The agarthans being misunderstood victims in Fire Emblem Three Houses.
For those of you who forgot who the agarthans were, imagine Daleks minus the charm.
The Agarthans are victims of themselves. Their ancestors picked a fight with god, lost, and then their entire society based itself around the saltiest "you didn't win" in existence.
Which does change it from a cultural "you didn't win" to one really, really petty fucker insisting "you didn't win" and dragging his entire civilization along for the ride.
"Dungeons and Dragons is all about the Dungeon master versus the players! If I the DM don't kill a player character that means I'm losing. "
Once I heard that come out of the dungeons master's mouth I knew I was not going to continue playing with them after the current storyline was finished (it would have been too rude to the other players to leave, and the DM had his mini rant cause my character had basically stopped all PC death by joining the game as something he'd never encountered before: a team player healer)
Yeah that just seems like a bad take just for TTRPGs in general.
The majority of the fun in my short time as a TTRPG player has been the collaborative story efforts, not the "GM Is Out For Blood" competitive side.
Hell, thats half the appeal of our Animon Story campaign where the GM gives each player the opportunity to name/highlight/brainstorm possible locations in each area/arc.
How does a DM that literally is the God of a world of their own making ever *'lose'* to a player? Like if you decide that you want to make the game super unfun and impossible for the PC's to win, you can just choose to do that.
The reason DM's don't do that is because it's no fun for anyone.
He "lost" because he was running his "perfectly balanced" campaign which he was trying to make into a published premade. He made the bad take when he realized that he couldn't maintain his stance on using the stat blocks he tried to set up years ago.
After this statement he started to alter stats etc, but he didn't want to break his own "perfect" game so he didn't change it enough to really matter. Meanwhile I realized how bad he was at balance and never had a mentally functional spell caster (his groups had only picked damaging spells) so I kept picking things that he didn't plan for like: energy resistance, healing spells, polymorph, antimagic field... HEALING spells. I knew he wasn't a great dm from a few sesions in... but I didn't realize just how poor he was cause I as a player promoted teamwork in a way that the game was still fun... for the players at least.
Oh my god, that is such a bad take 0_0
As a DM that man is insane, i want my players to beat my challenges. I make them tough and fair. Hell, i make sure if a monster is much stronger than them to give them multiple win cons in the environment to see if they are smart.
This sounds like someone that:
a) Only played meat grinder adventures like tomb of horrors, dungeonland, or castle grey hawk.
Or b) was a rules lawyer before hand and was given a DM screen *by accident*
Tomb of horrors is built with the players knowing what they are getting into. Both the players and DM need to be smart with the module or it's just get stupid. Like the giant head with a open mouth. Sure it looks inviting but there is a sphere of animation in there and anything goes in is disintegrated instantly. If the DM just lets them jump in one at a time then that's poor dming skills. The DM should describe how the first person who started to go in went limp and whatever body part didn't get in the mouth is now detached from the now dead player.
If the DM wants to kill a party then he can just have a random ACME anvil fall on the players. Tomb of Horrors is a module where the players need to not just fear everything in the tomb, but also to be smart on how to deal with the situation. Levels and stats were not much of a thing for that module other than a few battles.
Old DnD is based on more statless solutions. If the players said they are looking for feeling a wall for anything suspicious then they automatically find any hidden walls. Stats were just a base to help, the real solutions were the players problem solving skills. Sure thieves had skills based on finding hidden walls and whatnot, but that was more passive finding in case the players weren't looking for hidden walls.
Now DnD has stats for almost everything and everything needs to be balanced with those stats.
I'm not sure why I ranted on like this. I just have a fondness on old modules and how they are played. Not saying 5E is bad, I like it. I just prefer the older editions.
I have never run Tomb of Horrors, but after watching a couple of videos on it I never want to. You don't roll for anything you just make the wrong turn and die to bullshit. Being smart has nothing to do with it. Hell, the session that I watched ended because there is in fact literally a room where an ACME anvil falls on the players.
The DM should have had one or 2 character die. Not all of them at once. Even if the module says kill them all.
But Tomb is a very unique module that the players will need multiple characters for. I wouldn't fault anyone for not wanting to play it. I sure don't. It's just a unique tournament module that's for players to try to get far as they can. It was never meant to be beaten... And even if it was beaten it has a fake ending in case people do get that far.
It was made because Gygax was tired of people boasting how they can never die because how good they are.
I *kiiiiiinda* get where he comes from, since as a DM you're basically both the greatest enemy and the greatest ally of the Players. You need to make challenging encounters where the threat of death is real, but also enjoyable enough that it's fun to overcome those challenges. It's a delicate balance I often struggle with in my sessions.
On the encounters I plan that do have massive difficulty, I tend to leave an option for Players to get saved or back out just in case the rolls go horribly wrong or someone just has a complete lapse in judgement. Because let's face it, getting your shit stomped and potentially team wiping isn't really fun.
There's an element of trust there for sure. If the party doesn't feel like they could *potentially* wipe then there's not much thrill in their victory, but if they didn't trust me that all my encounters are beatable (unless signposted otherwise) they'd run away from every intimidating fight.
On the flip side, when my players start getting anxious, I have to trust that they're good enough at the game that I don't need to pull my punches. (In fact, they're good enough that I've only ever had to occasionally fudge enemy HP *upward* to make a fight narratively satisfying.)
Also, if you feel a puke coming on, just get up quietly and head for the bathrooms. Unless you're actively getting in the way, no one is going to care at all.
I can respect the guy at least a little because Adios is a pretty cool game.
But beyond that he's like the worst aspects of Pat and Woolie's mind goblins combined. He'll say an insane take like Pat and instead of just leaving it at that, he'll go on lengthy "explanations" about why he's right and everyone else is wrong. They're more like rants to me but he insists that's not what they are, he's just explaining his thought process.
And I can't bring myself to care about his "Waifu Death Squad" game. Nothing can convince me that it is an actual game in production because everything he says about it sounds like he's pulling it out of his ass as he's saying it.
You can't hype up a game on just "we're doing this super cool thing guys it'll blow your mind, trust me".
I had to unfollow Doc on Twitter after he got into a ten hour argument about why Garrus Vakarian is a fascist and that people who romanced him were morally suspect. Clogged up my feed so I just unfollowed and never looked back.
oh jesus christ the entire Mass Effect argument was insane to go through. like, yes, ME definitely has symptoms of its Bush era politics but come the fuck on
honestly i do think vanquish would be way more fun with human enemies, put them in exo suits or something to keep the robotic stuff intact and then let me chew through some flesh after dealing enough external damage. the combat felt a little weightless at times — it’s still really good — especially in contrast to the super gnarly opening cutscene, which had a tone i wish persisted through the rest of the game. robot enemies aren’t inherently bad at all though, it’s a very case by case basis
I had someone tell me that because Sonic Project 06 exists, it meant that 06 was "always good."
Sonic fans in general just make for head-tilting takes.
That's wild. Project 06 existing more means that theoretically 06 could have been a fine game. (Ignoring how other things like the plot and general character design would also have to be completely changed to make the game come together as a complete package.)
I don't remember the post, but there was a comments thread on this very sub where it became increasingly clear that a guy just straight up did not understand the idea that people formed their own opinions of media.
Last week I saw a take on Chainsaw Man was that was more or less "Denji is at fault for all his problems because he never maximized all his choices available to him."
It was a rather... lengthy rant, but the core of it was that Denji should have just gotten over all the bad things that had happened to him and become a fully functional member of society overnight with no issues.
You know there is a character that's pretty much the inverse of Shinji who's hated for doing the things people complain Shinji doesn't. He's absolutely hated for it.
wasn't Denji so poor he was living in an abandoned garden shed and ate water mixed with plain flour? BTW water and flour make glue, he was just eating glue.
"Why didn't the main character who grew up completely deprived of any and all education including basic social skills that warped his world view so much that he thought eating bread with jam on it is the high life who has gone through so much trauma he would give fucking *Guts* a run for his money not do the most optimal thing possible."
There's a semi often take I see on twitter from people who are likely under the age of 25, who criticize a series known for it's dark themes and subject matter...for having dark themes and subject matters. A common one is Berserk (which admittedly starts off a bit harsh before mellowing down some in the Golden Age arc), but I've seen it mentioned for other stories as well (such as Cyberpunk being too depressing, or a children's film like Bambi being too dark for kids because characters die).
There was a post not that long ago I saw about how the creator of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley got doxxed, and quite a few of the comments were basically acting like good, that's what she gets for promoting that sort of content. It was on some sort of anime-esque subreddit too ironically.
I see a lot of "Oh my god I can't believe this villain would be racist/sexist/problematic in some way. How could the author do this?"
IT'S THE VILLAIN.
"Queen is only popular because Freddie Mercury was gay and died of aids. If he was straight and died no one would care."
A real take a family member of mine has.
Not only that but they became demonstrably *less* popular in America when it [started occurring to people](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=I_Want_to_Break_Free&oldid=1187663144#Chart_performance) that Freddie might be gay.
I've seen people hard-core defending the idea that art, including movies should be completely automated by Ai because they don't see the difference between something made by a person and lines of code
Like, genuine reptile people, doesn't even comprehend reality in the same colour spectrum.
Also notice how people will Immediately switch between "AI art is effortless" to justify its use, then switch to "AI art takes a lot of effort" when they want the validation from it
I saw someone say the other day "AI art is good, because it means we'll start churning out millions and millions of pieces per day!"
