293 réponses à ce sujet

[Mox Ruuga]

Perhaps there's some future space IKEA on Bekenstein that's supplying the alien craving for human furniture?

[glacier1701]

Smud,



You are right in that the kitchen area point is a minor issue. I still feel some nagging doubts about it even though its not so bad as I first thought when I entered Liara's apartment and looked around. However it is one of those things that could be made 'futuristic' looking and we'd all be going wtf!!! What is that area? So practicality means it has to be reasonably familiar. If you have the Kasumi DLC I think we all are still trying to figure what the heck that glowy chair is for.



Anyways still agree with the rest of your analysis.

[Nightwriter]

Bekenstein... I could never figure out how the hell we settled that colony.

It's in the Serpent Nebula, it's next door to the Citadel. It should've been colonized thousands of years ago by the asari or salarians. It's like if there was a section of empty farmland outside New York City.

[xSTONEYx187x]

This guy and is bashing of ME 2 still continues? I mean if I thought a game had so many problems when it comes to the story, the part I value most, and I'm assuming you do to seen as you made umpteen videos on ME 2, then why do you bother? Seriously? If they're so many things you find wrong with this game then put it to one side and don't play it.

[smudboy]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

This guy and is bashing of ME 2 still continues? I mean if I thought a game had so many problems when it comes to the story, the part I value most, and I'm assuming you do to seen as you made umpteen videos on ME 2, then why do you bother? Seriously? If they're so many things you find wrong with this game then put it to one side and don't play it.

[BellatrixLugosi]

He doesn't have anything else to do. He fancy's himself a intellectual but spends the so called intellect on poking holes in a Game most of the gaming world likes (shrug). I dunno he's just smudboy Stoney, its what he does.

[MarkieeAi]

I yawned my way half thru the video then I shut it off. LotSB was a good DLC and ME2 was a great game. did you even read the books/comics and play ME1 ? ah I can't be arsed to argue here... You failed a lot with your "analysis"

[smudboy]

MarkieeAi wrote...

I yawned my way half thru the video then I shut it off. LotSB was a good DLC and ME2 was a great game. did you even read the books/comics and play ME1 ? ah I can't be arsed to argue here... You failed a lot with your "analysis"

I'm glad you find analysis boring.  It should be.  Although I do try to make it entertaining, that's not my goal.

LOTSB was a good DLC.  ME2 was a good game.

I did not read the books/comics.  I did play ME1.

How did I fail in my "analysis"?

[BellatrixLugosi]

smudboy wrote...

MarkieeAi wrote...

I yawned my way half thru the video then I shut it off. LotSB was a good DLC and ME2 was a great game. did you even read the books/comics and play ME1 ? ah I can't be arsed to argue here... You failed a lot with your "analysis"

I'm glad you find analysis boring.  It should be.  Although I do try to make it entertaining, that's not my goal.

LOTSB was a good DLC.  ME2 was a good game.

I did not read the books/comics.  I did play ME1.

How did I fail in my "analysis"?

This is the first time that I recall smudboy actually saying Me2 was a good game.......

[Fiery Phoenix]

I'm sure Smuddy likes ME2 and all. His analysis videos are what we call 'constructive criticism'; NOT complaints.

[BellatrixLugosi]

Well, that's the problem most people have with him on the forum's when it comes to him. He makes statement's that make people think he hates it, it's easier to look at his criticism when he points out his feelings about the game.

[Shockwave81]

What would you like to see for the next DLC Smud? I'm still waiting on something that's more related to, or (even better) actually FOCUSED ON the Reapers and/or Protheans.

[smudboy]

Hard to say. Considering ME2, ME3 can be anyone's guess. All I know is that if it's bridging ME3, it'll automatically be better than ME2's story, as LOTSB is evidence of.

Considering Liara, our Prothean expert, just gave little ideas on Protheans being involved, it'll be odd to have a story about Protheans in the next DLC.

However, if this is a trend in DLC, that is to say, the retcon of Liara was clarified, then the clarification of the retcon of the VS, or the Council, could be the next installment. Though it would be nice to see the reunions with Dr. Michel, Emily Wong and the Consort, that would be too much work for a DLC. The obvious is some kind of VS/Alliance scenario, where they can use the voice talents of the 4 actors in a variety of roles.

[Turin_4]

Using the word "gay" as a synonym for "bad" isn't getting old at all. No, really.

Ha! Does he really, Optimystic_X? I was really just glancing at the first page of this thread to get a sense if this 'analysis' would be the same as the other (goodness) affair, and it seems I was right. Couldn't get more than a few minutes past the first of six to find out, but having spoken with the guy a few times, I'm not at all surprised to find out he uses 'gay' for 'stupid' interchangeably, finds no problem with it, and thinks you're being silly for objecting to it.



This is the Internet, so it's not an idea that's going to get much traction around here - especially on this thread - but you don't have to be a homosexual to know that's a pretty adolescent, small-minded way to look at language and the way it affects people, Optimistic. Another generation and this sort of thing will hopefully go the wayside, and these 'literary gurus' will have to stop kidding themselves and us.



Just didn't want you to think you were the only one who objected to that sort of thing, since it bothers me when I see it too.

[smudboy]

Turin_4 wrote...

Ha! Does he really, Optimystic_X? I was really just glancing at the first page of this thread to get a sense if this 'analysis' would be the same as the other (goodness) affair, and it seems I was right. Couldn't get more than a few minutes past the first of six to find out, but having spoken with the guy a few times, I'm not at all surprised to find out he uses 'gay' for 'stupid' interchangeably, finds no problem with it, and thinks you're being silly for objecting to it.

This is the Internet, so it's not an idea that's going to get much traction around here - especially on this thread - but you don't have to be a homosexual to know that's a pretty adolescent, small-minded way to look at language and the way it affects people, Optimistic. Another generation and this sort of thing will hopefully go the wayside, and these 'literary gurus' will have to stop kidding themselves and us.

Just didn't want you to think you were the only one who objected to that sort of thing, since it bothers me when I see it too.

It's a colloquialism.  You can take your Political Correctness and shove it.  I'm a grammar nut, but I see nothing wrong with people using words, especially loaded words.

And yes, this is the internet, where opinions are plenty.  If you can be offended by a colloquialism which may mean any number of things, then you're not worth my time.

Modifié par smudboy, 02 octobre 2010 - 01:30 .

[jojon2se]

smudboy wrote...
...Though it would be nice to see the reunions with Dr. Michel...

Garrus: Oh ****! It's her. Shepard: I'll see you later, you haven't seen me, ok?

Dr. Michel: Yoouuhoo! Commander Shepaaard. So good to see you again. Umm, *peeks eagerly over your shoulder* you wouldn't have Garrus with you, would you?

Could be fun.

Modifié par jojon2se, 02 octobre 2010 - 01:36 .

[Turin_4]

It's a colloquialism. You can take your Political Correctness and shove it. I'm a grammar nut, but I see nothing wrong with people using words, especially loaded words.

Using a word referring to a minority group as an insult. Aren't there other terms in the English language for that sort of thing, smudboy? If you're as intelligent and knowledgeable as you act, you must know some of them, so let's dispense with the bullcrap, shall we? Colloquialism indeed.

The only thing - the only thing - that separates 'gay' from 'ni@#er', 'k#@e', 's#$c', or even 'qu!@r', is intent of usage.  That's what language is, intent.  When you use a word strictly to insult or criticize, such as to say, "This is so gay," meaning stupid, you're saying gay=stupid.  It's very straightforward.  Is it as harsh as saying, "These people had such a n@#$%r budget on writing they came up with a ****ty story!"  Well no, of course not.  But it's a difference in degree, not in kind.

I'll repeat myself: you're using a word that refers to a minority group as though it meant 'stupid'.  It's not just a matter of colloquialism.  It's not just a matter of words in the English language having multiple meanings.  I realize you fancy yourself some sort of intellectual, but one of the hazards of recognizing that words have multiple meanings is that you can pick a different word that means stupid.  Such as, well, stupid for example.  Or dumb, or foolish, or idiotic, or nitwit, or numbskull, or dunderhead, or jackass, or on and on and on.  But you're choosing the word, repeatedly, that refers to the minority group.  And when people object to it, what's your defense?  "It's just a colloquialism, and I don't have time for your political correctness."

