I'd wish he'd come back to smugpost about how he knows Mike Sparks and whats-his-name, the author of Fallout Equestria: Project Horizons with the Nina-Tucker-getting-merged-with-her-dog fetish.
David Bushey.
I'd wish he'd come back to smugpost about how he knows Mike Sparks and whats-his-name, the author of Fallout Equestria: Project Horizons with the Nina-Tucker-getting-merged-with-her-dog fetish.
He came back to post in the TLOU2 thread. In a surprising turn of events he's no fan of the post-apocalyptic troon character either, despite being the one person Naughty Dog could purportedly "represent" with Dick Splittem.I'd wish he'd come back to smugpost about how he knows Mike Sparks and whats-his-name, the author of Fallout Equestria: Project Horizons with the Nina-Tucker-getting-merged-with-her-dog fetish.
He came back to post in the TLOU2 thread. In a surprising turn of events he's no fan of the post-apocalyptic troon character either, despite being the one person Naughty Dog could purportedly "represent" with Dick Splittem.
Oh hey your ability to form cohesive thoughts is much better when you aren't spergposting.It's just incredibly dumb plotting from top to bottom. They spent the entire first game getting us attached to Ellie and Joel. Why would they throw that all away by introducing a new character that nobody gives a fuck about, whose motivations have roughly the depth of a cardboard stand-up? Seriously. I've read the leaks. Abby just comes out of nowhere, with no explanation or fanfare or anything to make us empathize with her in any conceivable way. She kills these characters we've been attached to this entire time. Murders them in cold blood. What is it supposed to be? What is it supposed to mean? Did killing Marlene cross some line and mark Joel for death? Is this some kind of middle finger to the nuclear family? So, Joel and Ellie aren't allowed to be happy or have a life, after all that effort spent trying to survive being hunted by zombies and cannibals in the first game? What is the message? What is the point?
This is the kind of bullshit plotting that makes people decanonize sequels and just assume the story ended after the first one and everyone lived happily ever after. This is why people keep complaining about Mary Sues and all that shit. If you want to show us a female character with power, you've got to fucking sell it.
Take Rey in The Force Awakens, for example. She flies the Millennium Falcon with no background as a pilot. She fights a Dark Jedi to a standstill with zero training in the Force.
The problem should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about writing. Rey has no background. She just materializes at some point in the timeline, as if from the ether. Luke Skywalker being a pilot was believable, because he used to bullseye Womp Rats in his T-16 Skyhopper. When he went up against Darth Vader, he got his hand chopped off. Even though he had some training, it wasn't enough to overcome his father's years of experience, just as Rey's lack of experience or training should have made her falter in light of Kylo Ren's possession of both.
Do you know why characters like that are irritating? It's because nobody can fucking empathize with them, because people have to work for shit in the real world.
Neil Druckmann thinks he's gaming's equivalent of a fucking Cannes director, or something, like everyone else is doing it wrong and pandering to their fans and he's this enlightened and special contrarian creature with his finger on the pulse of pop culture. He's one hundred percent pretentious ass and zero percent talent. He's Vincent Gallo, minus the blowjob from Chloë Sevigny.
Oh hey your ability to form cohesive thoughts is much better when you aren't spergposting.
Did your time actually interacting with faggots at sietch instead of yelling doomer shit at them finally get you to calm down your nonexistent ovaries?
I'd suggest lowering your sperging still tho, tl;dr and all that. I've lessened it for you. Sort of.
The funniest thing about this is when I saw your post in the thread, I could only tell it was you by the fact you overstate and pontificate, so about two or three paragraphs in. Hell, there were actually points you brought up I agreed with. The lack of link spam helped too.It's just incredibly dumb plotting from top to bottom. They spent the entire first game getting us attached to Ellie and Joel. Why would they throw that all away by introducing a new character that nobody gives a fuck about, whose motivations have roughly the depth of a cardboard stand-up? Seriously. I've read the leaks. Abby just comes out of nowhere, with no explanation or fanfare or anything to make us empathize with her in any conceivable way. She kills these characters we've been attached to this entire time. Murders them in cold blood. What is it supposed to be? What is it supposed to mean? Did killing Marlene cross some line and mark Joel for death? Is this some kind of middle finger to the nuclear family? So, Joel and Ellie aren't allowed to be happy or have a life, after all that effort spent trying to survive being hunted by zombies and cannibals in the first game? What is the message? What is the point?
This is the kind of bullshit plotting that makes people decanonize sequels and just assume the story ended after the first one and everyone lived happily ever after. This is why people keep complaining about Mary Sues and all that shit. If you want to show us a female character with power, you've got to fucking sell it.
Take Rey in The Force Awakens, for example. She flies the Millennium Falcon with no background as a pilot. She fights a Dark Jedi to a standstill with zero training in the Force.
