This is a board for topics that don't fit on other boards, but that are still otaku/hobby related.
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [First 100 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Email
Subject   (reply to 33905)
Message
BB Code
File
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: BMP, EPUB, GIF, JPEG, JPG, MP3, MP4, OGG, PDF, PNG, PSD, SWF, TORRENT, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 7000 KB.
  • Images greater than 260x260 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 3006 unique user posts.
  • board catalog

File 157747670175.jpg - (164.38KB , 850x1205 , sample_005766acf89a387fc6488b84d665226a.jpg )
33905 No. 33905 [Edit]
What are some things that really bug you?
Things that genuinely piss you off?

I thought it would be nice to have a thread to vent about any little annoyance, no mater how big or small.
Any and all complains about the world around you are welcome here!

Old one reached bumb limit I think.
89 posts omitted. Last 50 shown. Expand all images
>> No. 34225 [Edit]
I began watching Age of Empires II matches on youtube after the definitive edition came out because, unbeknownst to my clueless self, there's a sizeable community and tournaments. It's really enjoyable, but I've also had to experience the Twitch userbase: it's awful. The users parrot, spam "memes" and phrases, and engage in banal behavior that's tedious. E-motes are obnoxious, and the faggotry is nearly deadly. I try to focus purely on the match and the, surprisingly good, commentary (where applicable), but the chatbox is a dynamic component so I will, unfortunately, take a glance at it from time to time. I don't know how anybody can enjoy that garbage.
P.S. I am very happy that AoE2 is still going strong. I dumped so many hours into it in my formative years. I just wish III was a bit more popular.

>>34224
>The internet is just too accessible.
Time to move to a different protocol? I wonder if Gopher would be viable.
>> No. 34226 [Edit]
>>34225
>Time to move to a different protocol?
I'm optimistic about safenet, but I can understand why others would be less so.
https://safenetforum.org/t/so-you-want-to-make-a-safe-website

Post edited on 10th Mar 2020, 6:17am
>> No. 34227 [Edit]
>>34225
>Age of Empires
I remember playing it for the first time back in ~99.To be honest i never liked it.I found it really tedious and boring.After some point it gers so repetitive that its mindbogling.Most of its appeal is that it was the "first".And they are still milking it-that just goes to show how creatively bunkrupt they are.
Stronghold on the other hand-now that game is fucking amazing.Levels of /comfy/ never seen before.
and the walls are actual walls
>> No. 34228 [Edit]
>>34227
I mean at stronghold you have to use strategy.No matter what huge army you throw at the enemy castle,you are gonna lose if you just rush them.On aoe if you just spam the strongest units you win-no strategy no tactics-nothing.not even moats.The first time i took an enemy castle by moving cleverly and finding an opening in the defences i was ecstatic.That kind of feel is missing from aoe.Even the battle for Weskek is more strategic than aoe.Checkers is more strategic than aoe.Going to the bathroom requires more strategy than playing aoe.
I dont mean to insult you but i can see why normals still like it.
>> No. 34229 [Edit]
>>34227
>>34228
Not the other person but I think it's precisely because of that that it is not as popular online as AOE2 is now. It doesn't have the meta and strategy just gets in the way, look at LoL, it's immensely popular but it's basically AoE but only controlling one unit. it's incredibly simple mechanically and that's why people like it.
>> No. 34231 [Edit]
>>34229
Yeah i agree i was just ranting about how i dont like it.Stronghold lost its online popularity because it had some pretty serious problems in its multiplayer mechanics that were abused and made the game tragically bad.If you look at multiplayer games you ll see that literally everyone is doing exactly the same thing.That got old pretty fast.Personally im not a huge fan of online multiplayer but there are some games that are/were popular and had an element of strategy in them maybe Total Annihilation/Planetary Annihilation and Starcraft.But as far as castle siege/mediaval warfare goes i think that aoe is pretty bad.I think that i will go as far as saying that it is worse than Empire Earth 2. I mean at EE at least you had hilarious situations were you were fighting archers with tanks.Then of course i discovered that Japan made games,too and i never looked backed.
And since i brought japan up,have they made any interesting strategy games?
>> No. 34232 [Edit]
>>34223
>Another post was bashing others, calling anime other than entry level garbage 'creepy' and 'pedophilic'.
For some reason I've wanted to get into an argument with someone who thinks like this lately. Sometimes my idle thoughts imagine this argument and come up with things I'd want to yell at them with. It would probably be a waste of time, though.
>> No. 34233 [Edit]
>>34232
They are people that think internet is serious business and they dont want you there because you are making them look bad.They cant be discussing the latest social issues in a place with anime pics!Hence the whole anti-anime crusade in the imageboards in the past few years.And if you pay close attention you ll see that they are the same people that flooded in and took over-with the blessings of the mods.Dont even bother,they are not interested in discussing anything they want to drive you out plain and simple.
Lately,in the past year, in a small-ish imageboard i used to visit, they made their appearencce.When i saw people bashing others because they used anime pictures in their posts,my blood pressure rose so high that i thought i was gonna have a stroke.Yet another place gone...and it was a fkng anime themed imageboard ffs.
>> No. 34235 [Edit]
>>34226
I cannot imagine showing that to the common user--even an imageboard user--and getting a good response. Which is why, even though I suggested it in the first place, moving to an alternative web is a dream.

