Lurker > HerpToTheDerp

creativerealms posted...

And you are being equally as dishonest saying a game not even released yet is watering things down. I know a turn based RPG system is more complex then that.

You are the one making a claim you can't backup.

theres a demo already out and the full game is practically leaked.

creativerealms posted...

How do you water down, "press a button and choose an option?"

Sorry final Fantasy VII didn't have a complex battle system.

yes, if you simplify and are dishonest about how most games work they all sound easy huh

Leanaunfurled posted...

Even bigger shit like FFVIIIR has two combat mode to please both camps.

both modes are watered down, but hey aT lEaSt wE hAvE oPtIoNs

its sad how many people on the ff7r board are defending the shift to action based combat right now.

i hope it becomes ligma

AsucaHayashi posted...

actually those 71% of console gamers dont count since they, by his own admission, playshit like pubg(its logical to assume that fortnite/apex also belong in this since all 3 are in the same genre).

classic example of this argument is only valid when it works in my favor.

or that a good amount of them are children

whats this? duckbear is posting current events on the current events board?

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I Like Toast posted...

Because playing flash, Facebook, and solitaire counts as gaming on your pc

https://www.businessofapps.com/data/fortnite-statistics/
A May 2019 Newzoo found that 41% of US gamers play one the biggest three battle royale games (Fornite, PUBG, and Apex Legends), with a further 15% representing churned battle royale gamers who intend to play such a title again. 71% of these are primarily console gamers, 17% PC games, and the remaining 12% mobile gamers.

touche
still 57% of the recorded 211 million gamers would be 120 million. steam has 90 million monthly users so it's not that many people padding the stats.

anyone who does something like that intentionally should be banned

SuperShake666 posted...

That was a decent suicide OP, I'll give it that.

i give it a 4/10

it was pretty shitty tbh

so were you sitting on your hand?

Purely posted...

Well, if you're ok with missing the best games which are Playstation exclusive.

playstation doesn't have any games. they have mediocre interactive movies that are just a few steps above well organized slideshows

Bio1590 posted...

No, because you're not even accounting for other factors like natural population growth as well.

It's also extremely difficult to break into an already well-established system.

yet half of the people in the us that play games play on pc

https://mybroadband.co.za/news/gaming/275047-pc-is-more-popular-than-console-in-the-united-states.html/amp

sean murray

this decade confirmed best decade

that internet historian video made me unironically submit no man's sky

squee posted...

If reddit wants to take over the contest again they will and not like Allen can do anything to stop it

untitled goose game of the decade

*links me to the FFR board*
gee, and i thought this place was hot shit. i forgot how bad game boards can be.

i finally caved and watched this crap. that shit was so stupid when he reached across the screen to grab that necklace or whatever to analyze it. literally a gag tiered power

first joe and smo
now this
2020 is off to a great start

the only way console gaming is cheaper is if you buy one console and just never upgrade when the new generation comes out, don't buy any additional accessories like controllers and headsets, don't play online, don't buy games at launch/full price, yes. and thats only if we're comparing it to some guy thats running games at max settings.

there's plenty to get out of pc gaming beyond graphics when you have so many diverse modding communities. then theres emulation which hardly requires a beefed up rig.

its funny watching people over exaggerate the complexity of pc gaming. in the long run console gaming is hardly any cheaper. theres nothing cheaper about having to buy an entirely new console and accessories when its time to upgrade. youre paying monthly for online play. and finally youre paying more for games in general as console games are more expensive

the only console worth owning is a switch tbh. switch and pc is the intellectual way to go

iTs cHeApeR tHaN a Pc!!!!!!

well no shit. so youre telling me i can pay less for an inferior product that has less functionality in every way comparable? wow. i am sold. consoles are great. i love buying the more inferior version of a game for more than it would cost me on steam

she looks like a cross between aubrey plaza and maisie williams

hey guys, anyone here that owns or drives a car, guess what? you are no longer allowed to care about global warming since your carbon footprint contributes to it.

also, you obviously dont hate to be that guy since nobody forced you to make this topic. nor did anybody ask for your "thoughts".

Blue_Inigo posted...

Final fucking Fantasy VII Remake

this is a reason to die. square is gonna ruin one of the best things they got. do you really wanna be there to see them massacre our precious nostalgia

i guess its time to block bluemonk and all his shitty alts on this account too

AlisLandale posted...

