|
Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah. didnt he start out as maost then took amerian "aid" when he turned on MPLA? They were founded as a Maoist alternative to MPLA's Soviet Marxist-Leninism, became democratic socialists who wanted to get rid of "foreign influence" in Angola, and have become conservative Christian democrats with ties to the Republican party.
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
I guess I'm one of the baddies for liking sexy, buxom characters in video games?  happyhippy posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdAGgUNyvyw I thought fanny meant butt?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
Fanny in America is some kind of grandparent word for butt, fanny in the UK a crude word for vagina. Still better than axe wound though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Fanny in America is some kind of grandparent word for butt, fanny in the UK a crude word for vagina. Personally I prefer using direct terms if I'm gonna tell someone I don't like 'em. Gotta go for the specifics. "Idiot" is easy to shake off. "You didn't actually read it" is a more direct attack. Sargon doesn't read and if I was in a debate with him, I'd just accuse him of not actually reading any of the poo poo he brings up. Over and over again. Sure, there'd be one time when he had read the thing, but I'm pretty sure it'd work 90% of the time and be way more effective than actually trying to attack him on points that he doesn't know. E: Plus this means that most racial and 'slang term for vag' slurs get dropped from the vocabulary right off the bat, which is a nice side effect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:pretty much. he goes way over the top with poo poo like that because he is basically a moral majority rear end in a top hat but on the left. i think the biggest issue is how black and white he is with that stuff. violent games can be genuinly engaging and tell a good story and have good messages. its not always perfect but they try. i had a amazing proffsor in lit who talked about how anything even poo poo like doom can be art because specticle isnt a bad thing per say but people can always get a deeper meaning from anything. john doesnt see that. he gets pissed because they have the joke difficulty setting where BJ has a binki. he is Snob and not even a clever or good one. but yeah the term is overused and poisoned but when it fits, it fits. Yeah Infinite warfare was great. Really fun campaign. And the core players hated it because of some memetic hatred of games set in the future. Something something halo LOL. It was really weird seeing the whole gaming world suddenly act like they'd been waiting for a WW 1 action game all along. Now we're going back to WW II and again everyone is acting like this is what hey wanted all along. Which isn't true. WW II was done as a setting. And then it wasn't. It was that abrupt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:kinda yeah. id say if anyone fits that pejorative, its Mcintosh. i just dont why some people act like he is a good critic and should be listened too. there are a ton of great socially/ficaly left critics, and most of them dont like him. lmao at this guy and his concerned parent tweeting style
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Yeah Infinite warfare was great. Really fun campaign. And the core players hated it because of some memetic hatred of games set in the future. Something something halo LOL. It was really weird seeing the whole gaming world suddenly act like they'd been waiting for a WW 1 action game all along. Now we're going back to WW II and again everyone is acting like this is what hey wanted all along. Which isn't true. WW II was done as a setting. And then it wasn't. It was that abrupt. Pretty much. The game came out at the worst time but it was genuinely good. WW2 look pretty good too. But yeah it's like that, personally I want a full Korean War or Vietnam war game. Whorelord posted:lmao at this guy and his concerned parent tweeting style Well yeah. That's him in a nutshell. Pretentious prudish oval office of a man.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
He's not technically wrong when he's talking in massive, sweeping generalities about the nature of game design and violence (as a game developer myself, violence is actually a really easy thing to implement compared to almost everything else that exists), but he doesn't know what he's fuckin' talking about regarding choice or playstyle or narrative. There is indeed a political importance to the nature of violence in the video games we make and play. The thing is, that political importance can be disguised behind initial appearances or hidden in lore. Like, in the new DOOM game, the player avatar interacts with Hell's creatures by killing them, but never in a sadistic way; always in a utilitarian, brutal way. He'll gouge an eye out, or knee a face in, or rip an explosive organ out of one area and shove it into another area, but the feeling is always that this is just the quickest, most efficient way of putting the monster down for good, and as soon as the thing is dead he's done with 'em; it's always one hit and that hit is always lethal and never lingers. The player avatar's real sadism is limited to their interactions with the corporation that is mining