Reply With QuoteMore like I mention I don't like something and there's a collective gasp of horror and a lot of clucking and tsking. Which doesn't change my opinion any.Originally Posted by henke
I always took it be mildly aware of itself, without being 100% caricature. It's rammed with tropes, but that didn't stop me enjoying it.
More like I mention I don't like something and there's a collective gasp of horror and a lot of clucking and tsking. Which doesn't change my opinion any.
I thought you said it was objectively bad.
Also, who was trying to change your opinion? My point was just that your opinion isn't law.
I don't think you have bad taste because you don't like a book I like. Opinions vary.
There are exceptions for some things, like for example, I'd question the taste of someone who told me that e.g. Mortyr was the best game ever made, bar none; but in this case, it was that Snow Crash is not objectively AWFUL. I didn't say it was the best book ever, just refuted that it is dreadful to the extent that enjoying it means a lapse in judgement.
I did and I stand by that. But I was responding to henke's more general claim. He's wrong of course.
Oh I see, it's a catch-phrase.
Y'know, just a thought, but 'this is objectively bad by universal standards and you are WRONG and TERRIBLE for liking it' isn't quite the same as 'I don't like it'.
That's what I was getting at, but somehow I get branded a martyr (which I still don't quite get - martyrdom comes from some kind of sacrifice to a higher authority in the name of a cause or belief as I recall...is...is Dethtoll the higher authority?) for it. I wasn't even intending to be too pissy about it, but my workload and stress levels kind of drain every last iota of measure and patience from my prose these days.
I read Snow Crash for the first time recently, and thoroughly enjoyed it. It's definitely interesting reading it now considering many hold it up as one of the pillars of the genre, and near-future stuff from the Nineties is always good for a chuckle.
But some of his concepts were great, and he has a knack for action when he finally gets around to it.
But I'm really not sure he understands games and gaming if he intends for a motion controller to be the primary way of interacting with his game. Did he miss the point where core gamers* abandoned every motion controller like the gimmicks they are?
*Yes, it's a horrible marketing term, but it's a quick way of identifying a demographic, one with heavy representation amongst PC gamers.
Well, just because no one has done a motion controller "right" doesn't mean we should stop trying.
also, I may be mistaken but I dont recall him saying he is ONLY targetting hardcore gamers. Plenty of people playing Wii / Move / Kinect who might fun some casual sword skirmishes fun.
I agree with what others have said about the real problem being the lack of a "stop" mechanic for the controller when the sword hits something.
That's your proof? Grasping for straws, buddy. I can't believe you're actually trying to drag me back into this stupid argument after I'd already recused myself. And then you have the gall to accuse me of always trying to argue? I'll say this, you've got some stones on you buddy.
NONE of your examples are more recent than 2010, almost all are related to books, and they certainly don't involve arguing to the level that was in this thread -- arguing mostly because faetal decided to take out his bad day on me. So why don't you just bugger off.
And faetal, you basically said "oh i liked stephenson i guess that makes me a horrible person right?" That's where the martyr thing comes from. Blatant "come at me bro" right there. Argument's over though, no matter how much henke and Stitch want to start it again.
I was picking you up on your use of definitive terminology to describe a subjective thing. I did the same thing with Koki when he did it for Fallout 3. It's a bugbear, I'll admit it.
I rate you and Koki two of the better contributors to the forums too, when you're not getting all ad hominem about things (actually sometimes, even then in terms of humour), but this whole "X sucks" rather than "I think that X sucks" mentality about things which other people like is one of those things which ticks me off in any kind of discussion. It comes across that you know people like something you don't so you make sure to use the most definitive terms possible, rather than present your views as being no more than that. It's not the same as evolution vs. creationism where you can actually cite a fuckpile of evidence to rebuke all of the silly creationist misconceptions about evolution (e.g. here's a paper showing a type III secretion system), it's just subjective. The very simple inclusion of language showing that something is your view rather than LAW would make it less incendiary, but I guess you don't actually want that. It's like religious folk telling you they KNOW god exists rather than they BELIEVE it. The language matters.
Believe me dethy, there's nothing I want more than for you to just shut the hell up, so I think we can agree on this.
There is a plugin for firefox that replaces every instance of "I " with "I think"
which would just give us "i think think" a bunch of times
I think it's better to be safe than sorry!
Is your point that I should always assume that "X sucks" means "I think X sucks"?
If so, what happens when the person then comes back and says "X is objectively bad"?
How many rules can this plugin handle?
How about a couple weeks ago, then?
I don't know why you think that would matter, anyway (it isn't as if most people on TTLG weren't around a couple years ago) and I don't know why you'd think it matters whether or not literature vs. video games function as the springboard for you to air the same old now-tired opinion (it doesn't).
My point is that you "chase down each mention of Stephenson on this forum and stamp them with a regurgitation of your opinion," a point that I didn't expect would pan out quite as literally as it did. A simple search for dethtoll and "stephenson" was all it took to find a bread crumb trail of you HAVING TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT on Stephenson, even if it's only via a snarky comment.
I get it, you're an opinionated asshole and you think Stephenson is hideously overrated. These are two things we have in common, dude. All I'm saying is we opinionated assholes need to know when to consider our job done and lay off. We may consider pissing all over everything with our opinion just part of our charm, but it only goes so far. In moderation, airing negative views can provoke debate. In excess, you turn into that guy.
You don't want to be that guy, do you? Trust the word of someone who has been there and struggled to get past it: life is better when I'm not that guy.
I know the Stephenson talk has already ebbed and I know directly calling you out on all this is just going to kick in the ol' dethtoll defenses--which I also get--but I can only do what I can.
All this talk about how opiniated assholes need to know when to shut up and you still can't follow your own fucking advice. Fantastic.
(lol)
You are right about one thing, though: if we keep this up then I'll also turn into that guy, so I'll bow out now and leave you to your whatever.
I think it does
After your performance in the feminism thread I am not touching that one with a ten foot pole(oh crap, are ten foot poles chauvinist?)If so, what happens when the person then comes back and says "X is objectively bad"?
...and another more technical video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JDJkB2vxnU
I was about to bag on the video of doing the horrible Wii thing of "replace button with a swing" but then it gets to the part where it actually does allow you to do whatever you want, and handling the result via realistic physics rather then pre-determined "moves."
I am curious tho - if you try to do your own thing and get close to one of the moves, does it auto-correct your movement and force your in-game avatar to perform that move? Or does it ALWAYS map exactly to your movements, and the on-screen widgets are merely "helpful guide" rather than set attacks?
Also I like their design philosophy in the ending - "we're not aiming for big, we just picked one small ESTABLISHED fighting system and try to reproduce it in a game, as sort of a proof-of-concept. If it works, it paves the way for more complex / better projects."
Remaining cautiously optimistic.
The guys made it, so the ones interested can look forward to CLANG. Let's see what they can do.
Posting Permissions