>>34227
>>34228
You're wrong, friend. I'll even go as far to say that you're ignorant of AoE2. Having the strongest units doesn't win you the game. If that were the case, units like elephants would be dominant, but they aren't. They're expensive and slow. Pikemen, who cost no gold--a very precious resource, can be easily massed and destroy elephants. Indeed, even the mighty paladin isn't always a wise choice because, once again, pikemen are an effective counter. And then there's monks! But here's a great thing: that's not always the case. If you have knights fight un-upgraded pikemen/spearmen, their natural counter is ineffective. Further, you're assuming a player can even tech into strong units. Getting high-tier knights or elephants is an expensive process, and it takes time too: time and resources that could be spent on producing units or researching other technologies. Hell, one strong unit for a faction might be unattainable or is weak in another. I've only been elaborating about this one misconception, but it perfectly illustrates why you're incorrect and very ignorant: this concept alone shows a lot of depth that you're overlooking. If you think I'm lying or don't know that I'm talking about, I recommend researching this stuff. It's interesting.
With respect to Stronghold, it's a fun game, but it's not something that scratches the RTS itch for me. It doesn't even have unit formations! Comparing the two games is not a good idea because one is a traditional RTS first-and-foremost that uses the medieval period as its base, and the other is castle management and a different kind of RTS.
>I dont mean to insult you
I don't see the point in saying this when you very much did intend to do that; otherwise you wouldn't have typed the things you did.
>> No. 34236 [Edit]
>>34235
No anon you are incorrect,when im talking about strategy im talking about how you have to position your troops in order to attack a castle and avoid the defences and find an opening.In that respect aoe is trash.
Its a fun game but its not a strategy game.The walls are a joke and there are no defences.I might have oversimplified things a little regarding the units but it doesnt change a thing.Even in pokemon you must know what types can attack other types,does that mean that pokemon is a good strategy game?There are units that are extremely buffed and if you rush them you can btfo anybody.I have actually played and seen other people play.On the formation that you say is missing, what are you gonna form on aoe?your 50 units?Let me laugh.At least on stronghold you can have up to thousands of units.
Its a fun game and you can like it all you want,my rant was that its not a strategy game.
ALso when i said i didnt want to insult you i meant i didnt want to bundle you with normals.
>> No. 34237 [Edit]
>>34236
>No anon you are incorrect,when im talking about strategy im talking about how you have to position your troops in order to attack a castle and avoid the defences and find an opening.In that respect aoe is trash. Its a fun game but its not a strategy game.
Your definition of a strategy game is unique and narrow, but interestingly enough, AoE2 also meets your requirements! If you have truly watched some games and played the game enough, you would notice that players do indeed do that. Anybody who wants to win isn't going to position and move their troops under a castle or town center's arrow fire. (Unless one absolutely has to.) Further, finding openings in an enemy's base is important for raiding and just generally winning a game. Players are always scouting and probing each other. You see it all the time. Just like having multi-prong attacks is another thing you'll see. Having some light cavalry raid your enemy's production areas while your engage in a hot spot is good idea.
With regards to defenses, I'll reiterate: AoEII isn't a castle management game. Defenses are important, but they're just implemented differently.
>There are units that are extremely buffed and if you rush them you can btfo anybody.
Care to give any examples? There are always gong to be issues with balance because RTS games are complex systems, but I can't think any unit that is like this. Maybe a lot of Gothic huskarls?
>On the formation that you say is missing, what are you gonna form on aoe?your 50 units?Let me laugh.At least on stronghold you can have up to thousands of units.
One would split them up or stagger them to avoid arrows and catapult shots. This is commonly seen at higher levels of play. Just because there are fewer units, doesn't mean that formations aren't helpful.
>ALso when i said i didnt want to insult you i meant i didnt want to bundle you with normals.
Fair enough, I guess.

