|
style / art gimmick combo you want to see next This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Commodore 64 hi fi 16 colors Drawing goons drooling over anime (or muscle men) |
|
35 | 20.71% |
| Everything in MSPaint Black and White and Undertale Characters |
|
22 | 13.02% |
| CGA in CYMK tones and rising stars of gaming like Hololens and Star Citizen |
|
36 | 21.30% |
| Only Purple and Waluigi and Kirby ship fiction |
|
76 | 44.97% |
| Total: | 169 votes | ||
|
Noted shitposter JFK got what he deserved.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
what supernatural contradiction spotting will the next ace attorney bring. will maya's new pet cat hiss at testimony. will apollo be able to rotate witnesses on the stand
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
i'm remembering all the explanations for magic in phoenix wright vs professor layton and they still own
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
oddium posted:what supernatural contradiction spotting will the next ace attorney bring. will maya's new pet cat hiss at testimony. will apollo be able to rotate witnesses on the stand A mystical table that slams itself in the presence of a contradiction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
oddium posted:i'm remembering all the explanations for magic in phoenix wright vs professor layton and they still own It was weird they felt the need in apollo justice to give a really detailed psuedoscience justification for the lie-spotting wristbands that only worked for apollo's family when previous games had maya and pearl straight up channeling spirits
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:I am very skeptical of this line of thinking, because it's the exact sort that justifies censorship and dominates the more irritating elements of the political left. Moral guardians have attempted to convince us that our entertainment is the cause of our sins for decades now and it's been nonsense since the start. I have literally no idea how saying "media influences people" justifies censorship, or is even a contentious issue. Ravane posted:lol that's very true like one time I watched american psycho and then I started beating up homeless people Lady Naga posted:Media can subtly reinforce previously held belief systems in horrifically negative ways and it's a lot more insidious than "bad games make bad people" actually. Lady Naga fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Mar 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Hog Inspector posted:It was weird they felt the need in apollo justice to give a really detailed psuedoscience justification for the lie-spotting wristbands that only worked for apollo's family when previous games had maya and pearl straight up channeling spirits pw vs pl is on a whole nother level. spoilers just in "case" (<-- ace attorney joke) everyone lives in a walled-in town set up by british megabillionaire and his medical research company. everyone is hypnotized all the time from the drugs in the ground water. when a witch casts a spell, everyone gets knocked out, superhypnotized outcasts from the village move things around, then everyone wakes up and whoa wow it looks like magic happened. also no one can see pure black and it turns out there's giant skycranes in almost every single visible part of the sky
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:14
|
|
If media didn't influence people, this rear end in a top hat wouldn't be embarrassing himself like this.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
is that ted cruz
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Like I know video games are a new-ish medium and still face a lot of stigma for being childish or "lesser" but Jesus loving Christ people we should be able to accept extremely basic standards of literary analysis and criticism regardless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
I don't have a 3DS so I'm sadly way behind on the good-rear end nintendo games that have been coming out. Hopefully I'll get around to it before a gang of FE rioters burn down their headquarters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:18
|
|
Lady Naga posted:Like I know video games are a new-ish medium and still face a lot of stigma for being childish or "lesser" but Jesus loving Christ people we should be able to accept extremely basic standards of literary analysis and criticism regardless. [Media I like] can change lives and inspire people to do great things and change how you think about the world unless you suggest it can have a bad influence in which case it is literally impossible for media to provoke any kind of response in a human.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:I am very skeptical of this line of thinking, because it's the exact sort that justifies censorship and dominates the more irritating elements of the political left. Moral guardians have attempted to convince us that our entertainment is the cause of our sins for decades now and it's been nonsense since the start. There's plenty of evidence that media affects people, like Mean World Syndrome, the CSI Effect, and the entire advertising industry. It's just that most gamers never moved past 20 years ago when games were used as a scapegoat so they'll latch onto every bit of validation no matter how flimsy (actually, games improve hand-eye coordination mom) but will off-handedly reject any criticism because they didn't grow up to be an axe murderer so obviously it's beyond reproach. The fact that a lot of gamers are also into the gently caress YEAH SCIENCE thing just makes it funnier when they have to rationalize away science that actually challenges their lifestyle and worldview.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
It's just pointless to talk about how "people" are being insidiously influenced by any piece of media where a lovely, sociopathic person does lovely, sociopathic things without getting some kind of come-uppance. And it's also impossible to argue because it's apparently invisible so you don't even know it's happening. All you can really say is "ok. I still just think watch_dogs was a mostly lovely game."
