Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 179
  1. #61
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,001
    [QUOTE=Nalano;261240]I do because I worked in that shit, and as such I say you're full of the afore-mentioned.

    The Republican establishment, however much you wish to deny reality, has never, ever done step one for education. They like their electorate dumb and malleable. Take your trickle-down bullshit and jump off a bridge.


    So economics does not trickle down? Tell me why then, when Obama raises the cost of providing health care for employers, do they begin dropping plans or cutting hours?

    Because the effects trickle down.

    Tell me why when taxes are increased on business owners, they begin cutting back hiring or even laying off?

    Trickle down.

    Every single thing we do in life trickles somewhere. In the case of economics, its down. The more prosperous are the people at the top, and the fewer regulations and costs they have weighing on their shoulders, the more money they have left for creating new jobs and new products.

    In the case of liberal theory, however, the trickle is usually down the drain. For more on that, google on Greece. I mean, c'mon man, we already KNOW it doesn't work.

  2. #62
    Lesser Hivemind Node Kaira-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oulu, Finland
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    In the case of liberal theory, however, the trickle is usually down the drain. For more on that, google on Greece. I mean, c'mon man, we already KNOW it doesn't work.
    Buhahahaha. You, you are a funny man.

    [E] No but really, using Greece of all possible countries? Greece is a great example of what happens with rampant corruption, not liberal theory.
    Last edited by Kaira-; 18-02-2013 at 08:14 PM.

  3. #63
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,001
    As much as I respect Nalano's opinions on many things - he is a wise man where gaming is concerned, for instance, and especially where Sim City is concerned - I just cannot get behind the liberal theories surrounding education for two very simple reasons:

    1. The liberal theory regarding education is based on the flawed perception that it is society's responsibility to bear the cost of educating their fellow men and women. This is patently false. Education and training are expensive. If you wish to have children - to place a greater burden on society - then bear the cost. Educate your children at your own expense, as opposed to asking others to bear the cost for you while you sit back and get a tax rebate in exchange for increasing our burdens. The very idea that society as a whole is responsible for educating the children of others is flawed to the point of the ridiculous.

    2. Assuming for a minute that society should bear the cost of education, let's look at how education dollars are currently spent. At the collegiate level, some professors make as much as $60k+ annually. Meanwhile, football coaches make millions. Administrators - who do not directly educate students - make more than the instructors, but less than sports coaches, whose contribution to education is Zero and whose presence on campus may even DETRACT from the goal of education.

    At the public school level - high school/grade school - administrators are once again making far more than $50k annually in most cases. So are many teachers. Health plans cost next to nothing, if they cost anything at all. Pensions are free and often require zero contribution from staff. It is plain to see, then, that the bulk of education dollars goes not to students, materials or in fact to education, but instead to salaries and perks for administrators and staff. As is the case with almost every government agency in existence today, 50% or more of all money spent is wasteful. And this is before figuring in free programs which have nothing to do with education, such as Band, Football/Soccer/Tennis/Golf/Track and other sports teams.

    And despite this, liberals still whine about funding. You are WASTING 2/3 of the money given to you on things that have NOTHING to do with your goal. If you did that in the private sector you would be fired. But here it is for some reason perfectly acceptable, to the point where you feel justified in asking for even more money to waste.

    Fix the current spending and maybe - just maybe - I will buy into the idea that you need more money to spend. I still won't agree that I should bear my share of the burden, since no share of the burden is in fact mine to bear. But I might agree that, if we are going to fund it, and you can stop wasting 50% or more of the funds, you might in fact be deserving of more funding if you remain short.

  4. #64
    I should stay out of this but...:

    1. It depends on what kind of society you want to live in. Sure, you can consign the majority of people to being uneducated and poor , in which case you get a much less productive workforce and much higher crime rates. I guess you have the option at that point of building a lot of prisons to keep all your poor under-educated people in, but that is also going to cost you a lot of money. Probably more that the schools would have cost. You can also try to compete with China with an authoritarian society built on sweatshop labor but you will have trouble convincing many people that that is ideal.

    2. I assume you are talking about college football in the US since that is the only place school football coaches make millions of dollars. College football in the US is a multi-million dollar industry with huge TV revenues. Those coaches are helping to make a ton of money for their schools. Of course there is a whole discussion to be had on the ethics of using unpaid student athletes to generate this kind of profit for the school but suffice it to say the government is not paying those people's salaries.

    3. To the extent this is true, it is for the same reason CEOs make absurd salaries (far more absurd than educators). If you want to attract qualified people you have to pay them in a way which is competitive with the private sector labor market.
    If you seriously think you could attract a bunch of great teachers while paying minimum wage you don't understand how labor markets work.
    Last edited by iridescence; 18-02-2013 at 09:00 PM.