Lol that's his shirt. It's like this

seong mina has a mega dong in that pic

darkphoenix181 posted...

I didn't put these words in your mouth.

You said things from a culmination of generations passed on are unnatural. Then you claim beehive bulding is innate which is likely false.

unfortunately for your narrative it isn't.
https://www.beeculture.com/instinct-vs-intelligence/
In The Hive and the Honey Bee, (1992 edition), Norman Gary wrote the chapter titled, Activity and Behavior of Honey Bees. He makes a strong argument that the behavior of honey bees is hard-wired, or instinctual. The bees unconsciously see a need within the hive and respond to it.
i wont cherry pick, the article does go on to give the argument of bees operating more off of intelligence than instinct but that goes beyond the scope of hive building and more towards learning where to collect nectar.

And I linked you an article detailing many animals lose knowledge when not raised by their parents such as how to build nests, what to eat, how to forage, etc.
These are things passed down and learned as you said from a culmination of generations. Yet this exists in the wild, in animals without human intereference.

the article you cited said nothing about this regarding a culmination of generations. it actually goes on to say thats where we humans benefit as most animals only learn from generation to generation. anything that can be found repeated in further species deals more with it being a genetic mutation thus making it innate. otherwise it goes from one generation to the next and it's not like mankind where we have the capability to learn from the previous generation and every other one before it while other animals mimic the generation that raised it but what we do goes beyond mimicking. anyways, that was never something i was arguing in the first place. I only mentioned bees to highlight the difference between natural behaviors and learned behaviors. i never said anything about any other animal in regards to natural behaviors nor did i say they operated only off of natural behaviors. at least not in that post you quoted. you're free to show me where i said otherwise though.

How can that be? It means your logic is non-existent and must be reformed.

no it doesnt. because nothing you've posted goes against what ive been saying. all you've managed to do is attack strawman arguments like "animals operate solely through natural behaviors" which was something i never said. instead you post articles regarding learned behavior which ive already spoken on. in the scope of these behaviors, though they are learned they are all learned in coordination with their innate/natural behaviors. nest building and scavaging how its done may be learned but its still done to address their natural needs such as attaining food and shelter. religion, which is what this entire thing started with, is nowhere in the mix. it is not innate. nore is it learned to appeal to our natural/innate needs

darkphoenix181 posted...

Yes.

Animals have hate even in the wild.

Infact, it seems dogs usually hate cats unless humans intervene.
Humans can grow cats and dogs together and they exhibit preference like brothers.

But in the wild they will attack each other not even over food.

hate=/=aggression. also thinking dogs instinctively hate cats because racism is lol worthy. it does have to do with instincts but has little to do with them being cats.

FrozenXylophone posted...

I was not aware literal science said Religion formed against the rules of nature....

Or anything else for that matter. What branch of science might I ask do you reference?

i guess psychology. that's typically the one that deals with what is innate and what is learned. nature vs nurture is most often referenced in psychology

TheOnionKnight posted...

Again, where are you drawing the line?

at piss, shit, and vomit.

there are too many variables that go into what is created to objectively state what is a natural creation. the thing is there is no line to be drawn. it's either all on the table or its not. unless you want argue racism, anti-semitism, and other racist ideologies being natural since they're man-made

is putting words in people's mouths the only thing you can do? or do you just have difficulty reading. humans teaching a monkey how to use gun being unnatural is what i said. how do you get there from that?

i wish i could say it slower or make it any more simple for you
learning/creating is a natural ability. that does not make what is learnt/created natural.

darkphoenix181 posted...

I never equated anything as being bad.
You are arguing religion is unnatural.
I am trying to explain to you why that position is nonsensical.

The only way it would make sense is if you believe God gave man religion. If man made religion, then it must be natural.
Like computers.

that's the thing. i never said computers are natural lmao. my post said the exact opposite of what you think it did. religion, computers, etc are all man-made. Whether something is tangible or not holds no basis on whether it is natural or not

darkphoenix181 posted...

It is called the socratic method. Let someone arrive at answer themselves.

Of course it doesn't work when a person refuses to accept the answer in front of them.