It's likely that the English language has the most words of any language currently on Earth, and that means you don't have to use language that clearly indicates gay=stupid.  There are at least 50 words according to thesaurus.com just now that turned up that meaning which means there are likely another fifty minimum within easy reach.

This is another test, smudboy.  Will you puff up and start gloating and preening and thumping your chest?  Or will you actually, y'know, live up to some of your own advertising?

Modifié par Turin_4, 02 octobre 2010 - 02:02 .

[smudboy]

Turin_4 wrote...

It's a colloquialism. You can take your Political Correctness and shove it. I'm a grammar nut, but I see nothing wrong with people using words, especially loaded words.

Using a word referring to a minority group as an insult. Aren't there other terms in the English language for that sort of thing, smudboy? If you're as intelligent and knowledgeable as you act, you must know some of them, so let's dispense with the bullcrap, shall we? Colloquialism indeed.

Funny.  I wasn't insulting a minority group.   I could be insulting Shakespeare, Shakespearen use of wardrobe, or interepretations of the day.

I could also be talking about being happy.  Or things sucking.  Or of awesome monkeys.

This is purely YOU thinking I am.  YOU thinking I'm referring to homosexuals.  YOU interpreting that the constant Hamlet graveyard seen as being the pinnacle of dramatic form to be something sexual.  YOU can interpret this a few ways, but for you to get hung up on a word and not what I'm trying to say is says nothing of the opinion.  You're hung up on a dictionary definition.

Believe me, when I insult something or someone, I'm very, very clear.

[glacier1701]

I find nothing offensive in the way Smud uses the English language that he has at his command. After all English is one that has the richest vocabulary in the world. Over the course of its development many words have changed meaning (if they did not go out of usage). Those who object to the use of a word should perhaps look back at history and see how that word has evolved. You might be surprised at what it was used for. If you cannot accept the fact that a word can have many meanings then perhaps you need to expand your horizons somewhat and really learn the English language. After all it has over 500,000 words in current usage excluding scientific terms. Closing your mind to the language is your loss if you choose to decide that one word can only have one meaning and that perjorative when it has many more for those who understand the variety that English has.

[Turin_4]

Well, no surprise there, smudboy.



--------------

Over the course of its development many words have changed meaning (if they did not go out of usage).

Yes, Glacier, they have. And what does 'gay' mean now? Does it mean 'happy'? In the 21st century? No. Does it mean bright and festive? No. Does it mean wanton and licentious? No. Does it mean anything, in fact, other than homosexual and usually male and homosexual? Almost never. Can you point to anything I have posted that has said or even suggested, Glacier, that I'm not perfectly aware that words have multiple meanings?



I realize my edit came two minutes after your post, but as you can see, I am entirely aware words have multiple meanings. But that cuts both ways. If words have multiple meanings, smudboy can choose another word for stupid. There are far more words for stupid than there are words for gay.

Those who object to the use of a word should perhaps look back at history and see how that word has evolved. You might be surprised at what it was used for.

Then again I might not. Looking at my post, even before the edit, do you really think I would be surprised to learn that words change meanings, or were you just trying to score points in defense of the gay as stupid word usage?

Closing your mind to the language is your loss if you choose to decide that one word can only have one meaning and that perjorative when it has many more for those who understand the variety that English has.

There is a lot of irony here, your lecturing me in choosing to decide that one word can only have one meaning, particularly since I was asking he choose to decide to use a different word with the same meaning for that perjorative.

[Il Divo]

glacier1701 wrote...

I find nothing offensive in the way Smud uses the English language that he has at his command. After all English is one that has the richest vocabulary in the world. Over the course of its development many words have changed meaning (if they did not go out of usage). Those who object to the use of a word should perhaps look back at history and see how that word has evolved. You might be surprised at what it was used for. If you cannot accept the fact that a word can have many meanings then perhaps you need to expand your horizons somewhat and really learn the English language. After all it has over 500,000 words in current usage excluding scientific terms. Closing your mind to the language is your loss if you choose to decide that one word can only have one meaning and that perjorative when it has many more for those who understand the variety that English has.

