Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Advanced search

1038151 Posts in 41950 Topics- by 33562 Members - Latest Member: nought

September 01, 2014, 05:49:45 PM
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 243
16  Player / General / Re: Religion (Formerly "What religion are you?") on: April 10, 2011, 01:39:36 AM
nice logic. enjoy explaining all this to jesus. Big Laff Shrug Roll Eyes Facepalm
Just curious, do you think it's your duty to convert people to your religion, as far as you are able?

If so, do you think that your posts in this thread are an effective method for conversion?
17  Player / General / Re: Religion (Formerly "What religion are you?") on: April 10, 2011, 12:55:52 AM
How is that the only scientific method? Do you even know what the scientific method is?  I don't think you can apply that to a metaphysical subject such as God and whether or not he exists.  I'm not gonna run experiments on my prayers to God.  How could I even attempt such a thing.  I'm so confused.  I need a detective.  Noir
I don't know why people always say that "the existence of God is a metaphysical concept" and "God can't be investigated with the scientific method".

Maybe that's true for some transcendental Spinoza-ish kind of God. But for the discrete, interventionist God described in the Bible, it's totally feasible to examine the evidence for His existence in a scientific manner.
18  Player / General / Re: Religion (Formerly "What religion are you?") on: April 09, 2011, 05:07:39 AM
I don't think that's really what most people mean by ethics. An ethical proposition isn't something like "Acting honestly will ultimately, on average, benefit you". That's just a statement about the world. An ethical claim would be "You should act honestly regardless of whether it benefits you". (Or, equally, "You should act honestly only when it does benefit you" - the point being that the statement hinges on 'should' instead of 'is'.)

i guess i just don't understand why someone "should" do something unless there's some benefit from it, or why someone should avoid doing something unless there's some harm that comes from it. if ethics is used in the sense of 'what you should do regardless of benefit or harm' then in that sense i don't think people need ethics, they don't need to be told what to do regardless of how useful or useless it is or how beneficial or harmful it is -- what's the point of doing good if there's no benefit of doing it over not doing it? if there's no reason or "why" for a moral choice, why would it matter?
Well, if you do anything in life, then at some point you must be motivated by a reason which has no "why" beyond it. Even if you are a complete egoist who only does whatever benefits yourself, you are still working from the ethical proposition that "I should always look out for my own benefit first regardless of others" or whatever. Ultimately you have no reason why you want to benefit yourself rather than, say, donating all your money to charity, or killing yourself, or doing a little dance. Any action you take is a moral action, because by doing it you are implying that it is better than any other action you could have taken.

To me it seems like a problem that's pretty much unresolvable unless at some point you rest your motivations on a bedrock of "just because". And although I personally don't rest my bedrock on a really old book written by desert tribesmen, I can't find any reasons why my basis for morality is any less arbitrary than that.
19  Player / General / Re: Some indie films, should not exist at all on: April 08, 2011, 10:18:27 PM
I actually really want to see Terror Toons and I think it truly embodies the indie spirit. I mean, what mainstream studio would ever be able to create a horror film which turns into a superhero-action movie in the last ten minutes?
20  Player / General / Re: Religion (Formerly "What religion are you?") on: April 08, 2011, 10:01:10 PM
a science of ethics would not be about what people ought to do in general, it'd be about what people ought to do to achieve specific ends that they want. that's something that can be studied. what makes people the most happy (among alternatives) could also be studied. which actions lead to which results; effective and ineffective methods, and so on.

for instance, if honesty really is the best policy, that could be proven scientifically: study honest and dishonest people, record what they are honest and dishonest about, and see what those correlate with (success, happiness, and other variables). the same could be done for a lot of other moral issues -- adultery, chastity, politeness, and so on.
I don't think that's really what most people mean by ethics. An ethical proposition isn't something like "Acting honestly will ultimately, on average, benefit you". That's just a statement about the world. An ethical claim would be "You should act honestly regardless of whether it benefits you". (Or, equally, "You should act honestly only when it does benefit you" - the point being that the statement hinges on 'should' instead of 'is'.)
21  Player / General / Re: How to gain levels? on: April 04, 2011, 01:48:56 AM
I have arrived to salvage the rotting carcas of this thread and recycle the fluids within to gain as much feesable biogas to power the world for an atosecond of AWESOME. <3

So, anyway, why isn't there a thing thing that shows how many topics you have that ave atleast 10  Hand Thumbs Up Right or something like that. Can I get a  Hand Thumbs Up Left Hand Thumbs Up Right for this topic? It displays insanity very artistically.
Oh yeah, I'd really love to see a 'Like' button on every thread. Hell, on every post. Ideally it should be possible to Like every element of the website, including the Like buttons themselves.
22  Player / General / Re: Why are ROMs bad? on: April 03, 2011, 12:31:59 AM
ROMs are morally wrong....unless you download them with piles of DRM from the Virtual Console shop

After all, you should support the developers!