hell for its energy; he waits for the explanation of just how complicated and difficult-to-construct the hell-energy purification machines were before meticulously destroying them as the head of the corporation watches. It's revealed later on that the Doom Slayer is from a world that Hell took over and is now using as a power source, in the same way that humanity is using hell as a power source- so while the Doom Slayer is violent toward the creatures that killed his world, his true rage is toward the idea of humanity becoming the same as hell and destroying worlds in its thirst for energy. Violence is indeed the MO, but there's nuance to it, and if you're painting all in red splatters, those nuances in tone can make all the difference. Meanwhile this gently caress looks at a Jackson Pollock and says "my three-year-old could do better than that" and walks away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
Somfin posted:He's not technically wrong when he's talking in massive, sweeping generalities about the nature of game design and violence (as a game developer myself, violence is actually a really easy thing to implement compared to almost everything else that exists), but he doesn't know what he's fuckin' talking about regarding choice or playstyle or narrative. There is indeed a political importance to the nature of violence in the video games we make and play. The thing is, that political importance can be disguised behind initial appearances or hidden in lore. Great post and it gets to kinda the heart of why he is loving terrible at this. Doom and a lot other games have a duck ton of depth but he will never see or accept it because it's "wrong to like it and it's bad."
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
I'm rereading it- my point, which I sort of wavered on, was that violence is a narrative element that, due to the nature of games, is really easy to put in place. It needs to be read in context, seen as an element of a larger text, and critiqued within the broader work. Criticising a game for containing violence is like criticising a sport for using a ball or criticising a book for having a male character, and leaving the criticism at that. Saying that the game is politically wrongthink because it has violence in it misses the fact that games have been using violence for over 55 years (Spacewar, motherfuckers!) and there's a lot of history and nuance to how a game uses violence, and what violence means in the text in question. DOOM's violence is about justice winning out over greed. Wolfeinstein's violence is about hope triumphing over tyranny. Undertale's violence is about video game violence itself and the nature of choice in constructed experiences, and the fact that it offers another choice is itself a political decision- rejection of violence, which is an act the player must perform every turn by consciously moving the clicker off "FIGHT" and onto "ACT," is presented as the superior choice. Overwatch's violence is about the joy of competition and the power of teamwork and about how little turret bastards are just the worst and suck and should be nerfed and I hate them. That's not to say that violence is inherently okay, either. Because violence is easy and lethal violence is way easier than a lot of other means of conflict resolution (if you remove an element from the board rather than changing its nature, that's easier to design for than building a system to handle changed items, and brainwashing or conversion is its own fuckin' kettle of fish, man), a lot of games default to it or its inclusion to the detriment of their narratives. A lot of other games revel in explicit violence as a primary conceit to the exclusion of almost anything else. This may or may not be the point of the text and proper critique will involve flushing that out, rather than just looking at the violence's presence or absence and knocking a point off the overall score. There's been a lot of games where the violence has been unsettling, for example. Bioshock Infinite comes to mind. But one must never assume that "this violence is unsettling" is the end of the goddamned conversation. If video games are to be treated as an art form, then their elements, and the effects those elements have on the audience, need to be assessed as being decisions made by a creator rather than mistakes. Bioshock Infinite's violence is unsettling because Booker DeWitt is a shithead who defaults to violence, and up until that is revealed, the game seems a lot more friendly, and the player is more able to project themselves into a player character who is secretly not the same as them. It is unsettling because players may have assumed things about their character which are now not true, and the sudden and vicious inclusion of a sequence of brutal violence is jarring until more of Booker's past is revealed and the earlier sequence snaps into place as a natural outgrowth of how Booker deals with basically everything in his life. Would the game have been better without violence? No. Bioshock Infinite is the experience that it is because it contains the violence that it does. Removing it would require a massive overhaul of the entire narrative, and in the end the game would not be the same game, and comparing the two would be like comparing Call of Duty Black Ops to What Remains of Edith Finch. So, that's my point. Violence is a core narrative element in a lot of games, and calling for it to be removed is like calling for romance to be removed from all films.