1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

Xewaka wrote...

Indeed. This is why, when I ask for the need of armor for Isabela, I mention a padded waistcoat and a wide-brimmed hat. It still conveys grace and dexterity while being an adequate real-life based outfit for a duelist.
And wide-brimmed hats are awesome. Pirate hat works as well.

Well, I have to confess I have no interest at all in realism. I think perceptions are far more important because they're the filter people actually use.

But there's certainly a case to be made in that line of thinking, in that rogues are commonly the leather wearing archetype and so a rogue without leather could be seen as counter to the commonly held perception and conspicuous on that basis.

It's not the reaction I had myself, and I'm unsure why. Probably because I like the outfit, which is generally the concern I find most pressing.

[Maria Caliban]

Piecake wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

???

I never understood that analogy and I always found it odd when used.

I always thought of it as eating your cake and then still having the cake after you eat it. 

This is correct. The problem is that the only reason to have a cake is to eat it. A better saying might be, "You can't spend your money and save it too," because there's no benefit to merely having a cake - it just goes bad after awhile.

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...
Having your cake and eating it too strikes me as either impossible - you can't have a cake you ate because... you ate it - or asking for two cakes.  Which strikes me as unreasonable, hence the analogy.

I wonder if it's a translation, because that does makes sense: You want to both eat the cake and continue to own cake at the same time, but worded in a poetic manner. I'm still dubious, read either way it seems to be missing the central purpose of cake. I guess "You want cake now and more cake later" doesn't have quite the same ring or paradoxical quality.

Still, I suspect I'll wince a little less now. I might celebrate. With cake.

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...
The problem is that the only reason to have a cake is to eat it.

Duff Goldman disagrees.

[Piecake]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

[

The answer of, "Just make a lot of swappable outfits" strikes me as approaching the problem of the cake in the same way.  The question is one of choice, having a cake or eating it, or having armors that do not change versus ones that do.  When you solve the problem by saying, "MORE CAKE" you're trying to solve the problem by trying to get rid of the problem.  While that might be simple if you live in a bakery and it's easy to make yourself another cake, it's another thing entirely to simply ask it of someone else who has time and resources to consider.  I mean, do you know what Bioware would have to cut from the game in order to devote sufficient time to have enough custom outfits to satisfy a majority? I sure don't.

Cake, obviously;)

[Maria Caliban]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
The problem is that the only reason to have a cake is to eat it.

Duff Goldman disagrees.

If I google this man's name to see what else he does with cakes, should I put safe search on first?

[Atakuma]

Edit: messed up

Modifié par Atakuma, 13 décembre 2010 - 09:51 .

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...

If I google this man's name to see what else he does with cakes, should I put safe search on first?

They're still ultimately eaten, of course, but Googling would be entirely work safe.

[Ryzaki]

Why would someone want a cake to look at?

Urgh. I hate that expression because of course someone wants to eat the cak. What else are you going to do with it?

Also I fail to see how a compromise is having my cake and eating it too.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:10 .

[Crimson Invictus]

I think the cake discussion is a case of people wanting to have their cake and eat it.

[upsettingshorts]

Ryzaki wrote...

Why would someone want a cake to look at?

Urgh. I hate that expression because of course someone wants to eat the cak. What else are you going to do with it?

Someone else needs to look up Duff Goldman it seems.

Ryzaki wrote...

Also I fail to see how a compromise is having my cake and eating it too.

If the compromise is "Have at least X amount of detailed custom outfits to choose form" it is.  If it's something else, I wasn't taking it into account with my post.

[Ryzaki]

Ah it was something else. I don't care if there's only one custom outfit as long as I can change them into usual generic armor.



The expression is still made of fail.

[Ryzaki]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

I think the cake discussion is a case of people wanting to have their cake and eat it.

Which is exactly the point.

I ask for a piece of cake and then eat it.

Now what? There's not much else you can do with cake other than eat it.

Unless someone just wants to have it sit there and look pretty and that's ot the case with exchangeable outfits.

It's a  poor way of trying to say someone's greedy for wanting to have a more resource intensive compromise.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:19 .

[Snoteye]

Ryzaki wrote...

I ask for a piece of cake and then eat it.

We're out of cake. We only had three pieces and we didn't expect such a rush.

Ryzaki wrote...

Unless someone just wants to have it sit there and look pretty and that's ot the case with exchangeable outfits.

Analogies generally aren't meant to be taken literally.

[upsettingshorts]

Snoteye wrote...

Analogies generally aren't meant to be taken literally.

What are you talking about?  I was specifically referring to baked goods!

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:26 .

[Atakuma]

So I think the solution to this problem, is to cover the companions in cake.

[Ryzaki]

Hm...depends on what type really. Strawberry cake might be good. With lots of whipped creme.

At the whole literary: Yes but how is asking for an option equal to being given something yet wanting more of it?

To use the cake anology I'm asking for cake but BW gave me a bunch of horse radish. Not just horse radish but nasty smell horse raddish. Which was never desirable in the first place.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:57 .

[Maria Caliban]

Atakuma wrote...

So I think the solution to this problem, is to cover the companions in cake.

Can I have Isabela, and eat her too?

[nightcobra]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

So I think the solution to this problem, is to cover the companions in cake.

Can I have Isabela, and eat her too?

covered in cake too i gather?

[Atakuma]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

So I think the solution to this problem, is to cover the companions in cake.

Can I have Isabela, and eat her too?

:blush:
 

[ErichHartmann]

Cake? I always prefer pie. Which possibly means I have better taste than most.

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Can I have Isabela, and eat her too?

The former can involve the latter.

I guess this proves women are not cake, even if both can be delicious and moist.

Modifié par tmp7704, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:47 .

[nightcobra]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Can I have Isabela, and eat her too?

The former can involve the latter.

I guess this proves women are not cake, even if both can be delicious and moist.

but women can be covered with cake:innocent:

[Crimson Invictus]

All I'm getting from this is apparently I have no trouble understand what a simple phrase means.

Atakuma wrote...

So I think the solution to this problem, is to cover the companions in cake.

It would get caught in the midget's chest hair.

tmp7704 wrote...


The former can involve the latter.

Really? Oh my, if only Maria knew what she was saying!

Modifié par Liana Nighthawk, 13 décembre 2010 - 10:56 .

[tmp7704]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

Really? Oh my, if only Maria knew what she was saying!

It's funny how confusing the deadpan delivery can be, isn't it?