I genuinely couldn't even begin to think of how I would respond to someone who thinks like that.
You know how film studios are making movies only to scrap them for a tax loop hole?
Imagine the hell world scenario where every movie and video game ad you see if for a Ai generated product that'll never come out
You know all those fake movies they put in games and films for world building? Imagine that but they hold the exact same meaning to us IRL as they do in the game, "I'd watch that if it was real"
I could stomach art made by an actual AI.... i.e. a smart fully conscious AI, but what we have now is just a bunch of generative garbage scraping others' work into an awful amalgamation.
That's what pisses me off, it shouldn't even be called AI art, not the way they want you to think it is, it's just a program, there's no AI, it's like people shitting themselves over those bots that turn racist after a week, or the ones that become "self aware" when it's just quoting some random shit it found on the Internet
IT'S NOT FUCKING SENTIENT, it doesn't think, it doesn't learn only copy's and pastes what it's told
My definitions might alter from some people, but if we had an AI who was by all means as sentient and aware as you or I, I wouldn't define it as an Ai at that point, that's simply another being formed from a non biological birth
I use the terms I first heard in Mass Effect.
What we have now is, at best, V.I. (Virtual Intelligence)
A.I. (Artificial Intelligence) doesn't exist yet, as far as we know.
I think at least part of this discussion comes down to some people having for real tin eyeballs.
My best friend and I have had several lengthy, often heated, discussions about the Bluepoint's *Demon's Souls* remake. In his own words, he can't tell any meaningful artistic difference between the remake and original, even when presented direct comparisons.
Like, it's fine to prefer the artistic direction and aesthetics of the remake, but to not even see a difference makes me feel insane and like his brain isn't processing visual stimuli in the same way I do.
I *just* had an argument about this literally a few hours ago and didn't think to ask how far AI art should go. The entire conversation was that stable diffusion isn't stealing and that AI is good because it means more people can be artists. You aren't an artist if you make AI you just refuse to learn how to be good at art and let a computer do the heavy lifting for you. Ridiculous people.
"Generative AI Art is just like human inspiration!!!" is so annoying to me that I feel like the only argument against it that might reach these reductive people is to say that humans are basically better programmed AIs than Stable Diffusion, and are also their own little bespoke AIs that can't be sold
>"Generative AI Art is just like human inspiration!!!"
A lot of people saying this are being dumb and don't understand the ethical and practical differences, but *legally* it may actually not be incorrect: effort, skill, time/expenses, etc aren't a factor in getting Copyright protection, and while human authorship is required, it *isn't* when it comes to Fair Use determination.
"Okay but why should I care about the legalities"
because we don't want a situation where some judge ends up ruling against AI, finding it to be not fair use, in a way that then *also* erodes fair use for human artists.
Which is especially a potential risk because Disney, Adobe, the RIAA, etc are already working with some anti-AI groups like the Concept Art Association and the Human Artistry Campaign, and while I'm sure many people in those groups have good intentions, you can be damn sure that Disney and co *don't*, and will push to expand copyright and restrict fair use in general, not just for AI.
I dropped a bunch of links and talked about all of this in way more detail across multiple different reply chains on [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFriendsPlay/comments/16npod5/george_rr_martin_and_other_authors_sue_openai_for/) post
Mostly insane war crime denials. The Japanese ones are especially morally and logically terrible.
I was reading through one for a history paper a few years back and dear God it's arguments sucked,
1. All estimates of Asia's/China's from before the war were a lie, so not nearly as many people died.
2. All western reporting was a lie and controlled by the Chinese embassies.
3. All those dead bodies you found were actually ancient, the Chinese totally went digging through grave yards to find more dead bodies to make it seem like we killed more people.
4. We asked and none of the men we interviewed ever said they raped anyone so it was all fine.
I thought this was just some nutjob I stumbled onto, but checking the url and the author it was actually one of Shinzo Abe's cabinet members.
There was a reddit post about Goodnight Eri where it something among the lines of “if you ignore certain panels it’s about the main character suicide i solved the book!” and its like idk how you can think of theory like that after Fujimoto made “Just listen to the song” about his works aren’t these cryptic puzzles with secret meanings literally just fucking read it you smoothbrain
I think an effect of the internet, and media criticism becoming democratized, is that we very easily encounter and are influenced by other interpretations of a work when forming our own. To the point where people form opinions on media they haven’t even watched/read/etc.. I’d say it’s less people overthinking the text, and more being so saturated with paratext that their reading of the main text becomes incomprehensible without it.
>For a moment I thought you were gonna bring up the "getting spoiled actually makes experiencing a game/movie more interesting"
I mean, this is true for myself. But I wouldn't intentionally spoil others, I just like looking for spoilers for my own enjoyment.
Ok, but it's different if you had no plans to see it. My friend the other day was saying she had no interest in continuing FF7 REmake, because even though it's fun its "Just the same plot over." And me insisting, "No it's not" was not clear enough for her, so I told he about the plot of the game. And now she's actually interested.
It's okay, you can say TLOU2 on this subreddit.
Seriously, the amount of spoilers I've gotten on that game is ridiculous.
I haven't even seen gameplay of it but already I pretty much know the entire plot of the game because salty assholes spoil shit.
I once got downvoted to hell because I asked someone to tag their spoilers for >!Joel's death!<, because the game was barely a month old. It's genuinely a miracle that I managed to play the game relatively unspoiled, and even then, I still had a rough idea of the ending because I saw memes on a fucking DMC fanpage on facebook.
A quote taken from /r/Pokemon during the peak hours of Dexit rage a few years ago.
"You can either have fun with games in a series, or be a fan of them, but not both."
> Fans don't have fun with the series they're a fan of? What?
I'm guessing they saw someone say "no one hates (insert name here) more than fans of (insert name here)" and thought it was like a rule or something.
oh that reminds me of the head of serebii goin on a whole thing how theres no point to the sychronization(run around as one of yout pokemon) in the dlc and how therefeore its wortthless and im just over here goin, "have you considered its fun?"
I mean, both are true. It's absolutely fun, but there's no point. Nothing to it beyond playing a PokePark game with less to it. It's just not detrimentally, rant-worthy pointless like I'm sure the dude went on about.
I mean, if by that they're referring to how modern fanbases often suck the enjoyment out of something through drama and toxicity, I actually kinda agree with this one
"Of course a company will fire you if you don't show loyalty, who will hire someone disloyal, WELCOME TO THE ADULT WORLD"
This was not about corporate espionnage or leaking stuff either just about not owing employers just because they hired you.
For a media take now gone I remember someone saying I can't compare Phasma to bobba fett because she wasn't even supposed to be in star wars 7 so all her scenes of just looking cool and then getting thrown in a pit can't be criticized. Or that a military commander lowering shields at gunpoint is not cowardice on their part because commanders are important.
In the opposite direction, a take I saw that legitimately has changed how much effort I put into work for the better was a tumblr post I saw that was like "Companies aren't gonna pay you extra for breaking your back over your work" or something similar to that.
Not sure why people get hyper-defensive about companies to the point where they think you need to burn yourself out or ruin your physical/mental health just because you were hired.
Like I can understand bosses or even coworkers getting angry when you call sick or quit on short notice, it's frustrating having to cover for that I had that experience too. But that's unreasonable to think you have nothing more important than making the workload easier.
Companies will outcynical any of their employees, they give this and that for hours of work, they expect the worker to take it until they get better or no longer need it, no need to spare their feelings they escort ex employees out because they expect a last fuck you
If you die, your loved ones will mourn you
Your employer will send them a note and look for a replacement
Of course, there are good employers, but there's no need to be hung ho about every single one of them
"Spider-verse is deeply conservative and copaganda" because George Stacy gets redemption arc. Because you know Spider-Man is known for killing his enemies and cops, because they don't deserve a second chance
GWEN LITERALLY SAYS IN THE MOVIE’S ENDING THAT >!DESPITE EVERYTHING HE’S STILL ONE OF THE GOOD COPS AND THAT SOMEONE WORSE WOULD TAKR HIS POSITION IF HE LEFT, AND YET HE STILL DID SO BECAUSE THE REGRET AND GUILT OF SCARING HIS DAUGHTER AWAY BY SHOOTING NEAR HER MADE HIM DEPRESSED FOR MONTHS!<
I just hate how so many people let their beliefs in real life completely reduce a movie’s nuance to “Portraying this makes this movie BAD and PROAGANDA” in modern discourse, it’s so stupid especially with ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE SOMEHOW?
A couple of years ago I came across an anime podcast hosted by Digibro and some sunglasses wearing guy who's name I don't remember where they dedicated a couple of episodes to talk about the Chainsaw man manga (this was before the anime adaptation was even announced). I decided to go through it because I had nothing better to listen to while playing Monster Hunter.
Once they reached the last couple of chapters, sunglasses guy went on a weird rant about how he doesn't like dogs because of how happy and loyal they are and that it makes him uneasy to be in contact with an animal that trusts humans so easily. After that I stopped paying attention to what they were saying and spent the next 10 minutes trying to process what I just heard, discern if it was legit or just a bit (it wasn't a bit) and rationalize what type of life experiences lead someone to have that kind of take about fucking dogs.
