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 - ๐ Aria ๐ฎ
Pages: 1 ... 328329330 331332 ... 352
9871
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:50:30 PM »
The point is haruhi isn't the first show with an omnipotent teenage girl
Well duh, that's like saying The Day the Earth Stool Still was the first piece of science-fiction ever. I'm just pointing out that it's been done before, and years before Madoka rolled around.
9872
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:46:49 PM »
Haruhi did it first.
no she didn't
Shut up George Lucas.
Don't even need retconning
>implying Haruhi wasn't basically God
I'm actually only objecting to the 'first' bit
The show in relation to Madoka, you pedant.
9873
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:45:20 PM »
Haruhi did it first.
no she didn't
Shut up George Lucas.
Don't even need retconning
>implying Haruhi wasn't basically God
9874
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:44:08 PM »
Nazi uniforms are stylish as fuck. They may have lost the war, but they went down in a flaming inferno of fashion.
9875
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:41:54 PM »
Haruhi did it first.
no she didn't
Shut up George Lucas.
9876
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:40:56 PM »
so, you only care if developers lie
even if it's the smallest thing
and i do consider fps to be one of THE smallest things
It's a problem of trust. Not trust like between people, but a trust to receive a product that closely resembles or is better than how it was advertised. If a developer puts forth the effort to lie about something so small as the framerate, then I wouldn't trust them to tell the truth about important things. Bullshots are one thing, they're usually advertised through wordplay and vague promises. I'm not naive of how advertising works, and I wouldn't expect the video game industry to be above it. But there is a clear difference between "advertising tricks" and such uncouth lies. I staunchly believe in a difference in being simply deceptive and outright lying, and consider it a principle not to support the latter.
9877
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:33:06 PM »
Haruhi did it first.
9878
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:31:36 PM »
i'm just saying, if a developer said "we chose 30fps because we don't give a fuck", i'd by 30 copies of the game
1 for each frame per second
If a developer outright said, "we just don't really care about framerate, it's not a main concern" I'd still buy the game. Because they aren't lying, and that's the only instance in which I truly care about framerate outside of an unstable one.
9879
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:29:32 PM »
>implying a dog can't be cute
Cute =/= pure love, hon.
9880
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:26:54 PM »
2D is on the line between "not moe enough" and "too moe". 3D, on the other hand, is a qt3.14 in terms of how cute a 3DPD can be.
9881
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:24:12 PM »
The only people who are adamant about 30fps are developers who use it as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, the rabid fanbase of said developers, and the people who buy into it without evidence solely on account of it being repeated so often.
I meant you, actually--the people who are adamant about 60fps. Because from the perspective of someone who doesn't care, at all, about fps, it all seems kinda silly and not losing sleep over. Developers lie all the time--why not focus on lying as a whole, rather than argue with idiots about minutiae?
I might sound hypocritical, too, because I still recognize 60fps is important in games like Street Fighter, but I still don't notice it optically. And if they ever changed it, fuck if I'd notice.
Like I said, I don't care if a game is 30fps. I play a lot of games that are 30fps. 60fps is indisputably better, but not necessary for a game to be good. It's icing on the cake, really. The problem isn't the framerate itself, it's the connotations of how a developer advertises it. There's nothing wrong with saying "It was either high-rez, high-poly models and environments or 60fps. We chose the former.", or "we chose 30fps because the game's performance was unstable beyond that." If a developer says that, I'd commend them on being honest about it. "We decided to use 30fps because it makes for a more cinematic experience" though? No, fuck you, I'm not buying your game. You don't lie about one thing then tell the truth everywhere else because of some sense of conscious; if a developer lies about the framerate, they're bound to lie about other things as well. Things that are much more essential to a good game than framerate. tl;dr I wouldn't refuse to buy a game because it's 30fps, I'd refuse to buy it on account of lies and (what usually is accompanied by) false promises. I refuse to support a developer like that on principle.
9882
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:13:58 PM »
I either managed to only play great games when I was little, or I forgot all the bad ones.
9883
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:11:12 PM »
Moe is cancer. Cute, cuddly, cancer.
9884
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:09:26 PM »
You're an idiot if you won't buy a game because it's 30fps, you're also an idiot if you buy a game because 30fps is advertised as a fucking feature. Right. I don't even understand the "30fps is cinematic" argument. Sounds dumb to me.
But to be so adamant about it?... I don't know.
