Lurker > BoshStrikesBack

Yeah, I'm not so sure I'd consider money and fame "alpha" in-themselves.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Your type of "getting women" is superfluous and unnecessary in my world.

You sure about that? I can get women both as hook-ups and long-term, and they tend to be lookers.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I don't need to be dominant to feel in-control. I have plenty control over my own actions, that I don't feel the desire to control others'. That's the type of confidence that I stick by, and nothing will change that.

You don't have control over getting women, obviously!

And as for the morality comment... yeah, you've got me there. Doesn't bother me though.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Oh hey it's Ryoko

Does my alpha swag turn you on?

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Question: instead of "faking it 'til you making it," why not just actually become alpha? This is what I've never understood about the other side; I personally enjoy being socially dominant and in-control, and I have no reservations using and exploiting people for this purpose.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

False. It's proven to help sustain lasting relationships as well. You think that girl you attracted by being an alpha is going to stick around after you show her your doughy beta center? Think again.

Exactly. Further, this is something that all guys can relate to. What if your wife, after being married for a year, put on fifty pounds, and said that it was alright because she was "still who she was"? Would that satisfy you? For most, the answer is no, and rightfully so.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Not seeing the problem here.

+1

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

jaffar approves of this topic

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

i didnt call you a beta until you posted something about how "OMG YOU STILL HERE BRO?? I owned your ass!!!"

I didn't say that; I said that I destroyed your position. Which is true.

and obviously you are getting upset because you thought i started the insulting. You really seemed to be angry and defensive when i called you a beta

"Irked" is probably a better word. But I don't see any reason to respond to the rest of your posts until you get back on-topic; a good start would be trying to build back the broken pieces of your argument into something workable.

My point was that if you have alpha characteristics (being Prime Minister for Berlusconi among other things) will trump age in any case.

Succinct, well-said, and completely true.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

You say that like it's a good thing.

"facetious"

And you all say it like it's a bad thing. A little smugness can be fun.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

They're not personal attacks. I'm just saying what I've observed, and it doesn't line up with your claims of open-mindedness.

Granted, it's not like I keep a log of your posts, but my general assessment of you that I've developed over my time on the board is that you are very stubborn and not very open-minded to differing opinions.

This doesn't mean I dislike you. Understand the difference.

And yet none of it is relevant. Can this be the last post about this, please?

wg and jaffar do you guys find it odd that in a topic about being defensive you guys are lashing out with the most personal attacks in this arguement (except for greysfield but let's ignore that)

I've only made a personal attack once, and it was obviously reactionary. The rest of what you're reading is just my own style.

lol. First off, you STARTED the insulting of me.

I wouldn't consider any of what was shared to be "insulting" until you called me a "beta" in a way that was entirely apart from the discussion and, accordingly, an ad hominem. Then I responded.

Secondly, ten time worse? Man you are some person who needs a lot of self-assurance. "OH BRO I CAN INSULT U SO MUCH HARDER THAN YOU CAN DREAM OF YO"

Think what you want. It's funny, though, since you're getting a lot more upset over what I said to you than the other way around.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I mean hes agreed with me in this topic at least 3 times, and then thinks im some idiot? Not sure what the hell is going on with ya man. You seem like u enjoy spirited debates, so props (a lot of b8 doesnt it seems these days). But you also come across as very smug underneath.

I treat personal attacks in a disproportionate-response style: if you insult me, I'll insult you ten times worse. Don't take it personally.

And I'm the most arrogant person probably alive on the planet Earth today. Not even kidding.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I've rarely seen you acknowledge the validity of another side's reasoning, to be quite frank, even when it comes to pointless things like video games.

Most people change their mind very gradually, if at all. I like to think I'm above the mean on this one.

And while I may not "change my mind" very often, I at the very least understand why people are the way they are and like things that they like, even if I don't agree.

And I'm not actively out to change people's minds more often than not. I just enjoy discussion.

Then by all means, keep discussing. Your personal attacks against me are entirely irrelevant.

Come on man, there's places in our universe where math works different. Why would it be hard to believe that multiple techniques is greater on a grander scale?

"What-ifs" are extremely unconvincing, Santa. You know this. If you want to make account Y seem like a viable alternative to account X, give us a reason.

Sorry, NOW it all makes sense. You might as well pack it in, Bosh

lol, does any of that surprise you? Beauty is in the eye of the be(ta)holder.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

My point is that that situation could have happened no matter how the two people found each other. Regardless of your method, it still ended up as a failed relationship. Which means that your "method" isn't inherently better than mine.

