Lurker > Lopen

Delicate flower thought that all discussion surrounding their list should be agreeing with it

Delicate flower was wrong and closed topic

That's really all that happened. It wasn't even particularly venomous disagreement or anything.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Tokoyami posted...

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

four Indy movies

Oh geez yea Crystal Skull is p bad

Well played
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

FlyingForever posted...

Okay Ulti

Thanks for that, Luster.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Ah whoops one save what can ya do
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

X-Death
Minwu
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Alvarez didn't say the already slim girl needed to lose weight which was the really objectionable thing there (even if it was code for implants outraged people didn't gather that) so I'm glad he's avoided any heat. Discussing women being attractive shouldn't be a boogeyman in and of itself.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I mean everyone should be saying that in SF2 those boys are hamburger when they lose
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Okay I'll acknowledge some of the games present him that way since that's what the wiki you looked that up on said. Pretty sure like earlier game win quotes implied it was definitely more along my lines though

(Kinda wanna find the actual bio that says it though. Could very well see that being a fan who thinks like you misinterpreting and putting it on a wiki lol)
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

My personal favorite RTS. Great game.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

He wears the mask because you're not worthy to gaze upon his beautiful face not because he has some mortal fear of being made ugly.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I mean you keep citing examples like it matters (it doesn't really it just means writers of the characters feel the same way as you) but you are aware there are vain characters that have no signs of insecurities shown too

Vega from Street Fighter doesn't have a breakdown when you hit his face he just tries to murder you for having the audacity to hit him in the face.

Zamza from Suikoden 2 calls himself the best and never shows any signs of being humbled under any circumstances.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Because vanity is an objectively bad thing...?

It's ultimately pretty harmless. I'm okay with it, myself! Vanity vs insecurity vanity is the better mindset to have imo.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

It's why you see vain wrestlers and characters on TV shows often seeking the attention of somebody. Their vanity is fueled by overcompensating for insecurities.

They're written by writers who are overcompensating for their insecurities lol.

I'm not saying the type of vanity you're describing doesn't exist, but it does read like something someone who was trying to treat vanity as an objectively bad thing would treat as the norm more than what's actually the norm.

Like it's a real feel good message for someone who is all "what's on the inside counts" to push the narrative that all superficial people are insecure and people who are beautiful inside are truly happy with themselves but I don't think that's the standard, personally.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

You can have excessive pride while having a high opinion of yourself though. Like you can be great and think you're even greater than that. I don't see why you need validation. If you're truly delusional society not thinking you're beautiful is their problem not yours.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Your interpretation of vanity vs insecurity reads like something out of a self help book you read because some beautiful cocky assholes were mean to you or something.

Like if they are superficial they can't possibly be happy with themselves! They're secretly wanting to be beautiful cause they want to be accepted!

Plenty of people who get cosmetic surgery don't strictly speaking think they need it but they want it because maximizing their beauty score is a good thing. Like you seem to have an image that everyone who cares about looks can't actually think they look good. That people who get surgery only do it because they think society sees them as ugly. It's just often not that way. Real people are more complex than Dashing Cody Rhodes or Narcis Prince, man
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Well vanity and insecurity often goes hand in hand. That's why vanity is "excessive" pride in one's appearance/accomplishments/etc.

They're contradictory feelings by nature, actually. If you're insecure you're less likely to be vain because your opinion of yourself is going to be low.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I think well adjusted vain people generally aren't insecure. If both exist at the same time you probably suffer from depression. Not every person who gets cosmetic surgery is depressed though.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Do they though? I think you're just saying that because it makes sense on paper to you rather than it having an actual basis in reality. That's not my experience with vain people-- that's my experience with insecure people. Not the same thing.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

The point of contention I have is that I think most people who are vain aren't doing it because they want to be loved by society as much as just wanting to think they're beautiful to themselves. Society's standards may influence this but ultimately the person is creating their own standard for beauty more often than not.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

most superficial desires come from wanting to be deemed acceptable/attractive/whatever by others.

I think this is not necessarily as true as you would think.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Do you agree with Rock that a majority of people 30 and over get the typical types of plastic surgery associated with beauty enhancement for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with superficial reasons? Just a simple yes or no, I'm just curious.

Is that what he was saying?

Well I think you can be superficial and not blame it on society, and I think that most women or men who get it are probably doing it to empower themselves vs the alternative of doing it because they feel like they have to because of society putting unrealistic pressure on them or whatever.

So yes, I guess?
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I assumed you were replying to me calling it brave since I'm the one who brought those words up

So you must have misunderstood why I was saying I feel like bold people who aren't as likely to be pressured by society get it more often if that's not what you were getting at. Or you just coincidentally said bold and brave after I did out of pure coincidence
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Getting bigger boobs isn't really some brave, bold statement that goes against society's norms so I'm not really sure that's the explanation

It's brave because you're letting a doctor cut into your body

I can tell you've never considered cosmetic surgery before or known anyone who has. Like your instinctive interpretations of all the concerns and mindsets don't read like those of actual humans <_<
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Do you really think all celebrities get plastic surgery just for publicity and not to hit or try to create some new standard of beauty, that then normal people try to emulate?

