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.
Topics - Verbatim
Pages: 1 ... 131415 1617 ... 25
421
« on: December 03, 2015, 05:35:45 PM »
go
422
« on: December 03, 2015, 01:24:14 PM »
i've been super fucking anxious lately and i feel like i'm going crazy AMA
423
« on: December 03, 2015, 10:50:36 AM »
My friend just told me that once you accessed the profile of a player you just played, you could report players for being "too good" or "not knowing how to play".
Is that fucking true?
If so, how am I supposed to believe that XBL is better than PSN?
424
« on: December 02, 2015, 11:33:04 AM »
TRIGGER WARNING:
This video contains feminism. If you are a small-minded bigot or misogynist, proceed with caution.
TRANSCRIPT
For many men, it can be hard to know exactly what role we can or should play in working towards an end to sexism.
How can men help; and how much or how little should we be helping? In this video we will explore answers to those questions and share a few suggestions for how men can respectfully approach feminism and – critically – explain why it’s beneficial for men to be involved.
First things first, because there’s so much misinformation about feminism floating around out there in the cultural aether, it’s useful to quickly define what that term actually means. Feminism is a sociopolitical movement with the central goal of ending sexism and dismantling gender-based oppression. So contrary to common misconceptions, feminism is not about “man hating” or “female supremacy.” It’s important to note that the feminist endeavor, as it has been defined by women like bell hooks, does not simply seek equal access for women within current systems of power, instead it seeks to transform these systems of power and the values associated with them.
So where do men fit into all this? Well, women have long been pointing out the ways in which men can benefit from feminism and actively calling for men’s participation in working towards ending sexism.
As bell hooks writes in her landmark book Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, “Like women, men have been socialized to passively accept sexist ideology. While they need not blame themselves for accepting sexism, they must assume responsibility for eliminating it. [. . .] Men are not exploited or oppressed by sexism, but there are ways in which they suffer as a result of it.” That bears repeating: “Men are NOT exploited or oppressed by sexism, but there are ways in which WE suffer as a result of it.”
We are taught early on that “boys don’t cry,” that to show sensitivity or emotional vulnerability is a sign of weakness. Men are discouraged from practicing nurturing, caregiving, compassion and compromise for the same reason. So there is an enormous amount of pressure placed on men to “prove our manhood” by acting tough, projecting strength and repressing our emotions so as to appear in control at all times. This is compounded by the fact that men are often more admired for being aggressive, dominant and violent than for being cooperative, vulnerable or empathetic. Not only is all of this damaging behavior encouraged in individual men, but those same values are also reflected in our larger political and military institutions, often to disastrous effect.
So while men, as a group, are afforded gender-based privileges at the expense of women, a byproduct of patriarchy is that it also causes real harm to men’s well being.
OK so if we’re on board with ending sexism: what specifically can we do as men to be helpful? Here’s our quick list of 5 tips for respectfully engaging with feminism as a man.
1. Listen to women: It might seem obvious, but too often men have a hard time just listening to what women have to say – and respecting women’s knowledge and experiences. Because of the way we’re socialized to think our voices are most important, men have a tendency to interrupt and interject ourselves into conversations and then dominate those interactions. This behavior is so ingrained that men often don’t even realize we are doing it. Which is why it’s critical to consciously learn to take a step back – to try not to interrupt and instead actively listen and absorb what is being said before responding. Now, of course, this does not then mean that you have to agree with everything every individual woman says – no one person’s perspective can ever represent all of feminism or the experiences of all women – it simply means that, as men, we’re not in a position to define feminism for women, and so, we should actively pay attention to women’s voices. Because for so long women’s experiences, perspectives and ideas – have been dismissed, ignored and silenced.
It’s especially vital to listen to women of color, particularly black and indigenous women, because as feminist scholars have long pointed out, sexism is compounded when it’s combined with racism and/or other forms of oppression – back in 1989, Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term “intersectionality” as part of her theory to describe these layered experiences that leave some women more disenfranchised by than others.
2. Educate yourself: It’s important for us, as men, to acknowledge that when we talk about feminism, we follow the lead of women. Yet while we should acknowledge that our ideas in this arena originate with women, this does not mean it is the responsibility of women to teach all men about sexism. So we shouldn’t go around interrogating or demanding answers from women. As men, we should instead be proactive in doing the work ourselves by committing to continuous, lifelong learning. Luckily for us, over the past century feminist scholars have written volumes on the topic. So with that in mind here are some suggested readings about feminism and how patriarchy operates as a social system:
Feminism is for Everybody by bell hooks is a good place to start, though definitely put The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love at the top of your list. Sociologist Allan G Johnson’s book The Gender Knot: Unraveling Our Patriarchal Legacy is also essential reading. As well as This Bridge Called My Back edited by Cherríe Moraga and Gloria E. Anzaldúa. For those interesting reading something written in more academic language check out: Masculinities by R.W. Connell and her follow up The Men and the Boys.