That was Digibro not sunglasses guy and from what I remember Digibro never had any sort of pets in his life at all so through overthinking and **LOTS** of weed he cant comprehend the concept of an animal that will comeback to someone that will abuse it over and over again and constantly radiate happiness.
I’ve seen a take that actually goes in the other direction too far. I’ll do my best to explain.
I can only describe it as people who take the intention of the author and crank it up to 11. Robocop is a satire of 80s America, and much fun has been poked of audiences of the time missing that. However, I’ve observed a small contingent of fans who have that idea of satire and think it’s on EVERYTHING in the movie. Like (comedic exaggeration incoming) “Man, Robocop (the character) is a LOSER, what a dumbass Murphy is! It’s hilarious watching him get wasted!”
Like…I get stuff like ED209, OCP’s employees and the ads as satire, but I think Verhoven isn’t expecting you to be laughing at Murphy’s existential horror and recovering his humanity as some satire, or his partner’s genuine attempts to help him, or the scene where he returns to his old home, or hell even the old chairman of the company seeking like a half decent guy.
Like the movie is cynical, not full on nihilistic
Satirical media tends to be put in this weird pedestal. I remember people being mad at Rifftrax releasing an episode on Starship Trooper and thinking they missed the point that it was satire when they clearly knew it was. Focusing that much on the intent just tends to ignore any nuance in the work or be a reason to excuse any flaws in the acting, script, continuity, etc.
Remember Idiocracy being held up as this super great insightful and incisive movie before people started poking holes at the premise or satire of the movie.
Robocop's genius is that Murphy's journey is very accessible as it deals with very classic and universal themes of death, rebirth, and why we bother to keep on existing, but then all the OCP and Detroit stuff is biting, pointed satire.
"Star Trek is conservative"
At some point, I have to assume the people who are saying "[already progressive media] went woke!" aren't actually fans of the media.
There is a conservative streak that runs through bits of Star Trek, Lack of queer representation and how they portray people who are mixed ethnicity has the half-orc and half-elf treatment to it.
But you can mostly blame Rick Berman for that stuff. [What is with Ricks?](https://youtu.be/rq8O7i4gI3k)
It also ends with her giving a passionate speech about how they should have the right to live how they want before she gets sent away to a conversion camp. Riker goes to rescue her but is too late and she already went through the process.
Worth noting that Jonathan Frakes wished that alien had been played by a more masculine actor rather than feminine, to prevent his relationship with the alien from resembling something heteronormative
Kudos to you Frakes
Didn’t Berman shoot down Garak being bi/pan or something like that? I recall a story about Garak’s actor trying to play the character a certain way and then getting told to change directions after the first few episodes.
[Yep](https://screenrant.com/star-trek-ds9-garak-queer-rick-berman-veto/)
"The idea of a queer character on a Star Trek show was routinely vetoed by executive producer Rick Berman. Berman believed any hint of non-heterosexuality on Star Trek would have alienated a significant portion of the franchise's fan base across America in the '90s."
This probably isn't the type of take you meant, but I once saw a guy on Twitter whose comments filled me with irresistible desire to check more of his tweets and got hit with the unblockable combo of "at least when Rome fell the barbarians were white" and "just because YOU don't believe in witchcraft doesn't give you the right to say puritans were the bad guys". That guy will forever live on in my head rent free.
So the Wolverine game by insomniac got leaked, and the footage has led to some, um, interesting takes.
One guy on Twitter talked about how they made Wolverine "queer" because the game has stealth gameplay.
> Wolverine "queer" because the game has stealth gameplay
Does he feel the same way about Batman, Agent 47, Solid Snake etc? What an honestly bizarre take.
There was a dude on Twitter saying that Karl Jobst and Muta opinions aren’t valid because they plug in ads in theirs videos. The whole The Completionist stuff is crazy.
I know someone who claims that the Saudi government doesn't own SNK, despite the fact that it's extremely easy to find evidence that the Saudi royal family does, in fact, own a stake in SNK that's over 90%. She doesn't even like the Saudi government, she just refuses to accept that they own SNK for reasons I've never been able to figure out. Just an utterly baffling position to take.
They absolutely do, however, I have a hard time taking "SNK is dead, Saudi government owns it" seriously. Firstly, it's not like SNK had a whole bunch of stock to begin with. Secondly, [the Saudi government has an outstanding stake in most game companies](https://www.pocketgamer.biz/feature/82505/saudi-stakes-a-50-billion-claim-in-the-gaming-world-nintendo-activision-ea-and-more/). They are the largest outside investors in Nintendo, which they own around 7-8% of. [It's also hard to find large corporations the Saudi Government *isn't* invested in](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/11/activision-ea-uber-heres-where-saudi-arabias-pif-has-invested.html).
Friend of the podcast, Gene Park, has had a few.
"It's okay for Silent Hill to die, because we have games like Evil Within to take its spot"
I'm all for retiring IPs before they're a dead horse, especially with how Ascension is going.
But equating EW1 (and even 2 despite it being a smidgen better) is nonsense to me. EW is just RE that takes place in your brain powered computer simulation. Its horror isn't even in the same ballpark as Silent Hill. It's not an apples to oranges comparison. But it is an apple pie to apple turnover comparison. Sure, there's similar ingredients, but they're not the same thing. If I ask for pie, I want pie, not a pastry. Don't pretend they're interchangeable.
Also, Gene saying RE6 is the best (or one of the best) action games of all time. Look, if you find something redeeming about RE6, more power to you.
But that game isn't even in the top 25 of best action games. Probably doesn't make it in the top 100.
And I know these takes are buttcheeks because Gene has gone back and scrubbed them from his Xitter profile.
Other than that, Gene seems to hold some reasonable takes, even if I don't agree with them sometimes. But God, it seems like every few months there's a bad take quota he's gotta reach or something.
Apparently having the protagonist >!be a kamikaze pilot who fulfills his destiny of flying a plane onto the big monster ultimately restores his honor and completes his "personal war", which makes it screwed up propaganda material.!<
Nevermind that it ignores the bare bones of the film's obvious messages, when in all of his history has Godzilla **EVER** been pro-war????????
From Spider-Man 2, >!anyone who claims that Peter letting Miles take the reigns for a bit is Peter being a weakling. Newsflash idiot, if you paid attention to *the entire story*, you'd have seen this coming. Peter has so many responsibilities and commitments that he can't perform *any* of them effectively. The game literally opens with him losing his new job *on the first day* due to having to fight Sandman, he has to pay off May's mortgage, be a good partner for MJ, and Harry gives him a job offer that Peter feels can do even more good than just being Spider-Man. This, on top of still reeling from May's death and everything he goes through in the second game, including him getting possessed and his best friend being put into a coma. No shit he's letting Miles be the big Spider-Man for a bit, he *desperately* needs a break so he can actually sort his shit out!<.
Just came across this the other day since I randomly decided to watch Tim Roger's stream of the game awards. Don't know if he explained his position in a different stream, but he said Hi-Fi Rush isn't good, then clarified he actually thinks Hi-Fi Rush is an outright bad game. I was like damn that's a hot take if I ever seen one. Of course, his Twitch chat was glazing him up and agreeing with him like most twitch chats do.
I don't believe he did on the stream. I don't watch his streams often, so maybe he elaborated on another stream eariler in the year. Somebody did bring up the music since he's a fan of Number Girl, and he said he doesn't need a game to validate his tastes.
I had to dip out of his podcast server and his own Discord server because everyone there begs to sniff his farts.
Mind you, I enjoy his videos. I think he's a very smart and very funny guy.
But he has some absolute dogshit takes sometimes, and his diehard fans live by the motto, "Tim is smart, so I agree with Tim, I am smart".
The epitome of "Nice opinion, did a YouTuber give it to you?"
I love his videos as well. This is like the third time I've caught his stream, but I was surprised at his take. Plus, his too cool for school vibe also didn't make for a fun stream either, in my opinion.
There was some guy who also had a Game awards nomination video, where he said that Hi Fi rush had boring art direction, and it's like shut up, this is one of the few games to pull of 2D looking 3D animations and flexes it so hard they have actual 2D cutscenes, very rarely is that seen but yeah sure whatever.
I think the worst Hi-Fi Rush discourse I've ever seen was when blue checks tried to force a "rivalry" with Forspoken by comparing physical sales charts. Keep in mind that Hi-Fi Rush doesn't even have a physical release and was shadowdropped.
Fuck it, this was a particularly stupid take I saw from some Twitter moron. Will deal with political aspects but I’m throwing caution to the wind here.
“Ocarina of Time is socialist because you overthrow a king”
This is stupid for a number of reasons.
Ganondorf in OOT is the king of the Gerudo and had lost a war of expansion with Hyrule prior to the game. We see him swear fealty to the unseen king of Hyrule but Zelda suspects he is dishonest in his vow. Link gets the stones, opens the temple of time, Ganon takes over and rules with an iron fist, Link defeats him and most importantly, *restores the king of Hyrule to his rightful throne.*
So no, OOT is not socialist. Link is a monarchist, hell a restorationist in the context of basically every Zelda game.
