Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
There's a difference between realism and verisimilitude. To not alex a lot about it, physics breaking affects the former, while the kids thing affects the latter, and it is usually the latter which makes us accept or reject a story/setting/concept. Or, as someone put it more eloquently, "It is easier to accept the impossible likely than the possible unlikely".
Look dude, kids controlling powerful forces of nature is the entire point of the game. If you can't accept that...well, I have nothing more to say.
I thought it was more about flashy cockfighting, but hey, opinions.
The two are not mutually exclusive by any means
And no, it really isn't about opinion. The game is objectively about a kid who controls magic animals.
There's a difference between "magic animals" and "omnipotent forces of nature"
But the former can include the latter.
Dio Brando vs Albert Wesker.
This is Part 1 Dio vs RE5 Wesker, because The World is overpowered and would let Dio win easily.
Yes, but the two cause different expectations among players.
Maaaaaan
how many threads have turned into analysing pokemon lately
Two. This being the second.
How so?
Magic is about doing things that violate the laws of conventional science. It is not that big a stretch to include omnipotence: it is simply a matter of degree.
And animals are undeniably forces of nature.
A force of nature is a natural phenomenon humans can't control.
If pokemons were a force of nature, the premise of the game would be wholly invalidated.
Well anyways, it's really ludicrous to be bugged about something that's the entire freaking premise.
I mean I agree that Pokemon would make a good deal more sense if the Pokemon weren't as powerful as the 'dex and lore bits say they are, but they are and it's stupid not to be OK with that.
Scott Free vs GLADoS and the entire testing facility.
Well anyways:
Magus (pre-Ocean Palace) vs Kefka (pre-godhood)
"Bella loves an abusive vampire". Boom.
You can just not read Twilight, in the same way as you can just not play Pokemon.
And if you read Twilight for bile fascination, you really have no right to complain about how disgusting the premise is.
That doesn't make it ludicrous to be bugged by it.
- sigh -
Look, just because you don't play Pokemon or read Twilight doesn't mean that their flaws are going to stop being present.
Regardless of why you read Twilight, you always have the right to complain about your issues with it. There's no such thing as "No right to complain" when it comes to media unless the complaint itself is unfounded. And none of the complaints here are except yours right now.
Augh, maybe we got sidetracked a bit.
The point I'm trying to make is that it's rather sad that Noimporta's suspension of disbelief has been broken by how kids can apparently control things more dangerous than guns and cars. While I could get behind that if Pokemon was a more realistic series, the premise of Pokemon needs to run on several unspoken agreements. One of these unspoken agreements is that (how many times does this have to be said?) kids can control Pokemon, which are dangerous.
I'm just annoyed that suspension of disbelief has been broken when logically it shouldn't have been.
So right, the Scott Free vs GLaDOS probably requires some caveats. I mean if he has the Mother Box with him, it's basically another Tuesday for him. Well then again, the Mother Box works to the point that it will service the plot more than an explicit I Win Button.
Granted, Scott is an out and out physical god, so really he could plow through the testing center no problem. On the otherhand, Shilo Norman with the motherboxxx or a portal gun is a more fair toss up.
(okay it isn't. He escaped from a black hole and death)
My knowledge on Scott Free is limited, and while I know lots about GLADoS and her merry crew I can't comment.
It's no more sillier than people being bugged by the fact that Superman's entire disguise is a pair of glasses.
I'm not so sure if that was an unspoken agreement in the first place.
It is.
As Noimporta pointed out earlier, I urge you to go read up on the concept of narrative verisimilitude. That is where this problem stems from.
But yeah I see where you're coming from. It really is confusing how people can accept that Superman can lug around cars and shoot fire from his eyes but bitch about how his Clark Kent getup is just a suit and a nice pair of specs.
^ Ninja'd
Twilight is an explicit attempt to teach an entire generation of girls a few lessons:
And based on its sales, it appears to be succeeding. I'd say people who don't read it have every right to hate it.
Hey Alkthash, can you at least post a list of Scott Free's known feats so I have something to work with?
Neh, whenever we talk superhero shit, just fire up wikipedia.
Oooh, I know. The Lord Ruler from Mistborn vs Doctor Doom. Or Magneto. Or the Avengers (lets go with movie line up for sake of convenience).
The Lord Ruler, for the first two. Probably the Avengers otherwise.