3. Challenge other men on sexism: The place where men can be most helpful in regards to feminism is first within ourselves, and then amongst other men. Patriarchy encourages men to buy into sexist thinking and at the very least remain complacent in sexism through our silence. So instead step off the path of least resistance and dare to make yourself and other men uncomfortable about sexism. Let other men around you know that their sexist behavior is not ok. For example, when you stand up and say that a sexist joke is not funny the men telling the sexist joke can no longer be assured that they will go unchallenged the next time they tell it. In other words, those men can no longer count on other men to accept or go along with their sexism. Interrupting the sexist status quo is a simple yet powerful thing that all men can make a difference.
4. Don’t get defensive: If you make a comment and a woman dismisses or disagrees with you, don’t take it personally. She doesn’t owe you anything and her disagreement does not necessarily mean that she herself is angry or frustrated with you as an individual. That being said, it is completely understandable for women to express anger about sexism. Sexism should make everyone angry. After all, most women have firsthand experience with violence, harassment or mistreatment at the hands of men. Sometimes even from men who claim to be allies. So don’t get defensive if individual women don’t want to engage with you, and remember that it’s definitely not our job to police the ways women may choose to speak up about sexism or their experiences. Men’s support of feminism should not be seen as some kind of favor to women. As we have discussed, dismantling the system of sexism benefits people of all genders, and moreover, men shouldn’t expect a reward for deciding not to participate in a terrible system of oppression. Or as many feminist women have said before – you don’t get a cookie for being a decent human being.
5. Learn from your mistakes: It’s really hard to break years of socialization overnight, so messing up is inevitable. I’ve certainly made my fair share of mistakes, the key is what you do next. We always have a choice as to how we respond to our mistakes: be humble, examine your own actions, acknowledge failings and continue to learn how to be better and more supportive. Sexism is not necessarily something that’s done consciously and overtly, it’s something we are socialized to think is normal, and as such it is something we often perpetuate and participate in without meaning to. This is why challenging ourselves and reflecting on our own actions is a vital step in the process but remember to be compassionate and patient with yourself and keep working at it!
That was by no means an exhaustive list of advice, but it should give you a place to start.
Now if you’re feeling a little uneasy at this point that might actually be a good sign. As men, the process of honestly reexamining our own assumptions and questioning our participation in a system that maintains sexism, may often feel uncomfortable. But remember that even though we as individuals didn’t create that system of patriarchy, it does manifest itself in almost every aspect of our lives. Which means we do have a responsibility to challenge it. We must always recall our own potential for positive impact in the world. And be involved in this work not out of personal guilt or shame, but because, as we have discussed in this video, the desired outcome is ending gender oppression and in so doing make the world better for people of all genders including men. Figured it was about time to piss some of the misogynists here off again. 
425
« on: December 01, 2015, 02:52:31 PM »
"Omit needless words." - best thing anyone has ever said
"i am absolutely certain"
stop saying this
all you need to say is that you're "certain"
because to be "inabsolutely" certain would be an oxymoron
certainty already implies absoluteness
i'm guilty of doing this one all the time, and it annoys me
"and as an added bonus..."
a "bonus" is something that is added to a finished product, usually as a gift
so you don't need to say "added" bonus--we already know that shit, you fluffy fuck
"end result"
oh my god i hate this one
END RESULT?
as opposed to what? the beginning result? fuck you
"suddenly..."
the word "suddenly" has to be, by far, my least favorite word in english
not only is it redundant--it's just a lazy cliche used by shitty writers who can't develop tension for their life
what's that? coming up with some alternate method to surprise your reader sounds like too much work?
just slap the word "suddenly" on that bitch for some quick, easy suspense
if i'm feeling lazy, sometimes i'll do this--i'm guilty
but i don't try to pass it off like it's good writing or anything--it's terrible
what sounds better to you
"it suddenly exploded," or
"it exploded"
explosions are, by definition, sudden--so being told that the explosion was sudden, rather than just allowing us to infer it for ourselves, just slows the action down a little bit, when explosions are supposed to be alarming and fast-paced
so never use the word "suddenly" in any of your creative works
it's boring and makes you look bad
426
« on: November 30, 2015, 04:30:48 PM »
427
« on: November 28, 2015, 11:14:47 AM »
I think they're trashy and make you look like a fool, but I mean, whatever.
I feel the same way about dyed hair and piercings and all that stupid shit. I just hate body mods, conceptually speaking.
Have I seen body mods that I thought were actually pretty cool and modest and dignified? Yeah.
But for the most part, they just look really tacky in my opinion.
People get SOOOO OFFENDED when I say stuff like this, which I think is kinda funny. Like, I'm somehow attacking a bit of your character by claiming that tattoos look ugly and stupid (because they do), or something--which I'm not. There's more to being a good person than not having a tattoo, and having one doesn't make you a bad person.
I just happen to dislike them. People will still get mad, though. Oh well.
