Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 ... 113 114 115 116 117 [118] 119

Author Topic: PET PEEVES FUCK  (Read 182030 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2340 on: November 29, 2013, 04:49:47 PM »

At the moment?

This thread.
Logged

Healy

  • Tested
  • Karma: 6
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2341 on: November 30, 2013, 01:40:20 PM »

You know I honestly didn't expect you would be such a pendant about this. Like, why do you call them comic books? I read a Batman comic once and it was only unintentionally funny. Etc., etc.

Do you really want me to list all the reasons your analogy is stupid, or would you rather I just point and laugh at you for calling me a pendant and call it a day?
Actually, I fucking well would like you to list the reasons you think my analogy is stupid, because I think you're being a jackass about this subject and I would like to see your reasoning here. I've read enough Rock Paper Shotgun comments whining about how the Twine pieces they sometimes post pieces about aren't "real games" to last a fucking lifetime, so forgive me if I have a kneejerk reaction to arguments like this. The terms "video games" and "computer games" may have been used for different (but analogous) things in the past, but right now in the Year of Our Fucking Lord Two Thousand Thirteen they are virtually interchangeable synonyms, and when you exclude a certain kind of thing from one category it pretty damn well looks like you're excluding it from the other.

Look dude, I can feel for your case here. I can be a total pedant about shit too (and I know I was being a hypocrite when I called you on it)! And I understand your need to make language as exact as you can make it. I get bummed out by ambiguous turns of phrase; I get frustrated trying to parse poorly written comments on the internet. But when you dig in your heels on this subject, knowingly or not you are joining ranks with some of the worst bottom-feeders on the internet, the kind of jerks who can't even let go of their entitlement enough to recognize the existence of types of games that aren't the ones they like. By drawing this line in the sand, you are not making language any better, you are making the world a little bit worse.

(sorry mongrel)
Logged
the assassination of video james by the coward electronic arts

Lottel

  • You know that's right
  • Tested
  • Karma: 81
  • Posts: 3723
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2342 on: November 30, 2013, 02:50:45 PM »

A digital painting requires no paint.
You do paint it though, as paint is also a verb
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2343 on: November 30, 2013, 05:34:18 PM »

Actually, I fucking well would like you to list the reasons you think my analogy is stupid

The phrase "comic books" as used to describe the medium derives from its original use as collected booklets of existing newspaper strips that, yes, were comical in nature (the first of which was in fact called Famous Funnies).  Over time the medium was used to introduce original content in a bevy of genres but by then the nomenclature had already stuck.

Zero of those facts apply to the nomenclature of "video games".  Games using graphics and games using text evolved in parallel.  The phrase "video games" was coined, specifically, for the purpose of describing the way the medium transmitted visual information to the player.

That's not to say there's not a huge amount of overlap between the two things -- indeed, the entire point-and-click adventure genre is a direct descendant.  I'll come back to that in a minute.

I've read enough Rock Paper Shotgun comments whining about how the Twine pieces they sometimes post pieces about aren't "real games" to last a fucking lifetime, so forgive me if I have a kneejerk reaction to arguments like this.

Cute quotation marks, but please do feel free to find any actual quotes where I refer to anything, ever, as not being a real game.

If you want, I CAN find you posts where someone jumped my shit for precisely the opposite reason -- being, to his mind, TOO inclusive for daring to suggest that "casual gamers" are gamers too -- but I think you'll be hard-pressed to find me dismissing things as "not a real game".

The terms "video games" and "computer games" may have been used for different (but analogous) things in the past, but right now in the Year of Our Fucking Lord Two Thousand Thirteen they are virtually interchangeable synonyms, and when you exclude a certain kind of thing from one category it pretty damn well looks like you're excluding it from the other.

That's a lot of outraged words that seem to be saying you misunderstood what I was saying and are very angry about it.

I'm not precisely sure how you could possibly think that I was excluding IF from the category of computer games by excluding it from the category of video games, given that my exact words were "They're certainly computer games."

Look dude, I can feel for your case here. I can be a total pedant about shit too (and I know I was being a hypocrite when I called you on it)! And I understand your need to make language as exact as you can make it. I get bummed out by ambiguous turns of phrase; I get frustrated trying to parse poorly written comments on the internet.

Oh, piss right off.

You're talking like I turned the "Are video games art?" question into a semantic debate.

Precisely what the FUCK do you think it IS?

It is nothing BUT a semantic debate.  Take away the semantics and there's no discussion.

Which I'm perfectly all right with.  I think it's a frankly stupid discussion, and will come back to that in a moment.  But if you're faced with the question of whether video games are art, you've got two choices: dismiss the entire discussion as a waste of time, or acknowledge that you're having a semantic debate.

The only difference between this and the typical route these discussions take is that, while most people tend to focus on the definition of "art", I've gone for the definition of "video game".  There is a reason for this.

The question of "What is art?" is an inherently elitist question.  It's asked by people who wish to act as gatekeepers and declare things they don't like to be Not Art.

The question of "What is a video game?", on the other hand, is categorical.  It's quantitative, not qualitative.

Put another way: you can argue all day about whether Warhol's soup cans, Pollock's splatters, Lichtenstein's swipes, or Piss Christ are art -- but you can't fucking well argue about whether they're video games.  They're not.  Period.

Now, obviously the distinction between IF and video games is not quite so clearly-cut -- if it were, you probably wouldn't be throwing a hissy fit because someone dared to suggest that some people might think that there is one.  They came about around the same time and run on the same hardware, and, if that weren't enough, there are games that quite obviously draw from both traditions.  I think any discussion of games as art would do well to use The Walking Dead as an example, and it's in fact a pretty primitive example of what video games AND IF have to offer -- and it also happens to be fucking excellent.