Why are you defining failure in this way? What constitutes "success"? Just marriage?

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

The issue is that you think that your ways are the better ways of doing things, so it's sort of a waste of time even arguing with you about this.

Did you just not bother to read what I typed? As I said, determining the "best way" is through the process of reasoning and argumentation. If a better argument is presented on the other side, then of course I'll change my mind.

From my experience with you, Leon, you're much less like myself in that regard.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

man on my first date with my current girlfriend we had a discussion about which eeveeloution was the sexiest. Most girls played pokemon when they were a kid too! Maybe if you were more off color with your conversations, women would surprise you with what they enjoy talking about.

Sorry Santa, but I can guarantee that this women is not very attractive.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Not everybody has to end up married. But if you entered the relationship without the express forethought of when you were going to end it, then yes, the relationship failed. You can sugarcoat it however you want, but unless you actually said to yourself, "I only need a girlfriend for X number of weeks/months/years, then I can dump her because she'll no longer be useful to me," then you are no more special than the rest of us who have experienced failed relationships.

Typically, I go into a relationship with an open mind. Some turn out to be hook-ups, some turn out to be long-term. You don't have to plan everything in advance, and yours is an attitude that women find very unattractive.

Then you're still essentially saying your way is better than his way and he should adapt to your way because your way works and his doesn't. That's what I'm getting from every single post you've made in this topic anyway.

"Works" is the word I'm avoiding, because clearly, his way "works" better if he wants to cling to his silly ideals. From experience, however, I'm arguing that my way is better for his own happiness, if employed at least a little.

You are not very open-minded about other people's ways of thinking, it seems.

I'm not a relativist, no; I maintain that there are better and worse ways of doing things, and that we can understand such choices through well-founded reasoning and argumentation.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

"My way is better than your way, so you should realize you're being stubborn for no good reason and adapt to my way."

Careful, Leon; appreciate the subtleties. If this guy *really* believes that standing by his (perhaps contradictory, certainly silly) principles is worth a potentially wonderful relationship, then that's his call. What I'm saying is that he doesn't really want that deep down.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

If all of your "long term relationships" have failed, then it doesn't really matter how many of them you've had.

When a hook-up ends, did it "fail"? No; I got what I wanted out of it, namely sex. Similarly, when a long-term relationship ends, it hasn't "failed," because I got what I wanted out of it, namely emotional support and a meaningful relationship for an extended period.

To pretend that all relationships aim at marriage is an outdated ideal.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

No, it doesn't.

I don't consciously hide it, but I don't divulge my life story to every girl I meet.

But this is exactly it: in every social situation, you reveal certain things about yourself and hide others, because you want to either form or continue a certain impression of yourself to certain people. Not doing it with women doesn't change the fact that you do it with everyone else, which is a big part of the reason why claiming it's "shallow" is so silly.

Also, there's a difference between self-improvement and putting on an air to get your way with someone by pretending to be something you're not.

Being an alpha has nothing to do with lying, Leon.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I would argue that it's shallow to change who you are just to get women.

Difference of opinion; fine. My opinion happens to get me both more women and more stable, long-term relationships. But I'm not better than you for employing a more fruitful method to women, just to be clear. I'd encourage you to change your mind, however, once you realize that you're done being a stubborn mule.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

People should continually work to improve themselves. That doesn't mean they should completely change who they are.

This is a completely arbitrary distinction. For some people, improving courtship skills is "changing who one is"; for others, it's not. All you're doing is trying to deflect the question behind an empty sentiment.

literally needing self assurance on a post....maybe youre a beta too.....

Maybe. Better a beta here than an abject loser everywhere.

I can still maintain a respectful approach to women and better myself as a person. I can become a better me and not turn into a manipulative, sex-centric douchebag.

Tying this in to what I said above, you've established that improving your courtship skills constitutes "changing yourself" instead of "improving yourself." Again, going back to what I said earlier- which you still haven't bothered to respond to- that's fine; just don't expect many women along the way. And again, what makes your principles so great? Are they really worth sacrificing a potentially blissful union? Are you that shallow?

No one said you need to "completely" change who you are. But changes are definitely needed.

Well said. It's naive to think otherwise.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Powerful words from mr. beta over here. Keep it up!

You remember that post I made that absolutely destroyed your position? Yeah. Why are you still posting here, exactly?

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

100% of the girls who know I've had that psp have had my dick in their mouth.

there's your stats.

