Whamola's forum posts

#1 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

To be fair, there's nothing wrong with being critical of Mormons (or any religion really). Let's not forget that it was established canon in the Mormon religion that black people were unclean and unfit to enter heaven. Not to mention that they have some pretty unhealthy views on sexuality along with a lot of other unsavory stuff.

As for "boycotting" art, it really depends. I don't think Hitler was a very good painter. What I saw of his work is very bland and lacks anything worth discussing (oddly enough I REALLY like George W. Bush's self-portraits). But if he WAS, I'd have no problem with buying his work. Mainly because his art isn't a result or motivated by antisemitism.

With something like Ender's Game, it's very clear that his personal views are integral to his art. So even if I didn't know that it was going to be garbage, I still wouldn't go to see it.

There's also other things to consider. I like H.P. Lovecraft even though he's a terrible writer, but there's quite a few stories of his that are completely racist. The focus of his work isn't really racially motivated though, so it's pretty clear that although he was kind of racist, it wasn't a driving force for him.

#2 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

Mountain Dew and Doritos both use the term "Gamer", so I definitely don't want to be one.

Honestly though, it's a stupid categorization. Also, I'm not sure I understand why someone who rates GTAV a 9/10 can't be a gamer because that score is apparently too low.

I'd say a Gamer is anyone who defines their life by the fact that they enjoy video games. I have a lot of games and systems from Atari to PS3, and I have a PS4 and several games pre-ordered and paid off, but I wouldn't consider myself a "gamer" because even though I play a lot of games, it's just one small part of my life.

#3 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

Dan O'Bannon also wrote Alien, so I'm sure people were pretty comfortable giving him money from whatever project he wanted.

#4 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

Mad Men. Japanimation is for dorks.

#5 Edited by Whamola (134 posts) -

Personally, I don't really see the point of a dedicated streaming device, especially if you're going to have a PS4 and Xbone. If you LOVE the other streaming device or if there's a service you can't get on either of them, then sure, keep it.

From what I hear both the PS4 and Xbone cost a dollar or two a year in electricity when they're in standby mode, so there's really not much to worry about as far as saving electricity goes.

#6 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

These segments are fantastic, and I love how easily fed up he gets with things. Also, since I and probably everyone else here are interested in games, it's fun to see what games appeal to people who aren't so interested.

#7 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

This is a long movie title. It's also a terrible movie. Coincidence?

#8 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

Basically because the human brain is more complex than a cat brain. Our brains need near constant stimulation (that's why we're on a video game website right now) because we evolved really big brains really fast and became really great at meeting our needs for survival quickly. So now we need stuff to be different every so often to keep ourselves from becoming depressed, bored, or crazy.

If you eat the same thing everyday, you'll likely get tired of it or you might even get sick if this hypothetical Bachelor Chow doesn't contain every possible thing we are likely to digest regularly.

#9 Edited by Whamola (134 posts) -

@video_game_king: Well, if he wants to write non-fiction, the same rules apply pretty much, but with a few things added:

Figure out what is relevant and what isn't. I know its en vogue for journalists and the like to write these long set ups about how they were drinking a chai-skinny-latte with extra foam at Balducci's on MLK and Washington when The Killing Moon by Echo and the Bunnymen started playing on my 32 gig Apple iPhone 5s when I saw a Peruvian Pan flute player wearing Gauchos and I thought to myself, "My God! It's so simple! Globalization is...SHUT THE HELL UP. The worst thing you can do is insert yourself into a story. Hunter S. Thompson did it, sure, but he did it because he specifically became part of whatever he was covering, that was how he worked best. Just learn what the story is, figure out why it's important or interesting, and talk about that, don't pad things out. Be concise first and foremost and the rest will fall into place.

Figure out how to properly put things in an order that makes sense. Let's say you're writing about art in the ancient Mediterranean. You wouldn't start with the Etruscans, go on to the Romans, and end on the Greeks. It sounds simple, but its a mistake I see a lot of people make.

#10 Posted by Whamola (134 posts) -

Game reviews are fine, it's scores that are pointless. That's why I just read the reviews Giant Bomb posts without looking at the score.

With this new batman game, most of the reviews I've read are, "It's okay. It's the same as the last one mostly." Judging from the Quick Look I can say I fully agree. It doesn't look bad, it just doesn't look amazing.

The thing is, games get judged on what they try to do. You can't really say a Fifa game is bad because you can't cast Firaga in it, you have to judge it on how it is as a soccer game. At the same time a game like Batman has to be judged it by itself, and not on how well it recreates something else. So while Batman may be a more interesting or compelling game than Fifa, it's definitely possible and pretty reasonable that it might score higher.

Don't read the review if you already played and enjoyed the game, and don't look at the score if you want to know if you should buy it or not.

If anything I'd say user reviews are worthless. xXWEED_GOKU420Xx may give Batman a 10/10 because "YO ITS SICK U CAN FITE THE JOCKER" or give it a 0/10 because "They should have made Bane have a cooler voice, game sucks." Most people deal in absolutes, so if one thing is good, or one thing is bad about a game, it's either the best game ever or the worst game ever.

What I don't understand is people that get angry when a game they like gets a lower score than they think it deserves. I thought GTAV deserved a 7 or 8 out of ten, and I'd definitely say its one of the best games of the year, but I've seen people flip their shit because some random reviewer from an established website gave it an 8/10 and said, "Yeah, it's not the best game ever, but it's really great and well worth playing". Didn't a couple people send Jeff death threats or something because he didn't give a Zelda game a perfect score?