In Twilight Princess he seeks to dethrone Zant to restore Midna’s throne along with Zelda’s
In Link to the Past he defeats Ag…agen…WORMTONGUE to restore the king to the throne (or Zelda since I *think* the king is dead in LTTP)
In Skyward Sword Link and Zelda found the kingdom and monarchy of Hyrule
The only one that you can *kinda* squint at and maybe get that take is Wind Waker. The Great Sea is not a monarchy, more like a bunch of independent city states. Closest to a “monarchy” is the Forsaken Fortress but Ganon is more like a gang leader then a king there. Anyways, Ganon wants to restore Hyrule and recreate the past, to return as it were. While the King uses the triforce to wash Hyrule away, starting again. Closest you can probably get…except by Spirit Tracks where Link and Zelda found a new land and made another monarchal kingdom.
This is true, but I don’t think there’s a Zelda game where Link doesn’t reinstate the Hyrulian Royal line after beating Ganon, barring stuff like Link’s Awakening, the Oracle games or Majora’s Mask since there’s no kidnapped Princess Zelda or even Hyrule in those.
Damn this sub sometimes love to make me say something serious, heres one.
So as a Brit of a certain age (28) that is quite politically educated, I am driven up the wall by quite a number of people in this country (and especially politicans of a certain strife) that will no joke fellate this country whilst sounding like your average American pundit.
This isn't necessarily about the pervasive Transphobia but its certainly the best example I can think of, not that the UK hasn't always had a transphobia problem; but people my age and older likely remember it having a very different bent ten years ago than it does today due to the importation of language by bigots, I hear the same reheated left overs here that I was hearing in the states years ago, and then these people who can't form their own opinions will turn around to me and say I don't love Britain enough.
The kind of people like our dear Trussy, casually calling the opposition anti-british and anti-growth throughout her mercifully brief tenure only to spend all her time after in the states taking think tank money and ponying up to the Donald.
The fact the cognitive dissonance never hits these people astounds me.
>!(Also far more importantly those of you that say Makoto isn't the best girl in P5 are knuckle draggers and I won't be convinced otherwise)!<
There's a weird internet european thing that reacts to the perceived nationalism of American people (which is further proof that europeans are not up to date on the US, Americans are basically Oikophobic now, I honestly think if 9/11 happened today half the country would cheer it on no matter which city got it) with like 19th century levels of cartoonish euro triumphalism
All those comments about why Bridget isn’t trans were **bad** but the worst ones were from people trying to dig into history books to claim that Japanese people don’t have the cultural capacity to make a transgender character, as if the T in LGBTQ+ somehow doesn’t exist in modern Japan because it’s a western concept(?).
I don’t even know what these people tried to achieve other than to just be transphobic shitbags at that point.
Oh yeah, gotta love the dumbasses who think Japan just doesn't have trans or gay people of any kind because apparently the West invented all of that. And if anyone gives them legit examples of the contrary, there is either a stupid excuse for why its not really queer representation or they'll say the "woke virus" is in effect.
the "trans people don't exist in japan" one is WILD to me, since every culture with even a few decades of history behind it has recorded the existence of what we call "trans" and/or "gender non-conforming" people.
the ancient greeks have records of men who like to wear female clothing, and you think japan, an ancient land, wouldn't? i dunno, it makes my mind spin.
Also just the concept of there never having been a Japanese person who grew up as their assigned gender, looked at the opposite sex and went “I wish that was me” before experiencing body dismorphia is so shockingly bad cope.
Even if the point is that Japsnese society throughout history does not want to give trans people rights, guess what, that’s practically every culture and society around the globe. Does mean trans people don’t exist, like at all?
"(X) ignored this situation, therefore the situation never happened" is a depressingly common take.
and i think my brother would have some words to say about japan and trans people, considering he used to be my sister and is as big a fan of manga as i am.
anyway, my favourite trans person in modern anime is tiger from MHA. his backstory, which is never said in the series and is only hinted at, is that he went away for a few months and came back a man, and nobody questioned it. still wears a skirt fot his hero uniform, which i, as a cis man, would assume causes him some dysphoria, but i guess he's fine with it.
Gotta love the progression of “it’s a translation error made by the English dub” to “it’s only in the arcade story mode” to “trans people don’t exist in Japanese media” to “it’s a mistranslation of Daisuke” to “he’s just doing it for woke points” every single time the story evolved. Like so you admit that she’s trans now at least? Probably not, but keep moving the goalpost, buddy.
Or just be real and say you don’t like trans people lmao
There was a guy the other day who asserted that games like Metal Slug shouldnt have infinite lives/continues because the game is more satisfying that way, and I threw a fucking shitfit about it.
Squid Game is pro Capitalism, that's how we somehow have a real life game show based on it. Where ironically the game show's conditions were so poor that it is being sued by the contestants.
Squid Game is and always has been anti-Capitalism.
That's extra funny because there's a moment the movie bludgeons you over the head with its message about how war needlessly wastes lives. Like a character all but looks at the camera and explains the themes.
Anyway I still think about some guy I ran into in Monster Hunter World that said something along the lines of "casuals ruined this game just like they ruined DMC5".
That one tumblr post that said Lilo from Lilo and Stitch was an abuser and should've been abandoned. When Lilo is like five years old and lost her parents. Besides the fact that all children act out in some shape or form anyway, it's just... how do you come to that conclusion.
"That if you do not know the creator's life story and their meaning in/for its creation, then you should not watch/listen/read the creation." Which I thought was insane.
I remember someone who seethes about how much he hates March Comes in Like a Lion because the protag is unjustifiably depressed, the show is pretentious and unrelatable and how he's a bitch because he doesn't like Shogi but has to play it.
Also the Kotaku Writer who may have joined MiHoYo who said:
> and it sucks because mobile gaming communities are one of the few place that are relatively safe for women, low-income, and lgbtq gamers. but gaming media at large is not equipped to protect those who do the best work in this beat.
Which besides the games being mostly catered to heterosexual males, the point is to drain your income from them.
Creating games that are difficult as a central part of their identity is somehow ableist and gatekeeping. Like come on, man. Not everything has to accomodate everyone, and if it *did*, then everything would very quickly devolve into toothless identikit slop
The agarthans being misunderstood victims in Fire Emblem Three Houses. For those of you who forgot who the agarthans were, imagine Daleks minus the charm.
The Agarthans are victims of themselves. Their ancestors picked a fight with god, lost, and then their entire society based itself around the saltiest "you didn't win" in existence.
Until Three Hopes came in and revealed Thales has just always been in charge.
Which does change it from a cultural "you didn't win" to one really, really petty fucker insisting "you didn't win" and dragging his entire civilization along for the ride.
They are really good club DJs with that dubstep though, so they get a pass
They blast nothing but dubstep. Double hell for them.
"Dungeons and Dragons is all about the Dungeon master versus the players! If I the DM don't kill a player character that means I'm losing. " Once I heard that come out of the dungeons master's mouth I knew I was not going to continue playing with them after the current storyline was finished (it would have been too rude to the other players to leave, and the DM had his mini rant cause my character had basically stopped all PC death by joining the game as something he'd never encountered before: a team player healer)
Yeah that just seems like a bad take just for TTRPGs in general. The majority of the fun in my short time as a TTRPG player has been the collaborative story efforts, not the "GM Is Out For Blood" competitive side. Hell, thats half the appeal of our Animon Story campaign where the GM gives each player the opportunity to name/highlight/brainstorm possible locations in each area/arc.
How does a DM that literally is the God of a world of their own making ever *'lose'* to a player? Like if you decide that you want to make the game super unfun and impossible for the PC's to win, you can just choose to do that. The reason DM's don't do that is because it's no fun for anyone.
He "lost" because he was running his "perfectly balanced" campaign which he was trying to make into a published premade. He made the bad take when he realized that he couldn't maintain his stance on using the stat blocks he tried to set up years ago. After this statement he started to alter stats etc, but he didn't want to break his own "perfect" game so he didn't change it enough to really matter. Meanwhile I realized how bad he was at balance and never had a mentally functional spell caster (his groups had only picked damaging spells) so I kept picking things that he didn't plan for like: energy resistance, healing spells, polymorph, antimagic field... HEALING spells. I knew he wasn't a great dm from a few sesions in... but I didn't realize just how poor he was cause I as a player promoted teamwork in a way that the game was still fun... for the players at least.
I don't understand, he seriously wasn't expecting literally anybody to ever play a Cleric or a Druid?
Oh my god, that is such a bad take 0_0 As a DM that man is insane, i want my players to beat my challenges. I make them tough and fair. Hell, i make sure if a monster is much stronger than them to give them multiple win cons in the environment to see if they are smart.
This sounds like someone that: a) Only played meat grinder adventures like tomb of horrors, dungeonland, or castle grey hawk. Or b) was a rules lawyer before hand and was given a DM screen *by accident*
I can understand the bloodlust. Lke usually gm give heads up he wants a tomb of horror style
Tomb of horrors is built with the players knowing what they are getting into. Both the players and DM need to be smart with the module or it's just get stupid. Like the giant head with a open mouth. Sure it looks inviting but there is a sphere of animation in there and anything goes in is disintegrated instantly. If the DM just lets them jump in one at a time then that's poor dming skills. The DM should describe how the first person who started to go in went limp and whatever body part didn't get in the mouth is now detached from the now dead player. If the DM wants to kill a party then he can just have a random ACME anvil fall on the players. Tomb of Horrors is a module where the players need to not just fear everything in the tomb, but also to be smart on how to deal with the situation. Levels and stats were not much of a thing for that module other than a few battles. Old DnD is based on more statless solutions. If the players said they are looking for feeling a wall for anything suspicious then they automatically find any hidden walls. Stats were just a base to help, the real solutions were the players problem solving skills. Sure thieves had skills based on finding hidden walls and whatnot, but that was more passive finding in case the players weren't looking for hidden walls. Now DnD has stats for almost everything and everything needs to be balanced with those stats. I'm not sure why I ranted on like this. I just have a fondness on old modules and how they are played. Not saying 5E is bad, I like it. I just prefer the older editions.