428
« on: November 23, 2015, 09:12:06 PM »
protip: you CANNOT >promotes creativity, like with all LEGO products >helps children with spatial reasoning and shit >they're unisex >they look cool as fuck--every single one of them >parts can mix and match--you don't have to follow the instructions >near infinite possibilities with all those different pieces >if they break, you can literally just put it back together again, effectively making them unbreakable >later models were double-jointed, allowing you to pose them in any way you want, unlike static toys >just the premise itself-- you are building your own action figureliterally the only flaw i can think of is that the parts are easy to lose but that can also be turned into a positive >teaches kids to be organized by incentivizing them not to lose any pieces, lest they ruin the coolest toy ever 10/10 toy there is nothing better--NOTHING
429
« on: November 23, 2015, 09:37:06 AM »
I know we have a Smash megathread now, but I'd rather have this centralized in a separate thread. Who are your Smash 4 mains (I guess you can talk about 64, Melee, Brawl, Project M, etc. as well)? Who are your secondaries? ...Tertiaries? ...Quaternaries?And which characters are you practicing with, but aren't quite ready to use in battle (and could use some advice on)?
In Smash 4, I'm sort of all over the place. I'm maining Sheik, primarily, with Ganondorf as a secondary. The relationship between these two characters is pretty poor, I think. There's little synergy. Sheik, theoretically, dominates practically every mid-to-low-tier in the game, and Ganon is a niche character that is good at beating up slow fatties like Bowser, Donkey Kong, Charizard, and himself, and struggles with everybody else--particularly projectile characters. Sheik has no problem with beating these characters, but if I ever catch myself slipping against a fatty, I can always fall back on Ganon to ensure the win, like I did with CK back in the 3DS tournament. For tertiaries, I'm starting to learn how to play Roy. I really really wanted this character to be in this game, and now that he is, I've been neglecting him, because they ended up making him too different (I particularly hate how they made it so his d-tilt doesn't launch anymore). I'm trying to get over it, though. He's definitely a strong character, but he still feels a little bit unwieldy for me. My Lucario skills from Brawl translated decently well over into Smash 4, but I haven't been playing Lucario much at all lately. I'd hate to start back up again and be horrible. I hate re-learning stuff--it feels like a waste of time. I also have a shitty Mario, Little Mac, Pit, Ike, Falco, Lucina, Shulk, Mewtwo, and the worst Ryu you've ever seen in your life. I also play Mii Swordfighter decently well. I wish these things were legal. Older games In Melee, I have my characters rotating in my avatar right now: Roy (main), Falco (secondary), Ganondorf (tertiary).
In Brawl, I played Lucario, Ganondorf (mains), Pit, Falco, Ike (secondaries), and King Dedede (tertiary). I originally played Ganon as a joke character, because I thought it was hilarious how powerful he was, but ended up making him my main, because I got kinda good with him after awhile. Too bad Brawl fucking sucks.
In 64, I played... I mean... I've never played it competitively, sooo. I guess I played Mario and Ness a whole lot.
Fuck Project M.
430
« on: November 22, 2015, 11:27:39 PM »
Simple Question Monday.
You just broke the law, but there are no repercussions. Is that okay with you?
431
« on: November 22, 2015, 11:19:13 PM »
have you
432
« on: November 21, 2015, 10:08:40 AM »
http://www.livescience.com/33179-does-human-body-replace-cells-seven-years.htmlIt's a neat idea, and one that has caught the popular imagination. Here's how the story goes: Every seven years (or 10, depending on which story you hear) we become essentially new people, because in that time, every cell in your body has been replaced by a new cell. Don't you feel younger than you were seven years ago?
It is true that individual cells have a finite life span, and when they die off they are replaced with new cells. As The New York Public Library's Science Desk Reference (Stonesong Press, 1995) notes, "There are between 50 and 75 trillion cells in the body.... Each type of cell has its own life span, and when a human dies it may take hours or day before all the cells in the body die." (Forensic investigators take advantage of this vaguely morbid fact when determining the cause and time of death of homicide victims.)
Red blood cells live for about four months, while white blood cells live on average more than a year. Skin cells live about two or three weeks. Colon cells have it rough: They die off after about four days. Sperm cells have a life span of only about three days, while brain cells typically last an entire lifetime (neurons in the cerebral cortex, for example, are not replaced when they die).
There's nothing special or significant about a seven-year cycle, since cells are dying and being replaced all the time. It's not clear where this myth began; perhaps some well-meaning but innumerate person simply added up the all the lifespans of the body's various types of cells and (mistakenly) assumed that all the cells are renewed after seven years. I've already seen a couple people perpetuate this myth on this forum before, so I thought I'd post this here. For some, it might seem like a no-brainer (PUNS) that, when your neurons die, they never come back. i mean, it was for me, but i never really put two and two together i suppose Thoughts?
435
« on: November 16, 2015, 10:29:49 PM »
same thread, different board, HAHA
S:
The Wind Waker
A:
Majora's Mask
A Link to the Past
The Adventure of Link
B:
The Legend of Zelda
The Minish Cap
Twilight Princess
Link's Awakening
Ocarina of Time
C:
A Link Between Worlds
Phantom Hourglass
Four Swords Adventures
D:
Oracle of Seasons
Oracle of Ages
E:
Four Swords
Spirit Tracks
i haven't played much of skyward sword and i have absolutely no plans to do so
i also haven't played four swords, but i'm placing it in the lowest tier out of spite for having the dumbest gimmick ever
436
« on: November 16, 2015, 09:00:49 PM »
bored
S:
The Fragile
A:
The Downward Spiral
Broken (technically an EP but i'm still throwing it in here)
B:
Hesitation Marks
Pretty Hate Machine
With Teeth
Ghosts I-IV
C:
The Slip
Year Zero
the tiers are in order, but there is no particular order within the tiers
437
« on: November 15, 2015, 10:45:32 AM »
Is this a rational way to think?
