Shit that makes you bitter

user, there are two types of games. There are games that have a purity to them, that are about gaming and fun. The others are toys sold for profit.

Deja vu.

Most of these people don't get invested or care, they just want a simple exchange of
tl;dr they're normalfags, user

I remember being genuinely excited reading vidya magazines, before vidya websites were even much of a thing.

Because the world wasn't at your fingertips. Books gave you info and that knowledge manifested into the curiosity of the unknown and wanting more, with the internet that magic of discovering dissipates and you just grow apathetic on top of everything in general being shit now and the internet corporatizing into another TV.

But I remember a time when the two were not mutually exclusive. That's why its so painful too me. I remember when the top selling video games were Pokemon, Mario, Tetris, and The Sims. What the fuck happened?

How about this?

>Learned and seen so much corporate and Judist bullshit that I simply can't ignore it on good faith and go back to playing videogames

...

Kill yourself.
>>>/facebook/

I recognize 7/12, what do I get, dubs?

Seen a few before. I don't understand why the first guy takes some water first. I mean, c'mon, you're gonna die in 5 seconds, why bother with your thirst?

What's the most effective way of ending yourself with a handgun? Through the mouth or from the side?

Story of the first guy: he's at a police station somewhere in a south American country. He was being interrogated at a police station, the guys who handed him off to the police (can't remember if it was highway patrol or some shit) didn't search him so he manged to keep his handgun with him. If you listen with the original audio you can hear the policemen lose their shit when they see him pull the gun on camera.

Btw thirst isn't related to dehydration, the feeling of thirst is in no way related to the feeling. So wetting your mouth is really a comfort thing. He was trying to find some comfort before ending his life user.

Putting the barrel inside your mouth and aiming up at your brain is the most effective way to kill yourself with a handgun.

I stopped giving a fuck about the industry ~15 years ago when AI failed to keep pace with graphics. In the '90s, I had some notion that creativity was going to keep pace with moore's law, which obviously didn't happen aside from the occasional glint of originality, like Shadow of Mordor. So… yeah. It can all rot. I don't care. Totally not bitter, though.

It's funny how that happens. Someone in the Deus Ex thread pointed out that the writer for that game went on to write some stupid shit about a nigger supergenius or whatever. The same for the game's director. Just another progressivist asshole who wants us all dead and who doesn't deserve our time or money.

I used to think the same thing too, but I have a pretty big face so I'm worried I'd only be giving myself a nose job or deep throating a 9mm. If you miss even a shotgun won't kill you.

Should be written on the front page of the internet

What's wrong with the persona 3 method? Does it not always go through?

Can you explain this any further? I've started running in a northern climate and dehydration has become relevant to my life.

As in, back towards your brain stem. Not straight up.

Funny thing, nintendrones won't brag about it on public because they're afraid of getting assaulted by niggers.

This is the shit that I'm talking about.

This fucker doesn't believe that there is an objective measure of quality or taste that exists outside himself.

Consider the implications of that.

You can survive and be a vegetable.

For what fucking purpose. You're just diminishing your own argument by trying to tie something actually subjective with something demonstrable.

I fucking swear

Consider building and utilizing this convenient solution to modern living.

Both things can be measured objectively, separately. That is why the OR modifier is present.

I knew about the director but god no, not the writer. God dammit.

If it was objectively good then there
There isn't though

Maybe he might have a point at being pissed off because the standards and qualities that were thrown aside, which made the videogames notable and popular, have led to stagnation and mediocrity. He might have a point that you shouldn't like something because it leads to shit

At this point its sort of become hollow user
I just enjoy good vidya from when companies used to be good and cling to the ones that still are good, like Falcom, Spike Chunsoft and whatever else
Blizzard is probably the one I felt the most sad about, but I'm in that stage where it translates to a hatred of them while still remembering the good times I had with their games

mfw
I genuinely wonder how half of them haven't killed themselves already.

Ignore that first line I fucked up

I found it reading about suicide: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_methods#Dehydration
You can follow the link for the source seems like an html book written by a doctor on old people killing themselves by refusing food and drink.
I hate the cold so I run indoors, I'm not worried about you dehydrating in your 40 min run, but I've witnessed someone passing out in the middle of the woods at night, and having to be ambulanced because they weren't drinking enough.

Moral relativists belong here.
>>>/suicide/
You are objectively wrong, as proven by the fundamental operation of the universe's processes.

Progressivefags never had any morals or integrity to begin with, they still want more power if you can believe it
JK Rowling is a prime example of what you're describing and she's full-blown brainwashed

I didn't know the universe cared about which vidya is the best, let alone morals.

