FlarePhoenix

You know, I could make some well reasoned argument as to why one person's opinion on the internet doesn't really mean anything, but let's be honest here: everyone already knows that, but we're so used to having to defend games from someone that we go after the easiest target. With her broad sweeping statements, and no back-up to her words (at least on Twitter), it would be all too easy to just look at her and go "that's nice" and move on. One person saying they don't like a game on Twitter isn't going to change anything. We're so used to having to defend games, we've resorted to turning Anita into a much bigger threat than she really is.

I think it is interesting she voices her opinion, even though I really don't agree with what she has to say (as I said before, it's hard to agree with her when she says things with nothing to back them up). I watched a few of her youtube videos, and found them to be interesting. I may not agree completely with what she says, but she isn't hurting me by saying them. If she believes ICO or DMC are bad games, that shouldn't diminish your enjoyment of them, should it?

Please, can we stop with the whole "she stole money from people" because she didn't. She started a Kickstarter, and people choose to donate to it. It's no different to any other Kickstarter: sometimes you take a gamble, and wind up losing out. She hasn't officially said the videos are not coming, so can we please stop using it as "proof" that she is a horrible person.

Better yet, can we stop making threads about her. She's a person on the internet that just happened to get into the public eye for a brief moment. The only reason anyone still remembers her is because we can't help but keep bringing her up. She voiced an opinion on Twitter; is that really worth making a thread about? Trust me on this, nothing Anita can do will be more damaging to games than how we act whenever she comes up.

Alright...

If this is serious, fuck that guy.

If this is a joke, all of the fucks that guy. Seriously, gamers have a hard enough time being taken seriously without us having to explain this shit.

If the people signing the petition are being sincere. Fuck them.

If the people signing the petition are doing it for the lulz. Don't encourage stupidity. It's not worth it.

People: Oh the 3DS is a bunch of crap!!!!

*Super Mario 3Ds Land comes out*

People: OMFG THIS THING IS FUCKEN AWESOME!!!!!!

*fast forward a bit*

People: Oh the WiiU is a bunch of crap!!!

*Super Smash Bros comes out*

People: OMFG THIS THING IS FUCKEN AWESOME!!!!

That about sum it up?

Seriously guys, why do we do this with every new console? If it's not successful in the first five minutes, we start to write it off. The WiiU is going to do fine. It could actively punch you in the stomach every time you turn it on, and people would still buy it just to play the new Mario, Zelda, Kirby, Smash Bros, etc...

Also, the Wii's success is impossible to determine at the moment, since the point of the Wii was to introduce a new audience into gaming; something that is a little hard to determine at the moment.

@clumsyninja1 said:

Having kids is the most amazing ever! Also is the natural course of life, it defines the men from the boys.

If not wanting to have kids makes me a boy in people's eyes, so be it.

If they can find a provable connection between violence and video games, that is something to consider, but that's not going to happen. I know that, you know that, hell the government already knows that. All this is. is the government doing the least work possible to appease the masses who demand something be done about this school shooting (but run for your life if you even suggest taking away their guns). I honestly don't see how they can test something like this. The lifestyle and personality of each individual tested would have to be taken into account, and even if it is, it is pointless because everyone is different. I mean what's going to happen: someone plays GTA, gets frustrated when they get stuck, and that means there is a connection. No, this whole thing is just one big stage show; no one in government is actually expecting anything to come out of this.

Also, don't kid yourself, even if they somehow proved 100% video games do not cause violence, the people who believe it will still believe it. At this point, it's really going to ever change when the old generation dies off and this generation (or possible even the next) come into power. Then some new thing will come out, and we will go through this whole song and dance again, because hell why should our children have it easy... :P

@thabigred said:

The problem with changing the starting type is the rock paper scissors aspect to it. The only other combo I can think with the same rock paper scissors element to it would be Psychic>Dark>Fighting. I honestly can't think of another.

Psychic>Dark>Fighting wouldn't really work because Dark is immune to Psychic not just strong against it. However, I still question why the rock-paper-scissors aspect of it needs to exist. When you first battle your rival, you both only have access to Normal attacks and by the time you face your rival with attacks specific to your starter's type you've played enough of the game that you should have picked up on the whole strength and weakness thing long before then.

Also,

http://pokemondb.net/pokebase/21931/how-many-type-triangles-are-there-like-the-starter-pokemon

lists all the type triangles that could work, if they really needed to stick to that.