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
PantsBandit posted:It's just pointless to talk about how "people" are being insidiously influenced by any piece of media where a lovely, sociopathic person does lovely, sociopathic things without getting some kind of come-uppance. And it's also impossible to argue because it's apparently invisible so you don't even know it's happening. All you can really say is "ok. I still just think watch_dogs was a mostly lovely game." What?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:What? My point is this conversation is doomed to lead loving nowhere other than you making a bunch of condescending posts hth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:28
|
|
PantsBandit posted:My point is this conversation is doomed to lead loving nowhere other than you making a bunch of condescending posts hth. You definitely beat 'em to it.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
me? yeah, i love to analyze Media.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
PantsBandit posted:My point is this conversation is doomed to lead loving nowhere other than you making a bunch of condescending posts hth. Only if you're unable to accept very basic concepts like "America has a problem with support of vigilante justice and violence as a means of conflict resolution, and media wherein a crazed vigilante murders dozens of people to resolve conflicts does not help that preconception." A supreme court justice member unironically used 24 as a justification for torture and you're over here telling me that Watch_Dogs affects people in ways we can't possibly know or understand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
absolutely anything posted:me? yeah, i love to analyze Media. i got the boys in the lab analyzing your media....... .... 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:I have literally no idea how saying "media influences people" justifies censorship, or is even a contentious issue. It's a vague statement in general, but based on the context of your post, it seems you are suggesting that media must show bad behavior being punished in some way or else that media is implicitly supporting or encouraging that bad behavior. Otherwise, simply saying "media influences people" doesn't really mean much. Influences them how? Towards what? In what way? I mean, yes, the presence of a television in a room influences what I may do while in that room, but I don't think that's what you meant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:You definitely beat 'em to it. Oh, I'm definitely being equally condescending but in my defense it's in the interest of moving the topic of conversation away from Watch_Dogs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:It's a vague statement in general, but based on the context of your post, it seems you are suggesting that media must show bad behavior being punished in some way or else that media is implicitly supporting or encouraging that bad behavior. Otherwise, simply saying "media influences people" doesn't really mean much. Influences them how? Towards what? In what way? I mean, yes, the presence of a television in a room influences what I may do while in that room, but I don't think that's what you meant. Okay but I don't know how you can go from "media does have a responsibility to portray negative characters in a negative light" to "media that doesn't portray negative characters in a negative light should be banned"? PantsBandit posted:Oh, I'm definitely being equally condescending but in my defense it's in the interest of moving the topic of conversation away from Watch_Dogs. Sorry for talking about a thing you don't want to talk about in the general games discussion thread 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
oddium posted:i got the boys in the lab analyzing your media....... .... the only lab you're qualified to work with is a meth lab
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:I have literally no idea how saying "media influences people" justifies censorship, or is even a contentious issue. It doesn't justify it, but when has media-inspired fear of the unknown led to a proper justification? Lady Naga posted:Media can subtly reinforce previously held belief systems in horrifically negative ways and it's a lot more insidious than "bad games make bad people" actually. Whether or not science affirms or refutes the notion that violent videogames lead to violent social tendencies, someone's going to  ask the hard-hitting questions that companies and science refuse to correctly answer tl;dr Fearmongering over violent games--regardless of the actual impact of the games--leads to censorship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:It's a vague statement in general, but based on the context of your post, it seems you are suggesting that media must show bad behavior being punished in some way or else that media is implicitly supporting or encouraging that bad behavior. Otherwise, simply saying "media influences people" doesn't really mean much. Influences them how? Towards what? In what way? I mean, yes, the presence of a television in a room influences what I may do while in that room, but I don't think that's what you meant. It's actually really easy to tell whether a piece of media supports the actions of a character regardless of whether that character is actively punished in the story. I mean if it's a super complex and/or well written story it can be fairly ambiguous but the vast majority of media (especially video games) is extremely clear in portraying whether something is right or wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