....Unfortunately, those developers have long since moved on in the past 20 years and all the money goes to a monolithic conglomerate that bought out the company when it went belly up decades ago.

And these works wouldn't still be under copyright at all if it weren't for Goliaths like Disney lobbying to extend the copyright term again and again to keep Mickey Mouse out of the public domain where he belongs.

You know what? They're just bad, okay. Shut up and do what you're told. We have everything under control.
Most of the stuff you're saying is totally reasonable, I'm just wondering what's your reasoning for saying that Mickey Mouse "belongs" in the public domain? Since he is still in use and is still associated strongly with a specific company, it seems reasonable to me that he should remain under copyright.
23  Player / General / Re: How to gain levels? on: April 03, 2011, 12:23:12 AM
Skipping from page 1 to page 4 of this thread is brilliant.
24  Player / Games / Re: Glum Buster on: April 02, 2011, 03:40:11 AM
Glum Buster isn't really very much like Seiklus or other 'atmospheric'/'zen' platformers. It's pretty traditional in terms of its design, only the presentation is somewhat unusual.
25  Player / General / Re: Why are ROMs bad? on: March 31, 2011, 06:55:01 PM
Food is a scarce, physical good; If I eat it, the restaurant loses it. A video game is an infinite, digital good that costs nothing to copy.

And indeed I have tried things at restaurants without paying for them. Once, I ordered a stake and it was raw. Obviously I didn't pay for it. Another time, my salad was rotten. Similarly, I "ordered" an RPG from BioWare and it was crap; I didn't pay for it. I don't know how restaurants work where you're from but over here it's far worse for a business to give customers bad service such that they never return. If my food is bad, the restaurant always apologizes and compensates. It's pretty obvious, otherwise I'd never go there again.
Yes, but the difference is that you kept playing DA2 all the way to the end. The restaurant analogy would be more apt if it were like this: You got served a salad (allegedly rotten, although this is somewhat subjective) but you kept eating it. In fact, you ate a huge five-course meal, spending many hours at the restaurant. Then after you'd polished off the dessert you said "Well actually, the salad was rotten, the steak was raw, etc. so I shan't be paying for any of this."
If a game is worth spending 20+ hours playing it then how is it not worth spending the money that it costs?
26  Player / General / Re: Why are ROMs bad? on: March 24, 2011, 05:47:40 PM
whether corexii liked dragon age 2 or not doesnt matter because his original post read "worth playing at least once" and "pirate, don't support bioware"
doesn't sound like testing

Well that's what it is. Despite being a disappointing experience, it was still an experience worth having if you've nothing better to do (like me at the time).
You had nothing better to do? Were you locked inside a room with a computer that can't do anything except play DA2?
27  Player / Games / Re: Let's Talk Zelda on: March 21, 2011, 01:08:23 AM
Since reading this thread I started playing the original Zelda for the first time, and it's really good. The whole mystery of it is very daunting at first, not knowing where to go or what to do. But it makes the discoveries a lot more meaningful when you find them. I'm really glad that I never read anything about the game before I started playing it. (Getting the stepladder was a huge surprise... I really didn't think I would find any items that I hadn't already seen in later games.)
28  Player / General / Re: Why are ROMs bad? on: March 17, 2011, 08:14:41 PM
imo there are no ethical problems with ROMs

sure there are. i've some sympathy with saying that it's not that bad, but there *are* ethical problems with it, the main one being that the people who made the game don't want you to play it that way. so you're taking something they made and playing it in a way that they prefer you not play it in. so you're clearly going against the wishes of the people who made the thing you're enjoying, and doing that has ethical repercussions provided you believe that you should treat other people with respect and honor how they want you to use the things they created

But you're assuming that all creators think it's a bad thing for people to be pirating their stuff. Whereas a lot of the time I think they would be cool with it. Like, if I went to Shigeru Miyamoto and said, "Hey, would you rather I played Zelda 1 on an emulator, or not at all?" He would probably be cool with it.

But, I realise that I am also making an unfounded assumption there. So it's kind of tricky, I don't think we should assume one way or the other. Not to mention that it depends a lot on context (I figure that Miyamoto would be a lot less likely to be happy with me pirating Super Mario Galaxy 2.)

So in conclusion I guess I have no fucking clue...
29  Player / Games / Re: Dragon Age 2: A game designer's review (small spoilers) on: March 11, 2011, 01:17:41 AM
Though I haven't played either of them I enjoyed reading this review, good stuff!
30  Community / Townhall / Re: MineLands - Minecraft Clone on Facebook on: March 10, 2011, 12:56:28 AM
Allow the player to place only a certain number of blocks every 24 hours, unless they pay cash money for a larger block quota.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 243
Theme orange-lt created by panic