There are reasonable points to be made on both sides!  Hell, I think I just made your argument for you a whole lot better than anyone else in the thread has.  This isn't a matter of easy is-it-or-isn't-it categorization -- which is exactly my point.

But when you dig in your heels on this subject, knowingly or not you are joining ranks with some of the worst bottom-feeders on the internet, the kind of jerks who can't even let go of their entitlement enough to recognize the existence of types of games that aren't the ones they like. By drawing this line in the sand, you are not making language any better, you are making the world a little bit worse.

Here's another fun treasure hunt for you: find an example of me "digging in my heels on this subject" or "drawing a line in the sand".

Hell, for that matter find me any post where I've actually STATED that text adventures aren't video games, instead of merely raising the point that there MIGHT be a distinction.

Sounds to me like you're pissed off at a bunch of dudes from some other conversation entirely and are blaming me for "knowingly or not" reminding you of them.

Look, dude.  You're the one bringing the idea that I'm making some kind of value judgement to this.  I said, outright, "It's certainly valid to discuss their artistic and literary merits."  Indeed, I think the sort of person who would ask "Are video games art?" would find it MUCH EASIER to recognize the artistic merits of IF than of games with graphics.

I really don't know how I could have been any plainer in framing the question as a categorical one rather than a value judgement.  Saying something may not count as a video game is not at all the same thing as saying it's bad or inferior.  I wouldn't call Mario Paint a video game either, but I think it's pretty neat.

tl;dr what the fuck are you even talking about, and are you actually responding to my post at all or are you venting your frustration at some other guy who isn't actually here?
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2344 on: November 30, 2013, 05:53:22 PM »

What was that recent Brentai quote about "You guys must have really great lives and agree on just about everything if this is the dumb shit we're reduced to arguing pointlessly over."

Something like that, yeah.
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2345 on: November 30, 2013, 06:02:55 PM »

An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.  It isn't just contradiction.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2346 on: November 30, 2013, 06:13:45 PM »

No it isn't.
Logged

Friday

  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65374
  • Posts: 5122
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2347 on: November 30, 2013, 07:11:12 PM »

I could just be arguing in my spare time.
Logged

  • Magic Gunner Miss Blue
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65461
  • Posts: 4300
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2348 on: November 30, 2013, 07:27:40 PM »

 ....
:popcorn:
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2349 on: December 02, 2013, 11:28:36 AM »

This might look like I'm spiking the ball, but I really did mean to mention it earlier and I think it's important enough that I still should:

You know who else might consider a distinction between video games and IF, and not think that it's trivial or pedantic at all?

Blind people.
Logged

Royal☭

  • Supreme Court Judge President
  • Tested
  • Karma: 88
  • Posts: 6301
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2350 on: December 10, 2013, 02:16:31 AM »

What with talks of strikes for better wages in the news lately, raising the minimum wage has come up a lot. The target that striking fast food and Wal-Mart workers are looking at is $15/h. Now, putting aside any ethical or moral reasoning for paying somebody a wage they can live on, a favorite argument among libertarians seems to be that raising the minimum wage to this level wouldn't help anybody because only 3-4% of workers make the federal minimum wage. If you can spot why that argument is so infuriating you're smarter than a libertarian, at least.

Lottel

  • You know that's right
  • Tested
  • Karma: 81
  • Posts: 3723
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2351 on: December 10, 2013, 08:26:54 AM »

I delivered to a lady in a law office the other day. She asked if I got paid minimum wage (I do) and if I get mileage reimbursement (I don't) and if I was going to join in the strike. She then said it's terrible that I don't get paid more and hope that changes. And then paid with exact change.

It seems a lot of people want us to go on strike as a lot are asking and there's a "JIMMY JOHNS STRIKE" sign-up sheet at work but no one wants to help.
I'm still just trying to get paid what I'm already owed and that's a battle. I can't imagine trying to fight for more than that.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2352 on: December 10, 2013, 08:40:15 AM »

Also it seems like a strike sheet at work is also the "fire me list". By which I mean, "look for pretext under which to fire me list".
Logged

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2353 on: December 10, 2013, 08:57:07 AM »

Also it seems like a strike sheet at work is also the "fire me list". By which I mean, "look for pretext under which to fire me list".

Never underestimate the laziness of middle management. Firing people means hiring people.
Logged

Lottel

  • You know that's right
  • Tested
  • Karma: 81
  • Posts: 3723
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2354 on: December 16, 2013, 09:52:28 AM »

My friend keeps saying "#lottelluck" in person to me.

And he's using it wrong.


EDIT: A punch to the mouth to whoever replies to this with #lottelluck
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2355 on: December 16, 2013, 10:08:21 AM »

#luckylottel
Logged

Caithness

  • Hat Man
  • Tested
  • Karma: 8
  • Posts: 889
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2356 on: December 16, 2013, 01:34:28 PM »

How is he pronouncing the number sign?
Logged

Lottel

  • You know that's right
  • Tested
  • Karma: 81
  • Posts: 3723
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2357 on: December 16, 2013, 01:56:57 PM »

"Hashtag"
Logged

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2358 on: December 16, 2013, 03:23:33 PM »

#thatssolottel
Logged

François

  • Huh.
  • Tested
  • Karma: 83
  • Posts: 3313
    • View Profile
Re: PET PEEVES FUCK
« Reply #2359 on: December 16, 2013, 03:23:52 PM »

You ever thought about playing the lottely?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 113 114 115 116 117 [118] 119