Unpopular opinions! V2: I Don't like half life edition.
17,782 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;46818517]I don't like the way Adventure Time and Regular Show are animated.
It's not bad, and I like the shows and all, but I dunno, the animation style (and a lot of the two show's content) give me extreme hipster vibes. I can taste the flannel when I watch it.[/QUOTE]
the fuck you say about flannel?
[QUOTE=ImpSnob;46818724]the fuck you say about flannel?[/QUOTE]
Hipsters love it.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;46818712]Something to keep in mind when comparing it to those things though is that it's something happening now meaning it can be more thoroughly documented. And this isn't an opinion on the situation itself, just that the Wikipedia page on it being bigger than others on older situations does make some amount of sense. Aristotle for example was someone who lived nearly 2500 years ago. All the information we have on him is stuff that was written down about him and not lost over those centuries. And at the time, documenting things was a lot more costly than it is now as well so people were less willing to document trivial things.[/QUOTE]
This would be valid if not for modern day events too.
The gamergate article is bigger than the ones on the Somalian civil war, television, automobile, and the moon landing.
If a controversy about videogame journalism has more attention devoted to it than on the moon landing, it says a lot.
[QUOTE=Deng;46818758]This would be valid if not for modern day events too.
The gamergate article is bigger than the ones on the Somalian civil war, television, automobile, and the moon landing.
If a controversy about videogame journalism has more attention devoted to it than on the moon landing, it says a lot.[/QUOTE]
Not to defend it but considering that most of the gamergate fiasco is done online, it makes sense you'd end up with a super filled up article since the people involved are mostly people on the internet who will probably spend the time to fill that article out.
You don't have the same vocal internet based community attached to writing those articles.
Workshop was the worst decision ever and the Toybox should have stayed.
[editline]29th December 2014[/editline]
Wait that's popular nvm
[QUOTE=HWECQI;46818785]Not to defend it but considering that most of the gamergate fiasco is done online, it makes sense you'd end up with a super filled up article since the people involved are mostly people on the internet who will probably spend the time to fill that article out.
You don't have the same vocal internet based community attached to writing those articles.[/QUOTE]
That's pretty much it.
It's pretty depressing how much wikipedia has gotten involved in it. I've checked the talk pages and there's hundreds of them and the entire wikipedia bureaucracy straining to manage it all.
Imagine if all of those people were actually focused on contributing meaningful information to wikipedia instead of a single article which nobody even bothers to read anyways. Instead, it's a bunch of people who spend more time complaining about games and people who complain about games than actually playing them.
The most surprising thing I've found is how much importance has been placed on it.
People keep telling me about XYZ has happened or been done, why it's important. I get linked to inane and boring streams of idiots jerking each other off about gamergate. Even the facepunch thread on it has hundreds of pages, and that's the type of dedication you don't see everyday.
But in all honesty it's just a fucking boring inconsequential thing. Nothing has happened. It's just a pile of boring shit garbage that I honestly couldn't care for because it's the stupidest internet movement possible. Half of it is tweets and blogs and the other half is edit wars on encyclopedia pages.
[QUOTE=mastoner20;46818519]I like her as an actress as you say, but beyond that I'm just of the 'who the hell cares' variety. Emma Stone also falls under that category, though I find her a little less attractive...[/QUOTE]
Exactly. I just don't know why people care about celebrities that much anyways. I find her pretty personally, but not like anything where fans are so creepy about it...
[QUOTE=fudge blood;46812650]Grinding in games is good.... it gives me a feeling of accomplishment :v:[/QUOTE]
I have to agree. Some grinds are fun, like, say, Mount and Blade.
You [I]have[/I] to spend some time farming bandits and raiders to get your cash to cover the costs for your armies.
Once you do, you fuck shit [I]up[/I]
When you find yourself involved in a discussion on a topic you know nothing about:
1. Be willing to listen to what other people are saying.
2. Only speak to ask questions whose answers will further your understanding of the subject.
How hard is it for people to get it through their skulls that they're only making everything worse by pretending to be experts without knowing what they're talking about?
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;46823442]When you find yourself involved in a discussion on a topic you know nothing about:
1. Be willing to listen to what other people are saying.
2. Only speak to ask questions whose answers will further your understanding of the subject.
How hard is it for people to get it through their skulls that they're only making everything worse by pretending to be experts without knowing what they're talking about?[/QUOTE]
Isn't that more of a shit that gets you mad kind of thing?
Why are there so many people all like "Why would you kill someone for breaking into your house it's not worth taking a life because someon wants to steal your telelvision"
Do I look like a fucking doormat? If you force your way into my home, you're likely willing to harm me and/or my family, and I am damn-well willing to kill for them. I don't care how mentally incompetent you are, I will storm down there with nothing but my underpants (or not), my shotgun, and the fury of the highlands themselves and you can either leave then and there or we can do it the hard way.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;46827743]Why are there so many people all like "Why would you kill someone for breaking into your house it's not worth taking a life because someon wants to steal your telelvision"
Do I look like a fucking doormat? If you force your way into my home, you're likely willing to harm me and/or my family, and I am damn-well willing to kill for them. I don't care how mentally incompetent you are, I will storm down there with nothing but my underpants (or not), my shotgun, and the fury of the highlands themselves and you can either leave then and there or we can do it the hard way.[/QUOTE]
I don't get this either. Look, if you're gonna break in to someone's house, you're accepting you might die in there. If you won't accept that, then don't fuckin' break in. Simple as that. As soon as you get inside your life is forfeit.
Technology and automation causing jobs to disappear isn't a problem in itself. The amount of wealth doesn't decrease so it's just a matter of distributing it properly.
