To some extent. But nevertheless irrefutable trends emerge, do they not?
Characters with smooth, glowing skin. White, even teeth. Silky hair. Who dress In well fitted clothing and speak clearly and eloquently. Who are in excellent physical shape. Surely you wouldn't deny these things?
Someone should make a new romance or equality thread to take the discussion so it will be on topic and not get this one closed.
We only barely got started on groups being neglected. never even touched on degrees of depravity or how well the characters represented groups.
Also another romance thread might bring in other posters who do not click on this one.
Aesthetics are subjective.
But preference trends nevertheless exist.
Oh? Is there some epic fantasy or science fiction series or whatever that features primarily average or ugly characters that I don't know about?
Yes. It's called Dragon Age Inquisition. You may not have heard of that game before, it's quite obscure, but there's been a long on-going debate whether or not the females in that game are even attractive at all.
But preference trends nevertheless exist.
Ad populum is a fallacy.
Ad populum is a fallacy.
Didn't say majority = right, just that general preferences do exist.
Yes. It's called Dragon Age Inquisition. You may not have heard of that game before, it's quite obscure, but there's been a long on-going debate whether or not the females in that game are even attractive at all.
No. End of debate.
Ashley Williams in ME3? Yes. Over and over with no break please. Kelly? Absolutely. Morrigan can get it whenever she wants it. Any character in DAI? 
Didn't say majority = right, just that general preferences do exist.
Which is irrelevant to whether beauty can be objectively true, unless you want to base "objectiveness" on "popularity". If you don't want to, mentioning that there are trends most people accept is irrelevant to the discussion. If you do want to , we're back to ad populum being a fallacy.
To some extent. But nevertheless irrefutable trends emerge, do they not?
Characters with smooth, glowing skin. White, even teeth. Silky hair. Who dress In well fitted clothing and speak clearly and eloquently. Who are in excellent physical shape. Surely you wouldn't deny these things?
You shouldn't assume your tastes are universal.
Cause they ain't. And that's all I'll say about it.
Someone should make a new romance or equality thread to take the discussion so it will be on topic and not get this one closed.
We only barely got started on groups being neglected. never even touched on degrees of depravity or how well the characters represented groups.
Also another romance thread might bring in other posters who do not click on this one.
Every time someone says the word 'depravity' I giggle uncontrollably 
No. End of debate.
Ashley Williams in ME3? Yes. Over and over with no break please. Kelly? Absolutely. Morrigan can get it whenever she wants it. Any character in DAI?
End of debate?
I do not find any of the female companions in DAI attractive, but I then I don't pretend my opinion is universal.
Which is irrelevant to whether beauty can be objectively true, unless you want to base "objectiveness" on "popularity". If you don't want to, mentioning that there are trends most people accept is irrelevant to the discussion. If you do want to , we're back to ad populum being a fallacy.
You can say "In aggregate, the following are generally considered beautiful traits" and there's even evolutionary explanations for why those preferences exist.
End of debate?
I do not find any of the female companions in DAI attractive, but I then I don't pretend my opinion is universal.
My word is like the Qun. Law.
No. End of debate.
Ashley Williams in ME3? Yes. Over and over with no break please. Kelly? Absolutely. Morrigan can get it whenever she wants it. Any character in DAI?
I rest my case.
Every time someone says the word 'depravity' I giggle uncontrollably
Uh huh. I bet I know why too. You and your house of lust. Deviant!
You can say "In aggregate, the following are generally considered beautiful traits" and there's even evolutionary explanations for why those preferences exist.
You can say there are traits that are considered beautiful by the (even vast) majority, for cultural and/or evolutionary reasons, but that's not enough to make said traits objectively beautiful.
My word is like the Qun. Law.
.
Uh huh. I bet I know why too. You and your house of lust. Deviant!
Actually I'm pure as new fallen snow
It's just that in my experience 'depravity' is basically an over-dramatic way of saying '**** I don't like'.
You can say there are traits that are considered beautiful by the (even vast) majority, for cultural and/or evolutionary reasons, but that's not enough to make said traits objectively beautiful.
It's the closest to objective you can get.
It's the closest to objective you can get.
That would be the scientific method. A popularity contest it ain't. Otherwise, Fifty Shades of Gray, Twilight, and the Da Vinci Code are some of the finest pieces of literature ever written.
It's the closest to objective you can get.
Objectively true is something that's true regardless of personal preference. It might be "closer" to objective than other approaches, but it's still ridiculously far from it to be called anything near objective.
My word is like the Qun. Law.
[labored breathing]
The Qun...never demanded...this. X_X
That would be the scientific method. A popularity contest it ain't. Otherwise, Fifty Shades of Grades, Twilight, and the Da Vinci Code are some of the finest pieces of literature ever written.
Fifty Shades of Grades. Sounds like a really inappropriate spoof motivational video focusing on academic achievement.
[labored breathing]
The Qun...never demanded...this. X_X
HA! consider yourself lucky DAI has clipped the wings of the Qunari. Gaatlok has been shown to be in the hands of bas. The Dreadnaughts have been proven to be pitiful excuses for a navy. You don't know what end is up as far as their lore goes, and this isn't months ago for we would have words! 
I'm not seeing how someone being gay versus being bi even matters, aside from representational purposes. But for an outsider who apparently does not care for LGBT content?
I wasn't trying to make a point other than point out that the first 2 games were less diverse in that regard. Just a statement 
Retour en haut
