Aerial satellite photo labelled in bright yellow letters: 1. Tiny Bodily Remains 2. Welsh Sand Cineplex 3. Legendary Bunker
IMINT #2906 from RASR-2 (TS/SCI)
1. Tiny Bodily Remains
2. Welsh Sand Cineplex
3. Legendary Bunker
the impulses themselves are understandable but if you find yourself inclined to respond to current events with "this is unprecedented" and looming possibilities with "we would never" I urge you to learn about how in fact they aren't, and how we already have
Again, Tár starts with talent and ambition, two things that WW completely lacks.
I love Macbeth but because it’s a tragedy - it charts his fall from grace. Walter White is a graceless imbecile to start with.
*hemmed
Thanks. I’ve trod multiple times (again after Pluribus) and I find it so dull and lacking in tension because Walter White is already irredeemable after the first episode so dramatically it already feels hedged into a corner.
Good vs evil I’m fine with; horror I’m fine with; bad man do bad things is just boring?
I really have a problem with understanding what it is about those stories that people find interesting. If you don’t empthasize with the characters, what’s the attraction?
The correct response was to turn it off after episode one, because why would you want to spend time with someone like that.
Aerial satellite photo labelled in bright yellow letters: 1. Maze of Chants 2. Unspeakable Nothingness
Manifest #284 from NROL-129 (CLASSIFIED)
1. Maze of Chants
2. Unspeakable Nothingness
I thought this setting was for joke posts, not images
If you’ve previously bounced off Sixty Years in Space, I’ve now had reports from multiple players than update 6 made the game significantly easier to play while keeping all the emergent goodness intact.
Ugh I’ve got to split up All Errors are My Own, because a 600 page book is ridiculous, and a 3/2 era split makes sense, but the last 2 eras are 70% or more of the book…
“Ah yes, the David Lynch original edit of Dune. Although it runs to more than 3 hours, it deepens the experience significantly.”
(I see now: “fun” is in quotes in the OP. I’ve been thinking a lot about types 2 and 3 fun, which are definitely not enjoyment fun. That’s how I missed this. My apologies.)
A short essay on why I jumped on a thread:
[] you were a leftist ignoring the evils of someone you support
[] you were a leftist applying a moral purity test to an imaginary class of person you just dreamed up
[] you were a right-winger being particularly stupid (category retired due to exhaustion)
The bad game defender has logged on.
Or as another poster put it, we don’t worry for one second about the GM role playing bad guys, but as soon as the players do it, it’s a problem.
That takes a lot of agency away from
the players.
(And yes, I realise a game manifests its politics in a lot more systems than just GM and player agency)
(I hope that’s an accurate summary).
Radmad’s position is more “it doesn’t matter if we can salvage them later, the short term damage of those players defending the bad game outweighs any long term gains”.
And where you and I disagree is the impact of a “bad” ideological game on its players. I think those players are ultimately salvageable because they can distinguish their actions in the game as fantasy.
(Not stated elsewhere: And clinging to the neutrality of a game while at the same time defending its ideologies is an inherently contradictory, and I optimistically believe collapsible, position).
To be clear, every game is ideological and I 100% agree with this. If I’m referring to ideological neutrality, I’m talking about a player’s perception of a game, not mine.
Yes.
It’s probably worth restating my original argument: it is possible for people to play “bad” ideological games and not be affected by them because they can recognise them as fantasy.
That seems a fairly mild statement and yet here we are.
I’m going to lose to you on this argument because you clearly know way more than me. But I was using truth as short hand for concepts like verisimilitude and speculation because I’m not sure how you can have either of those without some sense of the artist’s relationship to an agreed reality.
Or, to take a more interesting example, why the fuck are people still playing Monopoly?
Also I’m not sure where you got “enjoy” from. I’m not defending people who enjoy playing a game; merely those who play it. As stated elsewhere I’d much rather they felt a sense of shame in doing so - that doesn’t sound like enjoyment to me?
Yes. Do you have a specific question about the differences between making a game and playing it?
I believe you chose to bring FATAL up as an example, because extremes are great at inflaming debate and getting people to take your side without understanding the subtleties of the conversation.
I’m much more interested in talking about how you judge people who play Dungeons & Dragons.
It is entirely possible to go into a game believing it to be ideologically neutral and discover through play that it is not. That’s the opposite of being blinded by it.