438
« on: November 13, 2015, 10:11:43 AM »
on a roadtrip with my family right now
439
« on: November 12, 2015, 11:41:11 AM »
This archaic convention of Internet forums doesn't really mean anything anymore. Nobody cares if a topic reaches 50+ (or in our case, 60+) replies--it's not much of an accomplishment, and there's no purpose in denoting whether or not a topic is "hot" or not anymore. If there ever was one in the first place.
I propose that we either
- Remove the hot topic symbol, because it's useless and superfluous and nobody cares
- Change the requirement to something like 100 or 150 or even 300 replies (10 pages)
i recommend the former because, again, it's not like anybody cares about getting hot topics--it's a pointless feature
not a big deal or nothing
just an idea
440
« on: November 11, 2015, 09:28:24 PM »
441
« on: November 09, 2015, 03:50:18 PM »
http://www.eventhubs.com/news/2015/nov/08/provocative-r-mika-and-cammy-gestures-removed-view-latest-street-fighter-5-beta-build-community-responds-perplexity/Earlier this weekend, Capcom ran a mini Street Fighter 5 beta test that introduced an updated version of the game, along with newcomer Laura. Amidst the excitement of new features and fighters, some keen-eyed observers noticed an interesting change made to both R. Mika and Cammy.
In this version of the beta, the camera was altered to remove R. Mika's now trademark "butt slap" during her critical art animation and the underside view of Cammy during her intro from view. Gonna go right ahead and consider this a victory. Feminists: 1 Everyone else: 0 Hopefully they don't change it back. I'd rather they just remove R. Mika entirely, but that's never going to happen. I appreciate this gesture, and my hope for this game has went up a little bit.
442
« on: November 09, 2015, 10:26:10 AM »
TRIGGER WARNING:
This video contains feminism. If you are a small-minded bigot or misogynist, proceed with caution.
This was posted on the feministfrequency channel. It was reviewed by another feminist, Carolyn Petit, rather than Anita. Transcript 2013’s Tomb Raider reboot gave us a new, and at least superficially more human, Lara Croft. Gone were the cartoonish features and Barbie doll proportions of the legendary adventurer. The new Lara Croft looked like a real person. The story half-heartedly tried to make her act like one, too, showing her feel guilty about killing a deer early on, but Lara’s internal conflict was quickly swept aside as she became a walking arsenal, slaughtering enemies by the dozens with bows, pistols, shotguns and other weapons. The first teaser trailer for the sequel, Rise of the Tomb Raider, showed a seemingly troubled Lara in a therapist’s office, so I hoped that this game might be that rare blockbuster action adventure that at least takes violence somewhat seriously. I hoped it might acknowledge that even if you were in a situation where you absolutely had to kill hundreds of really, really bad people to survive, doing so would probably leave you a little traumatized. But Rise of the Tomb Raider doesn’t do that. I won’t spoil exactly how the therapist actually figures into the story, but I will say that it’s not in a way that suggests Lara might actually benefit from therapy after everything she’s been through.  In fact, there’s a remarkable dissonance between Lara’s attitudes in the story and the experience of playing the game. When she’s asked about it, Lara asserts that she did not enjoy all the killing she did in the first game, she did it because she had no choice. But she also doesn’t seem troubled about it. And of course, a ton of games put their protagonists in similarly absurd kill-or-be-killed situations that provide an excuse for lots of gunplay. Naughty Dog’s Uncharted games, for instance. But the seriousness with which Lara is portrayed makes Tomb Raider different. Lara is not a happy-go-lucky Nathan Drake type. Drake shoots his way through his adventures with a wink and a smile and he has a wisecrack for every occasion. We’re meant to see Lara as a survivor, a person with deep, real emotions who doesn’t relish violence but does what needs to be done. But meanwhile, the game revels in violence. It celebrates your marksmanship every time you shoot someone in the head. Blasts from your shotgun can send enemies flying. It all feels powerful and satisfying. Playing as Lara, you don’t feel like someone desperately fighting just to survive. You feel like someone who is very, very good at killing people and doesn’t hesitate to do it. The game just doesn’t want to acknowledge that Lara clearly enjoys it, and the disconnect between the narrative’s portrayal of Lara as someone who feels things deeply and doesn’t enjoy violence at all and the gameplay’s attempts to make violence as fun and explosive as possible is really jarring. Despite what she says, Lara does have a choice and she chooses to put herself in this position. The game expects us to believe that she views her actions as some sort of grim necessity, all the while wanting us to have a blast, as it continually introduces new tools and new skills that give us exciting new ways to kill people.  