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I'm rereading it- my point, which I sort of wavered on, was that violence is a narrative element that, due to the nature of games, is really easy to put in place. It needs to be read in context, seen as an element of a larger text, and critiqued within the broader work. Criticising a game for containing violence is like criticising a sport for using a ball or criticising a book for having a male character, and leaving the criticism at that. Saying that the game is politically wrongthink because it has violence in it misses the fact that games have been using violence for over 55 years (Spacewar, motherfuckers!) and there's a lot of history and nuance to how a game uses violence, and what violence means in the text in question. DOOM's violence is about justice winning out over greed. Wolfeinstein's violence is about hope triumphing over tyranny. Undertale's violence is about video game violence itself and the nature of choice in constructed experiences, and the fact that it offers another choice is itself a political decision- rejection of violence, which is an act the player must perform every turn by consciously moving the clicker off "FIGHT" and onto "ACT," is presented as the superior choice. Overwatch's violence is about the joy of competition and the power of teamwork and about how little turret bastards are just the worst and suck and should be nerfed and I hate them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
I mean my read on wolfenstein was more that BJ is characterized as some kind of murder elemental that has been poured into a human mold and that he just does it because he likes it but also has a tragic past or something. I dunno, I felt like they were trying to have lots of different characterizations and stories at the same time and none of them were very good. TBH I don't really like the new wolfenstein though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
I think the way they handled BJ blaskowitz in the new Wolfensteins has been the most interesting character acting I've probably seen in a good long while, he's a real hero but there's also something fundamentally broken about him that's shown really effectively through his acting and dialogue. I loving love him as a character and the overall feel the went for with the first game and the upcoming one was really quite genius.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Eh, personally he came off just kind of a mess of cliches that aren't very coherently put together. Also I wasn't best pleased by the gameplay being a pretty large step down from the 2009 game. And the "actually the international Jewish conspiracy to control the world was real" angle I thought was in... pretty loving weird taste at the very least?? The only thing I will say for it is that I like the effort they put into the environment design and the music they recorded for it. The 2009 one though I wholly recommend if bethesda ever puts it back on steam because it's probably one of the closest games of its time period to the new DOOM game, great weapon and enemy variety and great pulp scifi nazi science occultism setting. For its time it's real good and holds up pretty well even now I reckon. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Sep 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean my read on wolfenstein was more that BJ is characterized as some kind of murder elemental that has been poured into a human mold and that he just does it because he likes it but also has a tragic past or something. I dunno, I felt like they were trying to have lots of different characterizations and stories at the same time and none of them were very good. BJ is basically Samson(gently caress even one of the main characters calls him that) OwlFancier posted:Eh, personally he came off just kind of a mess of cliches that aren't very coherently put together. Also I wasn't best pleased by the gameplay being a pretty large step down from the 2009 game. And the "actually the international Jewish conspiracy to control the world was real" angle I thought was in... pretty loving weird taste at the very least?? Somfin posted:I'm rereading it- my point, which I sort of wavered on, was that violence is a narrative element that, due to the nature of games, is really easy to put in place. It needs to be read in context, seen as an element of a larger text, and critiqued within the broader work. Criticising a game for containing violence is like criticising a sport for using a ball or criticising a book for having a male character, and leaving the criticism at that. Saying that the game is politically wrongthink because it has violence in it misses the fact that games have been using violence for over 55 years (Spacewar, motherfuckers!) and there's a lot of history and nuance to how a game uses violence, and what violence means in the text in question. DOOM's violence is about justice winning out over greed. Wolfeinstein's violence is about hope triumphing over tyranny. Undertale's violence is about video game violence itself and the nature of choice in constructed experiences, and the fact that it offers another choice is itself a