I really wish I had some idea of what brought this on because I feel like I'm arguing against something I can't see.I'm not sure why you feel like you need to argue at all. You're not arguing about others' favorite comebacks.
| Author | Comment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crawl and 1OOO |
|||||
I really wish I had some idea of what brought this on because I feel like I'm arguing against something I can't see.I'm not sure why you feel like you need to argue at all. You're not arguing about others' favorite comebacks. |
|||||
Flying Omelette |
|||||
|
The others don't seem like they're in direct response to things I've said lately.
I don't think I'm being completely unreasonable. Even CB007 backed me up on this originally...
Last Edited By: Flying Omelette
03/19/08 10:26 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||||
CLOUDBOND007 |
|||||
|
My super secret identity revealed?!
This...cannot...be!!!!!
|
|||||
Crawl and 1OOO |
|||||
|
"You can't make an inference about millions of people by studying hundreds or thousands of people."
Jesus Christ people, learn statistics. EVERY TIME a statistical study comes out, this is how people rebut it. A similar one is, "There's no way this study is accurate, because it doesn't describe anyone I know." A famous example of that is... Kael is frequently quoted as having said, in the wake of Richard Nixon's landslide victory in the 1972 presidential election, that she "couldn't believe Nixon had won," since no one she knew had voted for him. A recent news story is that 25% of all teenage girls carry an STD. I saw BOTH of these rebuttals used against the study. (The second rebuttal is especially great, because of course everyone that has an STD will share that information with everyone else) The REAL -- well, it's not a rebuttal, but it can make the initial shocking result less shocking -- is that the most common disease is HPV. 80% of all women by age 50 have HPV (though the study may have only included particular strains). The second most common disease was chlamydia, which is easily treated with antibiotics. It's not like all those people have AIDS or something. |
|||||
DEATHAMSTER |
|||||
|
Studies are just government conspiracies to get you to buy more shit you don't really need.
Studies show that 85% of people own a cell phone with internet and text messaging! SO WHERE'S YOURS?! |
|||||
da dick |
|||||
|
i'm not yankee and i own a pretty old one which can do those shite. SO WHERE'S YOURS, O SUPERIOR WHITE FURRY BEING?!
is it a world conspiracy!?!? the new world order is taking over!!!!!
"How can we jump over our shadows when we no longer have one?How can we
pass out of the century (not to
speak of the millennium)if we do not make up our minds to put an end to it, engaged as we are in an indefinite work of mourning for all the incidents, ideologies and violence which have marked it?" - THE END OF THE MILLENNIUM OR THE COUNTDOWN , Jean Baudrillard. |
|||||
Flying Omelette |
|||||
|
The Fallacy of the Rose - When someone tries to defend a game by saying that they worked on it.
I named this one after the internet urban legend, "The Rose". The reason why is: - Whenever someone uses this argument, they are always very vague. Example: Jordan Yochum saying that he worked for Data East during "the Genesis year" and worked on Two Crude Dudes. Notice that he does not seem to know what year it was that the game was in development, or the fact that the Genesis was around for more than one year, and nor does he state exactly what it was he did for the game. This is very much like how in the "The Rose" urban legend... - The details of Rose's education are kept very vague. We don't know what college it took place at, what courses she was taking, what her major was, and the story seems authored by someone who doesn't really know how college works as Rose appears to graduate within a year. |
|||||
Crawl and 1OOO |
|||||
|
Companies are in it to make money! - Why do people even say this? It's a truism, but it has no value as an
argument. "This game is pretty terrible, but, oh, it made money? Well, I guess I do love it then!"
See how your opinion ruined Christmas for everyone!
|
|||||
Magnus CROWE |
|||||
Flying Omelette wrote: Speaking of that, I did a Google search of "Jordan Yochum" and only two results for that name came up. Both point to a person in Pennsylvania who graduated high school in 2005. If you still have the original email and can see the IP address it came from, and if it matches somewhere in Pennsylvania, you've probably got your match - and if so, this guy is too young to have worked for Data East.
Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great. -
Mark Twain
|
|||||
Flying Omelette |
|||||
|
Thanks for that information, Magnus! I did an IP lookup on him and it turns out he's a Comcast user in Pennsylvania. Looks like we found our man.
|
|||||
James FP |
|||||
|
And if he graduated in 2005, that means he should at least be in his 20's by now. So he's either retarded or the American school system is.
|
|||||
greybob |
|||||
|
In reply to the original post, has anyone ever seriously suggested that Animal Crossing is "the best game ever?"
I mean, I kinda like it, for a casual play now and then. But I'd never call it the best game ever. Not in a million years! It's not really eligible, because it requires no skill whatsoever. It's not really goal-oriented either. So the REAL question is: IS IT THE BEST LIFE SIMULATION GAME EVER?!?!?!?!?! Well, no, not really. I'd say one of the Harvest Moon games probably holds that title. I'm sorry, Animal Crossing, but not everyone has a bizarre facination with digging holes like I do. |
|||||
greybob |
|||||
|
Somewhere in this thread there's a comment about who's qualified to review certain kinds of games, and that someone would have to play the game
multiplayer, or whatnot.