Standards and rules are what lead to stagnation

maybe in the eyes of a retard like yourself

It's funny. Jews created the concept of "progressivism" and got weak, pathetic, cowards to go along with it. And then those same cowards have the gall to act shocked when progressivism keeps progressing beyond what they themselves wanted.
IT'S RIGHT IN THE FUCKING NAME OF THE IDEOLOGY. "Progression" ITSELF is the POINT.

I'm not surprised, then, that you don't comprehend how objective truth is codified in the structure of the universe itself.

Just because you don't want to think about a thing doesn't mean the thing itself does not exist.

Which side of the building I posted is more beautiful and why?

Alternatively, why do we have Judges in the court system? What kind of decisions are they tasked to make? They are tasked to make OBJECTIVE DECISIONS WITH NO PERSONAL BIAS YOU MARXIST FAGGOT.

Perhaps, but many times you can explain why you like a certain thing. A combination of colors, a certain ratio, the combination of lines. And once you have that then you might as well have a measure of quality. If all you've ever thought "ooh pretty" instead of deconstructing what you find pretty about it, then certainly there is no objectivity.

Skyrim is a objectively a good game though. The TES franchise has no competitor on top of that. GTA V has GTA Online, which has no substitute as well.

Pretty garbage tbh. The early ones like Blue/ Red and Gold/Silver were pretty unique, but now not so much. They're like botched JRPG, which are botched CRPG to begin with. Plus, they're console exclusive, nobody but autistic weebs buys 3DS.

Casual shit. I don't see the difference. Sims 1 and 2 were decent though.

I meat the standards that the modern videogame industry threw aside. Ones like letting artist be creative and not being slave to market trends and business strategies, and political agendas like they are today

Reddit is that way: >>>/suicide/

I know. It's all so tiresome.

But I guess if there's a silver lining, if there were no DX writer, it would be necessary to become/fund him.

Wow user, you certainly seem to know all the answers to the universe's machinations. Could enlighten me as to how objective truth and the universe's laws are related?

Try picking up an introduction to philosophy book.

Maybe you should try picking up a physics book.

Easy. Stab yourself and you'll bleed, every single time. Laws of nature are ironclad, it's just humans alone who manage to delude themselves into thinking they're above nature.

I'm not sure how my reply to your question warrants this response or what it's even supposed to mean.

Rhetoric isn't a substitute for a proper argument.

You illiterate, cancerous mongoloid.

That's not a law of nature you niitwit, that's an observation. And it's not even true, what if something is between my hand? What if the blade is dull?

And most laws of nature do not hold up in every circumstance. It depends on many factors such as frame of reference. Do you think it's called special and general relativity just for the giggles?

You're claiming that the nature of the universe is static and deterministic and that this makes truth the same, when that couldn't be further from the truth.

He claims something and didn't back it up, I want him to.

This isn't a joke. This isn't a glib statement. Get medical help for your neurological disorder or put a bullet in your brain.
You are not healthy and cannot continue to live like this, and I don't want my fucking tax dollars going to supporting your existence.

The idea that all truth is subjective leads to a bleeding heart, i.e. someone who shows sympathy to everyone. Since truth is subjective and everyone has their own truth, then everyone is deserving of sympathy. Two notions are further implied. Everyone’s truth is equal, thus all truths (opinions) are equally valid. Further, the equality of opinion implies the equality of equal desert. Everyone deserves equal sympathy. The practical consequence of these notions is the following: the truth of the sage is equal to the truth of the sophist. The murderer is worthy of the same sympathy as the saint. Thus, the liberal says, “Give us Barabas!”

Conservatism is fundamentally predicated on the belief that there is a single, objective reality that is intelligible (read: can be understood). This, in turn, leads one to adopt specific codes of conduct and behaviors that we call a moral core. Leftist thought is fundamentally predicated on the belief that everything is subjective and nothing is objectively true or capable of being understood. This, in turn, leads one to adopt a fluid and contradictory moral relativism. Leftists often attack conservatives for being hypocritical. Indeed, conservatives can be very hypocritical. Take, for example, anti-drug politicians who abuse alcohol, or so called “free market capitalists” that give subsidies to oil companies. They get attacked for this stuff all the time, and I’d say you’re right to call them hypocrites.