The argument is that since movies play at 24fps, then 24fps is more lifelike than 60fps. Since refresh rate is very important, and TVs don't refresh at such an odd rate, they use the next best: 30fps. This, of course, disregards how visual perception works in reality as apposed to video footage, the fact that movies only tend to be shot in the range of 24-26fps, a misconception on why 60fps worked so poorly for The Hobbit, the difference between fps and Hz, input lag, among other values. The only people who are adamant about 30fps are developers who use it as a "Get Out of Jail Free" card, the rabid fanbase of said developers, and the people who buy into it without evidence solely on account of it being repeated so often.
9885
« on: January 08, 2015, 09:03:44 PM »
Is it possible for determinism to be proved or disproved, or is the debate entirely based on conjecture?
How misunderstood is the average Schrodinger experiment?
Is it immoral to apply Pavlov and Skinner's experiments at a substantial scale on humans? Would it even be possible to do that at such a scale?
9886
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:58:17 PM »
Watch_Dogs and Destiny also had high amounts of pre-orders. I'd rather wait and see the final product than be wowed by the average consumer's buying habits and advertising.
9887
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:52:15 PM »
To act like it's "superior"... well, yeah, okay, it is superior.
But that's like saying having two pennies is better than having one penny. Which, yeah, you're right, but it's absolutely nothing to write home about or make a big deal out of.
I think the fact that it's even a talking point--something that people are legitimately concerned about--is retarded.
Definitely, a game being 60fps, or 30fps, or 120fps is not a major concern. It's the implications of how developers handle it that matters. A game with a steady 30fps vs a game with 30fps and drops to 20fps, for example, is an indicator of a game's technical stability and polish. A developer that lies about 30fps being better because it's more "cinematic" (a platitude I could write an essay on, but won't for sake of brevity) is a liar and someone who I won't support. Not because the game is 30fps; if they want sub-1080p with comparatively hi-res textures in place of a higher framerate, that's their choice. I wouldn't support them because that developer just showed clear as day that they will lie to the consumer without hesitation. Not even a "white-lie" or a "clever word choice", no, a lie. You're an idiot if you won't buy a game because it's 30fps, you're also an idiot if you buy a game because 30fps is advertised as a fucking feature.
9888
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:28:00 PM »
30fps isn't bad, but 60fps is objectively, quantitatively superior; to claim otherwise is a boldfaced lie and I refuse to support developers who mouth such stupidity. "Cinematic 24fps" can go die in a whole, alongside all of Jack Thompson's trash claims. If you can't hit 60fps and have to cap at 30fps, whatever, but don't bullshit an excuse for it.
9889
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:22:39 PM »
I am Tru
Os pls, you can't be a Scandinavian and an island dwelling Englishman at the same time!
9890
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:20:59 PM »
So there's a difference between knowledge and intelligence. How does education support intelligence as it exists? Knowledge?
By providing knowledge at a level in which in compatible with a person's intelligence. That why a one-size-fits-all approach is stupid, because not everybody learns at the same rate or in the same way.
And to what I understand, genius would be the proper application of intelligence and knowledge to excel in a field.
And is excelling a societal or self label? I guess I should ask which is more important in defining yourself as a genius, do you think?
I agree, a one size fits all approach is idiotic, because it fails to account for individual difference. What about standardized tests? Why are they necessary if they approach intelligence by appealing to standards?
I would define "excelling in a field" as performing at a high level (e.g. someone performing in the 98th percentile of their field would be high performance). I wouldn't define it too strictly, because since intelligence itself isn't a fixed point neither can genius. It would have to be a spectrum of highest performance levels.
Standardized testing is also idiotic. All it does it promote memorization vs understanding, or knowing the answer vs knowing why it's the answer. And since understanding lasts longer than strict, short-term memorization, it follows that standardized testing is a failure on two accounts: measuring knowledge learned and providing a solid foundation to further build on. The only best replacement would be to establish an early baseline of intelligence, provide education that fits the results, and monitor progress by providing benchmarks (of which are compared to the individuals previous scores, not at a state or national level) over the rest of the term to further tweak or improve the education of the such said person.
Is there really such thing as intelligence predestination? It seems like a lot of people hold a belief that individuals have set learning potentials, and if it isn't realized early that correlates to less overall intelligence.
That is the biggest misunderstanding of intelligence, and why IQ is misquoted so often. Intelligence changes and develops over the course of a person's lifespan. It isn't possible to know what a person's IQ will be 50 years from now, much less ten. That's why assigning people into heavily standardized "castes" for their education is unhealthy. It can lead to underperformance/frustration at higher levels or overperformance/boredom at lower levels. This leads back to extremely regimented standards to be a poor choice, because it does not match the needs of the individual, and in the worst case scenario be detrimental. Even then, "intelligence" determinators have been a work-in-progress since the early 20th century. As Meta mentioned, it's much easier to determine the learning progress and retention of STEM fields due to their inherent logical and rational nature, where as creative fields (such as fine arts) are much more poorly understood. Someone could be (for lack of a better word) an objective musical genius, but it would go unproven for lack of the ability to do so. Even in STEM fields it's still not completely clear how intelligence "works", as an intelligence rating is a range of levels. At this point in time, an IQ test is not a good indicator of someone's ability to succeed in a field.
9891
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:07:10 PM »
So there's a difference between knowledge and intelligence. How does education support intelligence as it exists? Knowledge?
By providing knowledge at a level in which in compatible with a person's intelligence. That why a one-size-fits-all approach is stupid, because not everybody learns at the same rate or in the same way.
And to what I understand, genius would be the proper application of intelligence and knowledge to excel in a field.
And is excelling a societal or self label? I guess I should ask which is more important in defining yourself as a genius, do you think?
I agree, a one size fits all approach is idiotic, because it fails to account for individual difference. What about standardized tests? Why are they necessary if they approach intelligence by appealing to standards?
I would define "excelling in a field" as performing at a high level (e.g. someone performing in the 98th percentile of their field would be high performance). I wouldn't define it too strictly, because since intelligence itself isn't a fixed point neither can genius. It would have to be a spectrum of highest performance levels or mastery. Standardized testing is also idiotic. All it does it promote memorization vs understanding, or knowing the answer vs knowing why it's the answer. And since understanding lasts longer than strict, short-term memorization, it follows that standardized testing is a failure on two accounts: measuring knowledge learned and providing a solid foundation to further build on. The only best replacement would be to establish an early baseline of intelligence, provide education that fits the results, and monitor progress by providing benchmarks (of which are compared to the individuals previous scores, not at a state or national level) over the rest of the term to further tweak or improve the education of the such said person.
9892
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:19:46 PM »
I haven't heard that term since Wyldfyre left Bnet.
The Fur Group died after Wyld and Rounded left, didn't it? What a shame, it was a "decent" group.
9893
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:17:09 PM »
So there's a difference between knowledge and intelligence. How does education support intelligence as it exists? Knowledge?
By providing knowledge at a level in which in compatible with a person's intelligence. That why a one-size-fits-all approach is stupid, because not everybody learns at the same rate or in the same way. And to what I understand, genius would be the proper application of intelligence and knowledge to excel in a field.
9894
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:13:27 PM »
More Weeb on the staff or there will be mass sudoku in the town square
>thinks I'm a filthy Weaboo
>ใใใใ ใตใ ใใต ใใใใจ
pls kitty, ใใใใใใใใฏใจใใฎใ
9895
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:07:54 PM »
[Insert remove Common Core argument]
As I understand it, I actually think Common Core isn't a half-bad idea.
In theory it's sound. Too bad that in reality it's just No Child Left Behind applied to the curriculum and a one-size-fit-all approach to how teachers can do their job.
9896
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:05:10 PM »
More Weeb on the staff or there will be mass sudoku in the town square
9897
« on: January 08, 2015, 06:57:48 PM »
A measure of learning ability and knowledge at a given period of the brain's development.
9898
« on: January 08, 2015, 06:55:34 PM »
oh, i thought you said you had the E4 beat
i actually just made it to the seventh gym; haven't played in a couple weeks
I realize there have been a few changes since Gen 3, but I played all three versions so much that I could Nuzlocke them without much difficulty. Given that Gen 6 is the easiest one ever, I have no doubt that I can beat the E4 without breaking a sweat.
9899
« on: January 08, 2015, 06:06:23 PM »
I'm still trying to decide if I'm going to bother making a competitive team in AS or not. All I'll end up doing is sweeping the E4 harder than I already do. do it, that would be sweet
and add me so i can destroy you
Pls Verb, I'm still on my way to the fourth gym.
9900
« on: January 08, 2015, 06:04:08 PM »
I'm still trying to decide if I'm going to bother making a competitive team in AS or not. All I'll end up doing is sweeping the E4 harder than I already do.
Pages: 1 ... 328329330 331332 ... 352
|
Show Posts