In my opinion, if a game is centered around the multiplayer experience, like a fighting game, racing game, or MMORPG, then I believe that the review should have experienced online play. But if the multiplayer is inconsequential, like the tacked-on multiplayer in alot of one-player Nintendo games recently (Zelda: Phantom Hourglass, Super Mario Bros. Galaxy, to name a couple) it shouldn't matter. A note should probably be made, though, about available multiplayer options. For example: "This game has options for multiplayer, but I didn't check them out." A game like Halo, with developed multiplayer and single-player options, should be evaluated for both modes of play. |
|||||
Agisuro |
|||||
|
The posts about Drakkhen/Ogre Battle that were farther back in this topic reminded me of a conversation I got into at some other message board back in the
early 2000's. It was not GameFAQs, it was some site with a black background, and I almost want to think they were using an ezboard for their message board
because I normally don't post anywhere outside of this community (even back then I had pretty much given up posting at other boards - too much time
involved), but since it was an ezboard, and I was already logged in, I found it easy to make a quick response...
Anyway, the subject of the topic I replied to was about Drakkhen and everyone (of course) was saying how awful the game was. I made a reply saying that while Drakkhen wasn't very good, I thought the sequel, Dragon View, was actually pretty good and improved on a lot of things. The only response I got was, "OMG! If Dragon View was an improvement, than Drakkhen must've been an exercise in pain!!" ??? I'm not saying that I can't see where someone wouldn't like Dragon View, but if they truly feel it's a painful experience, than I can't imagine why they'd be playing any game of that type. I also may not have been as put off by the statement if a general feeling of self-evident snobbiness hadn't pervaded the entire forum. (Like, people would say things "suck" or "rule" without any giving any reasons, as though it was self-evident and everyone should automatically go along with it.) ----- There is no spoon! |
|||||
Crawl and 1OOO |
|||||
Agisuro wrote: I think that comment was a lot more confusing to me than it was to you. I had to read it three times to verify that 1) People were saying Drakken sucked 2) You said Dragonview was better 3) From that, people inferred that Drakken was bad. It's like, what? After step 2, did everyone travel back in time and not play Drakken but played Dragonview instead? "Of the three ways in which men think that they acquire a knowledge of things--authority, reasoning, and experience--only the last is effective and able to bring peace to the intellect." -Roger Bacon |
|||||
Agisuro |
|||||
|
I'm guessing that what happened was is that the one guy who responded to me hadn't actually played Drakkhen (unlike everyone else), but he had played
Dragon View and didn't like it.
I guess what I'm complaining about are responses like that in general where someone feels it's completely self-evident why a game would be "painful" to play and they make it sound like I'm some uninformed idiot because I liked it. Maybe another reason it put me off is because I actually listed where I thought it improved over the first game and gave reasons for liking it, but then none of those were addressed by his response. It's like that part of my post may as well have not been there. ----- There is no spoon! |
|||||
Crawl and 1OOO |
|||||
|
Well, yeah, that, but it sounds like he ignored pretty much ALL of the rest of the previous conversation. He could have replied more to your post, but I
imagine he could have replied more to any of the other posts, too. For instance, if anyone named any specific complaints about Drakken, he probably could have
said, "People were saying that Drakken was bad, and [this one particular aspect] did sound a lot like Dragonview (and I didn't like it in that game),
but maybe worse."
Maybe it's me, but when people don't acknowledge previously made points or have their posts make sense in the larger context of the conversation, it's like they just came here from planet Neptune. "Of the three ways in which men think that they acquire a knowledge of things--authority, reasoning, and experience--only the last is effective and able to bring peace to the intellect." -Roger Bacon
Last Edited By: Crawl and 1OOO
03/10/09 1:05 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||||
Flying Omelette |
|||||
|
That's what James would call the "Poster Outta Nowhere" and it's similar to what I said in this post at DHN.
It's indicative of many people's desire to dominate a forum with a particular ideal than it is to have open two-way discussions. I think the main reason so many people vanish from the internet after a year or two is because eventually they realize that just posting "Drakkhen sucks!" and "Zombies Ate My Neighbors rules!" becomes old and pointless, and they leave not ever once knowing (or believing) that internet conversations can be so much more than that. |
|||||
Flying Omelette |
|||||
SETZERtheGREAT |
|||||
|
Wow, guys. I usually just laugh at or ignore people who comebacks like the ones mentioned all over this topic.
Like I always say, thanks, but no thanks, to message board psychiatry. "People are to be respected
regardless of position or class.
This should always be remembered." - Saradin, Ogre Battle |
|||||
| Affiliates Websites & Yuku/Ezboards
YUKU & EZBOARDS
WEBSITES
|