Here’s the kicker: a moral relativist cannot be a hypocrite, because there is no situation where he’s objectively in the wrong, even when he is acting in disagreement with his own “morals.” You can’t call someone a moral hypocrite if they functionally have no morals. So when Hillary Clinton professes to be a feminist while taking donations from regimes that abuse women, or Obama professes to be transparent while obsessing over secrecy, or Michael Moore makes a movie trashing capitalism while making cash hand over fist off it, there’s no problem for them. It’s all relative. They don’t care. The second big thing–and this is their most beloved tactic–is this: They accuse you of what they are doing to you. Just meditate on that sentence and you’ll start to see it everywhere.

Thus is the narrative of the Left: projection. Everything–everything–which serves as the foundation of leftist thought derives from emotionality, emotions being innately irrational. The left realizes this and so projects its own tragic flaws upon those it opposes, hence the consistent tend of leftists accusing anyone/thing that opposes their ideology of espousing irrational emotionality as the motive source. The most common emotions cited–the most common amongst leftists, no doubt–being hate and fear. Nearly everything that opposes leftists is claimed to derive from hate and fear. Racism in the Leftist narrative requires hatred and/or fear–they outright deny the capacity to espouse racism without such emotionality and have gradually redefined the word in the minds of the people to exhibit such requisite.

Opposition to feminism? Male fear and/or hatred of female “empowerment.”
Opposition to globalism? Fear and/or hatred of outsiders, xenoPHOBIA.
Opposition to Islam? IslamoPHOBIA.
Opposition to faggotry/dykes/trannies? HomoPHOBIA and transPHOBIA.
Support for an armed populace? Base animal fear, nothing more.

Everything–every single foundational component–of leftist ideology is rooted in fear and/or hatred, and this they project onto others, attempting to deny their own irrational emotionality and lay the consequences of such mindset upon their opposition. “It is not I who is fearful and hateful, but you! You are full of hate and fear, and thus you can be–must be–silenced and ignored.” It is truly disgusting. Leftists abandoned traditional cultural values and racial heritage. They foolishly believed that they were above it all, with their fancy post-modernism and media deconstruction and sophisticated irony and all that bullshit. The truth, however, is that their abandonment of traditional culture and racial heritage left them with an even bigger gaping hole in their soul. It didn‘t fix their inner emptiness–it only exacerbated it. So leftists are silently but desperately trying to fill with a constant influx of flashy hedonism, superficial identity politics, and cheap pop culture. They need to constantly distract and bullshit themselves, otherwise they’d have to face the fact that they were wrong. Not just wrong about some abstract factual argument between intellectuals, but wrong about their own fucking natures and personal everyday lives.

Watch me get banned for "derailing" when the post's topic is DIRECTLY related to the collapse of the video game industry. Simply because our moral relativist yid of a board owner doesn't like his tikkun olam being exposed.

That pic.

Then you didn't stab yourself, stupid.

what game did they ruin with political bullshit?

Well, they ruined YookaLaylee by making a shit game, but the whole Jon "Persian Pogrom" Tron thing certainly didn't help.

oh so it isn't about rare its about the former employees of rare

Did you even read the op?

He does say old devs you're right guess I should have read it twice.

Pokemon Sun and Moon are the fastest selling games in Nintendos history and have sold over 15 million. Pokemon as a whole is still the best selling game franchise overall. But I digress because that wasn't the point I was trying to make

Regardless, your opinions are wrong and you're a faggot

I love you guys. You can keep my thread.

Wait, really? Last I checked, they stickied threads calling for "the final solution" and you'd get banned for questioning whether or not jews are the only thing to focus on. Like, especially bringing up the nature of parasitism and delving into it will get you banned if you don't word it as "GAS THE KIKES RACE WAR NOW".

I feel like 8/pol/ is intentionally railroaded to be as extremist and irrational as possible, so as to ensure opposition to (((the powers that be))) is controlled and also hyperinflated. Thoughtful discussion seems really frowned upon there.

So
Yeah, nah; why not just not post at all since you're so obviously incapable of articulating your claims?
>>>/tumblr/
>>>/reddit/
Why bother posting, nigger?
Here you go.

archive.is/XSwPV
I archived it, if anyone cares.

if you refresh the page, it only has 27 replies. Some serious hotpocketing is going on.

read the board topic newniggers

Were we talking about good games, or popular games?

Mark go into ketosis. Youve ran away from your health for too long.

you arrived too late faggot, I reported shit plenty of times kill yourself

I still don't understand how are we supposed to know what is objectively good and what is not

Guess it was inevitable

What unit are we supposed to use?
If we rely on self-reporting, how do we tell if the people are actually telling the truth?
If we are observing them, what reactions do and do not apply, and how much?
How can we tell a particular reaction of any sort is due entirely to the game, and not, say, some detail of the subject's past?
You cannot, at least not effectively.
That said, you can filter subjective impressions by the objective quality thereof, and thus have a more complete idea of whether or not something is to your tastes.

