723 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Haunter]

Ha, definitely worthy use of my time.

I agree

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

I'd rather talk about this:
 

That staff is kind of pointless if you want to use a grip and staff blade but depending on the difficulty I guess it won't matter much.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

Well, we are currently having a discussion that talks about how humans are animals...

Humans are animals. That is a fact and an irrefutable one. Do you deny this?

[Dieb]

That staff is kind of pointless if you want to use a grip and staff blade but depending on the difficulty I guess it won't matter much.

 

"Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

"Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"

Kommt drauf an.

[maia0407]

That's assuming I seek your "kudos" or approval in the first place. Hint: I don't.

 

And this post proves that you haven't actually understood my point. I never said admitting that I can be an arsehole or saying I was a lesbian made me immune from "problematic behaviour" as you put it there. As I've stated, I acknowledged that there is consequences to my actions. People are offended, and I am informing them that I wasn't attacking them. That apology was for them, had nothing to do with you.

 

Secondly, you are a hypocrite. Let me let you in on a little secret; just because you subscribe to a popular worldview preached by modern media (often referred to as "politically" correct), and use big fancy words in your argument, it does not make you "right" nor does it make you "holier than thou", as you are putting yourself across. Your arguments are passive-aggressive and you hide behind "calling out" of me, by stating it is merely an opinion.

 

Now, the worldview you subscribe to is nothing but a fantasy ideal. Ironically, those who engage in such are no different to the bigots that insult women about their weight. Sure, it isn't a blatant "Hrhr you're fat, DERP!" insult any more, but a careful, "politically correct" tactic that the media obsesses over. For example, constant adverts on TV, and news articles about obesity epidemics and how people should stop eating X food groups and start eating vegetables instead. Weight loss reality shows, where a certain physical trainer is allowed to treat the contestants like dirt and insult them, all in the name of "helping". Google "Australia's Biggest Loser" (even the name is suggestive, right?) and the trainer in question, Michelle Bridges.

 

Your main issue, however, is with "Don't insult people about their physical appearance. It's wrong. You're immature." Lady, there are many levels of immature, and one level is believing the "politically correct" ideals that the media shoves down your throat. The same politicians and PR that preach about these ideals get on the TV and preach, but you know what happens during parliament debates?

They discriminate each other. They insult each other. They act like little children in a schoolyard. Yet these same people are the first to get on the screen and yell to the skies, "STOP DISCRIMINATION!"

 

Ultimately, your beliefs are built on a foundation of lies, preached by those who don't actually care about anything they are peddling, other than 15 seconds of fame and the next paycheck. Now, in reality, people who don't like other people for whatever reason will insult them and make fun of them behind closed doors. Some are worse; and resort to violence. Why, just at a football match last week a woman was punched by a man because she asked him to stop swearing in front of her children.

 

Your ideals, while admirable, are naive at best. Your "opinion" counts for nothing, because nothing will change. The only change that will be achieved is by drastic force, which will result in lack of freedoms and tyranny, the very thing that people such as yourself will stand up and argue against. And nobody wants that

 

Now, I'm sure everybody is sick of this argument and wants to go back to discussing female inquisitors. So I will no longer  engage, but being the immature git I am, I will leave you with this Gif. What separates us, is the fact that I am honest. You? Not so much.

 

 

No matter how much you want to say that you are not attacking others with that post, you are attacking people that share an appearance with her. You've even stated that you will use whatever ammunition you deem necessary if you don't like the person. Using physical appearance to mock people explicitly states that you think some features are worthy of mockery; even those who you aren't directing those words to feel the splash damage. Your apology feels a bit hollow when you admit that you will still use appearance as 'ammunition'.

 

You've said that race is off limits for you but 'other' features are not.  I have to question why race is off limits to you, as it is to so many other people, but not other physical characteristics. Would you also attack a person's disability? Where do you draw the line? All of these questions are rhetorical, btw, as I know you will have your justifications all lined up with a dose of 'for the lulz'.

 

It's a naive world view that believes that social push back against this type of stuff is pointless. How in the world do you think it became unacceptable to disparage people for their race (for most people anyway)? Do you go into gay bashing threads and tell people to pipe down when they take issue with a comment as it's pointless? Or, should the PC police only shut up when your comment is being pointed out as problematic?

 

I'm not denying 'calling' out the comment in question. Don't know where you got that idea. I can 'call out' a comment using my opinion on the subject matter. As for the rest of the comments on my ideology and supposed hypocrisy, I suspect that's you using all the 'ammunition' you have so I won't comment.

 

At any rate, this conversation has went a bit off the rails. It all started over me feeling bad for the woman in the pic and those that would also feel mocked. Still, a worthwhile conversation to have even it it has gotten ugly. So, apologies to those that are annoyed that this went on for so long.