The people you’re killing in this game are an ancient, violent sect called Trinity with designs on controlling humanity. The story is predictable and derivative. Lara’s late father was obsessed with a source of eternal life associated with an ancient prophet, sort of like how Indiana Jones’ father was obsessed with the Holy Grail. Lara becomes obsessed with finding this divine source of immortality, too. It’s all very familiar, standard adventure story stuff. Trinity has big evil helicopters and lots of mercenary dudes. (No mercenary ladies, though, sadly.) Like Lara, Trinity will stop at nothing to find the divine source, but Lara’s obsessive quest for it is good because she’s a good person and Trinity’s obsessive quest for it is bad because they’re bad people. I really wanted a villain at some point to say to Lara, “We’re not so different, you and I,” because in this case, it’s absolutely true. The game encourages us to hate Trinity by showing them killing innocent people, which in turn makes us feel good about killing them, but the game never encourages us to consider the morality of what Lara is doing by choosing to be here and kill all these people herself. And that’s too bad. The new Tomb Raider games clearly want to humanize Lara, and exploring the emotional and psychological cost of what she’s putting herself through would have made her seem more human. Still, there are some improvements in the way Lara is presented in Rise of the Tomb Raider. By default, she now wears clothing that’s much more appropriate for the harsh elements that she finds herself in than she did in the previous game. And while Tomb Raider seemed to take an almost sadistic pleasure in making Lara suffer and putting that suffering on display with grisly death animations and excruciating injuries she sustains, Rise of the Tomb Raider doesn’t delight in torturing Lara or impaling her on things.  Rise of the Tomb Raider is exactly what you expect it to be. It’s competent and thoroughly unsurprising. There are plenty of environmental puzzles, and plenty of sequences in which everything is collapsing all around you as you run, jump, or climb for your life. Lara is crafty and resourceful, able to whip up Molotov cocktails, shrapnel bombs and other deadly devices from junk she finds lying around. Enemies are smart enough to try to flank you and flush you out when you’re hiding, and you can try to be sneaky or just go in guns blazing. Oh, and the camera really doesn’t deal well with close combat in tight spots. The world of Rise of the Tomb Raider is beautiful, and I enjoyed those moments in which I felt like I was just exploring and discovering the world for the sheer beauty and enjoyment of it. I love the experience of coming around corners or climbing up ledges to behold some breathtaking new landscape. But that beautiful world is constantly reduced to being just a source of stuff to collect. There’s just soooo much stuff to collect in this game. You switch to Survival Instincts, look for the things that glow, and grab them; suddenly the world isn’t this majestic, wondrous place anymore. Rather, it’s a place full of little golden things you can snag for your own personal gain. The world exists just for you to plunder. There are moments in Rise of the Tomb Raider when you’re solving a puzzle involving some ancient contraption, or studying ancient murals, or traversing the environment, or taking in the view. And in these moments, I admired Lara’s skill and resolve. I’d like to go on more adventures with her. I just think she has a few issues she needs to deal with first. ^ HEY LOOK THERE'S A FUCKING TRANSCRIPT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH THE VIDEO AND GIVE HER "AD REVENUE" EVEN THOUGH SHE NEVER PUTS ADS ON ANY OF HER VIDEOS
443
« on: November 08, 2015, 07:29:25 PM »
 We started this tourney all the way back in August, and though it's taken us awhile, it's finally finished. The grand finals ended up being between Rocketman (Fox) and myself (Sheik), with Rocketman coming in with a strong 3-1 victory. So congrats to him, first and foremost. In order to commemorate the finals, however, I thought it would be fun to do an in-depth analysis of our match. I'll have videos down there, with a short explanation of what was going through my head as I was playing. I can't exactly account for any of Rocketman's decisions, but I'll do my best. These videos were created with SSB4's in-built highlight reel feature. Unfortunately, the game is only capable of uploading full matches if they are around 3~ minutes in length (for some reason), so the only other option is to have the game chop up each match into short little clips (or highlights) for you.
Player Analysis: VerbatimCharacters: Sheik, Ganondorf Tournament record: 6-3 Okay, so allow me to just talk myself up for a moment <_< A brief synopsis on my tournament history Originally a Ganondorf main, I eventually came to my senses after losing to CK97 during the Grand Finals of the 3DS tournament we had last summer. Since Ganon is one of the worst characters in the game, I knew I needed to find a stronger character to face CK's Greninja with. So, I picked up Sheik in a surprise effort to deal with CK's intense Greninja shenanigans, BUT, in a surprise twist, CK unleashed his (newly patched) Charizard on me instead. My day 1 tactics with Sheik simply weren't enough to deal with his new-fangled Charizard tech, and it ultimately resulted in my crushing defeat.
My sodium levels were through the roof, as Sheik has been considered one of the best characters in the game for awhile, and Charizard was bordering on one of the weakest, and I still lost. I knew what I had going with Sheik was a good foundation, so I went back into the lab. And, over time... I... still have the worst Sheik in the universe <_< But not bad enough to prevent me from joining the next tournament. Especially considering my Ganon is still on-point, despite him not being main-material--he's more of a counterpick against other low-tiers.
Early in the group stages of the tournament, I had already fought Rocketman--and the only reason I won was because he was using Captain Falcon (his sandbagging character). He SD'd on accident, and I received what felt like was an undeserved victory. Later, I went on to face foes such as MistaNosejob, Alphy, TBlocks, and RadicalClass--the last of whom ended up putting me in loser's bracket, with his strong Mewtwo play.