That's not what I am saying

I'm saying you associate it with celebrities because they get publicity when they get it and the random businessman down the street from you doesn't
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

OoT is the only one of the 3D Zeldas I've beaten and I don't agree with anything in the game being remotely tough to battle. Not trying to be elitist, just being honest.

Could be that the difficulty curved upwards too slowly, though. Throw the endgame stuff early game and yeah it's probably tough.

Possibly why I thought Twilight Princess seemed better cause I played some random segments in the middle of the game rather than playing from the beginning.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Because celebrities get a lot of publicity when they get it?

Plenty of everyday people get plastic surgery. It wouldn't survive as a field if only celebrities got it.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

When you get into the type of surgery that has to do with altering your appearance to make something more attractive, where else is the "why?" coming from if not how you've been influenced?

I dunno. Do you think like this? The way you're talking makes it sound like it's dumb to think that most people aren't being pressured by society to do everything.

There are a lot of influences out there. Which determines which you like better? Plenty of girls get implants that bloat their breasts way beyond the level of what society thinks looks nice. Are larger breasts even generally thought to be more attractive by a significantly large margin these days?

Intuitively Rock seems closer to on the mark to me-- when I think of a personality profile likely to get plastic surgery I think of the type that is bold, willing to take risks. These types of people seem more like the type that aren't going to be pressured by society in general.

Kinda off topic but I feel like these days people tend to overrate societal pressure in general because no one wants to be accountable for anything.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Well if I don't enjoy the battling there's little enjoyment to be gained from exploring to power up. Exploring is a means to get more powerful for the most part. It is also usually accompanied by battling

I think the z targeting thing is fine but there's just not a lot of depth there in OoT. Like Kingdom Hearts has pretty fun combat but that's because there are a lot of options offensively and defensively and most importantly MUCH better AI that necessitates you actually be good at the combat.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Even if it's not an outright "This is what they say is beautiful," what one considers beautiful in one's appearance is often shaped by their surroundings/how they grew up/etc., so there's typically still a societal reason behind "I like the way it looks" with plastic surgery when it's your typical beauty enhancement

I'd like the study for that one. Sounds like psychology 101 fortune cookie tripe to me.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

What games were doing quality real-time 3D combat on PC pre-98? Quake?

...is there combat in Myst? <_<

I was more talking 3D exploration of large worlds. You had a lot of PC RPGs doing that. Myst, Might and Magic games, etc etc

Quality real-time 3D combat I wouldn't credit to Ocarina cause it doesn't have it <_<
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

All I'm getting from this conversation is an inherent skepticism towards published studies from the internet considering you're both citing studies that say nearly the opposite thing
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Yeah I dunno I never really felt like Ocarina was something particularly groundbreaking. Maybe it was having played more PC games at the time or maybe it was just a lack of appreciation due to not finding the gameplay fun to the point it ruined enjoyment from exploration but yeah.

I kinda see what you're getting at but I think SMB1 still holds up really well today even against newer titles for doing what it aims to do.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

If you want the game I think is probably the one that benefits from nostalgia the most it has to be Ocarina of Time

Like I haven't played most of its successors since the formula of 3D Zelda entries is pretty off base to me but I can't believe so few of them improved on it. Like what I played of Twilight Princess seemed way better. Combat and the boss fights seemed a lot better than the stuff from Ocarina-- I dare say I'd possibly even like it if I bothered to play the whole thing.

Can't even guess at the others since I haven't had a Nintendo console since Gamecube but like what is it about Ocarina that is timeless to most people? Do the later entries have annoying puzzles to get through or worse dungeon design or something? I feel like the gameplay can only go up since Ocarina felt really dumbed down.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Four Swords games need to be kept in the same slot but the Oracle games gotta split em

You know how it is
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Here's my ranking as someone who doesn't identify as a Zelda fan

1. Link to the Past
2. Zelda II: The Adventure of Link
3. The Legend of Zelda
4. Link's Awakening
5. Twilight Princess
6. The Minish Cap
7. Four Swords Adventures
8. Wind Waker
9. Ocarina of Time

Not really a fan of anything below Link's Awakening-- didn't even fully play through 5-8!
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

If you can't handle some people disagreeing with your lists you probably shouldn't be posting lists
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Well I would've saved Auron if I hadn't forgot this topic existed
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

How about 610 ? <_<

If he's equal to or shorter than guys he wrestles on a semi-regular basis he doesn't draw.

If you wanna talk shoe lifts or whatever I don't wanna get into that-- you know what I mean.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

Basketball tends to be a meritocracy at least.

Wrestling is...not that, as Daniel Bryan demonstrated.

It is to some extent.

Like even if we hate Roman Reigns he doesn't get pushed for literally nothing. He is overpushed yes but there are things he does right too.