Sample size: 1

;)

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Did you just try to tell me that wanting a relationship with somebody who appreciates me for who I am as a person is entitlement??

Absolutely. You're probably not that great "as you are"- none of us are- and, perhaps more relevantly, you likely don't apply that same standard to women who are interested in you. Either way, this is more of a practical point: if you want women, you'll almost certainly have to change who you are, at least a little. Easy sex or otherwise.

And here's another question for you: why is "remaining true to who you are" worth more than finding a great partner? I'd personally consider that selfish.

I'd rather be alone than with somebody who only liked me for who I pretended to be. Screw that noise.

Then enjoy being alone. (Don't worry, I mean that ironically; you'll wise up to what I'm telling you with age.)

Self-improvement and being yourself aren't mutually exclusive.

What are you talking about? For this entire discussion, you've rallied against the idea of changing your approach to women as "disingenuous." If you want to retreat on that, by all means.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

If you're a serial killer, getting women is probably the least of your concerns.

Fair enough. Let's tone down the example then: say you've got some freaky-ass hobby; collecting toenails, torturing insects, etc. What then?

Ultimately, however, this is all irrelevant for the most part. If you really believe that staying "true to yourself" is the most important thing, then have at it, champ. Just don't expect too many women along the way.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

What you need to understand is that some of us don't base our self-esteem or life decisions on how much sex we can potentially score at any given time. I've had the occasional opportunity to get some NSA sex, and after the first couple times trying it, I decided that it wasn't something I enjoyed. So, you can take that however the **** you want to.

Fine. But there is a difference between "I don't like casual sex" and "being an alpha can't get be casual sex anyway." The first is a value judgment; the second is simply a statistical lie. I hope you can appreciate the distinction.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

You shouldn't be pretending to be something you're not to be getting women, you should be showing confidence in who you really are.

Surely you don't believe this, do you Santa? If I'm a serial killer, I should just "embrace who I am," and resent all women who find me unappealing as a result?

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I don't take any particular issue with the alpha/beta thing but man alive the fervor with which some of you people expound the gospel of Roissy borders on cultish and sometimes it gets kind of weird.

100% true. Again, most online alphas tend to be poorly-disguised betas.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

"You need to act like more of a jerk" isn't constructive unless you're just trying to rope in easy sex.

This is what most people don't realize: this is also important if you want a lasting relationship (with anyone who's even moderately attractive). A girl wants to feel that her partner is strong, confident, and powerful, after all. This has nothing to do with easy sex.

It seems to me it's the lonely people who defend alpha behavior the strongest (swift, extha) because it's made them slightly less lonely.

Certainly a possibility. Most people who spout alpha/beta talk tend to be insecure betas. Who knows? Maybe I'm in the same group.

I'm all for challenges. I just don't put p**** high on my "must have" list. Therefore, I'm not willing to sacrifice my moral center to attain it. It has nothing to do with lack of confidence or any of that other crap, I simply prefer to remain who I am. And woman who would throw herself at me because of my fake personality would be boring to me.

I used to feel this way, but time and maturity made me realize how wrong I was. This is a product of the everyone-wins generation, and the fallacy is identified as follows: you might not be perfect as you are. Maybe you *should* be changing yourself to fit the mold. Maybe there's nothing at all wrong with a girl who likes her man to be socially well-adjusted and strong. Perhaps, by clinging tight to your principles, you run the risk of losing out on the love of your life, for the sole reason that you're too lazy or inconsiderate to make basic social adjustments.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

It's taking a term and twisting it to describe a phenomenon that's already been well-known for years.

That's what "stipulating" means, yeah. Speaking of "twisting a term," you're making redefining seem like something evil or opportunistic. People do it literally all the time. For example, the word "life" means very different things in religion versus science. Stipulation; learn it, love it.

It's called "If you're confident and treat gullible women like crap, they'll want to sleep with you." All this alpha/beta nonsense is just smoke and mirrors to make it sound more deep and interesting than it really is.

No one's making it seem complicated. It's beautiful in its simplicity, maybe. The problem is that, for most guys, being a consistent alpha is difficult, and if you're anything like me, you love a good challenge.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

but it goes back to exthas piss poor example of berlusconi. He thinks hes an alpha because he has game? When its because he has fame and fortune.

Barney Stinson (another one somebody mentioned) is a fictional tv character. Enough said.

Think about hugh hefner. Do you legitimately think hed have all those girls at him if he had the same personality but absolutely no business? Please.