political decision- rejection of violence, which is an act the player must perform every turn by consciously moving the clicker off "FIGHT" and onto "ACT," is presented as the superior choice. Overwatch's violence is about the joy of competition and the power of teamwork and about how little turret bastards are just the worst and suck and should be nerfed and I hate them. Holy poo poo, you make amazing posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I'm rereading it- my point, which I sort of wavered on, was that violence is a narrative element that, due to the nature of games, is really easy to put in place. It needs to be read in context, seen as an element of a larger text, and critiqued within the broader work. Criticising a game for containing violence is like criticising a sport for using a ball or criticising a book for having a male character, and leaving the criticism at that. Saying that the game is politically wrongthink because it has violence in it misses the fact that games have been using violence for over 55 years (Spacewar, motherfuckers!) and there's a lot of history and nuance to how a game uses violence, and what violence means in the text in question. DOOM's violence is about justice winning out over greed. Wolfeinstein's violence is about hope triumphing over tyranny. Undertale's violence is about video game violence itself and the nature of choice in constructed experiences, and the fact that it offers another choice is itself a political decision- rejection of violence, which is an act the player must perform every turn by consciously moving the clicker off "FIGHT" and onto "ACT," is presented as the superior choice. Overwatch's violence is about the joy of competition and the power of teamwork and about how little turret bastards are just the worst and suck and should be nerfed and I hate them. just caught this, this is a loving amazing post that I'm going to save offline to think about when I design stories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
I think kids past age 9 or so can handle most violence just fine unless it's torture or rape or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:I think kids past age 9 or so can handle most violence just fine unless it's torture or rape or something like that. The danger is when the violence is presented as reward and goal, rather than as a means to an end. In Mario it's entirely okay to just not hurt things, most of the time- some of the time you need to knock out a koopa or stop a goomba to get past an obstacle, but getting past the obstacle is the point. It's why I think Splatoon is perfect for kids. Violence doesn't itself win matches, but it makes winning matches easier; the best way to win matches is to avoid getting So, like, I'd say that violent games for kids should be narrative-driven single-player games about finishing levels. For multiplayer, stick to stuff with capture the flag matches and the like. Extermination-driven games are really iffy. Somfin fucked around with this message at 11:11 on Sep 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
Somfin posted:The danger is when the violence is presented as reward and goal, rather than as a means to an end. In Mario it's entirely okay to just not hurt things, most of the time- some of the time you need to knock out a koopa or stop a goomba to get past an obstacle, but getting past the obstacle is the point. It's why I think Splatoon is perfect for kids. Violence doesn't itself win matches, but it makes winning matches easier; the best way to win matches is to avoid getting true. its why i always sorta liked kirby games. you kind just float about and dodge poo poo if you want. plus waddle dees are cute.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
kirby promotes childhood obesity and gluttony
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
lol i can't believe this is his pinned tweet he really is the dumbest person alive. it's like shapiro with his facts don't care about your feelings garbage. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/874236625202462720
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:lol i can't believe this is his pinned tweet he really is the dumbest person alive. it's like shapiro with his facts don't care about your feelings garbage. Yes but do not forget for whom the bell tolls lest we forget the grass is always greener in greener pastures.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:lol i can't believe this is his pinned tweet he really is the dumbest person alive. it's like shapiro with his facts don't care about your feelings garbage. he started out as mcintosh type liberal/left social critic and then went to the extreme stupid alt right because he was to dumb to find a better path. it doesnt surprise me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
@stillstupid
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:he started out as mcintosh type liberal/left social critic and then went to the extreme stupid alt right because he was to dumb to find a better path. it doesnt surprise me. Apparently he was an "ironic" Nazi as a teenager so he's just spun in a circle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Apparently he was an "ironic" Nazi as a teenager so he's just spun in a circle. seems to be a theme. early on in his transition he was sorta interesting but he went straight to assholeville.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Wasn't it a review of Witcher 3 that made some mild criticism of it's more problematic areas that sent him back over the edge into Nazitown? Also something something ants.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
