willingly putting chemicals into their own bodies.
You're good at bringing up totally irrelevant things.
Being anti-circumcision doesn't make you pro-war on drugs. Nor does being anti-circumcision mean you are diverting your resources away from bigger problems that need your attention; although, funnily enough, given that you've made your own priorities clear here, I have to ask why you are focusing on telling anti-circumcision people they are wrong when you could be focusing on something that is--by your own admission--much more important.
Or are you immune from your own criticism?
It's not irrelevant. Being anti circumcision on the basis of consent means that you give inherent value to consent. That's not compatible with being pro war on drugs or pro needless vaccinations for infants.
No, you fucking junky, we're not obsessed with consent like you are. The point is to not put INFANTS through torture for NO REASON.
Giving your child the modern flu vaccine is worse than giving your child a circumcision. One has long lasting negative health effects, one doesn't.
If you're so against circumcision because of this "think of the children" mentality, why is that the only infant consent issue you care about? Worse things happen to infants in hospitals than circumcision.
Where are you getting the idea it's the only issue I care about? And it has nothing to do with consent. It's about what's best for the baby.
Infants can't give consent in the first place. I'm not sure if you know that or not, because holy fucking shit.
Your attempts at sidetracking the discussion are pitiful and your tactic of "heh you only care about this one issue, I'm morally superior to you" after you got anally raped into submission and admitted circumcision is bad is by far the most pathetic thing I have ever seen on this forum.
I don't know why you constantly try to push this point that I think I'm better than anyone else. It's just wrong. And duh, infants can't give consent, I literally never refuted that anywhere. This has everything to do with consent. The only reason routine circumcision shouldn't happen is because of that lack of consent. Anyone who can give consent can do whatever harmful shit to their bodies that they want to. Infants can't, which is why circumcision and non-essential vaccines shouldn't be given to them.
12599
« on: April 22, 2016, 06:34:25 AM »
yet there's people serving decades in prison for willingly putting chemicals into their own bodies.
You're good at bringing up totally irrelevant things.
Being anti-circumcision doesn't make you pro-war on drugs. Nor does being anti-circumcision mean you are diverting your resources away from bigger problems that need your attention; although, funnily enough, given that you've made your own priorities clear here, I have to ask why you are focusing on telling anti-circumcision people they are wrong when you could be focusing on something that is--by your own admission--much more important.
Or are you immune from your own criticism?
It's not irrelevant. Being anti circumcision on the basis of consent means that you give inherent value to consent. That's not compatible with being pro war on drugs or pro needless vaccinations for infants.
No, you fucking junky, we're not obsessed with consent like you are. The point is to not put INFANTS through torture for NO REASON.
Giving your child the modern flu vaccine is worse than giving your child a circumcision. One has long lasting negative health effects, one doesn't. If you're so against circumcision because of this "think of the children" mentality, why is that the only infant consent issue you care about? Worse things happen to infants in hospitals than circumcision.
12600
« on: April 22, 2016, 06:29:26 AM »
yet there's people serving decades in prison for willingly putting chemicals into their own bodies.
You're good at bringing up totally irrelevant things.
Being anti-circumcision doesn't make you pro-war on drugs. Nor does being anti-circumcision mean you are diverting your resources away from bigger problems that need your attention; although, funnily enough, given that you've made your own priorities clear here, I have to ask why you are focusing on telling anti-circumcision people they are wrong when you could be focusing on something that is--by your own admission--much more important.
Or are you immune from your own criticism?
It's not irrelevant. Being anti circumcision on the basis of consent means that you give inherent value to consent. That's not compatible with being pro war on drugs or pro needless vaccinations for infants.
Pages: 1 ... 418419420 421422 ... 1001
|
Show Posts