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    975
    Wow. Every time BC posts he just sounds stupider and stupider.

    How can he even manage to breathe with that level of intelligence?

  6. #66
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus SirKicksalot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,686
    Quote Originally Posted by arathain View Post
    I agree strongly with the rest of your post, Sir K, but what's your objection to the uncanny valley concept?
    It's simply bullshit. There is no scientific evidence. It's all about conjecture. Even the guy who coined the term didn't really think about it. And even if the initial "WTF" sentiment you experience qualifies as the uncanny valley effect, it just goes away in a matter of minutes in the most extreme cases. You can read more here.

    Furthermore, even if the uncanny valley would exist, it would be irrelevant. The initial post says:

    In modern video games, the contrast of pseudo-realism and the emptyness behind it's surface makes suspension of disbelief hard to maintain. Welcome to Uncanny Valley!

    So fucking what?

    You want to go back to the Unreal 2 days?
    You demand a two decades leap in rendering technology?
    You want to pay 180 dollars for a game with a John Carter sized budget in an attempt to leap past the uncanny valley as defined above?

    The uncanny valley is a red herring when used in any argument. It's bullshit, it's irrelevant and even if it would exist it would be fixed by the natural progression of technology. As long as its critics stop demanding developers to abandon the quest for realism, at least.

    I also hate how the concept of uncanny valley was hijacked by armchair CGI critics.

  7. #67
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by ado View Post
    I mean it's true that they are capitalizing on people's nostalgia, but I feel that there's a ton of value in Star Citizen, Project Eternity, Planetary Annihilation etc. well beyond mere nostalgia.
    I'd say Kickstarter is now filling the role of the old Shareware concept, and thus allows games to find a market which otherwise would be unlikely to be successful due to a lack of mainstream appeal. It's nostalgia in a sense, but primarily because the games they're producing tend to fall into genres which dropped out of the mainstream precisely because their target market is too small to sustain AAA development, and they're hoping to tap in to that market. Nostalgia might be the wrong term to use, but then I'd also say it's not likely to result in innovation either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    The more prosperous are the people at the top, and the fewer regulations and costs they have weighing on their shoulders, the more money they have left for creating new jobs and new products.
    Yup, and if everyone at the top was a philanthropist who loved spending their money rather than hoarding it that would work. Shame the planet we inhabit isn't like that.

  8. #68
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus mashakos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by iridescence View Post
    The problem is most completely new ideas(!) don't make good games very often. They're things that sound good in theory but fail in practice or they take a long time to refine into even a semi-decent game. Sure the odd genius comes along who can think up something totally out of left field which is both brilliant and actually workable but it's rare
    That is a good point, but my general impression is that the big names in the games industry have just stopped trying. The two most refreshing game concepts I can think of started out as student projects more or less: Portal and Journey. Maybe it's because of a lack of new talent, maybe it's because of the higher stakes but the end result is no one is willing to hack away at it till something wonderful is produced.
    A great example of creativity and innovation is Shadow of the Colossus. It took age old gaming mechanics from third person action / puzzle genres and combined them into a unique experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by iridescence View Post
    There's nothing wrong with trying to iterate on old ideas. The PC-only genres of the late 90s died out, not because they had naturally run their course, but because big publishers chose to shift their resources to big console-friendly titles. There is still plenty of territory there for today's developers to mine without just totally copying the old games.
    I don't disagree with this but not when new titles are essentially remakes of the old stuff with a new coat of paint. A creative and fresh title based on an old game mechanic does not elicit a sense of deja vu from the gamer.
    The team at Valve did a great reimagining of Gauntlet with Left 4 Dead for example. Show a young gamer a screenshot from both games and it would be tough for them to make out the similarities. Can you say the same for Diablo 3 or Starcraft 2?

    Quote Originally Posted by lithander View Post
    @mashakos: Nice keynotes! Hadn't seen them! And I laughed at you D3 mockery. Guess part of the negative feedback the game received was people thinking "why the hell did that take 10 years to make?? It's just an ordinary game - didn't you promise me a new hobby?!"
    I have nothing against Diablo 3, it was clearly made from the ground up as a love letter to the faithful. I am worried that it might end up being viewed as a successful model to emulate by future PC game developers. This is what happened after WoW blew up, everyone else just kept repeating "the future of PC gaming is MMOs" every time it was brought up.
    Sure, Diablo 3 is a well thought out game with a nice art style, but it suffers from the same problems plaguing the Zelda franchise: stuck in it's ways and unapproachable to newcomers.
    Steam profile
    PC Specs: I have a big e-peen

  9. #69
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Nalano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NY f'n C
    Posts
    10,000
    Usually people outgrow Ayn Rand's pseudo-philosophy at around sophomore year in college.

