next »

[gimymblert]

click on that bait you m8 not find it boring

[s0]

i clicked it (and i actually played the game haha). it sounds ok, kinda like an old disney movie THE SIMPSONS THEME OR ANYTHING ELSE BY DANNY ELFMAN. but id still personally prefer country-ish instrumentation similar to what they used on the n64, except with real instruments rather than midi soundfounts. maybe they could even get some hawaiian flavors in there considering the game title with some UKULELES (hint hint hint) and slide guitars.

when i said the orchestral music is wack i was just exaggerating

see the thing is, whenever game devs use live music they almost always go for orchestras, usually string orchestras. nuts n bolts actually breaks the mold slightly because it uses lots of woodwinds. music with smaller ensembles that isnt electronic music is a relative rarity in soundtrack music (for both film and games, tho moreso in games). banjo kazooie and tooie used band-style instrumentation with lots of country and dixieland flavors in a game that isn't a period piece. that's actually pretty rad.

[Impmaster]

Hey I love esports. I watched the League World tournament and I used to follow the Hearthstone scene. I also dabbled in CS: GO and Smash for a while. Esports aren't a waste of time at all. Sure, they might not be sports per se but the amount of effort that the pro gamers put in is definitely worth something.

Also, the multimillion dollar tournaments aren't actually that much money. The money is sent to the whole team, then the coaching and marketing staff need to be paid, then the rest gets split between 5 players who don't have a good salary unless they win and become the best of 70 million players.

[JWK5]

Though I could care less about sports let alone e-sports, they all require physical and mental skill. Playing Street Fight 4 (and its various iterations) is not the same as playing football in terms of how the body is pushed, but then an hour of football won't require a player to make nearly as many tactical decisions a player will make in just a minute of playing Street Fighter 4.

It is easy for people who don't play games to laugh off video game competitions and not take them seriously, but it is even easier for people who do play to do so (since most of us are pretty good at games and have been playing them for a long time and that makes it easier to underestimate how much practice and dedication is required for that level of play).

[oahda]

then the coaching and marketing staff need to be paid

... that's part the problem lol, not a way to defend the use of the money


i've never said it's a waste of time or that it has to be boring or that it doesn't require skill, tho

i just think it's sad to see so much money being put into it that could go to better stuff

[s0]

sure its fair to critcize the extreme commercialization of sports (including "e sports") and the marketing involved, but do you really think coaches are unimportant?

i have 0 interest in e-sports but i used to be a semi-professional skier in my teens and i can tell u that having a coach was pretty essential.

[oahda]

i don't think a coach should get more or less money than an individual player at least

and I don't think you should pay football players more money than scientists for that matter

all the money is in the wrong place and that's what upsets me

[Impmaster]

But a lot of science is just not applicable to the majority of the people with money. Sure, science is a noble goal in itself, but saying that the guy who really likes to study snails deserves the money more than the guy who entertains and gives a source of excitement in people's lives is a really strange idea to me. Sure we could say teachers deserve more money. But they are a poor quality form of education. Most education nowadays is simply memorizing a textbook in order to get good scores. It's rare to have a truly good teacher who enlightens a student.

I've never understood people who criticize money going to entertainment rather than more lofty positions. That's the basis Western civilization is based on.

[oahda]

Teachers are a great example, tho. Most teachers either aren't pedagogic or they're pedagogic but underqualified in their actual subjects. Or sometimes they're neither. And their pay is lousy. That's definitely somewhere a lot of more money should be put.

I think it's great that they entertain, but they don't need even a fourth of Beckham's salary for that and still live pretty neat lives. A lot of jobs are so overpaid when there could be a better, more balanced division of money across fields.

[gimymblert]

They are not paid because football, they are paid because they are popular, that's math, necessity don't define money, popularity is, ie lot of people want to give money. It's irrelevant to actual value, if a lot of people want a thing of little value, even if they think it has little value, volume will win. Money isn't a matter of morality in the strict sense, it depend on the cultural set up of demand and offer, and demand follow "want" more than "need". And defining need and want is political so that's another can of worm.

[oahda]

Maybe more people would want science than football if education was better tho.

[Impmaster]

yeah lol i wish education was better. although tbh my education system is probably fine, and i'm probably just too lazy to access the majority of my opportunities. Nah.

[Schoq]

the real problem is team CEOs who contribute with none of the value and make none of the sacrifices sucking up money from the players

education needs better funding pretty much everywhere and should always be a huge priority for any government wanting their nation to prosper, but politicians don't need to give a fuck because the immense positive effects of investing in it and the catastrophically negative effects of cuts don't really show until 10-20 years later when they're all retired or dead anyway

rip

[s0]

in my country the main thing holding education back other than funding is conservative ideological bullshit.

[oahda]

Ways of teaching are definitely flawed in many ways in many places too. There is often a focus on simply filling the students' heads with hard facts (numbers, names) that they'll be forgetting a week after they've had a test on it, than a focus on the subject and its workings as a whole. Teaching students that things are the way they are, but not how or why. Not encouraging a mindset of personal thinking and analysis.

I've heard many times recently that in the US classes often just consist of teachers dealing out so called "packages", which is a bundle of papers with information stapled together, not really doing any active teaching, and then having a test on it after a few weeks.

There needs to be engagement. Inspiration.

But it's also society in general, where parents care more about "proper behaviour" and keeping their garden beautiful and their rugs clean than to let their children run around and explore and have fun with their genuine curiosity. Or it might have to do with beliefs being imposed upon the children. They're discouraged at an early age from their natural curiosity when they're at their most receptive and eventually they move on to school with the motivation "beaten" out of them and any chances the school might have had at rekindling it are generally not taken.

[jiitype]

Parents don't let kids play and school beats us down what that's quite a generalization

[oahda]

I can't speak for schools outside of my realm of experience, but lack of engagement and ways of teaching laid out in a, to me and many, inefficient way, seems to be a pattern in both Swedish and US schools at least.

Parents discouraging children from doing a lot of things because they have to "behave" or "not make a mess" is far too common. Neil DeGrasse Tyson likes to make a point of this a lot.

And let's not forget religious parents literally indoctrinating their children at their most receptive age with stuff that's going to be hard to shake off later. Fortunately not really a thing in Scandinavia, but big elsewhere.

[jiitype]

Hmm I guess that makes sense then. I don't really know much about school systems outside my country it seems

[Schoq]

all such discussion is a distraction from the fact that education needs more funding imo

there's always talk about making schools more effective per dollar WITH THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK DISCOVERED BY A LOCAL DAD when holy shit just give them more money already
it's a given that some of the resources should go towards researching and evaluating methods

[s0]

no because pumping more money into a shitty system doesn't make the system better. education does need a lot more funding but it needs to change in a whole lot of ways before a hypothetical increase in funding has any effect. the research already exists.