It seems to me that your ideal strategy game is one like Stronghold (and Total War?), and therefore you favor that over AoE and friends. That's fine, of course, but to regard Age of Empires II as being devoid of strategy, and thus not an RTS, according to some odd definition is strange.
>> No. 34239 [Edit]
File 158388457485.jpg - (748.16KB , 864x1080 , e13b73afbebb10936eed96ffc4c25b3c.jpg )
34239
>>34233
>took over-with the blessings of the mods
Why does this happen? Shouldn't the mods be the most angry? A place they built and maintained which grew a community is being invaded and ruined by interlopers, and they don't have a problem with it. How does that make sense? Where's the banhammer avalanche?

>>34235
>I cannot imagine showing that to the common user--even an imageboard user--and getting a good response.
How come? Is it too technical?
>> No. 34245 [Edit]
>>34239
>How come? Is it too technical?
It's because I think that installing another application to browse "another web" might be confusing, and the fact that cryptocoin is employed is another aspect I can see the average user being weary of. And even if said stuff doesn't confuse or instill consternation, the willingness to install and use such things is another barrier. And this is just from my cursory knowledge, so please correct me if I'm being foolish.
>> No. 34246 [Edit]
>>34239
Unfortunately,no matter what the mods thought at that time-and it was to ban them-they did not own the websites.It was a decision made by the owner,at least in the case of 4 that i know of and in the process anybody that didnt agree got the boo here are a lot of archived screencaps showing the whole process,from gtfo to a warm welcome.I dont know and i dont care what happened behind the scenes but it happened and here we are.The only blame that i put on anons is that they were in a crusade of attention-seeking and in the end they managed to even get featured on the news.And in numbers anons were far too few to turn the tide even with self-moderation.
Its was actually pretty surreal,after a point in time to see that the whole inner conflict between groups ,after anons were driven out, was between newcomers.People that had just came were telling others to get out...
One could argue that with the popularity of the internet and content aggregation sites it would have happened sooner or later but who knows...
>> No. 34249 [Edit]
>>34245
Assuming it works, maybe all these barriers will be a good thing. Higher barrier for entry. If it works, some people will use it, and those people may be of higher quality. That's good enough for me.
>> No. 34251 [Edit]
>>34237
Games labeled as Real Time Strategy like aoe and its clones(age of mythology,empire earth,red alert etc) Shogun Total War and its sequels,Supreme Commander and the more modern Wargame series all place more importance in strategy than aoe.For example in the wargame series your units defence is dependant on whether they are out in the open or in a forested area.Forests in aoe are cosmetic.Or if you barricade your infantry in a city block you cant take them out so easily(Wargame bonus:tedious resource gathering is removed)Thousands of strong units can get lost if you rush them towards moderately prepared defences in a good strategy game, but in aoe if you get 50~60 of the stronger units you can level the whole map.
I actually had a lot of fun playing aoe in lan back in the day but what i was ranting about was that among its kind aoe is the least strategic and yet it is hailed as one of the bes hats my problem.I fail to see how my definition of strategy is narrow when all its competitors (and their fanbases) enjoy the more complex battle mechanics of other titles than aoe.The fact that the livechats that you mentioned are filled with cancerous-buzzword spewing-kiddies should be a huge red flag as to what is perceived as a good strategy title these days.I know that you know that the biggest marketshare today is reserved for very simplified-mechanics titles targeted at casuals.There are ofc communities with levels of autism never seen before but they are a small chunk.Aoe was succesfull andrecognizable because it was the firs here was literally no competition and back in the day people were getting impressed more easily.Today its still popular because its still recognizable and there are millions of dollars thrown in advertishment and promotion.It hasnt erarned its fame by its merits.
Just like you said, that stronghold didnt quite scratched that itch you had; thats exactly how i felt about it.
>> No. 34253 [Edit]
>>34251
You continue to ignore my examples of why AoE2 subverts your expectations and supposed experiences; you continue to compare two different (sub-)genres (Wargame doesn't even have an economy aspect that many enjoy in their traditional RTS; thus it must compensate with other mechanics to recover depth, as it should.); you continue to be obtuse and make heavily unsubstantiated, opinionated and odd statements about what and what doesn't constitute strategy; you continue to make claims that I refuted; and you continue to conflate popular with bad. (The latter is as incorrect as saying that because something is popular, it's good.) I could perpetuate this conversation with more examples that militate against your points, but you seem to not be interested in that. Your ostensible objective is to prove to me, and yourself, that AoE2 isn't a good "strategy" game because its undeserved popularity with normalfags and its inability to conform to your personal and specific definition of strategy. (But it does, in fact, conform, you just choose to ignore that.)
And by the way, if a game isn't good or fun, nobody is going to play it. Advertising budget be dammed. The fact that AoE2 continues to be popular despite its age is a testament to its gameplay. MicroSoft hasn't exactly been a good steward of the franchise either.