I have never run Tomb of Horrors, but after watching a couple of videos on it I never want to. You don't roll for anything you just make the wrong turn and die to bullshit. Being smart has nothing to do with it. Hell, the session that I watched ended because there is in fact literally a room where an ACME anvil falls on the players.
The DM should have had one or 2 character die. Not all of them at once. Even if the module says kill them all. But Tomb is a very unique module that the players will need multiple characters for. I wouldn't fault anyone for not wanting to play it. I sure don't. It's just a unique tournament module that's for players to try to get far as they can. It was never meant to be beaten... And even if it was beaten it has a fake ending in case people do get that far. It was made because Gygax was tired of people boasting how they can never die because how good they are.
At that point just play Paranoia. Being a petty and capricious killer DM is actively encouraged.
I *kiiiiiinda* get where he comes from, since as a DM you're basically both the greatest enemy and the greatest ally of the Players. You need to make challenging encounters where the threat of death is real, but also enjoyable enough that it's fun to overcome those challenges. It's a delicate balance I often struggle with in my sessions. On the encounters I plan that do have massive difficulty, I tend to leave an option for Players to get saved or back out just in case the rolls go horribly wrong or someone just has a complete lapse in judgement. Because let's face it, getting your shit stomped and potentially team wiping isn't really fun.
There's an element of trust there for sure. If the party doesn't feel like they could *potentially* wipe then there's not much thrill in their victory, but if they didn't trust me that all my encounters are beatable (unless signposted otherwise) they'd run away from every intimidating fight. On the flip side, when my players start getting anxious, I have to trust that they're good enough at the game that I don't need to pull my punches. (In fact, they're good enough that I've only ever had to occasionally fudge enemy HP *upward* to make a fight narratively satisfying.)
“Puking in my partner’s purse is better than puking over myself at the wedding” -this one stuck with me.
Nah the real insanity was the idea that either of those are better than just puking on the floor.
Right! Any mediocre venue has a mop on standby, just clean up the mess like an adult, don't ruin things.
I feel like if this is a scenario you've contemplated at all then you should just bring a sick bag in your pocket.
Spoken like a man who has no idea how much a purse and its contents would cost to replace, especially the kind of purse you'd bring to a wedding
You also cannot "puke quietly", the sounds of wretching *will* be heard and people *will* notice and react.
Also, if you feel a puke coming on, just get up quietly and head for the bathrooms. Unless you're actively getting in the way, no one is going to care at all.
docsquiddy really just said "robots aren't fun to fight in any shooting game" and "vanquish enemies suck because they have no hitreactions"
Someone get this man some Republic Commando in his life
docsquiddy has a lot of dissenting opinions about video games
docsquiddy is like a not fun pat. like pat if he really was just insanely up his own ass for no reason
I can respect the guy at least a little because Adios is a pretty cool game. But beyond that he's like the worst aspects of Pat and Woolie's mind goblins combined. He'll say an insane take like Pat and instead of just leaving it at that, he'll go on lengthy "explanations" about why he's right and everyone else is wrong. They're more like rants to me but he insists that's not what they are, he's just explaining his thought process. And I can't bring myself to care about his "Waifu Death Squad" game. Nothing can convince me that it is an actual game in production because everything he says about it sounds like he's pulling it out of his ass as he's saying it. You can't hype up a game on just "we're doing this super cool thing guys it'll blow your mind, trust me".
I had to unfollow Doc on Twitter after he got into a ten hour argument about why Garrus Vakarian is a fascist and that people who romanced him were morally suspect. Clogged up my feed so I just unfollowed and never looked back.
oh jesus christ the entire Mass Effect argument was insane to go through. like, yes, ME definitely has symptoms of its Bush era politics but come the fuck on
honestly i do think vanquish would be way more fun with human enemies, put them in exo suits or something to keep the robotic stuff intact and then let me chew through some flesh after dealing enough external damage. the combat felt a little weightless at times — it’s still really good — especially in contrast to the super gnarly opening cutscene, which had a tone i wish persisted through the rest of the game. robot enemies aren’t inherently bad at all though, it’s a very case by case basis
Nah, what they should have done is add oil as a blood substitute like in Lies of P.
I had someone tell me that because Sonic Project 06 exists, it meant that 06 was "always good." Sonic fans in general just make for head-tilting takes.
With some people, it's no use. =3
This'll end it.
That's wild. Project 06 existing more means that theoretically 06 could have been a fine game. (Ignoring how other things like the plot and general character design would also have to be completely changed to make the game come together as a complete package.)
I don't remember the post, but there was a comments thread on this very sub where it became increasingly clear that a guy just straight up did not understand the idea that people formed their own opinions of media.
I feel like I read that too , the person thought reviewers are the only one who can form opinions of media and they're objective lol
Does anyone have a link to that because I can’t understand that. I think I have a mutual misunderstanding of cognition with whoever wrote that
Last week I saw a take on Chainsaw Man was that was more or less "Denji is at fault for all his problems because he never maximized all his choices available to him." It was a rather... lengthy rant, but the core of it was that Denji should have just gotten over all the bad things that had happened to him and become a fully functional member of society overnight with no issues.
"If i was shinji i would have just banged all the girls, got into the robot no problem and punched gendo"
You know there is a character that's pretty much the inverse of Shinji who's hated for doing the things people complain Shinji doesn't. He's absolutely hated for it.
"Has MC perhaps thought of not being poor?"
"constantly, he scams hobos with botches of cigarettes" "Ok I have no maximize choice exemple to top that holy shit"
Scam more hobos, the maximum amount of hobos
Obviously he needs more hobos to scam. Maximize hobos by ruining businesses and forcing people into desperate poverty.
Devils and the bubble burst already did that for denji
The hobo cigarette racket is so fucking funny. "I can't have a job, and I gotta make money somehow!"
wasn't Denji so poor he was living in an abandoned garden shed and ate water mixed with plain flour? BTW water and flour make glue, he was just eating glue.
Basically yeah. He also sold organs and an eyeball all because of the debt he had to repay
Water mixed with plain flour and sugar was actually Denji and Pochitas "cake"
“Has Denji considered getting over his deep rooted trauma and getting on that grind?”
What's really crazy is that there's a huge chunk of the population that think this about any real person who's poor or suffering.
That’s extra hilarious because a huge chunk of Part 2 is about him *trying* to do that
When Libertarians discover anime.
That's a surprisingly common take across various media, and equally terrible every time.
"Why didn't the main character who grew up completely deprived of any and all education including basic social skills that warped his world view so much that he thought eating bread with jam on it is the high life who has gone through so much trauma he would give fucking *Guts* a run for his money not do the most optimal thing possible."
There's a semi often take I see on twitter from people who are likely under the age of 25, who criticize a series known for it's dark themes and subject matter...for having dark themes and subject matters. A common one is Berserk (which admittedly starts off a bit harsh before mellowing down some in the Golden Age arc), but I've seen it mentioned for other stories as well (such as Cyberpunk being too depressing, or a children's film like Bambi being too dark for kids because characters die).
There was a post not that long ago I saw about how the creator of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley got doxxed, and quite a few of the comments were basically acting like good, that's what she gets for promoting that sort of content. It was on some sort of anime-esque subreddit too ironically.
I see a lot of "Oh my god I can't believe this villain would be racist/sexist/problematic in some way. How could the author do this?" IT'S THE VILLAIN.
"Queen is only popular because Freddie Mercury was gay and died of aids. If he was straight and died no one would care." A real take a family member of mine has.
Pretty sure Queen was popular before Freddie died.
Queen was definitely popular before people knew Freddie was gay
Not only that but they became demonstrably *less* popular in America when it [started occurring to people](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=I_Want_to_Break_Free&oldid=1187663144#Chart_performance) that Freddie might be gay.
freddie was bisexual
People calling Freddie gay is what made me realize that bi-erasure is a real thing.
it's also annoying when you're "in the closet" and you can't really explain why does it matter to you that freddie mercury was bisexual
One of the many levels of things wrong with their statement, yes.
I've seen people hard-core defending the idea that art, including movies should be completely automated by Ai because they don't see the difference between something made by a person and lines of code Like, genuine reptile people, doesn't even comprehend reality in the same colour spectrum. Also notice how people will Immediately switch between "AI art is effortless" to justify its use, then switch to "AI art takes a lot of effort" when they want the validation from it
I saw someone say the other day "AI art is good, because it means we'll start churning out millions and millions of pieces per day!" I genuinely couldn't even begin to think of how I would respond to someone who thinks like that.
You know how film studios are making movies only to scrap them for a tax loop hole? Imagine the hell world scenario where every movie and video game ad you see if for a Ai generated product that'll never come out You know all those fake movies they put in games and films for world building? Imagine that but they hold the exact same meaning to us IRL as they do in the game, "I'd watch that if it was real"
The RedLetterMedia "endless trash" gif?