The problem isn't really his use of the word gay, but rather Smud's lack of awareness of his surroundings. Whenever someone presents their own work to be critiqued, it is important to consider the medium chosen for the critique. In this case, he is presenting an analysis of LotSB and he is presenting it to the Mass Effect 2 fans. On an internet forum, which have infamous reputations for misconstruing even the most basic of ideas.

It is not difficult to accept that a word can have multiple meanings. It is also not difficult to accept that people are generally stupid and will take any opportunity to twist what another person says to their own advantage. Given this, the obsession with political correctness in this day and age, and the medium of his chosen work (Internet Forum),  his word 'gay' demonstrates a lack of tact in an otherwise eloquent review, especially if another word, phrase, or sentence could be used to express the same exact meaning. Is there ever any reason to unnecessarily hand your opponents weapons?

Modifié par Il Divo, 02 octobre 2010 - 02:54 .

[smudboy]

Il Divo wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

I find nothing offensive in the way Smud uses the English language that he has at his command. After all English is one that has the richest vocabulary in the world. Over the course of its development many words have changed meaning (if they did not go out of usage). Those who object to the use of a word should perhaps look back at history and see how that word has evolved. You might be surprised at what it was used for. If you cannot accept the fact that a word can have many meanings then perhaps you need to expand your horizons somewhat and really learn the English language. After all it has over 500,000 words in current usage excluding scientific terms. Closing your mind to the language is your loss if you choose to decide that one word can only have one meaning and that perjorative when it has many more for those who understand the variety that English has.

The problem isn't really his use of the word gay, but rather Smud's lack of awareness of his surroundings. Whenever someone presents their own work to be critiqued, it is important to consider the medium chosen for the critique. In this case, he is presenting an analysis of LotSB and he is presenting it to the Mass Effect 2 fans. On an internet forum, which have infamous reputations for misconstruing even the most basic of ideas.

It is not difficult to accept that a word can have multiple meanings. It is also not difficult to accept that people are generally stupid and will take any opportunity to twist what another person says to their own advantage. Given this, the obsession with political correctness in this day and age, and the medium of his chosen work (Internet Forum),  his word 'gay' demonstrates a lack of tact in an otherwise eloquent review, especially if another word, phrase, or sentence could be used to express the same exact meaning. Is there ever any reason to unnecessarily hand your opponents weapons?

Nice to see you again Divo.  Actually, I'm all for giving my opponents weapon to attack my views.  I want to know where I am wrong.  However, the argument is over a word.  That's just borderline retarded, and I'm a grammar nut.

If someone can get offended over a single word?  These are people not worth my time.  The guy hasn't written anything of value in response to my views or opinions.  It's like saying the word "native" and someone thinks I'm insulting Eskimos, Native Americans, Indians, or some such.  It's assinine and completely missing the point.

The word gay can mean something that sucks, is happy, or homosexual.  If they can't interpret my use of the word -- even with imagery -- again, these people are not worth my time.

I will write about it because it's so goddamned hilarious, though.

Modifié par smudboy, 02 octobre 2010 - 03:25 .

[mosor]

Shandepared wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

Smud,

You are right in that the kitchen area point is a minor issue. I still feel some nagging doubts about it even though its not so bad as I first thought when I entered Liara's apartment and looked around. However it is one of those things that could be made 'futuristic' looking and we'd all be going wtf!!! What is that area? So practicality means it has to be reasonably familiar. If you have the Kasumi DLC I think we all are still trying to figure what the heck that glowy chair is for.

Anyways still agree with the rest of your analysis.

You know, I don't think I've ever seen any carpets in Mass Effect. Did carpeting just go out of style?

Cleaning blood stains on carpets is hard. I'm not suprised they went by the wayside!

[Fiery Phoenix]

Wasn't there a carpet somewhere during Kasumi's loyalty mission?