>Just like you said, that stronghold didnt quite scratched that itch you had; thats exactly how i felt about it.
And that's fine! Just don't make factually incorrect statements about something you don't like.
>> No. 34254 [Edit]
>>34249
That's the idea, and I too wonder about that. The only way to know for sure is to try it.
>> No. 34258 [Edit]
>>34253
My point was not to convince anybody about anything.
My first posts were rants about why i dont like aoe and how its treated as the best and i just gave reasons for that.
But guess what stronghold is better
>> No. 34259 [Edit]
>>34258
also
De gustibus non est disputandum
>> No. 34260 [Edit]
>>34258
>>34259
Initially, I was going to call you a pusillanimous bullshitter by defaulting to an argument about taste, but then I realized that since you used your own personal definition of strategy, it really is mostly about taste. (Though you're not consistent with your application of that definition, but whatever.) So your subsequent posts were trying to drill that into my thick head.
Still, I'm a tad disappointed in you, but maybe you'll change in time. I just hope you won't let normalfags' enjoyment of a game hinder your viewpoint or logic. I raged about the stupidity of Ages' community on Twitch, but in reality, that applies to all of Twitch. Further, the reason for their faggotry is to promote viewership and therefore money; money that goes towards increasing the games' player-base and tournaments. It's fucking annoying, but it's necessary unless the average person changes.
>> No. 34265 [Edit]
I spelt infiltrate wrong, oops.

>>34224
Tohno chan isn't bad. You'll get some crossposter from 4chan here and now but they usually don't stay due to the slow nature of the board. Posting quality is usually very nice with little to no shitposting. Some people feel that /ot/ is becoming like /so/ and in a way, it is, but it's not too bad. Maybe people are reflecting upon things now because, as I said, our culture is being degraded. We are the minority. Those among smaller boards (except for that chan federation crap but that is another story for another time) are different from those on bigger boards and other websites.

I hope tohno chan remains obscure. When a board population rises it gets worse. The mods here are strict so most likely it wont turn into a hellhole. I cannot say the same for other used to be obscure boards like wizchan and 8kun however.

>>34232
No use in arguing with others. Always just report and ignore, hide posts if you can. Giving them attention only attracts more of them. Make them feel unwelcome.
>> No. 34266 [Edit]
>>34233
I can only and I mean only understand disdain for anime posting when it is an avatarfag posting or a ironic animefag posting. You should know by now why avatatfags are looked down upon but with ironic anime fans things become more murky. These people will constantly shitpost and post 'smug anime girls' in a situation where it is unwarranted. It gets extremely annoying and is reminiscent of normalfag behavior.
>> No. 34267 [Edit]
>>34233
I can only and I mean only understand disdain for anime posting when it is an avatarfag posting or a ironic animefag posting. You should know by now why avatatfags are looked down upon but with ironic anime fans things become more murky. These people will constantly shitpost and post 'smug anime girls' in a situation where it is unwarranted. It gets extremely annoying and is reminiscent of normalfag behavior.
>> No. 34281 [Edit]
>>34008
There's a derivative of this that I hate even more:
>Whoever: "why do I hear boss music?"

This one is even worse, in my opinion. There's not even any such thing as, "boss music," it's just the soundtrack becoming more intense. At least, though annoying and uncreative, the "nobody: " thing conveys how unexpected something is, this one genuinely makes no sense because there's no such as "boss music."
>> No. 34282 [Edit]
>>34281
"Boss theme", as a convention absolutely exists. I have no idea what you mean. Those kinds of posts are definitely annoying but I can't agree on that. It's not an identifiable genre but it's a usage convention.
>> No. 34283 [Edit]
>>34282
Ummmm... I never considered theme music when looking at those posts. I always just saw boss music. I feel a bit silly now. Still, diction is important. Saying, "Bowser's Theme," is very different from, "the boss music."

Post edited on 13th Mar 2020, 3:12pm
>> No. 34284 [Edit]
>>34283
In rpgs, character have different themes for story events and battles. Kefka's theme? Which one? Oh, his boss music.
>> No. 34285 [Edit]
>>34284
Yeah, I understand. It clearly just never clicked with me that that's what was meant.
>> No. 34288 [Edit]
>>34285
I see where the confusion was now. I never thought it could be read like that but I can see how now.
>> No. 34297 [Edit]
File 158419637876.jpg - (153.06KB , 850x1274 , __artoria_pendragon_and_saber_alter_fate_and_1_mor.jpg )
34297
Celebrity culture in general. I don't follow any of the real world shit, but I can't help but be confronted with the e-celeb variety every so often. People empathize with and give a free-pass to e-celebs when if somebody they didn't care about did the same thing, they would not. Take Demolition D for example(he just uploaded something new). I like the guy as a video-maker, I think he's funny. I don't know him personally though and I have no reason to care about his personal issues.

Everybody else who likes his videos seems to see things the opposite way. Any time he's mentioned people start expressing their sympathies and whatever. "Hope he gets better" "I just want you to know we love you" "What a shame, very sad" "he doesn't owe us anything, I support him". On a stream a while back, he explained why he stopped making videos. To sum it up, he doesn't want to make money off his videos unless a company is giving it to him. He only wants money from his fans if they're buying his book. I thought to myself, why? Why not take money wherever you can get it?

He also gave a sob story about how his dad is killing himself slaving away at some shitty job to financially support his 3DPD and HER son, so he feels so bad for him. I thought, if he doesn't want to make money from his videos for his own sake, why not for his dad's?

The thing is, not everybody could make money like that. There's plenty of people with shittier circumstances, who do not have a sizable fanbase, and who could not get one. Most people aren't funny enough, or good enough writers in general, or can't edit videos. Or they came too late when things were already too saturated, unlike him. Lots of people tried to make videos and failed to get any recognition. Even with his book, how would he know if somebody is buying it just because they know him from his videos, or because they blindly found his book and are interested? Even it it's really good, there's tons of great self-published authors who don't have that advantage. So it's not a "pure" source of income either.