It's for that user to know and for you to listen and believe.

...

This thread is so much better now that all controversial discussion has been removed. I sure hate when people get passionate about ideas. It makes me uncomfortable. Surely we moved away from 4chan to escape controversial discussion. Now things are just the way they should be. Sterile, escapist and grey.

...

Believe it or not, this board is used to talk about video games.

With the flops of so many large titles and the flagging performance of so many flagship series, I'd say we're headed for a culling, if we're not already in an active cull.

That's right. And don't any of you forget it. Remember that if you stray even slightly into(U+200B was here) the realm of something that isn't children's entertainment. The mods will ban you and delete even your video game related posts. Truly we are lucky to post on such a great board with such fantastic moderation.

Remember to double-check the board listings, >>>Holla Forums and Holla Forums occasionally switch places on there

It's cool that you're mad, just remember to check your post to see if it's about video games before hitting the reply button, it's a neat little trick.

Hey boys remember TimeSplitters? Want another game? Not while CryTek is still alive.

Hi, eat shit. The topic was discussing the industry.

Because you're retarded. 2+2=4 no matter how hard your feelings got hurt.

Cry more, yid.

Believe it or not, illiterate, we were. Will I get banned again if I post something about gamergate as a response to moral relativism because the word "liberal" is in it, too? Does that hurt your precious kike feelings? Kill yourself, you cocksucking faggot. You will never silence us.

For England, James?

sad!

It's annoying because moral relativism is such a Holla Forums101 topic that shows you're probably a newfag and just discovered some basic redpill stuff. Which explains why you can't shutup about it and think you're showing everyone the light, when you're just preaching to the choir in a place where people are trying to talk about video games. Go read David Hume's Treatise of Human Nature instead and actually figure stuff out.

Reported.

Nope, try again by actually reading the thread. It's basic and fundamental and we're mocking the people who don't comprehend that for being fucking retards for not understanding something so basic and fundamental.
Wow, almost as though people are claiming lies are true or something…
Yes, of course. That's obviously true. Ignore the people who explicitly don't believe in objectivity; they don't exist at all. They didn't post in the thread. They didn't cause the topic to come up in the first place. Oh no, everyone believes it here. Sure thing.
Kill yourself. You deleted those posts right alongside ours and think that you can create a false consensus.
archive.is/XSwPV
No. Now delete your post because it has nothing to do with video games.

You're a real barrel of laughs

Ok, I guess if you're the type that assumes everyone that thinks you're annoying and off-topic is some kind of kike enemy I have no problem banning and deleting your future posts. Have fun acting like a retard and wasting your time.

Reported.

Delete your post or you're a hypocrite. It has nothing to do with video games. It violates board rules. It's a personal moderator vendetta against a specific user. It violates site rules.(USER GOT TOR BANNED FOR THIS POST)

He's saying that instead of deleting the posts that started the off topic discussion, you deleted the posts that continued it. Can't you see how that is a problem? Also, which mod are you?

Which post started it?

Of course he can't see how it's a problem. He got rid of the things that hurt his little moral relativist feelings. Now he feels good, so there's nothing wrong. Goodfeel is all that matters.
It's quite interesting that mods aren't forced to have their banners on when posting, isn't it?

Oh look, now the mod is violating site-wide rules because he got his feelings hurt. Will he be removed from his position? No. Will he be punished in any way? Nope!

Check the archive. The relativists spammed their shit.
archive.is/XSwPV
See 14232664. As THE MODERATOR HIMSELF ADMITTED here:
This means the moderator EXPLICITLY STATES that is wrong.

This one >>14232427

Yeah, but the thing where your logic fucks up is that Holla Forums isn't a philosophy debate board.

No shit. Wow. Thanks for asserting something that no one questioned. So how about instead of banning the people saying the thing that YOU YOURSELF EXPLICITLY ADMITTED IS TRUE…
…you just the thing that is EXPLICITLY FALSE and then any comments related to it WITHOUT banning the people who YOU YOURSELF admit are correct. Okay, chief? That too hard to comprehend?

Why are you arguing with the schizo anyway?

Your faggotry is so immense that you made me accidentally the verb. You know what I mean.

Moral relativists, everyone.

Eh, been volunteering here for a couple years, and from experience it's a little easier to talk these kinds of spergs down instead of repeatedly banning them until they tucker out.

Note that I was saging the thread (because I understood that the topic of discussion wasn't DIRECTLY related), but now I'm bumping because your rule violations need to be seen.

Oh shit, what are you gonna do next

And what are you hoping will come of this? Mark is gonna remove a hotpocket cause of one sperg hopping IDs? That everyone is gonna "revolt against Holla Forums" and move somewhere else cause of this incident? That's you'll be unbanned for ban evading for some reason?

Which one smart-ass?

It's not a waifu board, or an anime avatar board either, but those posters are not banned. If that kind of off topic is okay, than anything goes really.

If you anchor it, I'll just make a new thread. I have 100,000 IPs available; you're not going to be able to hide this shit.

So how about instead of banning the people saying the thing that YOU YOURSELF EXPLICITLY ADMITTED IS TRUE…
…you just the thing that is EXPLICITLY FALSE and then any comments related to it WITHOUT banning the people who YOU YOURSELF admit are correct. Okay, chief? That too hard to comprehend?

3 and/or 4. Try to keep up.

Watch out, we have a 1337 hacker who's gonna bring you to justice mods. You can't hide the truth!

This is the level of discourse you'd prefer to be on the site, i suppose.

Waifu threads are for video game waifu posting, the 4am thread gets bumplocked immediately and avatarfagging gets banned, what else do you want?

there's only one you braindead nigger

So how about instead of banning the people saying the thing that YOU YOURSELF EXPLICITLY ADMITTED IS TRUE…
…you just the thing that is EXPLICITLY FALSE and then any comments related to it WITHOUT banning the people who YOU YOURSELF admit are correct. Okay, chief? That too hard to comprehend?

Man, I've dealt with automated vpn switching bot spam that continues 24/7. A single person switching IPs and posting threads as fast as he can is pretty small time.

don't spoonfeed autistic retards

So how about instead of banning the people saying the thing that YOU YOURSELF EXPLICITLY ADMITTED IS TRUE…
…you just the thing that is EXPLICITLY FALSE and then any comments related to it WITHOUT banning the people who YOU YOURSELF admit are correct. Okay, chief? That too hard to comprehend?

Discussion that extends beyond one liner shit posts.

I don't remember expressing my opinion for or against moral relativity in this thread, I think you are just imagining things because you're in a defensive mental state.

Nah.

Too bad, Bill Clinton. It's right there.
So how about instead of banning the people saying the thing that YOU YOURSELF EXPLICITLY ADMITTED IS TRUE…
…you just the thing that is EXPLICITLY FALSE and then any comments related to it WITHOUT banning the people who YOU YOURSELF admit are correct. Okay, chief? That too hard to comprehend?

Did you actually just post that?

Nah.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHA

Like, I am just amusing myself here, sorry Holla Forums for the off-topic shit I'm part of now. Anyways, what exactly did I say that "admitted" moral relativism is true? I was only speaking of it as a topic, not an assertion.

Your problem, not mine.

Either you admit it's true and need to answer my question or you think it's false and have banned not only a set of on-topic posts, but all of Tor because of a personal vendetta.

Nah.

He's an obvious disingenuous shitposting cunt at this point. Just put a stop to it.

Cry more.

How autistic are you? Point to the place on the spectrum.

Imagining that I have a personal hatred of you, that I disagree with you, and that I'm trying to censor discussion I don't personally like is not healthy. You might have mental problems, because it's pretty clear to anyone that has been on this board for a while that off-topic stuff gets deleted. You're probably the 5th or 6th person I've had this exact argument with, and they all think I'm trying to "shut down" their free speech, when really the board has a topic. I care about Holla Forums, and if I allow people to just have threads on any topic it will kill any possibility of an active philosophy board etc… that might exist elsewhere.

He's asking you to take a stance, because logically if you do you admit certain things. Unfortunately, from what I can tell you believe in objective truth, but just don't want to see it discussed here because Vidya only safe space. It's pretty stupid because you can't really discuss whether or not a video game is good with no general understand in of what good even is

So answer my question and dispel all concerns. Shouldn't be too hard. It's just one question.
Guess what wasn't off topic.
What was that old saying about running into assholes everywhere you go…
I don't give a shit about free speech. Truth is more important than freedom. It is the DUTY of a community–any community–to demand truth above all else. Banning truth while allowing non-truths to remain up isn't conducive to any topic of discussion. Refusal to believe that truth exists is the least conducive of all.
Why allow waifu threads? That has nothing to do with video games, even if you somehow forcibly limit it to video game waifus. Why allow 4AM threads? "Instantly bump locked" is what cuckolds do. It shows you have no power. That you're impotent. You say, "This has nothing to do with video games. It will not be allowed again." and then you follow through. But when you leave up OFF-TOPIC THREADS and then ban POLITICALLY-BASED DISCUSSION OF VIDEO GAMES, you openly admit to not caring about Holla Forums, not caring about video games (and therefore the topic of v) and only caring about a specific agenda. Specifically, "light-hearted bullshit that doesn't even offer the opportunity to offend anyone."

Truth is not a matter of opinion. That rubs liars the wrong way, but ONLY liars. Why protect liars?

The one good torfaggot. Pretty impressive arguments.

I saw the thread, no one was talking about video games for the last 150 posts, get a grip my man.

My opinion on moral relativism is not relevant at all, and shouldn't be expressed by me since I'm acting as a volunteer right now anyways. If I did feel like discussing that topic I'd probably find a thread on Holla Forums or somewhere else that philosophy is commonly discussed.

If you think that expressing your "truth" is always on-topic no matter what, then I think you have an Asperger problem. Please keep discussion related to video games and all will be ok user.

Yeah, it's a fucking shame that tor has been taken over by sockpuppets more than anything else. Worse now that 1. Cuckchan is removing legacy captcha, so we get another exodus (particularly low quality, since it's 4 years on) and 2. Shareblue was just banned from Reddit, so all their paid shills are coming here and assaulting us.

He's not even a torfag, he doesn't have the ID.
He's just an IP hopping faggot who thinks that he's the hottest shit ever because he read a screencap or two from Holla Forums.

"Your truth" and there it is gentlemen. One of our volunteers is a relativist.

He was using Tor on one ID before that tor got b&

No it's not.
None that normalfags know about you mean. There's definitely plenty of better games than it that are roughly the same genre.

Or maybe he just knows the difference between relevant truth that people actually want to read and chris-chan tier TRUE AND HONEST shit that drowns out anything resembling importance.

I didn't make that implication you just misunderstood me in a way that's most easy for you to hate me. Anyways, you're the only one that's sperging out over moral relativism, it's not even a very interesting subject since I've explored it pretty thoroughly over a decade ago.

shit, meant for

They made some of the greatest shit back in the 80's and 90's. Holy fuck do I want Microsoft to die so that the IPs get freed up again.

Who's the artist? Do we have a pixel drawfag lurking here?

It is damn well important that the community knows the ideological standing of their mod/teers! Are you kidding? How can we be sure of the quality of moderation if we don't know you have a consistent foundation for your actions? If we don't know what you believe (not what kind of panties your wife wears, for fuck's sake; just how you view the world), we can't possibly take your word as to the real reason that [x] post or [y] thread was deleted.

Hypothetical: Say a mod is known to be moral relativist and he deletes a thread/post and/or bans a user with the reason "Statement not applicable to thread topic." If no explanation otherwise is given, either in the thread or the ban reason text, what reason would the community have to expect that said post was actually not applicable? And that's not even the true issue here, as what the community believes isn't true by virtue of their belief in it–the very act of deleting something because it "isn't applicable" when the act is done by someone who doesn't believe in the objective concept OF applicability is inherently damaging to the community, regardless of if anyone ever SAW the post. Hell, if the post WAS on topic and no one saw it, that does the most damage.

I'm trying to be as vague as possible on purpose; don't want any biases or recent events to tarnish the setup…

And there you go again. You can always tell the moral relativists by their neurological incapability of framing an argument outside of "the self." Moral relativists don't believe in objectivity (things which are true outside of human experience), and so they never use words to that effect. It's always "he thinks" or "his belief" or variants on the subjectivism–relating to personal perception–of the world. A moral relativist won't say, "The sun is cooling, and our measurements show this." He'll say, "Scientists say the sun is cooling," as though it's the scientists who made it cool.

The worst thing about that is one of our favorite things being used against us. "But user, Skyrim has MODS, lol! 'Mod it 'till it crashes!' That's what makes it so good/better than [other game]!" And so better games get passed over.

Implying that the truth as a concept is "personal" is an admission that you believe in personal truth. It's an admission that you re cosy with the idea of relativity

So, if someone says "this is true", there's no possible way he could simply be mistaken? That's exactly what I meant when I said "your truth".

Laws and rules cannot be objectively applied in all cases, that's why our judicial system requires judges and juries.

Elaborate more on this point, if you would. What produces the relativist, and prompts them to believe in such a destructive notion as "personal truth?"