I would say it's less merit based but merit does factor in. Ease in drawing money is influenced by height. Doesn't mean small guys can't draw and doesn't mean every huge guy draws, but like, a guy as skilled as Andre the Giant at 6'7" doesn't draw a dime.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

Are you sure about that? You don't think a woman would be?

Not in wrestling, at least.

And if they were, the criticism wouldn't be framed as "they need to lose weight"
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

2. 50 lbs of what? What if most of it is muscle and it in fact improves her in ring performance?

This is a stupid technicality argument you're trying to make to no relevant end because obviously no one is going to be body shamed for becoming a mountain of muscle
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

Where do you fall on body shaming wrestlers for their height?

You have literally no way to improve that aspect, so there's no real constructive criticism to be gained or work to be put in other than trying to distinguish yourself in other regards to overcome it.

I would say it's not body shaming to acknowledge, factually, that a Dean Malenko is playing from behind in the world of wrestling, however. Nor is it unfair for the promoter to push those people. People wanting to see big dudes clubber doesn't mean they should be ashamed of wanting to see big dudes clubber.

Is it body shaming to say that elite Basketball players are by and large tall for a reason? Wrestling is just a less obviously seen version of how height can help you succeed.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

At the core of it all, the way the original quote from Dave was INTERPRETED (Peyton Royce needs to lose weight to be attractive enough to stand out in WWE) would in fact be unacceptable body shaming if that was what the comment was intended to say.

Agreed?

100% agreed because Peyton Royce is hot and having her lose weight would make her anorexic.

My only grief was the Eddv comment that basically said "if she was 50 lbs overweight it still wouldn't be worth talking about unless we were talking in the sense of the state of her psyche that led her to that point"

An extra 50 lbs on a 5'7" woman is at the point where you're going to get some impact in terms of ring image and in ring performance. It's job relevant. If she was working as an architect designing a building for Seth Rollins, then who cares, but it's a physical profession where being in shape is relevant in many ways superficial and practical.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

StealThisSheen posted...

since you're basically saying that even if somebody is a great wrestler, it's still good to body shame them.

YES.

Because having a good body is part of the job.

You're shaming them for being bad at one aspect of their job, that's all. It's no different than my coworkers saying I'm bad at documentation or whatever.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I think if Roman didn't wear a flak jacket to conceal he's not really in that great of shape he would have a significantly easier time getting over, yes.

That being said he's not really a great talker either, and his matches are worse than they could be due to superman punch overuse so I mean, Roman has a lot of factors working against him.

Basically wrestling success is a combination of a ton of factors, and how closely you resemble a Greek god is one of them and it's not just because Vince has a fetish for it. We all have a bit of Vince McMahon in us in that sense. And getting in good shape is a form of hard working, too-- it's not always "steroids = bad." A lot of guys just work hard to look the part of a star and it does help them out in more ways than just the booking.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Nostalgia isn't the only reason someone could think LttP was one of the best Zelda games. Feel like the overhead style just doesn't appeal to you. Which is fine, but if you're the type of Zelda fan that it does it's hard to find much of anyone who would rank it so low.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Put it another way

CM Punk, Kevin Owens, Samoa Joes being dudes who are in average shape didn't stop them from being great. You can overcome that.

I would argue it is what stopped them from being legendary like The Rock and Stone Cold, and hell, even Hulk Hogan. And it's not all the push of the company being behind them. There is something to the presence of those guys that gets them over in a way that CM Punk never could be. There is something to the presence of John Cena that allows him to be as popular as he is despite not being anything super amazing in the ring or the mic (though I'm the first guy who will defend him as being good, even before it was popular opinion), and it's not a rocket boot push.

So what I'm saying is being in good shape is part of the job of being a damn good wrestler, and that it's never body shaming to discuss a wrestler's body unless they're retired or in a non-wrestling role. If you don't want to be body shamed and be as out of shape as you want, take up another profession that doesn't inherently play off your body or be ready for the criticisms.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I don't think I could either but I think it's at least worth humoring. To a level where it's being intentionally obtuse to try and attribute it to sample size. That the sample size is smaller is evidence that the weight is a hindrance in your chances to succeed.

There are a lot of terrible heavy wrestlers or attempted wrestlers out there-- most of them you only see on the lowest level indie feds and they sputter out quick. I would argue you see less of them than 200 lbers less because of a different attempt rate at being a wrestler (it is a factor don't get me wrong) and more because of a different success rate at being a wrestler because you're inherently at a disadvantage.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

Saying the 20 best 200 pounders are better than the 20 best 300 pounders might be true, sure.

And you're going to claim that that's all larger sample size, even if I would reasonably argue all 20 of the top 20 200 lbers are better than the number one 300 lber?
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I mean it should be readily apparent just by observing average star ratings of cruiserweight matches vs star ratings of heavyweight matches but yeah play dumb whatever. I'm not going further down that road cause it's just not worth it.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Jakyl25 posted...

There are many many many more bad 200lb wrestlers than good ones

The percentage of passable 200 lbers is much higher than the percentage of passable 300 lbers
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!