^^^^ Well yes, usually an author wants to make a point, but that's not really what's being discussed here.Lady Naga posted:Okay but I don't know how you can go from "media does have a responsibility to portray negative characters in a negative light" to "media that doesn't portray negative characters in a negative light should be banned"? Because then naturally one says "well, how can we ensure that media live up to its responsibility?" (not that I agree with that statement mind). Like, if one thinks media has this responsibility and thusly deems it not living up to its responsibility, the next logical step seems to be either setting "standards" that all content must follow or outright banning material that does not showcase proper morals. 8-Bit Scholar fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Mar 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
absolutely anything posted:the only lab you're qualified to work with is a meth lab i've been subtly influenced by [Br]eaking [B]ad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Mistle posted:It doesn't justify it, but when has media-inspired fear of the unknown led to a proper justification? Lots of good things can possibly lead to bad conclusions but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do them. How is saying "Watch_Dogs is bad because it reinforces lovely behavior" "fearmongering"? People sure are reading into a ton of poo poo I didn't say. 8-Bit Scholar posted:Because then naturally one says "well, how can we ensure that media live up to its responsibility?" (not that I agree with that statement mind). Like, if one thinks media has this responsibility and thusly deems it not living up to its responsibility, the next logical step seems to be either setting "standards" that all content must follow or outright banning material that does not showcase proper morals. No, the next logical step is critizing media that doesn't live up to its standards by saying it sucks and giving it a bad score, much like you would if it plays bad or has horrible sound design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
watch_dogs tells you in the title that it's ok to look at dogs but it turns out there isn't a single drat dog in the game? what message is this game trying to send here
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:46
|
|
Mistle posted:tl;dr Fearmongering over violent games--regardless of the actual impact of the games--leads to censorship. No one is fearmongering or talking about violence in games you stupid idiot.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:Because then naturally one says "well, how can we ensure that media live up to its responsibility?" (not that I agree with that statement mind). Like, if one thinks media has this responsibility and thusly deems it not living up to its responsibility, the next logical step seems to be either setting "standards" that all content must follow or outright banning material that does not showcase proper morals. There's a pretty big leap between "should" and "must"
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Talk about video games in the thread for talking about videogames? Everyone knows that if you discuss games at any level beyond declaring them the best/worst ever and asking for pro strats then you may as well be the lovechild of Jack Thompson and Tipper Gore snowboarding down a mountain of censorship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
I have a responsibility to not talk about my horrific fetishes in public but if I do I'm not going to be thrown in jail or "censored", people are just going to tell me to shut the gently caress up. Perhaps the same can apply to media?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
absolutely anything posted:watch_dogs tells you in the title that it's ok to look at dogs but it turns out there isn't a single drat dog in the game? what message is this game trying to send here "don't play me" They fulfilled their responsibility where it matters most imo
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:No, the next logical step is critizing media that doesn't live up to its standards by saying it sucks and giving it a bad score, much like you would if it plays bad or has horrible sound design. Well, that's fine then. I guess I somehow took your stance as being more authoritative, i.e. media MUST uphold this social responsibility, rather than that being a personal criteria of your own. To that end, I simply disagree. I don't think a story has any responsibility to anyone other than satisfying the desire of the author to communicate an idea, describe a situation, or just spin a yarn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:I don't think a story has any responsibility to anyone other than satisfying the desire of the author to communicate an idea, describe a situation, or just spin a yarn. Watch_Dogs does none of these things either though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Lady Naga posted:Watch_Dogs does none of these things either though. Yes, shockingly enough, Watch Dogs is a Bad Game made by a Bad Publisher. It's a pity too, it was one of those six-year projects, so I bet it was a big pipe dream by a really creative visionary type at the company, but poo poo got bogged down, that guy left years ago, and they just pieced it all together out of stray assets while they made Farcry and Creed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
Sleeveless posted:Talk about video games in the thread for talking about videogames? Everyone knows that if you discuss games at any level beyond declaring them the best/worst ever and asking for pro strats then you may as well be the lovechild of Jack Thompson and Tipper Gore snowboarding down a mountain of censorship. People can talk about whatever the hell they want but just maybe certain topics aren't conducive to a web forum and are just going to lead to a bunch of people insulting one another.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 00:59
|
|