Shit, I forgot to continue the thought…
Perhaps I wrote a screencap or two, myself. Does that fit into the potentiality of your worldview? Or are you simply framing things from the relativist standpoint that nothing can exist outside the self? Specifically, YOURself. Meaning "it's not something that I did–or which I understand–and therefore it cannot be something that HE did or understands." You sure that I think I'm "hot shit"? Or are you projecting your own inadequacies onto me? Let's pretend for a moment that you understand that objective truth exists. You at least know what the definition of the word 'truth' is, so if truth is understood to you, what reason would you have for NOT placing it above all else? Wouldn't a truth which is objective–unchanging based on feelings–be really useful? Wouldn't that be a pretty decent guide in life? If you don't know what to do or how to think about something, you can go back to things you know are always true and work from there. A relativist can't do that. He has no guidance OUTSIDE of what another human being tells him, and so that's where you get collectivism (and marxism, and all the other names for communism). And, of course, this quote: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

To a relativist, there is nothing which is absurd, because absurdity resides away from truth. Since there is no truth, there is no distance between what would otherwise be true and absurdity. And so the relativist doesn't even notice as he… I was going to give a list of examples here, but that would truly be off-topic. Oh! I can still do one. I'll even reference a video game comic. "If race doesn't matter, why not make Samus Aran black?" says the relativist. Because egalitarianism comes from relativism, after all. "If sex doesn't matter, why not make Simon Belmont a girl?" "If mental illness doesn't exist, why not make Duke Nukem gay?"

Someone who is mistaken is false at all times, regardless of what he thinks because the truth is an idea that exists outside of the individual. I thought this was basic and you already knew this?

And our judges are expected to be as objective non biased and impartial as possible so as to give a verdict closest to the actual truth

So did you write any Holla Forums screencaps?

I agree with you, and your anger is just seeing disagreements that don't exist.

Not really. Things like satisfying the public's appetite for revenge is a codified part of the law when determining sentences etc… things like that aren't precise. But as far as determining actual guilt, I'd say yes.

There are two people battling with you, and I am not the angry one of the two. You've logically admitted everything you've been accused of and don't have the mental facilities to face that so now you are attempting to obfuscate that by calling me emotional like some kind of narcissist. This entire exercise was a waste of everyone's time. Congrats.

Do you mean, as an example, in a case in which not all evidence is made available in court? Perhaps because some was destroyed, perhaps because some was tampered with, perhaps because some was withheld by the defense, etc.? If so, the error comes with your framing of the discussion, again in reference to people. The truth of the case remains objective, regardless of how the jury rules. If the jury was not given access to a piece of evidence or a key witness' testimony, or was missing anything else, that does not change that there was an objectively true set of events which occurred. It just changes their ability to rule based upon it… WITH the evidence they were presented. A jury might know the true events, but only know them outside the legal proceedings of the courtroom. In that case, the law is what prohibits objectivity (it's happening ever more lately…). The jury might rule incorrectly (because they're not basing their ruling on the objective truth), but said truth remains there.

There's a topic we can start with that leads to some uncomfortable (and off-topic, so I won't mention them here) conclusions if applied to specific areas of society, and that's the Theory of Mind. There's an age–fairly well defined–at which young children first begin to understand that their perception of the world is not all-inclusive. The famous test given is the basket test. A child watches as Subject A puts a cookie under one of two baskets. Subject A then leaves the room, and Subject B moves the cookie to the other basket. Subject A comes back in the room. The child is asked "Where will Subject A look for the cookie?" Young children will answer "the second basket" because they don't understand that Subject A has a different set of information in his brain than he (the child) does. Older children will obviously say "the first basket", because they know that Subject A CAN'T know that Subject B moved the cookie.

I've never read about any HARD scientific studies on this topic done in relation to political ideologies or worldview (and this may well be because such studies are blacklisted, just as every study on racial intelligence since the publication of the seminal book on the topic, The Bell Curve, has been), but if you were to start to think about when people DON'T develop the understanding that "truth exists outside of my perception", it would be related to a stunted, damaged, or perhaps forcibly changed Theory of Mind. I'll only make a tiny mention as to why this is an "uncomfortable" topic, and that's because white children, at 18 months, can look at a mirror and know that they're seeing themselves–their reflection. Black children cannot do this until they are between 5 and 7 YEARS old. Elephants can do it, though. And that hurts people's feelings. Anyway, no more specific politics from me.

Yep.

Got any links to back that up beyond the common sense stuff we already know?

Determining guilt is the jury's job, though.
The judge just declares the sentence and makes sure that proceedings don't go to shit.

Don't really know what you mean, I'm not a cultural/moral relativist.

Many trials do not have a jury.

Got any proof?

Are you expecting a famous image capture, except with a (You) up by the name? Unfortunately for the sake of vanity, that has always been in poor taste, so I never saved screenshots of my own posts. I always save text, though. Give the sheer amount of information to work with, I'd rather be able to search for any phrase anywhere within the block rather than to have to guess/remember a tiny filename.

This is also probably where I'd post the PDF of the first chapter of a "book" I'm doing, since the chapter is titled Truth, but I'm sort of mobile right now.

post it when you get home

Why don't you read the actual philosophical discourses made 300 years ago, which you're only just retreading banally?

Why don't you answer the question I posed of you?

Because it's patronizing to assume you don't aren't know about them, and taxing to write user cliff notes for some user that may or may not even care

Fine dude, I'll play. Ask me a question and I'll answer, just don't make it related to anything fro before so I can clearly understand you. Your writing is sort of fragmented and lacking in sentence subjects, so it's really fucking hard to understand you.

You've been asked it multiple times.
It's cute you think you get to dictate those terms.
I can't imagine you expect anyone to believe you.

I meant, don't make it a continuation of a previous post, just make a standalone question that's what I mean. I'm not saying "don't make it about this or that subject". You really need to chill, because you're hallucinating disagreements all over the place.

If someone misunderstands you, you might blame your lack of communication skills rather than the perception of someone who lives outside of your skull. Say what you mean what you say.

Well I clarified myself, but to jump to the extreme negative conclusion is what your and other sperg user are doing.

Really I'm still waiting for that question. Will you guys be pissed off if I actually agree with you? Would you be mad if I agreed with you, because then it means you were wrong that I deleted your posts out of disagreement and you did in fact sperg out about not being able to break the rules?

You already both agreed and disagreed. I'm really just watching at this point. I don't expect anything coherent from you because you're just trying to "calm things down" to mitigate any issues. Logically speaking your response has been a wet fart

The only disagreement I have with 321df3 is that he thinks a debate on moral/cultural relativity is on-topic to a video game board and also on-topic to a "game things you hate" thread.

WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION SPERG, I JUST READ YOUR LAST 10 POSTS AND DIDN'T SEE SHIT

Every year we breathe in, put our hands on our sides and laugh in the most awkward painful way possible.
AHHHH HA HA HA HA HA…HA HA…HAAAAAaaaaa

After Ace Combat: Infinity took my nostalgia, tore it up into tiny pieces, then asked me if I would like to pay $1.99 for each one or simply wait 24 hours for a free piece; It was then that I realized I had been bitter the whole time.

I'm sorry user, you posted on topic and I tried to save the thread but sperg-user won't let people talk about video games so this thread is bumplocked right now.

These are all just general things too. Specifics can even more depressing/bitter.

I seriously hope you're baiting.

Blame it's development for being an absolute clusterfuck of a mess. Tons of content was cut to get it released before the N64 went moot. It's a shame to admit, but I'd think their original idea for Conker would've been a better game.

Makes you bitter, huh?

Interesting point. When I think of console controllers, what is the last addition they got that then became a standard feature? It's basically been dual analogue and sort of gyro/tilt controls to assist in aiming (not counting accelerometer sensing motion controls for things like swinging) which I think Microsoft still avoids.

Kinda miss that PS2/XBOX/GCN multiplat era, where you had some of the game gaining exclusive features like Soul Calibur 2 (characters) or Sims Bustin Out, or even Nintendo getting their Mario characters/content in the GCN versions of EA sports games.

One thing I hate about games now, it feels like game design has turned from "how should we make this game as good as possible so it sells" to "how can we make this game drag out so we can extract as much money from the undiagnosed gambling addict-like vulnerable whales suckers as possible"

Exclusives are death.

Semi-related, but why hasn't the feature of scrolling shoulder buttons been added? Like regular shoulder buttons, but they can also function as a scroll wheel for menus and whatnot. Triggers already have pressure sensitivity, why not add multi-functionality to other parts of the controller?
That's a side effect from video games becoming popular with the general masses akin to movies. No longer is about telling interesting stories or crafting interesting concepts/gameplay, but it's yet another way to choke money out of dull minded saps by filling their head with the illusion of whimsy.

Exclusives are death to some, often smaller, developers, but back then, it was actually more expensive to port games seeing as how consoles often used widely different hardware than their competitors. But now, consoles are just glorified PCs and porting is of no effort at all. Blame the hardware manufacturers for providing little to no incentive to develop exclusive games. Fuck those greedy bastards who shit out their games onto every possible platform too. Exclusivity almost makes a game more enjoyable knowing it was tailor-made for specific hardware/players.

Your standard of "rough" is far too rough.

If that is true then explain Nioh.

The 90s were such a glorious time. It felt like things were just getting better and better, then it all went to shit.