While I wouldn't consider myself a bad player, I tend to fall apart when I have to face a character I never see. Very few people play Mewtwo, so it's difficult to know the match-up--and even though Sheik vs. Mewtwo is almost guaranteed in Sheik's favor, my unfamiliarity with his play-style is what led to my defeat. However, to my frustration, I faced Radical again in a couple of sparring fights, and ended up losing a first-to-five. It was like his Mewtwo had my soul in a glass jar--I just couldn't beat him.
However, when Rocketman ended up defeating him, I had an opportunity to run it back with him again in Loser's Finals, I ended up coming out on top. I adapted to his play-style very well, and though it wasn't a very handy victory, it was enough to give me the confidence needed to face Rocketman in Grand Finals. I like to have a very fast-paced, aggressive, yet cautious play-style. I only try to do as much damage as necessary--I don't like to take risks, and Sheik's speed, agility, and low recovery frames allow me to be supremely cautious when on the offense. Defensively, I am also very strong, but I tend to get bored of stalling quickly, and just want to start hitting things after awhile. My main flaws are that I'm too easily flustered, and I have below-average execution.  Rocketman287Characters: Fox, Captain Falcon Tournament record: 6-1 My adversary is a strong Fox player. Like me, Rocketman chooses to focus his play-style mainly in hyper-offense, always being on the offensive, and never letting his opponent take a breath of air. His choice of character reflects this, as Fox's speed is comparable to that of Sheik's--the main difference being that his attacks are much more hard-hitting. His execution is comparably superior to that of my own, and he appears to have a ready insight into where and when his opponents are going to move or strike, making him a formidable and mentally exhausting opponent. His only loss in the tournament was against myself, when he used his Captain Falcon character. He's stated in the past that he only plays Falcon when he's having fun or fooling around, so I barely count this as a victory--especially when the last game ended in an accidental self-destruct (where you fall off the stage by yourself and fail to recover). My lack of experience with the Fox match-up wasn't doing me any favors, either.
Game Analysis:I didn't know exactly what to expect during the first match. With Sheik, my general game plan is to juggle my opponent off the stage fast enough so that their % doesn't go too high--once I start reaching 80%, it becomes very difficult for Sheik to juggle her opponent's off-stage and KO consistently, considering her low number of killing moves. Instantly, I felt overwhelmed by Fox's hyper offense. I was having trouble dealing with Rocketman's neutral game--I had no issue rolling and side-stepping away from his attacks, but I was having great difficulty punishing any of his whiffed moves, because Fox is incredibly fast. More often than not, my punish would whiff, and be swiftly counter-punished, either by a powerful smash attack, a throw, or Fox's supremely annoying rapid jab combo. One mistake Rocketman made, and kept making throughout the duration of the set, was that he kept performing his side special--the Fox Illusion. It's a move that propels Fox horizontally at light-speed, causing minor damage and high annoyance. Its main use is for getting Fox back onto the stage after being launched, but he also used it as a way of getting some damage on me. So, because he kept doing it so often, I nailed him with an up-smash after anticipating that he'd use it once again (0:11). This didn't appear to shake Rocketman a bit, however. Fox's pressure, along with his aerial game (0:27), were beginning to test my patience. Once I lost my second stock, I knew I was going to lose--so instead of wasting energy trying to win, I preemptively thought about what I was going to do during the next match instead.
Game 2In the Street Fighter community, we have a saying--"the first round is data." It doesn't matter if you lose the first game--the important thing is that you learn how your opponent plays. In an effort to adapt to Rocketman's play-style, I made sure to play a little bit, well, better. This was difficult, because Fox has a way of tiring you the fuck out, which was really beginning to take its toll on me during the second half of this match. However, I managed to win this match with a bit of style. In spots like (0:13) and (0:31), you'll notice that I'm using Sheik's forward-smash a lot to get KOs on Fox. One of them was another Fox Illusion read. That's cool and all, but this ended up being a mistake: Since it won me the game, I ended up over-utilizing it in all future matches. It's not a safe move by any means--I have no idea why I used it so much, other than my dumb brain telling me, "Well, it worked the first few times!" So that ended up being a major flaw in my game down the line. During this game, I noticed Rocketman was doing a lot of down-smashes (0:26). In Smash 4, down smashes are especially useful for punishing rolling dodges, because they (usually) strike on both sides, and have a long-lasting hitbox, making them ideal for reading rolls. Whereas I over-utilized Sheik's f-smash for punishing purposes, Rocketman ended up over-utilizing Fox's d-smash. I tried to be very cautious with my rolls during this set, so as to never get bopped by this attack. The coolest thing I pulled off in this set is at (0:18). In Smash 4, there's a trick you can do with Sheik's down-aerial. Sheik can use this move as what they call a "meteor smash" (or spike), which allows her to send her opponents straight downwards. These are very flashy moves that are difficult to recover from--they're basically Smash's equivalent of a "slam dunk". Anyway, the way Sheik's meteor smash works is like this: Normally, her d-air sends her propelling straight downwards herself, so using it off the ledge will often result in an SD--making it a very risky move to use off-stage. However, as depicted in this video (where I picked up the technique), it is possible to use the move and still survive when Fox uses his up+b (the Firefox). The flames created by this move form hitboxes all around Fox's body, allowing Sheik to strike him with her d-air (as he's charging the move) without falling to her death, because her foot ends up contacting the hitboxes. It's the only safe method of using Sheik's meteor smash that I know of. As you can see, however, I still kinda fucked it up--I fell to my death anyway, while taking Rocketman with me. This wasn't intended, but it ended up working in my favor anyway. The reason it didn't work was because Fox had already launched himself by the time I hit him--it only works during the brief moment that Fox actually charges the attack.