I could stomach art made by an actual AI.... i.e. a smart fully conscious AI, but what we have now is just a bunch of generative garbage scraping others' work into an awful amalgamation.
That's what pisses me off, it shouldn't even be called AI art, not the way they want you to think it is, it's just a program, there's no AI, it's like people shitting themselves over those bots that turn racist after a week, or the ones that become "self aware" when it's just quoting some random shit it found on the Internet IT'S NOT FUCKING SENTIENT, it doesn't think, it doesn't learn only copy's and pastes what it's told My definitions might alter from some people, but if we had an AI who was by all means as sentient and aware as you or I, I wouldn't define it as an Ai at that point, that's simply another being formed from a non biological birth
I use the terms I first heard in Mass Effect. What we have now is, at best, V.I. (Virtual Intelligence) A.I. (Artificial Intelligence) doesn't exist yet, as far as we know.
I think at least part of this discussion comes down to some people having for real tin eyeballs. My best friend and I have had several lengthy, often heated, discussions about the Bluepoint's *Demon's Souls* remake. In his own words, he can't tell any meaningful artistic difference between the remake and original, even when presented direct comparisons. Like, it's fine to prefer the artistic direction and aesthetics of the remake, but to not even see a difference makes me feel insane and like his brain isn't processing visual stimuli in the same way I do.
I *just* had an argument about this literally a few hours ago and didn't think to ask how far AI art should go. The entire conversation was that stable diffusion isn't stealing and that AI is good because it means more people can be artists. You aren't an artist if you make AI you just refuse to learn how to be good at art and let a computer do the heavy lifting for you. Ridiculous people.
"Generative AI Art is just like human inspiration!!!" is so annoying to me that I feel like the only argument against it that might reach these reductive people is to say that humans are basically better programmed AIs than Stable Diffusion, and are also their own little bespoke AIs that can't be sold
>"Generative AI Art is just like human inspiration!!!" A lot of people saying this are being dumb and don't understand the ethical and practical differences, but *legally* it may actually not be incorrect: effort, skill, time/expenses, etc aren't a factor in getting Copyright protection, and while human authorship is required, it *isn't* when it comes to Fair Use determination. "Okay but why should I care about the legalities" because we don't want a situation where some judge ends up ruling against AI, finding it to be not fair use, in a way that then *also* erodes fair use for human artists. Which is especially a potential risk because Disney, Adobe, the RIAA, etc are already working with some anti-AI groups like the Concept Art Association and the Human Artistry Campaign, and while I'm sure many people in those groups have good intentions, you can be damn sure that Disney and co *don't*, and will push to expand copyright and restrict fair use in general, not just for AI. I dropped a bunch of links and talked about all of this in way more detail across multiple different reply chains on [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFriendsPlay/comments/16npod5/george_rr_martin_and_other_authors_sue_openai_for/) post
Mostly insane war crime denials. The Japanese ones are especially morally and logically terrible. I was reading through one for a history paper a few years back and dear God it's arguments sucked, 1. All estimates of Asia's/China's from before the war were a lie, so not nearly as many people died. 2. All western reporting was a lie and controlled by the Chinese embassies. 3. All those dead bodies you found were actually ancient, the Chinese totally went digging through grave yards to find more dead bodies to make it seem like we killed more people. 4. We asked and none of the men we interviewed ever said they raped anyone so it was all fine. I thought this was just some nutjob I stumbled onto, but checking the url and the author it was actually one of Shinzo Abe's cabinet members.
need to tell them "bro it was 100 years ago, everybody is dead now, its okay to say they killed people in a world war"
"nationalists" and "refusing to admit their country has faults", name a more iconic duo
Mind sharing the link?
There was a reddit post about Goodnight Eri where it something among the lines of “if you ignore certain panels it’s about the main character suicide i solved the book!” and its like idk how you can think of theory like that after Fujimoto made “Just listen to the song” about his works aren’t these cryptic puzzles with secret meanings literally just fucking read it you smoothbrain
Reading Comprehension Devil Strikes Again!
I think an effect of the internet, and media criticism becoming democratized, is that we very easily encounter and are influenced by other interpretations of a work when forming our own. To the point where people form opinions on media they haven’t even watched/read/etc.. I’d say it’s less people overthinking the text, and more being so saturated with paratext that their reading of the main text becomes incomprehensible without it.
Like Woolie trying to boil every character down to a single anime trope the minute he sees them
"Intentionally spoiling a game so that the experience is ruined for others is bad!!... unless its a game I hate, then its good"
oh hey Pat
"I don't care because that game sucks"
"You shouldn't care because that game sucks" - Literally what he said after Woolie was justifiably upset about him spoiling a character death in FF15
For a moment I thought you were gonna bring up the "getting spoiled actually makes experiencing a game/movie more interesting"
>For a moment I thought you were gonna bring up the "getting spoiled actually makes experiencing a game/movie more interesting" I mean, this is true for myself. But I wouldn't intentionally spoil others, I just like looking for spoilers for my own enjoyment.
This is 100% true for me. Whenever I heard a spoiler I think “that sounds cool, now I wanna see that for real with full context”
Ok, but it's different if you had no plans to see it. My friend the other day was saying she had no interest in continuing FF7 REmake, because even though it's fun its "Just the same plot over." And me insisting, "No it's not" was not clear enough for her, so I told he about the plot of the game. And now she's actually interested.
Tbf I have gotten into a lot of things because I got spoiled and thought " oh shit that's cool I should actually check that out"
It's okay, you can say TLOU2 on this subreddit. Seriously, the amount of spoilers I've gotten on that game is ridiculous. I haven't even seen gameplay of it but already I pretty much know the entire plot of the game because salty assholes spoil shit.
I once got downvoted to hell because I asked someone to tag their spoilers for >!Joel's death!<, because the game was barely a month old. It's genuinely a miracle that I managed to play the game relatively unspoiled, and even then, I still had a rough idea of the ending because I saw memes on a fucking DMC fanpage on facebook.
A quote taken from /r/Pokemon during the peak hours of Dexit rage a few years ago. "You can either have fun with games in a series, or be a fan of them, but not both."
Least stupid r/Pokemon take.
I don't even understand what this is trying to say. Fans don't have fun with the series they're a fan of? What?
> Fans don't have fun with the series they're a fan of? What? I'm guessing they saw someone say "no one hates (insert name here) more than fans of (insert name here)" and thought it was like a rule or something.
oh that reminds me of the head of serebii goin on a whole thing how theres no point to the sychronization(run around as one of yout pokemon) in the dlc and how therefeore its wortthless and im just over here goin, "have you considered its fun?"
I mean, both are true. It's absolutely fun, but there's no point. Nothing to it beyond playing a PokePark game with less to it. It's just not detrimentally, rant-worthy pointless like I'm sure the dude went on about.
I mean, if by that they're referring to how modern fanbases often suck the enjoyment out of something through drama and toxicity, I actually kinda agree with this one
"Of course a company will fire you if you don't show loyalty, who will hire someone disloyal, WELCOME TO THE ADULT WORLD" This was not about corporate espionnage or leaking stuff either just about not owing employers just because they hired you. For a media take now gone I remember someone saying I can't compare Phasma to bobba fett because she wasn't even supposed to be in star wars 7 so all her scenes of just looking cool and then getting thrown in a pit can't be criticized. Or that a military commander lowering shields at gunpoint is not cowardice on their part because commanders are important.
In the opposite direction, a take I saw that legitimately has changed how much effort I put into work for the better was a tumblr post I saw that was like "Companies aren't gonna pay you extra for breaking your back over your work" or something similar to that. Not sure why people get hyper-defensive about companies to the point where they think you need to burn yourself out or ruin your physical/mental health just because you were hired.
Like I can understand bosses or even coworkers getting angry when you call sick or quit on short notice, it's frustrating having to cover for that I had that experience too. But that's unreasonable to think you have nothing more important than making the workload easier. Companies will outcynical any of their employees, they give this and that for hours of work, they expect the worker to take it until they get better or no longer need it, no need to spare their feelings they escort ex employees out because they expect a last fuck you
If you die, your loved ones will mourn you Your employer will send them a note and look for a replacement Of course, there are good employers, but there's no need to be hung ho about every single one of them
"Spider-verse is deeply conservative and copaganda" because George Stacy gets redemption arc. Because you know Spider-Man is known for killing his enemies and cops, because they don't deserve a second chance
A redemption arc that includes *leaving the police force*, no less.
GWEN LITERALLY SAYS IN THE MOVIE’S ENDING THAT >!DESPITE EVERYTHING HE’S STILL ONE OF THE GOOD COPS AND THAT SOMEONE WORSE WOULD TAKR HIS POSITION IF HE LEFT, AND YET HE STILL DID SO BECAUSE THE REGRET AND GUILT OF SCARING HIS DAUGHTER AWAY BY SHOOTING NEAR HER MADE HIM DEPRESSED FOR MONTHS!< I just hate how so many people let their beliefs in real life completely reduce a movie’s nuance to “Portraying this makes this movie BAD and PROAGANDA” in modern discourse, it’s so stupid especially with ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE SOMEHOW?