@chrissedoff said:

@FlarePhoenix: It's easier for people to get mad about CAD because its creator is a thin-skinned hack who is alleged to have tried to seduce underage girls. Also, it's just kind of fascinating how crummy the comic is and has always been, and yet there's a lot of otherwise-normal people who eat it with a spoon. It's weird.

*shrugs* People who play sports professionally are often accused of all sorts of unspeakable acts, and, in my opinion, sports are "crummy" but "otherwise-normal" people eat them with a spoon. I don't go around to everyone who likes sports telling them how wrong they are. Tell me, would you like it if everyone kept attacking something you like? I'm not saying everyone has to love anything, but I just wish people could just go "I don't like this, but that's okay" and just move on with it. Don't get me wrong, if there is an interesting discussion to be had I'm all for it, but the amount of crap placed on CAD is unreasonable.

@LiquidPrince said:

@FlarePhoenix said:

@LiquidPrince said:

@Animasta said:

@LiquidPrince said:

@Cretaceous_Bob said:

CAD is still terrible, it seems.

What part of that was terrible exactly? I've always thought a majority of the CAD strips are pretty clever and funny.

one word; abortion

two more words; not clever

three more works; terrible and badumb.

(seriously even goddamn penny arcade is 10 times the webcomic CAD is and penny arcade sucks)

I haven't read in a long while. What happened to his main characters and that robot? Does he still write them?

The story with Ethan and Friends has ended (he has hinted they might come back in the future, but as a reboot if they do). Right now, the comic focuses mostly on one-strip jokes with the Player Characters as the main characters.

Oh did it end a long time ago?

No it ended November 24th. I like CAD, and I wish people who didn't like it could just accept they don't like it. I don't get how this webcomic somehow invokes so much rage in people that the simple mention of its presence is enough to force them to attack it as if them seeing or even hearing about it is going to cause them to fall ill otherwise. I wish we lived in a world where people just went "I don't like this, and that's cool, so I'm not going to engage in conversation about it. It's not hurting me, and I can pretty much control my exposure to it, so good luck to the people who actually like it".

Of course, I also wish for a Gundam and to be privy to, if not a part of, a totally impromptu but somehow choreographed song and dance number made up totally on the fly. Somehow both of those seem more likely...

@LiquidPrince said:

@Animasta said:

@LiquidPrince said:

@Cretaceous_Bob said:

CAD is still terrible, it seems.

What part of that was terrible exactly? I've always thought a majority of the CAD strips are pretty clever and funny.

one word; abortion

two more words; not clever

three more works; terrible and badumb.

(seriously even goddamn penny arcade is 10 times the webcomic CAD is and penny arcade sucks)

I haven't read in a long while. What happened to his main characters and that robot? Does he still write them?

The story with Ethan and Friends has ended (he has hinted they might come back in the future, but as a reboot if they do). Right now, the comic focuses mostly on one-strip jokes with the Player Characters as the main characters.

@CrazyBagMan said:

@FlarePhoenix said:

@Sparkul said:

@FlarePhoenix said:

@Video_Game_King said:

@FlarePhoenix said:

Still, would it be so bad if the starter Pokemon weren't part of a weakness triangle.

Then how else would the game teach you about weaknesses? Think of it as a small introductory lesson to an important system.

It doesn't teach you about weaknesses anyway. Even though your rival picks the Pokemon that is strong against yours, you both only have normal attacks in the first battle. It isn't until the second battle with the rival when their starter has moves that are strong against your starter. By that point, you've probably picked up on the strengths/weaknesses mechanic from other battles.

The first gym in B/W changes depending on what your starter is. By the time you get there your main offensive moves are of your starter's type, so that's where weaknesses become really important. The first battles against the friend characters are just general battle tutorials.

Well yeah, and they could easily do something like that regardless of what types the three starter Pokemon are.

I feel like you're pushing for them to avoid this just to stand by your original statement. There's no real reason why they couldn't change the starters, but there's even moreso no real reason why they would or should.

You're trying to make it sound like I'm making a bigger deal out of this than I really am. If they don't change the starter types, it's really no skin off my nose, but I'm just saying there isn't a reason they couldn't. I mean it's not like it hasn't happened before: Pokemon Yellow gave you an electric type (Pikachu) and your rival a normal type (Eevee).