Game 3This is where it starts going downhill for me. I'm already very worn out mentally from the first two games, and Rocketman was still going full-blast. It's actually pretty amazing how consistently fast he can play--I wish you guys could see the full replays. Or, maybe I don't, because I got absolutely destroyed in this game and there's no denying it. At (0:11), you can see Rocketman landing a well-placed back-aerial on me--somehow, I didn't see that coming. I needed to figure out a way to tire him out somehow, but I was having a lot of trouble. His neutral game was just overwhelming me again, similar to how it was during game 1, but even worse this time around. This is the point where Rocketman started to feel like a wall. Similar to how RadicalClass was. It just seemed like everything I did to him would be countered in one way or another--my confidence started dropping, and my performance started to suffer as a result. He's just a lot better at quick decision making, whereas I'm a little more apprehensive--which doesn't mix well with my aggressive play-style. Upon losing, I knew the next thing I had to do was go on Battlefield--arguably, Sheik's favored stage.
Game 4Ah, the final game... What could have been. The number of mistakes I made during this game are immense, but I won't go over them all. The one cool thing I managed to pull off during this game was at (0:10), where I managed to hit-confirm a Bouncing Fish after a shield-grabbed back-throw. Normally, my Bouncing Fish game is pretty awful--there was a point I forgot to mention in game 2 or 3 where I kept doing the move in the wrong direction, but whatever. Rocketman just outplayed me during this game, bar none. All the issues I've been having up to this point, especially with regards to Fox's neutral game, were beginning to compile--which was infuriating, because there's no excuse that I should've had such a poor performance on Sheik's home stage. Because the platforms are situated in such a way that Sheik gets a free sweet-spotted up-smash (that is to say, her up-smash is the very strongest when you land it exactly where her palms meet above her head), I kept trying to utilize it, but to no avail--I didn't even pull it off once. However, Fox has a similar advantage with his up-smash, and I don't recall him ever landing anything like that, either. At (0:13), I SD like an idiot. That's all I have to say about that. <_< At this point, I was very flustered. Fox's speed was just dizzying me--I couldn't keep up with him at all, and Rocketman was making liberal usage of his most irritating attack--his rapid jab. Every time he used it, I just got more and more annoyed--which is good for him, because it fucks with my reasoning, and I end up taking more brash measures to get hits on him. There were numerous opportunities to utilize the meteor smash trick I mentioned earlier, like at (0:23), but I didn't want to take the risk--I only had one stock, and if I fucked it up again, I'd look like the biggest dumbass ever. My only other KO was a dash attack out of utter desperation (0:27). You never should have to use Sheik's dash attack for KOs. After a grueling fight, Rocketman finally seals the deal at (0:33), with a well-placed forward smash. A well-deserved victory--he outplayed me almost every step of the way. Fox is one hell of an annoying character to fight, but he's definitely strong, and someone I'll have to practice for in the future. Congratulations again to Rocketman, and I hope I gave you a fair amount of coverage in this thread <_< I didn't want to just talk about me the whole time, even though it's a lot easier to. I don't know what's going on inside your head, man 
Well, hope you enjoyed my analysis. This was a fun tournament, even though it took forever. I can't tell you how ecstatic I am that we not only have our own little Smash community here, but that everyone here is formidable in their own right. I thank all of my opponents for their matches, and I humbly await our next tournament. I have a few requests, however: Next time, let's go with Evo rules (scroll all the way down). 3 stock is a lot, and I think we'd benefit a lot more if we had 2 stocks instead, with a 6 minute time limit. That said, I'll see you guys in the next tournament.
444
« on: November 08, 2015, 02:24:32 PM »
Whether or not you are a law-abiding citizen, it's not unlikely for you to have some laws that you either respect, or actively abide by in some form or another. If you're reading this, you've probably never killed anyone, or have done anything that could be described as heinous.
But let's say your friend has. Your friend has broken one of these laws that you consider a pillar of civilization. If you don't turn him in, he gets away scot-free, and is never punished for his crime. It's in your hands.
Would you ever rat him out on it?
What's the "right" thing to do? Some folks consider ratting your friends out to be an unacceptable breach of trust--the ultimate act of betrayal. Then again, committing a significant crime could also be considered a breach of trust on his part. Is it really your duty to maintain every friendship you have, even at the cost of justice?