At this point you just gotta say, sorry but you are wrong. Your logic is built on nothing.

a person refusing to accept the answer doesn't make the answer wrong or right. i cant say its wrong when my logic is built on science

Animals learn. They pass down knowledge like we do.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beastly-behavior/201803/in-humans-and-animals-social-learning-drives-intelligence

You mistakenly think animals are born knowing everthing. They aren't.

do i now? i recall talking about bees having the innate knowledge and ability to build hives but im positive thats as far as I went. youre putting words in my mouth when ive already argued before that primates are capable of learning doesn't make what they learn inherently natural simply because the ability to learn is

TheOnionKnight posted...

Babies don't need to be taught how to use a language. That's why I thought it would be an easy example. Babies can listen, observe, and learn words all on their own just through exposure.

I'd say religion is natural too. However, even if you say that learned behavior is unnatural, the logic still doesn't hold up. Before any humans could learn religion, humans first had to create religion. How was it created? Humans can only create things that their natural abilities allow them to create.

theyre still being taught lol. whether its intentional or not you are teaching them. again, youre missing the point regardless. learning, creating, etc are all natural abilities but that does not make everything we learn or create natural. like i said before, you can teach a monkey how to use a gun but that does not make it a natural behavior

Therefore, to claim things are unnatural like computers while believing religion is a hoax is nonsense.

can your posts get any stupider. see the issue with you is youre one of those people that conflate "unnatural" with "wrong/bad". i think both religion and modern technological advances are not natural occurrences but only think one is a hoax because what's unnatural and what's a hoax are not mutually exclusive

darkphoenix181 posted...

You are changing up the argument. Innate or instinct as we call it has no bearing on natural vs. un-natural till you decided the conversation wasn't going the way you wanted it to.

literally arguing semantics. go back and read the very first thing i said to you. you asked what unnatural things humans do? i said religion. you asked why religion is unnatural. i said because its learned. you asked why something being learned makes it unnatural. i said learning is natural but that doesnt make whats learned inherently natural. hence the monkey gun analogy. im expounding upon it because youre one dense motherfucker.

TheOnionKnight posted...

A baby will learn a language naturally, because the ability to learn is also innate.

no. a baby won't learn a language naturally. you need to teach a baby how to use it. if it needs to be taught then it's not really innate now is it? you were so close. the ability to learn is innate. yes. i dont think i said otherwise.

darkphoenix181 posted...

They aren't born knowing how to do this.

then guess what? that's a learned behavior.

darkphoenix181 posted...

No. You were missing the point that humans are natural thus anything they do is natural too.

It seems however you think if humans do something and animals do not, it is not natural.

See, that viewpoint is literally the ones the religious people use to say homosexuality is in which tc says "but they are incorrect that animals don't do it"

As I said, you are co-opting the same argument of the people you are disagreeing with.

no you're clearly the one missing the point. im saying that there is a clear difference between natural behaviors and learned behaviors. im not basing any of my arguments on whether other animals do something or not. homosexuality is natural. it is not taught. try as you might you cannot change someone's sexual nature. that is innate. religion is taught. whether you practice it or not can be changed. religion is not innate. it is learned. just because humans naturally learn does not make everything they learn inherently natural.

how we learn is natural. what we learn isn't inherently natural. try to keep up. just because you can teach a monkey how to use a gun makes that natural.

are you seriously trying to argue learned behaviors and natural behaviors are one in the same lol?

TheOnionKnight posted...

You'd consider it unnatural for a baby to learn how to talk?

the ability to speak is innate. babies will find a way to communicate regardless of whether someone is there to teach them language comprehension or not.

communication is innate
language is learned.

nice try tho

if youre lactose intolerant i guess. otherwise nothing beats the real deal

TheOnionKnight posted...

Everything that's learned is something that humans figured out how to do. Everything humans figured out how to do, they figured out with their natural abilities. Just because a behavior isn't instinctual doesn't mean it isn't natural.

yes it does. if you learn something then you learned something lol. learned behaviors are by definition something youve learned. imma stick with science on this one.

seriously agree with @Wetterdew on this one though. we wouldn't even be having this discussion if people would just stop appealing to nature. people gotta stop thinkin natural is synonymous with good.

TheOnionKnight posted...

All human behaviors are natural.

and this is where i disagree specifically. there are natural/innate behaviors and then there are learned behaviors.