I agree with you on all three accounts. True alphas are the guys who can walk into any social gathering and, without regard to money or status, pick up any chick they want. The above three are bad examples.

You want a real, historical alpha? Lord Byron.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Going for what's statistically popular has always been a long-term bad idea. This isn't me talking about dating, this is marketing and business speaking. Following trends is safe, and more reliable, while innovating, and looking for new solutions is risky, but more rewarding if it yields success.

"Statistically popular"? Women are attracted to the same characteristics now that they have been for thousands of years. You think that in a couple of decades, confident guys will somehow have trouble with women? Laughable. We're dealing with human nature here, not advertising.

Obviously I mean no bad will against you personally but it's my own opinion, and as it's brought me a lifetime of happiness, I can't really say I'm looking for a new philosophy.

If you're not having problem with women, then there's no reason to switch your approach. For the good majority of betas, however, women will always remain highly elusive.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Similarly, I would hope that all you "alpha" morons would have the same decency for those of us who choose to relate to women in our own way. But obviously that's not the case.

This whole discussion originated out of people expressing difficulty in getting women. The "beta way" just doesn't work most of the time, pending luck or finding a very specific breed of female. Hence, it makes sense that someone- alpha or beta in nature, doesn't matter which- would offer up the "alpha way" as an alternative. That's all that's happened. It's not about treating people like "garbage"; it's about getting what you want.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

amount of girls that would date mark zuckerberg when he was in college: 0
amount of girls that in the present would think hes "kinda cute" and would date him: too many to count.

why? because he has money.

Speaking of bad logic...

Zuckerberg is an interesting example: the dude's still a social incompetent (although from what I've read, he's mellowed out since breaking out), but he's got so much money that his lack of social skills allow him to get women all the same. Now, does this apply to people making 40k a year the same as it does to someone making 40mil? Of course not.

That's why this alpha/beta talk is complete garbage. It's a term coined by some lonely individual who's grown so tired of chasing loose women that he's actually created a blog on the subject, to attract other people to his ridiculous cause. This terminology is a way to make you feel superior, despite the fact that all you're really doing is supporting the idea that men and women should manipulate each other and fornicate repeatedly, and anybody who isn't doing the same is somehow inferior to you.

Have you heard the term "stipulate" before? Maybe "operationalize"? The words alpha and beta are used in a somewhat unique way when referring to social interaction; that's all there is to it. You're getting upset at people redefining a word to suit a specific context. Calm down.

And again, all I'm doing is telling you the facts of how women operate. The only one with a superiority complex here is you.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

But the thing is, women will view men with a high paying job and good health as confident. Because they needed some sort of confidence and "gusto" to get that far.

Modest income and health are indicators of attractiveness, sure. They also happen to be minor ones. Social skills always win out.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

yeah being confident is another thing I wouldn't throw into an alpha/beta discussion. I consider that a part of growing up. Saying "males need to have confidence" is the same to me as saying "males need to learn how to become potty-trained" It's not something that splits us down the middle, it's something that everyone needs, regardless of their plans with women.

Stop proving to everyone that you have no idea what the alpha/beta distinction actually means.

EDIT: For your sake, I'll be clearer. There alpha values and beta values, sure, but then there are dozens of other value sets; among these are social values. "Be confident" is a social value; if one can adhere to this consistently, it can help you get girls, as it overlaps with alpha values. "Always treat women well" is a social value; if one adheres to this consistently, it actually hurts one's chances of getting women, as it overlaps with beta values.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Speaking of the problems with alpha/beta talk, this is one of them right here. I happen to have a different viewpoint on dating, so that automatically makes me beta? Come on now, really?

It's not a matter of opinion: there are alpha attitudes, and then there are beta attitudes. If you want to dispute which works better, then go right ahead; they are what they are, however.

And the thing is, no amount of logic will ever win this debate, because the people arguing it don't care about logic. They care about feeling superior. And there's this misguided notion that somehow, getting easily-manipulated women to sleep with you makes you superior.

This is entirely about logic- namely, empirical logic. There are patterns of behavior that women predictably fall into, and being able to exploit these gives you power over the opposite gender. This can be used for free sex, sure, but also to acquire a long-term relationship or a lifelong partner. Everything involves game.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

A guy will get those college aged girls until he turns in his mid to late 30s and then he becomes a "creeper" by even the immature 18 to 22 year old crowd. Yep. Its true. Sorry bro.