SteelMentor posted:Wasn't it a review of Witcher 3 that made some mild criticism of it's more problematic areas that sent him back over the edge into Nazitown? yeah. pretty much. he got mad at the dude who wasnt even a dick about it, too. There were some dumb loving critiques of that game but he was the least bad. Dapper_Swindler fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Sep 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Ian Miles Cheong is so frustrating because he comes at everything with the certainty of an evangelical. It is self evident to him that SJWs are all evil Illuminati who want to control his brain. So any counter argument to anything he says clearly just means you're part of the conspiracy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Can't logic someone out of something they didn't logic themselves into. I'm guessing it's unfuckability that inspired that mindset and there's not much that will get someone out of a view they took to explain their lack of headboard notches.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:It is self evident to him that SJWs are all evil Illuminati who want to control his brain. So any counter argument to anything he says clearly just means you're part of the conspiracy. Dunno why that bothers him, no-one currently is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
I remember the 2016? E3 where they had the big trailers for both Doom and Infinite Warfare. Doom had you gorily tearing apart screaming jet pack skeletons with your bare hands. IW had you slickly grapple to a guy whereupon you tore off his spacesuit mask and he suffocated bloodlessly. The second was way, way more disturbing to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2017 07:32
|
|
|
Der Waffle Mous posted:I remember the 2016? E3 where they had the big trailers for both Doom and Infinite Warfare. Yeah and both games ended up being good. And because choking to death from no air at all is much scarier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:painting or other artistic pursuits, even when done badly, are far more productive than streaming. unless you are very charming or have some weird gimmick you're just filming yourself talking while consuming someone else's creation. the value you're adding is your speech, and most people who want to make it big as an entertainer grossly overestimate how entertaining they are My personal opinion on streaming is that a lot of people treat it as a bad man's podcast/radio and sort of have it in the background without even really watching it. They want commentary but need some action as stimulation. The twitch community sucks and is just full of spamming. At least I think they reduced the amount of Amnesia/fake screaming on the platform so that is good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Midig posted:The twitch community sucks and is just full of spamming. That's why you find cool and nice people with at best medium sized fanbases, when you've got streams like that twitch gets cozy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
One of the top things I'll always hate the Alt-Right for is taking the term SJW. Because it use to refer to guys like McIntosh. Guys who were always going way to far into this stuff and eclaring everything problematic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:One of the top things I'll always hate the Alt-Right for is taking the term SJW. Because it use to refer to guys like McIntosh. Guys who were always going way to far into this stuff and eclaring everything problematic. thats honestly one of the biggest reasons i hate them. they made making GBS threads/critiquing/gate keeping out terrible socially left critics impossible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:One of the top things I'll always hate the Alt-Right for is taking the term SJW. Because it use to refer to guys like McIntosh. Guys who were always going way to far into this stuff and eclaring everything problematic. I know, right?! It was a perfect term to describe idiots who thought space-dragon imaginary husband's were topics as valuable as basic human rights, but the Nazis managed to ruin it, just like they ruined the original meaning behind the opening lines of the German national anthem... Just like they ruin everything they touch, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
i recommend seeing this through to the end just to see the completely hosed up world view of a sociopath fall to pieces https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaRfhchKKGI yuck
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:One of the top things I'll always hate the Alt-Right for is taking the term SJW. Because it use to refer to guys like McIntosh. Guys who were always going way to far into this stuff and eclaring everything problematic. Glenn Beck kind of got that ball rolling in the late 00s by making the term "social justice" itself a toxic term among his audience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2017 09:57
|
|