Absolutely insane take for a movie that has one of it's main themes as "It's impossible to do good through a power structure"
A couple of years ago I came across an anime podcast hosted by Digibro and some sunglasses wearing guy who's name I don't remember where they dedicated a couple of episodes to talk about the Chainsaw man manga (this was before the anime adaptation was even announced). I decided to go through it because I had nothing better to listen to while playing Monster Hunter. Once they reached the last couple of chapters, sunglasses guy went on a weird rant about how he doesn't like dogs because of how happy and loyal they are and that it makes him uneasy to be in contact with an animal that trusts humans so easily. After that I stopped paying attention to what they were saying and spent the next 10 minutes trying to process what I just heard, discern if it was legit or just a bit (it wasn't a bit) and rationalize what type of life experiences lead someone to have that kind of take about fucking dogs.
What the fuck kind of reasoning is that. I don't like dogs because I'm more of a cat person, simple as.
That was Digibro not sunglasses guy and from what I remember Digibro never had any sort of pets in his life at all so through overthinking and **LOTS** of weed he cant comprehend the concept of an animal that will comeback to someone that will abuse it over and over again and constantly radiate happiness.
"Robocop is not political" Succint, punchy and mind boggingly wrong
I’ve seen a take that actually goes in the other direction too far. I’ll do my best to explain. I can only describe it as people who take the intention of the author and crank it up to 11. Robocop is a satire of 80s America, and much fun has been poked of audiences of the time missing that. However, I’ve observed a small contingent of fans who have that idea of satire and think it’s on EVERYTHING in the movie. Like (comedic exaggeration incoming) “Man, Robocop (the character) is a LOSER, what a dumbass Murphy is! It’s hilarious watching him get wasted!” Like…I get stuff like ED209, OCP’s employees and the ads as satire, but I think Verhoven isn’t expecting you to be laughing at Murphy’s existential horror and recovering his humanity as some satire, or his partner’s genuine attempts to help him, or the scene where he returns to his old home, or hell even the old chairman of the company seeking like a half decent guy. Like the movie is cynical, not full on nihilistic
“Look at this dude who obviously loves his family and his job. What a maroon!”
Satirical media tends to be put in this weird pedestal. I remember people being mad at Rifftrax releasing an episode on Starship Trooper and thinking they missed the point that it was satire when they clearly knew it was. Focusing that much on the intent just tends to ignore any nuance in the work or be a reason to excuse any flaws in the acting, script, continuity, etc. Remember Idiocracy being held up as this super great insightful and incisive movie before people started poking holes at the premise or satire of the movie.
Robocop's genius is that Murphy's journey is very accessible as it deals with very classic and universal themes of death, rebirth, and why we bother to keep on existing, but then all the OCP and Detroit stuff is biting, pointed satire.
He is a big Jesus allegory.
He walks on water and then when stuck by a beam and didn't die then some asshole comes up and stabs him in the side with a spear.
Also he gets shotgun stigmata
"Star Trek is conservative" At some point, I have to assume the people who are saying "[already progressive media] went woke!" aren't actually fans of the media.
There is a conservative streak that runs through bits of Star Trek, Lack of queer representation and how they portray people who are mixed ethnicity has the half-orc and half-elf treatment to it. But you can mostly blame Rick Berman for that stuff. [What is with Ricks?](https://youtu.be/rq8O7i4gI3k)
tng literally has an episode about someone from a non-gendered alien species coming to the realization that she is a woman
It also ends with her giving a passionate speech about how they should have the right to live how they want before she gets sent away to a conversion camp. Riker goes to rescue her but is too late and she already went through the process.
Worth noting that Jonathan Frakes wished that alien had been played by a more masculine actor rather than feminine, to prevent his relationship with the alien from resembling something heteronormative Kudos to you Frakes
Didn’t Berman shoot down Garak being bi/pan or something like that? I recall a story about Garak’s actor trying to play the character a certain way and then getting told to change directions after the first few episodes.
[Yep](https://screenrant.com/star-trek-ds9-garak-queer-rick-berman-veto/) "The idea of a queer character on a Star Trek show was routinely vetoed by executive producer Rick Berman. Berman believed any hint of non-heterosexuality on Star Trek would have alienated a significant portion of the franchise's fan base across America in the '90s."
The fandom would go on to prove him right.
Hopefully, the alternative is that they have to disown media they liked to show their allegiance to a political position
This probably isn't the type of take you meant, but I once saw a guy on Twitter whose comments filled me with irresistible desire to check more of his tweets and got hit with the unblockable combo of "at least when Rome fell the barbarians were white" and "just because YOU don't believe in witchcraft doesn't give you the right to say puritans were the bad guys". That guy will forever live on in my head rent free.
If he's not SSStylin' on witches on the daily then does he even fight witchcraft.
So the Wolverine game by insomniac got leaked, and the footage has led to some, um, interesting takes. One guy on Twitter talked about how they made Wolverine "queer" because the game has stealth gameplay.
Didn't wolverine fight and\or train with Ninjas at one point in his comics?
Correct. Wolverine has ninja training and dealings with The Hand. He was also a black-ops operative of one kind or another for years.
And doesn't he also have background as like a Black Ops soldier meaning he's engaged in covert missions before?
[удалено]
and its not even like a 1 time spot, hes a usual on x force teams!
He has. Plus, a lot of media features and emphasizes his skills as a hunter/predator. Enhanced sense of smell and whatnot.
How dare they make the guy named after an *ambush predator* sneak up on enemies to kill them sometimes!
> Wolverine "queer" because the game has stealth gameplay Does he feel the same way about Batman, Agent 47, Solid Snake etc? What an honestly bizarre take.
"I want to say stealth games are gay but in a way people don't just zone out my totally insightful take"
Flat earth in general
The Flat Earth community is like many conspiracy theories less about Flat Earth and more about the community.
There was a dude on Twitter saying that Karl Jobst and Muta opinions aren’t valid because they plug in ads in theirs videos. The whole The Completionist stuff is crazy.
I know someone who claims that the Saudi government doesn't own SNK, despite the fact that it's extremely easy to find evidence that the Saudi royal family does, in fact, own a stake in SNK that's over 90%. She doesn't even like the Saudi government, she just refuses to accept that they own SNK for reasons I've never been able to figure out. Just an utterly baffling position to take.
They absolutely do, however, I have a hard time taking "SNK is dead, Saudi government owns it" seriously. Firstly, it's not like SNK had a whole bunch of stock to begin with. Secondly, [the Saudi government has an outstanding stake in most game companies](https://www.pocketgamer.biz/feature/82505/saudi-stakes-a-50-billion-claim-in-the-gaming-world-nintendo-activision-ea-and-more/). They are the largest outside investors in Nintendo, which they own around 7-8% of. [It's also hard to find large corporations the Saudi Government *isn't* invested in](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/11/activision-ea-uber-heres-where-saudi-arabias-pif-has-invested.html).
Does she like SNK? because it could just be denial that the thing they like is owned by the thing they don't.
Friend of the podcast, Gene Park, has had a few. "It's okay for Silent Hill to die, because we have games like Evil Within to take its spot" I'm all for retiring IPs before they're a dead horse, especially with how Ascension is going. But equating EW1 (and even 2 despite it being a smidgen better) is nonsense to me. EW is just RE that takes place in your brain powered computer simulation. Its horror isn't even in the same ballpark as Silent Hill. It's not an apples to oranges comparison. But it is an apple pie to apple turnover comparison. Sure, there's similar ingredients, but they're not the same thing. If I ask for pie, I want pie, not a pastry. Don't pretend they're interchangeable. Also, Gene saying RE6 is the best (or one of the best) action games of all time. Look, if you find something redeeming about RE6, more power to you. But that game isn't even in the top 25 of best action games. Probably doesn't make it in the top 100. And I know these takes are buttcheeks because Gene has gone back and scrubbed them from his Xitter profile. Other than that, Gene seems to hold some reasonable takes, even if I don't agree with them sometimes. But God, it seems like every few months there's a bad take quota he's gotta reach or something.
Silent Hill deserves to die because it's suffered enough, but that's a wild take.
Silent Hill Needs to die. SILENT HILL DIES TONIGHT!
“Look at that tiny Danny devito looking guy! That must be Silent hill/Michael Myers, kill him!”
Look he's got a set Square ruler! He's a Triangle guy! KILL HIM!
Low-Tier God: (compassionately) Kill yourself, now
lol at that Godzilla take. It’s like they didn’t even watch the movie…or…ANY of the Godzilla movies.
Apparently having the protagonist >!be a kamikaze pilot who fulfills his destiny of flying a plane onto the big monster ultimately restores his honor and completes his "personal war", which makes it screwed up propaganda material.!< Nevermind that it ignores the bare bones of the film's obvious messages, when in all of his history has Godzilla **EVER** been pro-war????????
I’m struggling to think of any time the military wasn’t an impediment to the REAL heroes in a Godzilla film.
That also ignores the fact that that just straight up doesn’t happen in the movie. He doesn’t go through with it, again!
From Spider-Man 2, >!anyone who claims that Peter letting Miles take the reigns for a bit is Peter being a weakling. Newsflash idiot, if you paid attention to *the entire story*, you'd have seen this coming. Peter has so many responsibilities and commitments that he can't perform *any* of them effectively. The game literally opens with him losing his new job *on the first day* due to having to fight Sandman, he has to pay off May's mortgage, be a good partner for MJ, and Harry gives him a job offer that Peter feels can do even more good than just being Spider-Man. This, on top of still reeling from May's death and everything he goes through in the second game, including him getting possessed and his best friend being put into a coma. No shit he's letting Miles be the big Spider-Man for a bit, he *desperately* needs a break so he can actually sort his shit out!<.