The ****? College girls love attractive, suave older guys. The ones calling them "creepers" tend to be the guys who are getting their prey stolen out from under them.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

see this is the thing I'm not fond of with these alpha/beta talks. What you just said is just so narrow minded. Women like slobs, women like guys who are dressed up, women like everything in between. If you want to argue statistics you can, but the truth is every female is different. Really the reason you should dress up nice to go out isn't to get more tail, it's because you should have the self respect to look as good as you can. Do it for yourselves, not women.

I do want to talk statistics, yeah. The truth here is that women fall into very predictable patterns of preference. You can deny this if you want, but expect your string of failures with women to continue. You're like the guy who keeps casting his line without bait, hoping that a fish will bite regardless.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

actually, no. Thats incorrect. What im saying is the "alpha male" stops being an alpha male in the eyes of women his age and the man with the good job and looks good/in good health starts BEING the alpha male. Because he has money and looks very presentable.

So ya, that tatted up guy at the bar will still get those college aged girls (until he turns in his mid/late 30s and is labeled a creeper by even 18 to 22 crowd), but the man with stability and has long term goals will indeed be more attractive to women.

It's incredibly obvious that you don't understand women, because this hypothetical dilemma reeks of naivete. And it's a false choice, by the way. "Loser with tats" getting young girls over "loser with job," and vice-versa for older women, might be the case, but all of those traits I listed earlier (most notably confidence, poise, and tact) remain much more important. You'd be surprised how even the most basic of social skills can put a man far above his competitors.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

There is a huge gap between trying to be as attractive as possible and not being a slob.

Maybe, but this can easily go overboard. Caring about looking nice is one thing; getting "prettied up" and fretting over small, irrelevant points of appearance is another. It's feminine and it's unattractive in a man. Caring enough is the key, and only enough.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Yeah, this isn't at all due to oversaturation, because the jump in disinterest is too large. This contest just sucks.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

The "tatted up" guy she met at a bar because he was on tour with his dying indie band starts to be less attractive when she gets her 40k/year career started and that guy is still working the backroom during the day and living with his parents or 3 roommates. Of course due to the economic struggles (especially how this recession hit men way harder than women), men and women are staying in this "extended teen/early 20s" mentality a bit longer.

Totally oversimplifying things. What women are attracted to has a lot less to do with tats and a lot more to do with how you hold yourself socially. Are you confident? Popular (or, in some cases, distant in an attractive way)? Talented? Easy and fun to talk to? Willing to treat a woman like ****? A risk-taker? Successful? Smart?

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

I don't give a rat's ass about being with the most attractive women. That's my point.

To get the semi-attractive women, you should aim for the most attractive women. What you're saying is the equivalent of believing that you shouldn't run as fast as you can in a race because you're "not an Olympic athlete." Obviously; but even if you do try as hard as you can, chances are you'll still be relatively slow. Same with women: try to be as suave and "alpha" (although I hate that word) as you can for now, because it'll probably be enough only for mid-tier girls anyway.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

BestFly posted...
Chrono Cross

Yes.
-8 playable characters
-Replace the battle system with og Chrono Trigger's.
-Ditch elements.
-Refine the story a little bit to reflect the new playable characters.

Perfect game.

This post highly amuses me. Your changes can be summed up as follows:

-Make it more like Chrono Trigger
-Make it more like Chrono Trigger
-Make it more like Chrono Trigger
-Make it more like Chrono Trigger

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

brawl is another good one, it's amazing that it turned out so badly since you literally have to try to ruin that concept so badly, but sakurai literally tried to make it a bad game and he was quite successful

Only correct answer, and this is a perfect explanation for why. Tripping and the like are literally attempts to make the game suck more, and oh man, the SSE might be the biggest waste of development manpower in gaming history.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Time for Jaffar to swoop in with the correct answer.

It's because people are softies and raised in an environment where everyone wins, where they don't know what losing even means until they can't hold a job.

It stems from pluralism. How could you insult what someone does or how they do it? It's their way, so it's perfectly valid for them and you have no right to criticize them. Everyone is right and everyone wins.

Let's not pretend that this attitude is unique to the modern, everyone-wins era. People have always resented taking criticism, and understandably so to a degree. Our current education model has certainly fostered this attitude, however, well beyond a healthy degree.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Pssssh please Leon, King K. Rool fight for life. Dat music

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags

Obviously the third one.

--
Houston Texans: 5-3
If you have to put it in one word, it's lackofexecution.-- Ravens H.C. on loss to Jags