Keeping obsolete jobs around just so people have work to do is pretty backwards when instead people could both work less and have more purchasing power.
A bigger issue than police profiling is poverty amongst ethnic minorities and general police brutality; ethnic groups which do commit more crime per person are worth looking into but unless we try to implement a change in their conditions all that happens is more resentment of the police and more of a "Us and them" mentality. Poverty is the cause of crime in 99% of cases not race but the poverty often comes with race due to past hardships/poverty traps.
Also not being an expert on or experiencing more of something doesn't disqualify your opinion on it but it does make it less valid: A women talking about her experience with women in business is going to be more valid than a man talking about the same thing but both opinions are worth considering.
I can understand pointing a gun at an intruder, and shooting them if they try to reach for a weapon or attack you, however I really can't get behind shooting on sight (unless you live in a really fucked up place) or shooting someone running away.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;46827793]I don't get this either. Look, if you're gonna break in to someone's house, you're accepting you might die in there. If you won't accept that, then don't fuckin' break in. Simple as that. As soon as you get inside your life is forfeit.[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean the owner should be allowed or morally justified to just shoot them if they aren't in any danger, that would just be an execution which is totally fucked up. They don't deserve to die, they deserve to get jail time.
[editline]1st January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;46827743]Why are there so many people all like "Why would you kill someone for breaking into your house it's not worth taking a life because someon wants to steal your telelvision"
Do I look like a fucking doormat? If you force your way into my home, you're likely willing to harm me and/or my family, and I am damn-well willing to kill for them. I don't care how mentally incompetent you are, I will storm down there with nothing but my underpants (or not), my shotgun, and the fury of the highlands themselves and you can either leave then and there or we can do it the hard way.[/QUOTE]
The problem is when people act like taking a life isn't a big deal. Example from SH (added parent quotes for context):
[QUOTE=Kebap;45051397][QUOTE=isnipeu;45042891][QUOTE=proch;45042806]Honestly, if someone tresspasses, he's doing it on his own risk. The moment he breaks the law - tresspasses - and wants to harm me materially or physically, he looses his imunity against any harm.[/QUOTE]Would still avoid it if I can, I'm hoping I won't ever be in the position where I have to take a life.
But holy shit, it's so disturbing when people casually talk about killing tresspasses.[/QUOTE]
really sick of overly sensitive people like you on this forum. if you rob someone, especially with a weapon, you deserve to be shot and killed. That's why the law allows this.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Carlito;46828205]I can understand pointing a gun at an intruder, and shooting them if they try to reach for a weapon or attack you, however I really can't get behind shooting on sight (unless you live in a really fucked up place) or shooting someone running away.[/QUOTE]
You could shoot a warning shot to scare them off or put a bullet in their leg to hold them there long enough for the police to arrive.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;46828692]You could shoot a warning shot to scare them off or put a bullet in their leg to hold them there long enough for the police to arrive.[/QUOTE]
If you fire a warning shot, what's stopping it from hitting an innocent person
Also shooting someone in the legs could shred an artery and kill them. Just slower.
When you shoot, you have to shoot to kill.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;46828692]You could shoot a warning shot to scare them off or put a bullet in their leg to hold them there long enough for the police to arrive.[/QUOTE]
No.
You don't fire a gun at someone without the intent to kill. Overall police accuracy in high pressure situations is about a third. The average citizen cannot (and should not, even if they claim to be a good shot) be trusted to non-fatally shoot someone reliably.
Either shoot to kill or do not shoot.
I have a nearly-unreasonable hatred for people that steal from others. I would gladly shoot someone who tried to steal from my home, because they'll likely just get away with it if I hold my fire and go to the police about it. I hear too many stories about people who get things stolen from them that the police can never find, and I hate hearing about people who get away with fucking over other people.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;46829589]"bla bla bla..[B] if you do that, you're worse than x[/B]" are the worst fucking arguments.
They usually go something like this:
"I would kill that guy who murdered those 100 children."
"But then you'd be worst than the murderer!"
How in the god damn does that even make sense
I've always wondered how effective a pistol filled with blank rounds would be in a bad situation.
No one dies, someone shits themselves, and they all wake up tomorrow happily ever after.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it makes you worse than the killer, but it's still bloodthirsty retribution.
[QUOTE=Carlito;46828205]I can understand pointing a gun at an intruder, and shooting them if they try to reach for a weapon or attack you, however I really can't get behind shooting on sight (unless you live in a really fucked up place) or shooting someone running away.[/QUOTE]
I never intend to kill unless they try to strike first. I'd consider it dishonourable to make the first move.
MGS2 and Ground Zeroes are shit MGS3 and 4 are god tier
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;46828692]You could shoot a warning shot to scare them off or put a bullet in their leg to hold them there long enough for the police to arrive.[/QUOTE]
I use a shotgun, good luck hitting a leg and not tearing it the fuck off.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;46830916]I never intend to kill unless they try to strike first. I'd consider it dishonourable to make the first move.[/QUOTE]
This is what people don't get about self defense. Shooting someone in your house before they've even shown to have a weapon is really iffy. Once they have a weapon visible, that's when you know your life could be at risk.
pokemon xy best pokemon games next to heartgold/soulsilver
Golden guns in games are tacky as fuck
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;46833792]Golden guns in games are tacky as fuck[/QUOTE]
yeah i get them if you're playing something like saints row but they're an odd sight in something like call of duty. i mean, you're in the middle of a war, drop the bling
Golden guns are only fitting for "gangstas" and African warlords, of which I am the latter, therefore I need seven golden AK-47s.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.