445
« on: November 08, 2015, 08:40:38 AM »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zack_de_la_Rocha#Solo_careerFollowing the disbandment of Rage Against the Machine, de la Rocha worked on a solo album he had been recording since before the band's dissolution, working with DJ Shadow, El-P, Muggs, Dan The Automator, Roni Size, DJ Premier, and The Roots' Questlove with production partner James Poyser. The album never came to fruition, and de la Rocha started a new collaboration with Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails, in which around 20 tracks were produced. Reznor thought the work was "excellent", but said the songs will likely never be released as de la Rocha was not "ready to make a record" at that time. >20 tracks >"excellent" >will likely never be released Why live?Why live?Why live?Why live?Why live?This is the only song they put out:
446
« on: November 07, 2015, 05:26:21 PM »
it's 6:25 here, and the sky is already pitch black
DST is a nasty bitch
edit:
actually it ended, so
DST is a... kind lady whose tragic loss i will be lamenting
447
« on: November 07, 2015, 11:44:53 AM »
I've been hanging out with one of my best friends over the past week, because we haven't seen each other all summer. He doesn't really game that often--at least, not as much as he used to, so I was quite bemused when he had asked me one day, "Hey, do you still have any of those old games we used to play when we were, like, ten?"
Of course, he was referring to those shitty licensed games we used to think were good back in the day. Monsters, Inc. for the PS2, Shrek: Super Party for the Xbox, Madagascar for the GameCube, and many others. None of these were terrible games in their own right--they just lacked the depth, soul, and practically anything else you sort of need to keep yourself from growing bored of it after ten minutes. They're basically McDonald's Happy Meal toys--cheap, simple, low quality, and neurologically toxic if you try to digest them.
Regardless, I said to him, "Yeah, I think I still got 'em around somewhere. Why's that?"
Then he kinda gave me a weird look and said, "...We should play them again sometime."
The reason licensed games tend to be of low quality, of course, is because they are developed as fast as possible to coincide with the release of whatever source material they are schlepping onto their disc. A lot of them use Christmas as an easy deadline, forcing developers to rush their work, giving them no time whatsoever to fix bugs and other things. Everyone knows this, right? It's not that licensed games are inherently bad--they're just not treated with the same level of care, time, and wherewithal as your regular video game.
I chuckled at my friend's suggestion and said, "We can play them right now, if you want."
He beamed, and a glint of his old childhood self was present in his face. He really wanted to play these games again.
This thread really isn't about licensed games, however. As we finished playing Monsters, Inc., my friend seemed visibly irked by the things I was saying during our session (ie. "Oh god, that's such bad design," "Haha, what the fuck are we playing right now?"). We had fun, and we laughed, but eventually, he got fed up with what I was saying.
"Oh c'mon, Jake. You realize these games are made for little kids, right? They're not gonna be perfect."
I was a little taken aback by his tone, like I punched his childhood self in the gut, or something. I was honestly having fun sitting with him and making fun of these games--but he seemed offended by something. And what bothered me the most was just his statement--these games are "just for kids".
I said, "So? That's not an excuse, is it?"
He rolled his eyes, and gave me a look that said, "Come on--you know what you're saying is bullshit."
We had a little argument about it, and he didn't quite budge. He's under the impression that games are exempt from "sucking" if they were designed to be played for children. One of the things he mentioned was that, as children, we didn't really give a shit if the game was a buggy mess of boring, time-consuming gameplay--we still had fun with it, because our minds were still developing, and we couldn't tell what's good from bad yet.
It wasn't a bad argument--but something about it just didn't sit right with me. I still don't think that a game's status as a "kid's game" somehow excuses it from being bad. Lots of people say Nintendo is a kiddie company, because they make super-simplistic, super-casual games designed for the whole family, like Mario, Pokémon, Kirby, and even Zelda to a certain extent. They're wholesome games that could be described as "kid's games," and yet they're still fucking fun to play. And that's because Nintendo gives a shit. They have the care, time, and wherewithal to make those quality games, and they aren't constrained by arbitrary deadlines like smaller companies are.
I think it's insulting to imply that kid's games can't have some sort of quality assurance. This idea that kids are too dumb to know the difference between intense, layered, in-depth gameplay and simple, bare-minimum entertainment. Maybe he's right--those games did keep me interested for some time during my childhood, but it's games like Zelda, Pokémon, and Mario that I still play to this day. They actually stood the test of time. Why should we expect children to be comfortable with the idea that they have games being made for them? That's condescending as fuck, isn't it? Even the term "kid's game" itself is very dismissive, and I always sort of hated it, because it implies that only a dumb kid could ever find enjoyment in this game.
I mean, why even make games like that!?
Boggles my mind.
TL;DR
When it comes to "kid's games", does the fact that they are apparently designed for children excuse them from being bad? I don't think that's a good excuse at all. Why should a "kid's game" be any less quality-assured than any other game?
448
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:36:02 PM »
449
« on: November 03, 2015, 06:23:30 PM »
I am studying computer science now
...yep
i'm part of the dreaded STEM circlejerk now
don't worry, i'm killing myself after i finish this thread
I'm also gonna minor in English, though, so all is not lost
450
« on: November 03, 2015, 04:50:20 PM »
fraudulent "psychic" cunt gets exposed
Pages: 1 ... 131415 1617 ... 25
|
Show Posts