[maia0407]

I'm torn between a Solasmance for the angst/plot relevance and a Seramance with a qunari who has jeweled horns because Sera.

I vote Solasmance!

 

Sorry for the double post!

[Ieldra]

That staff is kind of pointless if you want to use a grip and staff blade but depending on the difficulty I guess it won't matter much.

2% less efficiency is irrelevant in the face of good looks. Perhaps unless you play on Nightmare, which I never do. I'd rather hear comments about the character than her weapon. How does she hold up against everyone's overblown standards of female beauty? Does she look at least interesting? Not that I'm going to change her, I like her as she is. I'm just curious.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

2% less efficiency is irrelevant in the face of good looks. Perhaps unless you play on Nightmare, which I never do. I'd rather hear comments about the character than her weapon. How does she hold up against everyone's overblown standards of female beauty? Does she look at least interesting? Not that I'm going to change her, I like her as she is. I'm just curious.

Looks ok, sure. If I recall you never play anything other than human/elf female mages? You don't like dwarves? even after all the potential information about them has been revealed?

[maia0407]

2% less efficiency is irrelevant in the face of good looks. Perhaps unless you play on Nightmare, which I never do. I'd rather hear comments about the character than her weapon. How does she hold up against everyone's overblown standards of female beauty? Does she look at least interesting? Not that I'm going to change her, I like her as she is. I'm just curious.

I like her. She looks sort of badass. I'm a sucker for green eyes/dark hair combo as well.

[Dieb]

2% less efficiency is irrelevant in the face of good looks. Perhaps unless you play on Nightmare, which I never do. I'd rather hear comments about the character than her weapon. How does she hold up against everyone's overblown standards of female beauty? Does she look at least interesting? Not that I'm going to change her, I like her as she is. I'm just curious.

 

I would never trade in the Griffon Bow for its distinct, yet not overly flashy/mystical design (i.e. cumbersome, half-dismantled, handcarried ballista) and shotgun features, despite many lategame DLC bows pragmatically vastly outclassing it in almost every regard. It's too iconic with its appearance, both visually and functionally.

 

If we're really honest, it is quite hard to create someone who would pass as downright ugly without going out of your way (or the slider bounds), since all facial proportions are horizontally perfectly symmetrical by design. Most famously ugly characters aren't necessarily just ugly, as much as they are inhumanly deformed.

 

...now, that probably wasn't the biggest compliment you ever got, now was it? Your Inquisitesse is obviously attractive, and I like the charisma her expression in that picture conveys. Also green eyes, come on.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

I would never trade in the Griffon Bow for its distinct, yet not overly flashy/mystical design (i.e. cumbersome, half-dismantled, handcarried ballista) and shotgun features, despite many lategame DLC bows pragmatically vastly outclassing it in almost every regard. It's too iconic with its appearance, both visually and functionally.

 

If we're really honest, it is quite hard to create someone who would pass as downright ugly without going out of your way (or the slider bounds), since all facial proportions are horizontally perfectly symmetrical by design. Most famously ugly characters aren't necessarily just ugly, as much as they are inhumanly deformed.

 

...now, that probably wasn't the biggest compliment you ever got, now was it? Your Inquisitesse is obviously attractive, and I like the charisma her expression in that picture conveys. Also green eyes, come on.

A fair point...but I can create an insanely deformed inquisitor, believe me!

[Ieldra]

Looks ok, sure. If I recall you never play anything other than human/elf female mages? You don't like dwarves? even after all the potential information about them has been revealed?

I have played a dwarven rogue - you can find her on my diary thread, and I am playing a Dalish rogue (both female). I do like dwarves, but I couldn't get into them in DAI. They just didn't appear to fit, and the backstory I made up for Runë Cadash never really took root in my imagination. Meanwhile, my DAO dwarven warrior Marada Aeducan is my second favorite DAO Warden.

Also, I play fewer characters in DAI because the game is so long and I'm a completionist. If I start a new character, I'm committing to 100+ hours time spent with him or her. I'll eventually get to playing males or Qunari, but it'll be some time, and most likely I'll never play a warrior again in a DA game. Melee fighting has become too actionized since DAO.

[Ieldra]

I'm a sucker for green eyes/dark hair combo as well.

Yeah. My primary characters in most games tend to share those features. Even more so in DAI since I haven't managed to make my second favorite hair color - white-blonde - look good.

A fair point...but I can create an insanely deformed inquisitor, believe me!

It's not that hard. Just choose the extreme settings on the sliders. I recall there was an ugly Inquisitors thread - some of the faces therein made me look for brain bleach.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

I have played a dwarven rogue - you can find her on my diary thread, and I am playing a Dalish rogue (both female). I do like dwarves, but I couldn't get into them in DAI. They just didn't appear to fit, and the backstory I made up for Runë Cadash never really took root in my imagination. Meanwhile, my DAO dwarven warrior Marada Aeducan is my second favorite DAO Warden.

Also, I play fewer characters in DAI because the game is so long and I'm a completionist. If I start a new character, I'm committing to 100+ hours time spent with him or her. I'll eventually get to playing males or Qunari, but it'll be some time, and most likely I'll never play a warrior again in a DA game. Melee fighting has become too actionized since DAO.

I would not say melee has become actionised so much as magicised. The warrior moves look like magic, I mean, splitting open the earth so molten fire comes out? magical shields? It looks bizarre. I still like warriors but it looks more and more like magic.

[Panda]

Humans are animals. That is a fact and an irrefutable one. Do you deny this?

 

I'd say that humans are evolved live form from animals rather than being animals.

[Majestic Jazz]

I'd rather talk about this:

Another white women that we see so much in videogames today? Come on, I though BSN/Bioware's fanbase were supposed to be progressive and different from the crowd/norm?

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

I'd say that humans are evolved live form from animals rather than being animals.

And you would be completely wrong.

[WildOrchid]

a Seramance with a qunari who has jeweled horns because Sera.

 

You know this is the right choice.

[Ieldra]

Another white women that we see so much in videogames today? Come on, I though BSN/Bioware's fanbase were supposed to be progressive and different from the crowd/norm?

So, now being progressive means not playing Caucasian women?

 

And people wonder why even reasonable, fair-minded people occasionally react with scorn to this obsession with representation. This is actually worth a considerable rant, but it's not worth the energy I'd have to expend to write one. This isn't progressive, this is ideological narrowmindedness, exactly the opposite of progressive.

 

I play what I want. If that happens to be the character I've posted, that's a personal preference and not a political statement. This incessant politicizing of everything gets on my nerves.

 

http://www.flamewarr...shtm/issues.htm

[Panda]

So, now being progressive means not playing Caucasian women?

 

And people wonder why even reasonable, fair-minded people occasionally react with scorn to this obsession with representation. This is actually worth a considerable rant, but it's not worth the energy I'd have to expend to write one. This isn't progressive, this is ideological narrowmindedness, exactly the opposite of progressive.

 

I play what I want. If that happens to be the character I've posted, that's a personal preference and not a political statement. This incessant politicizing of everything gets on my nerves.

 

I think that was supposed to be jab against "liberal", "SJW", "feminist", whatever crowd on BSN rather than honest remark from person who is progressive.

[DeLaatsteGeitenneuker]

So, now being progressive means not playing Caucasian women?

 

And people wonder why even reasonable, fair-minded people occasionally react with scorn to this obsession with representation. This is actually worth a considerable rant, but it's not worth the energy I'd have to expend to write one. This isn't progressive, this is ideological narrowmindedness, exactly the opposite of progressive.

 

I play what I want. If that happens to be the character I've posted, that's a personal preference and not a political statement. This incessant politicizing of everything gets on my nerves.

 

http://www.flamewarr...shtm/issues.htm

This is BSN.

[ArianaGBSA]

Humans are animals. That is a fact and an irrefutable one. Do you deny this?

Humans are animals, 100%. But what exactly does this mean? That we are trained like any other animal. Some minor behaviors are "hard coded" or direct response to body chemestry but most of them are reactions to environment. Perhaps in some unexpected or extreme situations we could "break" the leash for a very short moment, like trained animals do, but most time we wil just behave like we were conditioned to. (Note to understand my post: I don't believe in will, choice, and so on, we do what we do, no meaning, no reason, no point, nothing, just reactions and if you go quantic, probabilities, but no will, the very concept of will is completely impossible and free will is literally crazier than believing in Santa Claus or Easter Bunny)

[maia0407]

Humans are animals, 100%. But what exactly does this mean? That we are trained like any other animal. Some minor behaviors are "hard coded" or direct response to body chemestry but most of them are reactions to environment. Perhaps in some unexpected or extreme situations we could "break" the leash for a very short moment, like trained animals do, but most time we wil just behave like we were conditioned to. (Note to understand my post: I don't believe in will, choice, and so on, we do what we do, no meaning, no reason, no point, nothing, just reactions and if you go quantic, probabilities, but no will, the very concept of will is completely impossible and free will is literally crazier than believing in Santa Claus or Easter Bunny)

Humans being animals doesn't have anything to do with training per say. It's more that we are evolved from other animals and that our DNA is almost the same as Chimpanzees which I don't think anyone would argue isn't an animal.

 

I do get what you are saying about the free will argument though. I remember reading a study that called our free will into question when it was revealed that we make decisions before we are even consciously aware of the decision. I'm not sure what follow up has been done on that study, though.

 

http://www.nature.co...s.2008.751.html

[stop_him]

I'd rather talk about this:
 

Yeah, the hair clipping is awful. It's especially challenging with elves.