From a logical standpoint, there's no reason to empathise with the guy. I don't know him, and his actions are completely irrational and stupid. Nobody feels bad for Joe Schmoes with worse circumstances that had way less opportunity to fix their problems. They only care because they like him from his videos.
>> No. 34299 [Edit]
>>34297
That's a bit harsh... I could hardly care less about e celebs, much less IRL ones, but I wouldn't discount someone's suffering purely because they are one. I suppose it's rational to judge everyone's personal circumstances by what they could be doing to improve their quality of life, but that seems a rather tenuous position to hold; by any measure, there's nothing that anyone couldn't do to better themselves. Likewise, it would seem rather hypocritical to believe that, especially if you at all empathize and/or fraternize with NEETs or people with mental disorders. Perhaps you don't, but I find that hard to believe given you're posting here of all places... I also don't really get your point about earning money by any means. Sure, by virtue of Demo's audience he has the capacity to earn far more money than he does, but if he has personal beliefs about how he should go about earning money, then why fault him? I agree that there's definitely a pragmatic argument to make, though. Maybe you're arguing from the perspective that Demo seems naive or begging for sympathy somehow, but I don't really see that. Of all the people you could be complaining about, Demo seems the most innocuous as far as online personalities go. I don't follow drama, but apparently the teens hate boogie now or something? Something about paying for healthcare and lying by omission to illicit sympathy, but I don't know, nor do I really care to learn.

Anyways, I just like Demo for his videos and wish he would upload more often. I've heard stuff about his personal life, but it's moreso come off as venting than crying for sympathy from what I've heard. Knowing those things doesn't really color my opinion of him, though.

To the crux of your argument, that pity and well-wishers only comes to those more fortunate, however, I would have to agree. It makes me more sad than angry, though. Albeit, I'd consider myself an empathetic person to a fault, so maybe I'm not the best person to be responding anyways...
>> No. 34319 [Edit]
File 158457013910.jpg - (831.88KB , 1785x2624 , 1584132640209.jpg )
34319
>>34299
>why fault him?
I don't really. I'm not upset at or have much of any negative feelings towards him. I don't understand sympathizing with him as a person who only enjoyed his videos though. Aside from not having any kind of personal relationship with him, I also can't feel sorry for him as a victim of something. That's all.

>boogie
no clue who that is.

>especially if you at all empathize and/or fraternize with NEETs or people with mental disorders
I see this sentiment a lot. To be earnest, I don't really empathize with anybody a whole lot. I can't help how I feel.

Post edited on 18th Mar 2020, 3:23pm
>> No. 34405 [Edit]
File 158534339962.jpg - (17.38KB , 236x337 , 1585004267370.jpg )
34405
People who think reading about history or politics makes them sophisticated and intellectual. They feel important because they know trivial shit about people who were "important". It's lame and they're no more impressive than those people who memorize geography facts. Some of the most obnoxious people I've ever seen online have been historyfags.
>> No. 34407 [Edit]
>>34405
It's complicated. Humanities are a legitimate thing but at the same time they are rather pointless, I can see why people enjoy them but there are better things of that nature you could spend your time doing.
>> No. 34408 [Edit]
>>34407
Humanities aren't all bad. Art, literature and languages are interesting to me. It's just people who feel smart because they memorized every dictator and their familty tree that annoy me.
>> No. 34409 [Edit]
>>34405
Desu I just read about them because it's fun to read about all the weird and stupid shit that caused wars/took place in wars.
>> No. 34411 [Edit]
>>34407
>they are rather pointless

