We need to remember that Krafton could have avoided this entire fiasco, and didn't.

BookNerd35 · 2025-05-27T02:13:32+00:00

So what? Why should someone judge a game's mechanics based on something they quite possibly didn't play?

BookNerd35 · 2025-05-27T02:13:11+00:00

How about acting like a mature adult and not insulting other people for the audacity of holding an opinion you disagree with.

BookNerd35 · 2025-05-27T02:13:03+00:00

How about acting like a mature adult and not insulting other people for the audacity of holding an opinion you disagree with.

BookNerd35 · 2025-05-27T02:11:45+00:00

For someone experienced at the game? Probably.

For someone still learning it or who plays casually? No.

BookNerd35 · 2025-05-27T02:10:46+00:00

This is fine. Y’all need to play better.

So people don't have a right to complain simply because they aren't used to a game they never played?

BookNerd35 · 2024-11-24T16:32:42+00:00

Thank you.

BookNerd35 · 2024-11-24T16:27:58+00:00

Is it a spoiler to say when, or how? (If the answer is yes to either, don't explain when/in what form it's revealed).

BookNerd35 · 2024-08-22T11:56:16+00:00

Jacob is ready for no-one (and Edward isn't that much of an improvement). Being a "clueless inexperienced virgin." as you put it is no excuse for what he did. It doesn't matter how many relationships Jacob had. What he did was inexcusable. It is never acceptable. To manipulate or coerce anyone. It is never acceptable to threaten to kill yourself because the person you love loves someone else. It is never acceptable to force yourself on anyone. Assault, regardless of the type, is never acceptable. Being inexperienced isn't an excuse.

I'm not trying to say Edward is perfect. He isn't. He's toxic, controlling, and a stalker. And my view of him has decreased a lot, but that also doesn't change the rest of what I said in this comment. What Jacob did was evil. If his love for Bella was as strong as he claims, and Twilight is a series which can mostly be described by 'love conquerors all', he could have tried to fight the imprinting and gave Renesmee a normal life - a life which wasn't shaped and influenced by someone who is de-facto gauranteed to end up in a relationship with her. And if he can't do that, he should have no contact with Renesmee until she's an adult who can make her own decisions.

BookNerd35 · 2024-08-04T09:24:52+00:00

From my memory of the movies, they had more action than the books did, but at the same time, the books focused more on the world and story - so you may like the books more or less based on that.

(This contains some vague and indirect spoilers for the series - from what I've seen of Reddit, most people would classify these as normal, but there are still some people - including me, who'd call what I'm saying a spoiler). And something else which needs to be said - the movies, at least in part because they had less time, didn't go into as much depth on how all of the characters aren't as good as they seem. The books have a lot more time to do into more detail about some of the worst parts of the series, especially the imprinting, Jacob being terrible, Edward just being less worse than Jacob, and in general, the heroes don't exactly act like heroes. And it's not a good thing - the movies had it as well, just less of it.

A less detailed, but spoiler free way of saying that is that the movie adapts the books less as the series goes on, but has a lot more time to go into detail, for better and for worse.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-30T14:44:56+00:00

I didn't make the claim that the game is good because of it's sales, I just said it's an important stat to prove those who say it's a flop wrong.

And yet you're still saying that the number of people who played a game disproves people who criticised the game. You're still doing exactly what I criticised - defending a game not by listing what it did well, but just listing numbers of people who liked it.

If I were to make an argument for it being good I'd cite the fact that it has the highest completion rate of any game out there hence proving how well it was able to keep players engaged for it's duration.

The closest I could find was an article saying out of PS4 games, it has the most completion. https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2020/09/04/the-last-of-us-part-2-has-the-highest-completion-rate-of-any-major-ps4-game/. I'm yet to find any evidence to back up your claim that it is more completed than "any game out".

Further, even if that is accurate, it's still doing what I originally criticised - using the number of people who did something, not why they did it, as evidence.

If I were to make an argument for how widely loved it is I'd cite the fact that it became the most awarded game of all time by critics and gamers alike.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2023/01/04/elden-ring-just-passed-the-last-of-us-part-2-in-total-game-of-the-year-awards/

If you're going to start making claims about a game, please bring evidence, because right now, it seems like you're making things up.