The problem should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about writing. Rey has no background. She just materializes at some point in the timeline, as if from the ether. Luke Skywalker being a pilot was believable, because he used to bullseye Womp Rats in his T-16 Skyhopper. When he went up against Darth Vader, he got his hand chopped off. Even though he had some training, it wasn't enough to overcome his father's years of experience, just as Rey's lack of experience or training should have made her falter in light of Kylo Ren's possession of both.
If you watch the first three of the Lucas films, you can see that each character has their own well-defined background, and they develop over time. Rey never develops or changes in any conceivable way. She is exactly the same person at the end of the new trilogy as she was at the beginning. She's like the white equivalent of a Magical Negro. No explanation, no background, no effort, no development. Not even a person, really. Just a mysterious force of nature.
Compare and contrast with Alita from Battle Angel Alita. Before she fell to Earth, she had incredible martial arts skills and was an unparalleled super-soldier. The story starts off with her having amnesia and not even knowing who the hell she is. Pretty basic plot. The key is how this amnesia enables her to develop into a person that she never would have become before. It humanizes her. If you read the manga, you know that Yoko - the person she was before - was a nasty, remorseless killer and a saboteur. In contrast, the Alita of the present is selfless, kind, and creative, and just happens to be trapped in a violent, post-apocalyptic horror show of a world. Now that's how you do a fucking background.
Now, how about Abby in TLOU2? No background. Just like Rey. She was related to one of the scientists Joel killed. She wants revenge. She's an unstoppable, implacable force of nature. We never see her really struggle for anything. Success is handed to her on a silver platter. There's no subtlety, no craft. Nothing.
Do you know why characters like that are irritating? It's because nobody can fucking empathize with them, because people have to work for shit in the real world.
Neil Druckmann thinks he's gaming's equivalent of a fucking Cannes director, or something, like everyone else is doing it wrong and pandering to their fans and he's this enlightened and special contrarian creature with his finger on the pulse of pop culture. He's one hundred percent pretentious ass and zero percent talent. He's Vincent Gallo, minus the blowjob from Chloë Sevigny.
The funniest thing about this is when I saw your post in the thread, I could only tell it was you by the fact you overstate and pontificate, so about two or three paragraphs in. Hell, there were actually points you brought up I agreed with. The lack of link spam helped too.
Honestly sperg on wider subjects with less intensity, it makes me much less likely to tell you to lick your doorknobs.
if he was automatically threadbanned after 3 posts he'd probably fit in hereHonestly sperg on wider subjects with less intensity, it makes me much less likely to tell you to lick your doorknobs.
You weren't drawing a comparison you outright said you participated in them you disingenuous sped.When I mentioned the Battle of Seattle, even though I was too young to have participated in it, it was to draw a comparison. The ones calling for the toppling of the establishment and an end to globalist exploitation of the underclass were decidedly left-wing at that time.
If you actually knew a damn thing about leftism in the 90s, you'd know that they called the former "globalization". "Globalism" was coined by right-wing John Birch Society types as a new scapegoat after the Soviet Union collapsed. The vast majority of American Democrats aren't Communist or Anarchist by any stretch of the imagination, so why the fuck would they care about that?Ever notice that? Ever notice how everything flip-flopped?
Back in the nineties, if you were anti-globalism, it meant you were against sweatshops and exploitative business practices.
Now, if you say you’re anti-globalist, that means you’re a protectionist, fascist, low-IQ redneck who hates the global poor who benefit from industrial growth.
Female game characters dressing like sluts was a running joke among game journos for like 15 years before Anita Sarkeesian announced "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games" and half the people complaining about leftists "claiming to protect women and minorities by controlling how they are depicted" are rightists who are just mad the women don't have exaggerated anime breasts and that people might want to write a black character that isn't "gangbanger", because you and I know goddamn well that most Gators' experience with black protagonists starts and ends with Carl Johnson. Don't believe me on that last part? Go on over to the KotakuInAction and OneAngryGamer threads and see for yourself.In the nineties, if you were for creative freedom in fiction and opposed to little old grannies trying to censor everything, you were most likely a leftist and a libertine, scorning the heavy-handed moralism of the Right.
These days, most of the ones calling for censorship of fiction are self-avowed leftists who have anointed themselves as the new moral authorities, claiming to protect women and minorities by controlling how they are depicted.
"teenage rebellion" is literally only an American phenomenon that comes about because a lot of American parents are twits that treat their child as property more than an actual person. And even then the vast majority of American teenagers don't do that shit.None of this makes any sense to me at all. It feels like I had the rug pulled out from under me, so to speak.
When I was a kid, I was very, very conservative. As I hit my teens, I turned away from all that and went far-left out of a sense of rebellion. It was a repudiation of stifling and rigid moral authority, like the kind expressed on this very forum. Being involved with sci-fi and video game fandom communities made me feel like I was part of some kind of neo-beatnik movement, when all we were really doing was reading and writing shitty fanfics.