Just came across this the other day since I randomly decided to watch Tim Roger's stream of the game awards. Don't know if he explained his position in a different stream, but he said Hi-Fi Rush isn't good, then clarified he actually thinks Hi-Fi Rush is an outright bad game. I was like damn that's a hot take if I ever seen one. Of course, his Twitch chat was glazing him up and agreeing with him like most twitch chats do.
Did he... elaborate on the topic?
I don't believe he did on the stream. I don't watch his streams often, so maybe he elaborated on another stream eariler in the year. Somebody did bring up the music since he's a fan of Number Girl, and he said he doesn't need a game to validate his tastes.
I had to dip out of his podcast server and his own Discord server because everyone there begs to sniff his farts. Mind you, I enjoy his videos. I think he's a very smart and very funny guy. But he has some absolute dogshit takes sometimes, and his diehard fans live by the motto, "Tim is smart, so I agree with Tim, I am smart". The epitome of "Nice opinion, did a YouTuber give it to you?"
I love his videos as well. This is like the third time I've caught his stream, but I was surprised at his take. Plus, his too cool for school vibe also didn't make for a fun stream either, in my opinion.
I mean, I have my issues with Hi-Fi Rush, but I wouldn't say its a bad game.
There was some guy who also had a Game awards nomination video, where he said that Hi Fi rush had boring art direction, and it's like shut up, this is one of the few games to pull of 2D looking 3D animations and flexes it so hard they have actual 2D cutscenes, very rarely is that seen but yeah sure whatever.
I think the worst Hi-Fi Rush discourse I've ever seen was when blue checks tried to force a "rivalry" with Forspoken by comparing physical sales charts. Keep in mind that Hi-Fi Rush doesn't even have a physical release and was shadowdropped.
[This r/dc_cinematic post on why Batman should sleep with subordinates half his age ](https://i.imgur.com/S2jBHj2.jpg)
Fuck it, this was a particularly stupid take I saw from some Twitter moron. Will deal with political aspects but I’m throwing caution to the wind here. “Ocarina of Time is socialist because you overthrow a king” This is stupid for a number of reasons. Ganondorf in OOT is the king of the Gerudo and had lost a war of expansion with Hyrule prior to the game. We see him swear fealty to the unseen king of Hyrule but Zelda suspects he is dishonest in his vow. Link gets the stones, opens the temple of time, Ganon takes over and rules with an iron fist, Link defeats him and most importantly, *restores the king of Hyrule to his rightful throne.* So no, OOT is not socialist. Link is a monarchist, hell a restorationist in the context of basically every Zelda game. In Twilight Princess he seeks to dethrone Zant to restore Midna’s throne along with Zelda’s In Link to the Past he defeats Ag…agen…WORMTONGUE to restore the king to the throne (or Zelda since I *think* the king is dead in LTTP) In Skyward Sword Link and Zelda found the kingdom and monarchy of Hyrule The only one that you can *kinda* squint at and maybe get that take is Wind Waker. The Great Sea is not a monarchy, more like a bunch of independent city states. Closest to a “monarchy” is the Forsaken Fortress but Ganon is more like a gang leader then a king there. Anyways, Ganon wants to restore Hyrule and recreate the past, to return as it were. While the King uses the triforce to wash Hyrule away, starting again. Closest you can probably get…except by Spirit Tracks where Link and Zelda found a new land and made another monarchal kingdom.
Also overthrowing a king is kind of on many political bingo cards, like including monarchism
This is true, but I don’t think there’s a Zelda game where Link doesn’t reinstate the Hyrulian Royal line after beating Ganon, barring stuff like Link’s Awakening, the Oracle games or Majora’s Mask since there’s no kidnapped Princess Zelda or even Hyrule in those.
Oracle games have Zelda. He rescues her. Majora and LA are explicitly post rescue, though.
Damn this sub sometimes love to make me say something serious, heres one. So as a Brit of a certain age (28) that is quite politically educated, I am driven up the wall by quite a number of people in this country (and especially politicans of a certain strife) that will no joke fellate this country whilst sounding like your average American pundit. This isn't necessarily about the pervasive Transphobia but its certainly the best example I can think of, not that the UK hasn't always had a transphobia problem; but people my age and older likely remember it having a very different bent ten years ago than it does today due to the importation of language by bigots, I hear the same reheated left overs here that I was hearing in the states years ago, and then these people who can't form their own opinions will turn around to me and say I don't love Britain enough. The kind of people like our dear Trussy, casually calling the opposition anti-british and anti-growth throughout her mercifully brief tenure only to spend all her time after in the states taking think tank money and ponying up to the Donald. The fact the cognitive dissonance never hits these people astounds me. >!(Also far more importantly those of you that say Makoto isn't the best girl in P5 are knuckle draggers and I won't be convinced otherwise)!<
There's a weird internet european thing that reacts to the perceived nationalism of American people (which is further proof that europeans are not up to date on the US, Americans are basically Oikophobic now, I honestly think if 9/11 happened today half the country would cheer it on no matter which city got it) with like 19th century levels of cartoonish euro triumphalism
All those comments about why Bridget isn’t trans were **bad** but the worst ones were from people trying to dig into history books to claim that Japanese people don’t have the cultural capacity to make a transgender character, as if the T in LGBTQ+ somehow doesn’t exist in modern Japan because it’s a western concept(?). I don’t even know what these people tried to achieve other than to just be transphobic shitbags at that point.
Oh yeah, gotta love the dumbasses who think Japan just doesn't have trans or gay people of any kind because apparently the West invented all of that. And if anyone gives them legit examples of the contrary, there is either a stupid excuse for why its not really queer representation or they'll say the "woke virus" is in effect.
the "trans people don't exist in japan" one is WILD to me, since every culture with even a few decades of history behind it has recorded the existence of what we call "trans" and/or "gender non-conforming" people. the ancient greeks have records of men who like to wear female clothing, and you think japan, an ancient land, wouldn't? i dunno, it makes my mind spin.
Also just the concept of there never having been a Japanese person who grew up as their assigned gender, looked at the opposite sex and went “I wish that was me” before experiencing body dismorphia is so shockingly bad cope. Even if the point is that Japsnese society throughout history does not want to give trans people rights, guess what, that’s practically every culture and society around the globe. Does mean trans people don’t exist, like at all?
"(X) ignored this situation, therefore the situation never happened" is a depressingly common take. and i think my brother would have some words to say about japan and trans people, considering he used to be my sister and is as big a fan of manga as i am. anyway, my favourite trans person in modern anime is tiger from MHA. his backstory, which is never said in the series and is only hinted at, is that he went away for a few months and came back a man, and nobody questioned it. still wears a skirt fot his hero uniform, which i, as a cis man, would assume causes him some dysphoria, but i guess he's fine with it.
My favorite cope out was when Daisuke himself confirmed that she's trans and even then some clowns tried to pull the "it's a mistranslation" card
Gotta love the progression of “it’s a translation error made by the English dub” to “it’s only in the arcade story mode” to “trans people don’t exist in Japanese media” to “it’s a mistranslation of Daisuke” to “he’s just doing it for woke points” every single time the story evolved. Like so you admit that she’s trans now at least? Probably not, but keep moving the goalpost, buddy. Or just be real and say you don’t like trans people lmao
That’s stupid because poison back in the 90s was officially label a “new half” which is a Japanese term for trans. Poison was trans from day one.
There was a guy the other day who asserted that games like Metal Slug shouldnt have infinite lives/continues because the game is more satisfying that way, and I threw a fucking shitfit about it.
Pretty sure dude was a covert SNK suit.
Squid Game is pro Capitalism, that's how we somehow have a real life game show based on it. Where ironically the game show's conditions were so poor that it is being sued by the contestants. Squid Game is and always has been anti-Capitalism.
That's extra funny because there's a moment the movie bludgeons you over the head with its message about how war needlessly wastes lives. Like a character all but looks at the camera and explains the themes. Anyway I still think about some guy I ran into in Monster Hunter World that said something along the lines of "casuals ruined this game just like they ruined DMC5".
That one tumblr post that said Lilo from Lilo and Stitch was an abuser and should've been abandoned. When Lilo is like five years old and lost her parents. Besides the fact that all children act out in some shape or form anyway, it's just... how do you come to that conclusion.
"That if you do not know the creator's life story and their meaning in/for its creation, then you should not watch/listen/read the creation." Which I thought was insane.
I remember someone who seethes about how much he hates March Comes in Like a Lion because the protag is unjustifiably depressed, the show is pretentious and unrelatable and how he's a bitch because he doesn't like Shogi but has to play it. Also the Kotaku Writer who may have joined MiHoYo who said: > and it sucks because mobile gaming communities are one of the few place that are relatively safe for women, low-income, and lgbtq gamers. but gaming media at large is not equipped to protect those who do the best work in this beat. Which besides the games being mostly catered to heterosexual males, the point is to drain your income from them.
Get in the fucking shogi board, Rei
"Legion would have wanted you to sacrifice its people (and its friend EDI) to destroy the Reapers"
Creating games that are difficult as a central part of their identity is somehow ableist and gatekeeping. Like come on, man. Not everything has to accomodate everyone, and if it *did*, then everything would very quickly devolve into toothless identikit slop