    So either Blackcompany's a college freshman, or he's got some catching up to do.
    Nalano H. Wildmoon
    Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
    Attorney at Lawl
    "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

  10. #70
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Faldrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    São Paulo
    Posts
    1,381
    Is that what Ayn Rand is all about? "Having children is a burden on society"? I should probably point out that Rand is virtually unknown outside of the USA, but I do find those weird college extremisms fascinating (here in Brazil most humanities freshmen go through a Trotskyite phase instead, though).

  11. #71
    Lesser Hivemind Node ado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by Nalano View Post
    Usually people outgrow Ayn Rand's pseudo-philosophy at around sophomore year in college.

    So either Blackcompany's a college freshman, or he's got some catching up to do.
    Ayin Rand is one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century and her ideology had much influence in many wakes of the human existence especially in the business sector. Which kind of explains all the greed and apathy that the modern business man is known for.
    steam

    http://dailycelluloid.blogspot.com/- where I write about movies.

  12. #72
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Nalano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NY f'n C
    Posts
    10,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ado View Post
    Ayin Rand is one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century and her ideology had much influence in many wakes of the human existence especially in the business sector. Which kind of explains all the greed and apathy that the modern business man is known for.
    Ayn Rand was a pseudo-philosophical opportunist who attempted to insinuate herself into the New York intelligentsia and was laughed right back out of it until after her death. Her popularity has since grown because libertarians found her pronouncements flattering to themselves: She is a warm salve to asininity, and as such is lauded by assholes.

    She was to the McCarthy era what Michelle Bachmann is to the Bush era: A parrot of political expedience.
    Last edited by Nalano; 19-02-2013 at 01:23 AM.
    Nalano H. Wildmoon
    Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
    Attorney at Lawl
    "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

  13. #73
    Lesser Hivemind Node ado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by Nalano View Post
    Ayn Rand was a pseudo-philosophical opportunist who attempted to insinuate herself into the New York intelligentsia and was laughed right back out of it until after her death. Her popularity has since grown because libertarians found her pronouncements flattering to themselves: She is a warm salve to asininity, and as such is lauded by assholes.

    She was to the McCarthy era what Michelle Bachmann is to the Bush era: A parrot of political expedience.
    Sure she was mocked, Atlas Shrugged was horribly reviewed an no one of Rand's peers came to stand by her or defend her artistic integrity, let alone her ideology. And yet her ideas have been more influential in the following decades than those of any other writer of her time... Now I'm not saying that her ideas had a good effect on society, quite the opposite, but one cannot deny their influence.

    And as ideologies go objectivism is a very low hanging fruit that other (more serious) thinkers just never bothered to even pluck because it's obviously a rotten fruit. But someone had to sooner or later IMO, and I agree that its ideals sat very right with a lot of "self made" successfuls that did not profit from their own ingenuity (as they thought) but from a very fertile climate in the American post-war economy. Objectivism affirmed a lot of their egoistical and self serving notions and gave them a thin ideological justification (but a justification non the less) to proceed down a path that is purely self serving, with little regard to the consequence on the broader society. One of the consequences of such mentality is the financial crisis of '08.
    steam

    http://dailycelluloid.blogspot.com/- where I write about movies.

  14. #74
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,145
    Quote Originally Posted by mashakos View Post
    I have nothing against Diablo 3, it was clearly made from the ground up as a love letter to the faithful. I am worried that it might end up being viewed as a successful model to emulate by future PC game developers. This is what happened after WoW blew up, everyone else just kept repeating "the future of PC gaming is MMOs" every time it was brought up.
    Sure, Diablo 3 is a well thought out game with a nice art style, but it suffers from the same problems plaguing the Zelda franchise: stuck in it's ways and unapproachable to newcomers.
    I'd worry about going off topic, but seeing the posts above mine at least I'm sticking to games.

    I'm not sure I understand this one. While I may have a skewed perspective, Diablo 3 seems like it would be perfectly welcoming to a newcomer. I can't see where they could have any problems with it. You click on monsters to kill them and equip the loot they drop. Skills unlock quickly enough at the start to keep one interested, but slowly enough that you have time to experiment and see how they fit together. Normal difficulty (Monster Power system aside) is pretty gentle, and if you wish to keep playing after finishing that you'll be rapidly figuring out how to equip. By the time you get to the harder difficulties where good gear is critical you'll have been playing for dozens of hours and you'll know what to look for.

    Are there many games that are more approachable to newcomers than the Zelda series? The first hour or two of each game assumes you've never played one and teaches you everything you need.

