To make a point about how "all subjectivities are subjective but some are more subjective than others"... whatever it was supposed to meant.
It was a small jab at people who are perfectly fine with respecting the one kind and not the other one, even though they're both subjectivity-based, while making a reference to Orwell's "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others".
I'm surprised you didn't get it, dear.
It was a small jab at people who are perfectly fine with respecting the one kind and not the other one, even though they're both subjectivity-based, while making a reference to Orwell's "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others".
I'm surprised you missed it, dear.
You sure you actually jabbed anyone? Or have you made a jab for jab's sake, for no reason other than to show how "jabby" you are? Oh you little rebel you - coming in to try and stir the pot again, with your silly accusations *pinches cheek*
You sure you actually jabbed anyone? Or have you made a jab for jab's sake, for no reason other than to show how "jabby" you are? Oh you little rebel you - coming in to try and stir the pot again, with your silly accusations *pinches cheek*
But seriously, nobody was disrespecting Kefa's standards of hotness - merely pointed that they were subjective, like ENTIRELY so. I mean,I'm also not sure you can dance around here and throw accusations that people who asked for something "not offensive" were treated differently by people you want to accuse it of. I'm kinda sure this didn't even come up in this thread
Yep, obviously no one is feeling jabbed.
Yes. No one in this thread or the tons of similar ones we had, had their desire for inoffensiveness that boobplate and skimpy female armors disrupt respected or at least acknowledged as understandbale.
No one.
Never, ever.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with respecting said preferences, as long as you understand it's just a preference and treat other preferences the same way.
And again, this wasn't about Kefka and the people replying to him/her, in this particular instance. It was a general observation about which aesthetic preferences get to be "respected" more and which not, without any reason, imo, that I happened to post at that time.
Yep, obviously no one is feeling jabbed.
Yes. No one in this thread or the tons of similar ones we had, had their desire for inoffensiveness that boobplate and skimpy female armors disrupt respected or at least acknowledged as understandbale.
No one.
Never, ever.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with respecting said preferences, as long as you understand it's just a preference and treat other preferences the same way.
And again, this wasn't about Kefka and the people replying to him/her, in this particular instance. It was a general observation about which aesthetic preferences get to be "respected" more and which not, without any reason, imo, that I happened to post at that time.
Only if you confuse "jabbed" with 'confused with your desire to stay jabbity' for no reason.
Also, lol - I can't speak for anyone in this thread or "tons of similar ones", but most people I've seen making comments pointed out more substantial issues with ridiculous designs (or its occurrence in certain established universes) than simple "desire for inoffensiveness" or "I want it/don't want it here because I like it/I don't like it and mine is the RIGHT opinion, goddamit! With no justification!", and some even expressed that in case where ridiculous armors fit the world, character and if both sexes are treated equally, they have no problem with even ridiculous designs.
But of course, as usual, words were oftentimes put in mouths or arguments twisted, instead of being read with comprehension...
I do not, in fact, refute the concept of objectively. To analyze any kind of aesthetic, both objective and subjective aspects need to be taken into account.
When it comes to facial features, symmetry is an objective aspect while coloring is subjective. One person might, for example, be more attracted to red hair while another person might prefer brunettes. It's not just one or the other.
Assuming subjective aspects exist there is not point in caring about them because they are by definition some random abstract personal preference.
If they are not random then you might as well call them objective and cater to them.
For for practical purposes you might as well just care about what people generically regard as hot (ignoring precisely what is subjective and objective) and make life simpler.
I could also still just say there isn't much subjective here, if someone has rainbow colored disco light hair my guess is fewer people would prefer that.
Assuming subjective aspects exist there is not point in caring about them because they are by definition some random abstract personal preference.
That's what they are, yet clearly you still care about your personal tastes being catered to.
For for practical purposes you might as well just care about what people generically regard as hot (ignoring precisely what is subjective and objective) and make life simpler.
And what is that?
The thing about this topic, is that with the wording of the title, the inflammatory tendencies of the OP, and the fact that everyone has their own interpretation of exactly what "boob plate" means, it's absolutely destined to be a powder keg.
I can understand that, but he (or she) is far from the only person on this thread that has argued in that manner.
This is true. Not-Brevnau also had difficulty distinguishing his subjective preferences from objective assessment.
I myself haven't seen anyone else make a claim denying subjectivity as a concept in this thread besides those two posters. But here's an important clarification. My beef with Kefka has nothing to do with his preferences. I like "hot" characters too. Beauty and sex appeal are good in my books.
As much as I cringe to agree with this OP on anything, I'm in the "pro" camp of this discussion. I wouldn't call it "boob plate" but I would like more sleek, fitted armor aesthetics than the ones DAI had. If I could, I would have one or two of my female PCs wear something like Vivienne's absolute cleavage ensemble, or I would have a Qunari with the previously typical lack of armor design.
My problem with him has only to do with the convolutions he attempts to with logic, the pseudo intellectual spirals of pettifog he employs, in order the claim that his opinion is a reflection of objective reality. I have seen him use ad populum specifically (literally claiming that the popular opinion is inherently correct) to carry his argument that his opinion is the absolute truth. I have seen him claim that he "just understand things more clearly than other people do," and that's why he's entirely right and every single other participant in a discussion is entirely wrong.
I have a problem, not with the argument being made, but with the very simple concept of subjectivity being deliberately ignored in order to make it.
"People have opinions and something they're different from one another."
This is what Kefka refutes, which is ridiculous, because people do have opinions and they are often different from one another. It's one of the most simple realities about human beings imaginable.
My point wasn't about people's disagreement with Kefka. I say attractiveness is subjective in my post too, don't I?
The timing of your post, in unintentional, was positively uncanny. You happened have a thought about double standards as applied to subjectivity, apropos of nothing, while in this thread a discussion of subjectivity was under way. Your thought even coincidentally happened to involve some of the key words of that conversation. I'd hazard a guess that Midnight Tea and I were not the only ones to interpret your post as referring in some general way to our discussion. It therefore becomes worth it, to me, to elaborate that my point had nothing to do with the value of any subjective opinion, but instead was about the existence of subjectivity, and the fact that Kefka doesn't believe in it.
Since you have explained that the the timing of your post and the current discussion was just a freak coincidence, I'm more than content to drop it.
Assuming subjective aspects exist there is not point in caring about them because they are by definition some random abstract personal preference.
If they are not random then you might as well call them objective and cater to them.
Say what? Just because something is "not random" or "non abstract" doesn't make it less subjective. Me hating eating apples straight from trees because one time when I was a kid I've bitten into a fugly, plump worm STILL doesn't make my dislike of eating apples straight from trees any less subjective - even if someone can attest that the moment that ruined apples for me happened, objectively.
So, even if certain preference has something objective to be said about it (guys in general like boobs, likely because of their evolutionary development and significance) the preference is still subjective, or there will be varying levels of personal preferences among them (not all guys may be crazy for boobs, not all of them will like big boobs and not all of guys want to see them, say, crammed into a tiny top).... Not to mention the fact that this STILL leaves out many people who DON'T feel the same about boobs - like quite a few women.
For for practical purposes you might as well just care about what people generically regard as hot (ignoring precisely what is subjective and objective) and make life simpler.
.... Baconer asked it earlier, but I'll ask the same - what is "what people generally regards as hot"? And why are those "things that are supposed to make life simpler"? Simpler FOR WHOM?
Assuming subjective aspects exist there is not point in caring about them because they are by definition some random abstract personal preference.
If they are not random then you might as well call them objective and cater to them.
For for practical purposes you might as well just care about what people generically regard as hot (ignoring precisely what is subjective and objective) and make life simpler.
I could also still just say there isn't much subjective here, if someone has rainbow colored disco light hair my guess is fewer people would prefer that.
Subjective preferences matter as much as people matter. They're allowed to have their own opinions, and for them to matter, without those opinions needing to be labelled as objective.
One can absolutely consider the popular opinion, and factor in the reason for it. One can absolutely care about it. The Devs do, and they don't need it to qualify as objective to do so. Both of these concepts coexist. They need to, in fact. Each of them, without the other, is meaningless.
Dude. The examples for what subjectivity is, abound: I like blue but my friend likes red. I like apples but my friend likes oranges. I like rainy weather and my friend likes sunshine. This is subjectivity. The very nature of these examples being believable possibilities proves the existence of subjectivity. It's just the existence of preferences.
This, the bolded line, this is an example of an attempt to use the fallacy, ad populum (which is basically the claim that the popular opinion equates to the truth). "Fewer people" liking rainbow hair means nothing besides the fact that some people like rainbow hair and some people don't.
In other words: subjective preferences.
Say what? Just because something is "not random" or "non abstract" doesn't make it less subjective. Me hating eating apples straight from trees because one time when I was a kid I've bitten into a fugly, plump worm STILL doesn't make my dislike of eating apples straight from trees any less subjective - even if someone can attest that the moment that ruined apples for me happened, objectively.
So, even if certain preference has something objective to be said about it (guys in general like boobs, likely because of their evolutionary development and significance) the preference is still subjective, or there will be varying levels of personal preferences among them (not all guys may be crazy for boobs, not all of them will like big boobs and not all of guys want to see them, say, crammed into a tiny top).... Not to mention the fact that this STILL leaves out many people who DON'T feel the same about boobs - like quite a few women.
.... Baconer asked it earlier, but I'll ask the same - what is "what people generally regards as hot"? And why are those "things that are supposed to make life simpler"? Simpler FOR WHOM?
This is starting to feel less like an argument and more like a genuine question... perhaps I am mistaken, but
Anyway when it comes to just hot, my main reference in general is really pop music, I think a lot of KPOP has really entertaining people and usually the costumes are pretty entertaining. This is the only non-game picture by the way, just more as a reference.
As far as games themselves go then if you look at a lot of Korean MMOs or Korean games they generally have pretty at least "hot" stuff, though usually they are also kind of over the top in some ways that I don't like as much.
League of Legends is somewhat similar, has some pretty entertaining stuff like Jinx and Vi
These things are simply "hot," or at least exciting or something. It would be nice to have something that didn't feel like it was necessarily more simply hot, though, so something slightly less in your face like in Japanese games or comics or something
Sif
Samus
A couple obligatory bikini one because yeah I still happen to think it looks kind of cool at any rate, it doesn't mean it's my favorite necessarily or anything.
There are a number of just older games that I think we're pretty cool like breath of fire 2, or Maria from Castlevania.
I've been playing Dragon's Dogma it has some interesting ones, thought Mercedes was pretty cool
By comparison DA (even ME at times) has this kind of "beauty is so subjective" so lets be hammy and weird! Thing going on
Okay, so is it "hot" or is it "this looks cool and interesting"? Because those are not the same thing.
Okay, so is it "hot" or is it "this looks cool and interesting"? Because those are not the same thing.
Why can't it be all three?
It was actually 2 things, hence 2 sets of quotation marks, but that's besides the point. Anyway, it isn't those 2 items at the same time because Kefka presented them as different categories.
I also like how he says "something slightly less in your face like Japanese comics or games", because we all know Japanese games and comics are known for their modesty.
<snip>
Compared to SK in general, yeah.
Well so far it seems like "random things I like", though at this point I'm not sure I understand the reason for it s existence in this thread.
I mean, I can start linking things I like - quite a few of whom wouldn't fit DA universe at all... but why would I do this?
It would be like linking anime stuff (FairyTail to be more specific) done a page or two ago... not that I have anything against anime or that specific anime (as I've already stated before), but considering how far apart those things are design or tone-wise, I just don't see the point.
(I mean, at this point I feel like I'm getting a request from a commissioner to paint something they like >.>''')
Man, Japanese game armor is such a hodgepodge of pointy technicolor dancer bikinis.
It was actually 2 things, hence 2 sets of quotation marks, but that's besides the point. Anyway, it isn't those 2 items at the same time because Kefka presented them as different categories.
I also like how he says "something slightly less in your face like Japanese comics or games", because we all know Japanese games and comics are known for their modesty.
Compared to SK in general, yeah.
When you ignore characters like Ivy (Soul Calibur), Moka Akashiya (Rosario + Vampire), Yoko Littner (Gurren Lagann), Nami (One Piece), Saeko Busujima (High School of the Dead), literally any character in the Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball series, literally any female character in the mainstream Dead or Alive series (excluding Nicole-458, as she is a guest character from Halo and thus dressed up in the SPARTAN-II armor), Fran (Final Fantasy 12) , Tifa, Yuffie (Both Tifa and Yuffie hailing from Final Fantasy 7), Quiet (Metal Gear Solid 5), Chun Li, Cammy (Cammy and Chun Li both hailing from Street Fighter), Lady (Devil May Cry), Jill Valentine (Resident Evil, particular emphasis on her appearance in RE5), Jerrica (Dragon's Crown), and Catherine (Catherine), sure.
That's at least 15 characters from 13 games, plus an entire roster of characters for another game all off the top of my head. There is no "compared to X" in play here, Japan is not known for its modest portrayal of female characters in manga or video games. I'll dig for more if you want.
1. Hot
2. Cool
3. Interesting
Unless you meant for "cool" and "interesting" to represent the same thing, but that would just render it a redundancy.
*I* am not the one who set the criteria, Kefka is. And yes, in this context, "cool and interesting" are similar. "Cool" and "interesting" are synonymous with each other anyway, so even in another context, it still wouldn't be 3 separate categories. If one finds something cool, they also find it interesting, and vice versa.
I always think how much like high school it is when Kefka writes something. There was always that one kid who wanted to argue with the teacher but just ended up rambling incoherently for a few long minutes
Would that make you, midnight tea and some others a choice set of cool kids that sit back and egg em on?
*I* am not the one who set the criteria, Kefka is. And yes, in this context, "cool and interesting" are similar. "Cool" and "interesting" are synonymous with each other anyway, so even in another context, it still wouldn't be 3 separate categories. If one finds something cool, they also find it interesting, and vice versa.
lol No. Finding something interesting is not the same as finding something awesome. I find the Black Plague interesting, but certainly not cool. I find Jack the Ripper interesting, but certainly not cool. They are only synonymous in your own context, but in no way academic. It's just your opinion that it's similar.
Look in a thesaurus, they are synonyms. Unless you have some problem with the way the English language is constructed (in which case I would totally understand), I haven't said anything incorrect thus far.
Really though. Let us not argue over the schematics of a word.
Oh, this is a real kicker though. You're the one who made it into a thing when you first responded to me. You don't get to just walk away like that when you're the one who began to escalate it.
Look in a thesaurus, they are synonyms. Unless you have some problem with the way the English language is constructed (in which case I would totally understand), I haven't said anything incorrect thus far.
Oh, this is a real kicker though. You're the one who made it into a thing when you first responded to me. You don't get to just walk away like that when you're the one who began to escalate it.
Really? I always thought that interesting means peculiar or something worth paying attention too, where as awesome is something to be excited for.
Technically he (or she) can too, he can just 'walk away' by not replying to your post. I think your taking it a little too personally
Would that make you, midnight tea and some others a choice set of cool kids that sit back and egg em on?
.... well, look who's egging whom now here and trying to play even cooler kids...
While I agree that beauty is subjective, I do feel like some developers use a standard of beauty in design. They may ask themselves, "What seems to be popular in RPG's and other fantasy media." So, in a way, I do think popular opinion is influential.
That they use a standard is a no-brainer. Question that remains is why certain standards became a sort of status quo and should they need to stay one? Or why should either certain types of games or certain developers conform to one particular standard, perhaps? Or what shapes popular opinion? Is it even static or how static/dynamic it is?
Retour en haut