Can you define "pointless"?
>> No. 34415 [Edit]
File 158541850973.jpg - (349.58KB , 850x600 , sample_6ad72210b9e30ac0893464c66e25266a.jpg )
34415
>>34411
Different Anon. Here's my two cents. STEM knowledge in integral to our society's current level of development. If most of it was forgotten and lost, society would be reduced to a more primitive state. If most of history, art and culture were forgotten on the other hand, society would be pretty much fine technologically. You could erase Beethoven and Charles Dickens right this instant without all that much changing. Every memory of Robespierre, Pinochet and Hitler too. Erase everything Issac Newton did and we'd be fucked.
>> No. 34416 [Edit]
>>34415
I think that's a very disconnected view, especially with regards to major world leaders. Political circumstances absolutely affect the circumstances in which people making inventions and discoveries can work within.
>> No. 34417 [Edit]
>>34416
While those people were in power, they had an impact on things that are actually worth something, but as soon as they're out of office they don't actually matter. Everybody could totally forget about them and nothing would change. The only thing people unfortunately have to pay some attention to are the current circumstances and leaders.
>> No. 34418 [Edit]
>>34417
That isn't actually possible, because people will have lived through those circumstances and will tell people being born about them. There's still people alive who remember WW2, though not for much longer.
>> No. 34419 [Edit]
File 158542101856.jpg - (161.10KB , 850x776 , __original_drawn_by_kageng__sample-c48184f50a87eb0.jpg )
34419
>>34418
Possible, not possible. It's besides my point. If magically everybody forgot who Hitler was and all records of who he was an indivudal disappeared, biographies, Mein Kampf, Letters, all of it. It wouldn't matter. Learning about that stuff is "pointless" because that information has no technological value. Same with learning about Newton's personal life. My life wouldn't change at all if nobody had any clue who any of the members of the Nazi party were, or even what WWII or WWI or the Civil War of the Bosnian War was, etc, and nobody cared.
>> No. 34420 [Edit]
>>34419
Lots of people around the world have huge hangups about World War 2, so assuming the world actually did forget about him somehow, it would be a completely different place.
>> No. 34421 [Edit]
>>34417
You can't understand a thing from the present without knowing the past. If the past got erased from our minds from one day to another, societies will colapse in a matter of months.
>> No. 34422 [Edit]
>>34421
Only on a short term basis. Some information is also more important too. We do forget lots of stuff from the past as recently as yesterday. Can you remember every single thing you did last Saturday?
>> No. 34423 [Edit]
Modernity (some aspects of it).
The new Animal Crossing game uses a smartphone(!) as achievement device. I'm not a fan of playing for achievements, and less so on a virtual smartphone. I'm not a fan of smartphones. They are a symbol of informational decadency. A telephone or a diary as achievement script would be just fine. Escapism, as Animal Crossing clearly is, should refrain from using too many realistic objects. I don't play a game to see a reflection.
The other thing is the language used. Some texts in the game are alright with me, even being colloquial (although I'm not used to it), but other things like using both gender forms for one meaning is not very efficient in space and it looks hideous, neutral forms are (much) better.
Those are just little problems which could be improved on.
>> No. 34424 [Edit]
>>34423
>like using both gender forms for one meaning
I don't think many people know that, in English, it is/was appropriate to use masculine pronouns if the gender is unknown. To see the abuse of plural neutral pronouns is annoying, but as you said, it's a lot less tedious than having to employ both masculine and feminine pronouns in the a futile attempt to obviate outrage from fools.
>> No. 34425 [Edit]
>>34424
I don't see a problem with using themself. If the sex is vague, the word should also be vague. That actually adds nuance. I don't see the point in convention for convetion's sake if things can be made more convenient and coherent.
>> No. 34426 [Edit]
>>34424
It's a thing in other languages than English, in my mother language this psychological "language correction" takes place, too. For example, take the word student: in my mother language it's frowned upon(from the so-called independent establishment, you get my point) to just say student/-s, it's more common (nowadays!) to say students and (female form of student)s, or studying (people). It takes away valuable space on paper.

>>34425
I'm not so sure about "them" as pronoun, as I'm not sure about dealing with the source of this problem as a mass phenomenon(in English common language).
I agree on the part of neutral forms which are nuanced. Many "nuanced", refined words relate to objects which themselves are symbols and so on.

There is the possibility of me playing a game with a cute female protagonist with twintails while the actual player is a bearded male.
Why would the game must make a difference between the player and the protagonist?
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [First 100 posts]

View catalog

Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason  


[Home] [Manage]



[ Rules ] [ an / foe / ma / mp3 / vg / vn ] [ cr / fig / navi ] [ mai / ot / so / tat ] [ arc / ddl / irc / lol / ns / pic ] [ home ]