    As an aside, D3 may have been a love letter to the fans, but it seems like the fans hated it the most. I actually think it did some bold and interesting new things, with the skill system in particular.

  15. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    975
    The sad thing is that most of its proponents don't even understand Objectivism. They bear little if any resemblance to the protagonists of her novels.

    When was the last time Rush Limbaugh got down in the trenches and shoveled slag from a furnace, and just looking at him you know he wasn't any good at it. Where are the highest wage skills in the country to attract the best talent to Walmart?

    Please. They are much more like the second lifers wanting something for nothing. What have Romney and Rove contributed to society exactly? Have they created thousands of jobs? Have they discovered an untapped reservoir of fossil fuels? No? Huh.

  16. #76
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus SirKicksalot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,686
    Quote Originally Posted by arathain View Post

    I'm not sure I understand this one. While I may have a skewed perspective, Diablo 3 seems like it would be perfectly welcoming to a newcomer. I can't see where they could have any problems with it. You click on monsters to kill them and equip the loot they drop. Skills unlock quickly enough at the start to keep one interested, but slowly enough that you have time to experiment and see how they fit together. Normal difficulty (Monster Power system aside) is pretty gentle, and if you wish to keep playing after finishing that you'll be rapidly figuring out how to equip. By the time you get to the harder difficulties where good gear is critical you'll have been playing for dozens of hours and you'll know what to look for.

    As an aside, D3 may have been a love letter to the fans, but it seems like the fans hated it the most. I actually think it did some bold and interesting new things, with the skill system in particular.
    It's newcomer friendly, but not casual friendly after one playthrough on Normal. The reward curve is bullshit. At least in Inferno 1.07 I get a lot of yellows to sell or break down. However the upgrades make little difference and it takes way too much time to find a legendary or a plan.
    The game is simply not good enough for players willing to invest only a couple of hours every now and then. It's frustrating to see tons of blues on lower difficulty and only a couple of OK-ish rares every act. The carrot-on-a-stick aspect of the loot is not working.
    And magic find should work on chests!

    It's getting a lot better though. Wasn't the rare drop rate quadrupled in a patch? Also I have no idea how people played on Inferno before the respawn timer was reduced to a universal 3 seconds. I don't think it was worth the hassle, especially considering the shitty loot.

  17. #77
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,145
    I agree that the loot is surprisingly uninteresting, although it matters less to me personally. I like the skills and I like messing about with different builds. The combat feels enjoyable, and the classes are distinct. I skip about between classes, such that I will likely never even make it to Inferno, where it becomes all about the loot. It is a little discouraging that I've never even seen a Legendary, I will say.

  18. #78
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Faldrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    São Paulo
    Posts
    1,381
    Legendaries will drop relatively often in Inferno, but the chance of getting something that is an actual upgrade is really tiny.

    To answer the previous post, people who farm Inferno simply don't die, so the respawn timer is meaningless. The trick about farming inferno is playing on low monster power level so you can kill things really quickly and with very little chance of dying.

  19. #79
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,525
    To go back on topic...
    Quote Originally Posted by Nalano View Post
    I'm not just talking about the preponderance of platformers. With the advent of tablet gaming, platformers would have come back regardless. I'm talking about the purposeful remakes of Bullfrog games, the intentional use of pixelated graphics, and the endless references to the 90s.
    Exactly. It's all well and good to go on about how it's belitting Kickstarter or whatever to talk about nostalgia, but when so many of them are pitching their ideas based on 90s games or concepts, or based on the fact that they were making games in the 90s, it's hard not to associate at least some of it with fond memories of the 90s. There's a big push to remake the 90s which is actively encouraged through the whole "Golden Age of PC Gaming!" stuff going on today, similar to the golden age of NES.

  20. #80
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Stockton-on-Tees, UK
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    It's all well and good to go on about how it's belitting Kickstarter or whatever to talk about nostalgia, but when so many of them are pitching their ideas based on 90s games or concepts, or based on the fact that they were making games in the 90s, it's hard not to associate at least some of it with fond memories of the 90s. There's a big push to remake the 90s which is actively encouraged through the whole "Golden Age of PC Gaming!" stuff going on today, similar to the golden age of NES.
    As I said, more Establishment lies. As I said, thinking that things that used to be done but aren't done any more might be worth doing again need have nothing to do with nostalgia. It's quite easy not to associate it with "fond memories of the 90s". You just don't assume bad faith. The idea that everyone is sitting around sentimentally saying "oh, remember what it was like in the good old days" instead of sitting around thinking "I remember some things that were good and then disappeared, I wouldn't mind a few of those again" is just offensive.
    Irrelevant on further examination of the rest of the thread.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •