Lurker > BigOlePappy

green dragon posted...

Here's my 2010s list

Skyrim
Fortnite
minecraft
lol

those 4 for sure

I would add Street Fighter 4 as is completely revived a dead genre of game. Its life extended well into the 10s, too.

It is very hard to comment on the 2010s without the benefit of hindsight.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

PowerOats posted...

10s:
Minecraft
TLoU
Zelda BotW
GTA5
Street Fighter 4
???

Overwatch? Or something like it?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Kungfu Kenobi posted...

Minecraft is WAY more of a 2010s game in terms of its impact and release period. The 2010s were really the decade of open world survival build-em ups.

I agree with this.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Sarcasthma posted...

Zeus posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

For example, one could argue for the 90s:

Super Mario World
Doom
Street Fighter II
FF7
OOT
Resident Evil

Not really, no. For starters, SM64 was much more significant than SMW (which, at best, improved upon elements of SMB3). And Goldeneye probably had a bigger impact than OoT, since it popularized an entire genre on home consoles. It arguably did more for FPSes than FF7 did for JRPGs.

Plus you're missing fucking Pokemon, one of the biggest gaming phenomenon while ushering in a lot of clones and cash-ins. But hey, I guess there wasn't enough room for the biggest RPG of the 1990s on your list because you had to fit in Resident Evil and Doom. Who cares that Pokemon RB was the ninth best-selling game of all time despite having never been a pack-in with a system? Gotta make space for games that didn't even top50!

There's no need to be so grumpy in a nice topic like this.

That guy sounds like a neckbeard and an idiot. I think I actually have him blocked because of none if his/her posts make sense.

First, SMW was the iconic early 90s platformer and solidified a genre that everyone was trying to "cash in" on.
Second, FF7 is infinitely more synonymous with 90s JRPGs than Pokemon. I don't think that people at the time even realized Pokemon RBY were JRPGs.
Also, OOT was a better fit for 3D genre game, but SM64 could have worked too.

The most perplexing aspect is that the original 90s suggestions were a preface and framework for want I wanted for 00s games. The 90s games were not the point of the topic and intended as conjectural examples, however, the 00s games were to which I don't think he even mentioned a single one.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

HagenEx posted...

Tekken (To me, it's the game that made all the other fighting games step up and improve to match it)

Tekken came out in the early-to-mid nineties, and Tekken Tag (its "breakthrough entry) came out in the late nineties. That said, I do not think it, or 3D fighters in general, ever became as popular as their 2D counterparts (Street Fighter, KoF, Mortal Kombat, Versus series, etc)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Also, I think a good argument could be made for RE4, as well for the 00s.
Over the shoulder phenomenon, it captured the spirit of the "war on terror" decade, and also was easily one of the most popular games to come out of the 00s.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Miroku_of_Nite1 posted...

Halo
Half Life 2
GTA 3
Bioshock

What about the gimmicky Wii games that were hugely popular in the mainstream? I think it could be argued that was a major shift in the 00sgaming becoming a non-niche hobby. By that same logic, Rock Band was a massive commercial success too.

Or what about Fable giving the multiple character choices and endings format? I didn't word that optimally, but I think people know what I mean.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

For example, one could argue for the 90s:

Super Mario World
Doom
Street Fighter II
FF7
OOT
Resident Evil

To further define, by defining the decade I mean that these games were embodiments or progenitors of major trends, "era-creating" innovations, or the "spirit" of the era.

For the 00s:

Halo
GTA 3
?
?
?
?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Oprah for the lulz
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Mayo is in almost everything...so, yes.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

ifnsman posted...

LOLIAmAnAlt posted...

ifnsman posted...

I'm honestly still a believer in the Darth Jar Jar theory.

Oh it's 100% true, dum dum Lucas chickened out after the fan backlash. So the fans really are to blame for that one.

Thank you. I want to believe!

It's Darth Darth Binks, get it right!
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

For me, Anakin was the worse considering the weight he had in the story. Essentially, the prequels were all about him and, yet, he was almost Tommy Wiseau level at acting.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

LOLIAmAnAlt posted...

Is holdo the purple haired chick?

Yes.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

kangolcone posted...

When are people going to figure out that the Star Wars series just isn't that good.

2 great movies, 2 good movies, then 6 average to bad movies. Most of the related media has been mediocre at best.

It has become integrated deeply into popular American culture...I could see it as an offshoot of "Americanism".
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

jsb0714 posted...

DPsx7 posted...

I've heard people make fun of Jar plenty of times. Who the hell are the other 2?

You don't know who Anakin is?

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Why did you vote for your choice?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Silicone Lubricant
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

RE4
REmake
Chrono Trigger

3D Platformers
3D Mortal Kombat games
Old Sports games
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

BADoglick posted...

The N64/Ps1 generation

With some exceptions

What are the exceptions?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Yoshi's Story
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

She remind me of my wife. Why you laugh? My wife is dead.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

MNTwins1991 posted...

farmersonly.com

There is a chair. The chair walk, with a shoes. Lalalalala. He walk on the street. The chair is a-walking. Yes.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Not much, maybe 1 year...
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

AllstarSniper32 posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

a set of three similar things considered as a unit

This alone proves that none of them are trilogies. And I don't know where you got that definition of trilogy.

A group of three related novels, plays, films, operas, or albums.

Once there's 4, it becomes a quartet or quadrilogy. And who knows what they'd be called after that.

Wrong.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Sahuagin posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Per series, which of each is the best of the triology?

Final Fantasy 7 (9 could be the best, but I only played half of it once)

But the cliffhanger!
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

AllstarSniper32 posted...

vocedelmorte posted...

AllstarSniper32 posted...

None of these are trilogies.

He meant first three games i guess, except FF

I know that's what he meant, but that doesn't make something a trilogy.

A trilogy can be narrative, but also arbitrary.
triad, trio, triple, triplet
a set of three similar things considered as a unit
I.e. a trilogy of progenitors or era-related games.

It does become pedantic, though, and a little bit of a distraction to keep focusing on "triological" etymologies. For example, it is faster to enter the favourites of the listed series than to define trilogy.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

darcandkharg31 posted...

Pole

Is there a way you can set it up for multiple votes per user? (i.e. one vote per franchise trilogy)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Per series, which of each is the best of the triology?

Metal Gear
1
2
3

Resident Evil
1
2
3

Sonic
1
2
3

Silent Hill
1
2
3

Final Fantasy
7
8
9

My votes (MG: 3, RE: 2, Sonic 2, Silent Hill 1, FF: 7)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

FrozenBananas posted...

Final Fantasy X-2. Better than X in my opinion

Explain?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

They do not have to be literally 100% removed from the collective gamer memory, however, which are strangely neglected (despite being solid entries)?

I think Resident Evil: Code Veronica is a good example. It wasn't perfect, but it was vastly better than 5 and 6.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Lokarin posted...

I feel bad for Americans and their garbo McDonalds.

You should do a world McDonalds tour! Most McDonalds use locally sourced ingredients when possible (since many are franchises) and taste the difference

Japan has many more flavors (but many Americans wouldn't want them).
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Sage.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

FatalAccident posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

It isn't very good quality

lol maybe u should stop looking at the shitty 40 waterproof shells

u know they do more than that right

It is just the general opinion of the backpacking community. I would say there is substance to that, too, as they have been bought out (maybe a few times.) Patagonia has remained with the same owner since inception, though.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Nam quos praescivit,

If I referenced that in another clause I would need "cui." That is the mindset I had, however, "that" functions as "cui" and not standing in as a relative indirect object.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

LinkPizza posted...

SushiSquid posted...

LinkPizza posted...

The rest of the sentence would be in post #1.

No, that's a completely separate sentence (and more importantly, clause). The fragment can be made into a proper clause by switching out whom for the nominative who.

He used an ellipses(with an extra dot, it seems) after the topic title. Most of the time, people do that when they would like to finish a sentence or question in the topic title either for suspense, or because it's all to long to fit in the topic line. Or because they want to. Either way, the rest of that sentence would be in post #1, as it seems like he would use what he wrote to replace the topic title.

I mostly meant it to be a general lead in to the topic.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

It isn't a huge deal. In my graduate discussions people get into these technical semantic debates (often involving several languages) so I'm used to it. What was surprising is how vitriolic some of the people here were, even condemning a tenured professor (that dynamic was different.)

For me, I usually construct from very abstract syntaxes from Latin inflections. That mind set helped me learn German too, since it is also an inflected language with structured rules for the relative clauses (dass.) Even, Greek, but I struggled with the aorist tenses and it wasn't as necessary for me. Then going back to English after all of that helped me understand better what was happening with syntax but there are still some hiccups.

For example, in Latin anything referencing the first clause has to be in the exact same case as what it is referencing. The sentences will go on for lines and lines and with the correct inflection it is literally impossible to cipher the syntax.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SushiSquid posted...

All clauses have a subject, whether implied or otherwise. Relative dependent clauses are not different in that. You used an object as a subject. That is incorrect to do.

Also, English isn't Latin, nor is it even based on Latin. You may as well bring up Russian or Mandarin into the discussion for all that's worth. It doesn't apply here at all.

It is relevant for the discussion of cases (since it is the most common academic example.)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Sahuagin posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

The pronoun would become "Dass" in this case which is what I am used to syntactically. I was referencing the first clause with the second clause via whom (would be Dass or Cui in an inflected language), but I was told the correct relative pronoun in that syntax is "that" even though I'm using the first clause in the dative case.

if you're talking about people, then your choice is who/whom or that.

Incorrect:
"for those of you whom like Subway..."

like only Tarzan would say that

For those of you, of whom like Subway. <-----this is what I was structuring using the Latin syntax related to "cui/cuius" in the dative case (to reference "those.")
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

OhhhJa posted...

Dude you're wrong. It really wasn't a big deal until you decided to be so adamant about not being wrong

I said I was wrong (about the pronoun.)
That is what I don't understand?

The part I am trying to still clarify is the relative pronoun structure. I used various inflected sources as examples, too.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SushiSquid posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

I was using it as a relative clause.

No shit? And what was the subject of that clause? Your topic title is wrong. Just deal with it and learn going forward that whom cannot be used in the nominative case.

Then why can "that" be used in place as a relative pronoun and not be nominative case with whom referencing an indirect object?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

@SushiSquid

The main thing I was wanting to clarify to you is the syntax. The structure you referenced would not apply to a relative clause.

Clause ----> relative clause.
The second clause needs a pronoun in place of what it is referencing in the first clause.
For Latin, (I assume you understand cases because you referenced nominatives) nominative relative pronouns in the relative clause would be something like qui/quae/quod (depending on gender of the original noun.) This goes on all the way down the cases to even include things like dative case (for indirect objects) and you would use a relative pronoun for an indirect object (e.g. For whom etc.) What I was told, though, is that for this case the relative pronoun has to be "that" for what I am communicating and it can still remain a relative clause. She did confirm (the professor) that "who" in the second clause would function as a nominative (like I think you were saying) but "that" would not, which still would keep it a relative clause. Why some languages are better than English, in these aspects, is that you have to inflect very specifically.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

The person you asked needs to get fired if they have anything to do with teaching English

Post your relevant credentials and I'll post hers.

@SteamedHams
I'll even let you count shift manager at Dominos (you would need English).
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

OhhhJa posted...

"I may be wrong but so are you! My teacher said so!"

Why are you saying that? What would your teacher say? I'm confused.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Also for my German courses the syntax I use has a lot of separate relative clauses:

The function of relative pronouns in English is usually served by that, who or which. In German the main ones are fully declined, and the relative clause is usually set off with commas: Das Auto, das ich sah, war blau. Der Mann, der fuhr, hatte einen Hut auf.

It is different in English where pronouns do not fully decline (because our system doesn't inflect nearly as often.)

The pronoun would become "Dass" in this case which is what I am used to syntactically. I was referencing the first clause with the second clause via whom (would be Dass or Cui in an inflected language), but I was told the correct relative pronoun in that syntax is "that" even though I'm using the first clause in the dative case.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SushiSquid posted...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/video/who-vs-whom

Here, this should help.

I was using it as a relative clause.

In Latin the relative pronoun would be Cui for dative case.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Social Justice Warriors are coming from behind looking to take the lead!
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

JazzMasterZero posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

SteamedHams posted...

I give up, holy fuck. If you're just going to keep dropping obscure grammar terms you don't fully understand and not bother to post any actual examples to prove your point, there's no point in continuing to argue over it.

I posted a lot of examples on page 2-3.

I think I am actually wrong, though. Not in the idea of the structure (what people think I am making up) but it should be "that" instead of "whom" make it a correct relative clause. Also, because an English professor just told the previous.

Lmao at you asking your English teacher.

I asked someone in another department. I use this relative structure a lot in English and Latin so I needed to know. The structure was right, though (it's a relative clause.)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."