Nobody on the left seriously uses the term "globalism", "we ought to put an end to stifling bureaucratic institutions" has been a conservative/libertarian talking point since forever, actual leftists would just use "Wall Street" to bitch about global finance and not "banking cartels" (see literally Occupy Wall Street), and NO BLOOD FOR OIL had jack shit to do with the petrodollar. The "Project For A New American Century" doesn't even say shit about petrodollars.So, imagine my surprise when the identitarian SJWs came along. They embodied an ideological and existential threat. All of a sudden, we had censorious lefties who were claiming to be the new moral majority, tearing down the Old Left’s paradise of bohemian filth in the name of sensitivity and safe spaces.
I can’t be the only one who’s noticed this. Everything flip-flopped. The Left are the new squares and the Right are the new radicals. How the fuck did that happen? Most of what people call right-wing talking points today were left-wing talking points when I was a kid.
There’s too much censorship, globalism is bad and disenfranchises people, we ought to put an end to stifling bureaucratic institutions, the banker cartels control everything, our media is 24/7 corporate propaganda spew, and the perpetual security state makes the underclass fight their stupid petrodollar wars for them.
Which side am I on if I say these things?
I wasn't the biggest fan of Clinton's Kosovo expeditons or Obama getting involved in Syria or Libya but to most people "bombing runs to support an armed uprising against a dictator" is a far cry from "full scale invasion and occupation of two countries, one of them being based on literal bullshit". You can blame the Trump administration for Assange's bullshit trial, and that makes it even worse considering Trump was outright praising Wikileaks and Assange on Twitter for the DNC leaks.If you said any of these things in the nineties or early 2000s, chances are, you were a leftie and against neocons in power. Hell, you weren’t just against the invasion of Iraq, but probably Kosovo, too.
What happened? Why were these quite reasonable positions discredited by becoming associated with the radical right? Why did Barack Obama get away unscathed doing literally nothing different from George Bush as far as our foreign policy goes? Nothing in this world makes any sense to me, anymore. While you’re all here, criticizing me and calling me dishonest, we regularly put dishonest people in the highest places of power in our country. If any of you guys had balls, you’d use this energy and investigative skill to pick on and dox politicians; the big, fat lolcows who rule us all. Oh, but we all know what happens to people who dox politicians, as Julian Assange’s ludicrously Kafkaesque trial aptly demonstrated, where they practically put him under the Cone of Silence from Get Smart just to isolate and intimidate him. Nobody gives enough of a shit about the mentally ill to come to their defense. We’re easy targets. People who spread the private communiques of bureaucrats and diplomats get v&, or end up in self-imposed exile in countries with no extradition treaties. It takes actual bravery to do that.
lmaoDepression, anxiety, and gender dysphoria are all real things. They’re not made up. Upon learning of a pandemic virus, normal people don’t have screaming fits of panic so bad that they need fucking buspar to deal with them.
this is the only intelligent thought I have seen you express, David.To the average liberal, the government is, itself, a sacred cow, and bureaucracy is above criticism.
What the fuck does that even mean? Were you one of Ned Flander's kids?When I was a kid, I was very, very conservative.
basedAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez didn't even know what a garbage disposal was, and was freaked out the first time she encountered one.
You were never a leftist. You larped as a hippie and the minute some SJW twitter post offended you you took your ball and went home.
See, the way I remember it, the Right had Pat Buchanan and Rush Limbaugh, and the Left had Bill Hicks and George Carlin.
Bill Hicks wasn't that left and even Carlin was not a huge fan of any establishment politics. Hicks outright thought Clinton was just "one of the boys" and essentially part of the same conspiracy as the rest of the fuckers, considered the UK a socialist hellhole, and his album "Arizona Bay" was named after what he hoped would come into existence after California fell into the ocean.
>Bill HicksBill Hicks wasn't that left and even Carlin was not a huge fan of any establishment politics. Hicks outright thought Clinton was just "one of the boys" and essentially part of the same conspiracy as the rest of the fuckers, considered the UK a socialist hellhole, and his album "Arizona Bay" was named after what he hoped would come into existence after California fell into the ocean.
It's because we're still in the pandemic, and these things tend to come in waves.I don't even know what to think anymore. For every article I see that says the virus is slowing down and we can return to normal, I'll see another one that says new cases are increasing and more deaths are to be expected than originally anticipated.
Probably because the modern left got lazy and just want to be activists without the work tbh. That and it's all fashion to them now.How did we go from Noam Chomsky writing books about how the media are corporate mouthpieces and Michael Moore filming documentaries about how we went into Iraq for the second time on false pretenses, to Anita Sarkeesian whining about scantily-clad video game characters and Ocasio-Cortez wanting to ban meat?
Why is the Left so frivolous now? Nobody has a reasonable explanation for this. Not a single person I've encountered on the internet can put it into words.
Probably because the modern left got lazy and just want to be activists without the work tbh. That and it's all fashion to them now.
I'm starting to hate the "people will die if we reopen" argument. Like holy shit people die from the swine flu everyday and we never reacted like this! Lockdowns and social distancing isn't gonna last forever since....well..... people don't wanna risk going homeless.