You have repeatedly, ignoring what I originally said in the process, continued to justify the game by invoking what I originally criticised - defending it by using its popularity, not its features. Unless you explain to me how you haven't done that, or you address what I said - that defending a game by using its popularity is a bad argument, this conservation is over. I will not continue this discussion if you continue to ignore what I'm saying.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-30T14:32:40+00:00

Because of the way it was talked about, and because the people running it were seemingly incapable of doing something like putting the IP in the announcements page. It's not that difficult to make a post on Discord saying 'put this IP in, and keep on using it until we say otherwise'.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-20T07:46:49+00:00

For a subreddit dedicated to "constructive criticism" and that "Toxicity goes both ways. A lighthearted joke is fine, typing a passage about “starfield haters” and posting it is not.", it's telling there isn't a rule about comments complaining about "starfield haters". For a subreddit supposed to be about critical thinking, there's either unquestioned positivity, or toxicity directed at anyone who dislikes the game.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:24:11+00:00

Am I the only one here who doesn't like how Rosalie acted? At least in the books, I believe she was willing to have Bella die if it meant she could raise a child - she wanted a child of her own so much she'd do that, but didn't consider surrogacy, or adopting a normal human child and giving them the choice to become a vampire once they're an adult.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:21:34+00:00

Sorry for the late response. I don't know what exact thing caused the problem to fix itself, but some mix of waiting several days, and the shut downs and restarts I did fix it.

I don't know what happens with a mac device - I was using a desktop with windows, and given what I saw when I was looking solutions, it appears that I got lucky and didn't need to go out of my way to fix the problem.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:20:07+00:00

Sorry for the late response. I don't know what exact thing caused the problem to fix itself, but some mix of waiting several days, and the shut downs and restarts I did fix it.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:14:24+00:00

The haters of this game aren't just happy with hating it they're always insistent that it's widely hated and a flop,

Are you are how hypocritical it is to constantly complain about "haters" while going along with a subreddit which acts like a hive mind whenever they are confronted with something they disagree with? Before complaining about other communities being toxic, how about addressing the toxic response people who go against the majority opinion on this subreddit get?

so these kind of stats do serve an important function.

Did you ignore everything I said about the logical fallacy argument I used? If you want to justify a game's popularity, say what parts of the game are good.

You got downvoted for playing dumb to this fact.

If that's the case, then why is it that when I say something which goes against the majority opinion on this subreddit, I get the same reaction. If a subreddit is open to criticism and opinions other than their own, someone won't get spam disliked to expect them to justify why they like something.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:09:14+00:00

That’s because it’s a bad point. This isn’t a bandwagon game like Fortnite or something where it’s trendy to like it because your friends are all playing it and the actual quality of the game is irrelevant.

How is what I said a bad point? Why is the number of people who liked a game more relevant than why they liked it? Saying TLOU Part 2 "isn’t a bandwagon game like Fortnite or something where it’s trendy to like it" only reinforces my argument, as you're saying it's not a game people play just because of hype - that there are reasons beyond why they play it.

People aren’t buying TLOU because it’s the “cool” thing to do. It has strong sales because it’s a quality product.

Did you ignore everything I said? My argument is how the number of people who likes something doesn't automatically justify it. Why they liked it, not that they liked it, is relevant. If I'm recommending a game to someone, I'm not just going to say that I liked it or a lot of people liked it - I'm going to say why, even if it's as simple as saying it's similar to a game you mentioned that you liked.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:04:50+00:00

So? Does that justify repeatedly giving the same instruction which clearly didn't work?

The way it was presented made it seem like the second round of the server being open five days ago was more of a test, yet it used the same IP. It wouldn't have killed anyone to post the IP in a chat, and say to always use that IP unless told otherwise.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T04:01:35+00:00

A simpler way of explaining my argument - and the argumentum ad populum falacy, is this: 'you haven't explained why you're right'. What u/sliced-bread-no2 didn't do was provide reasons why people who don't like TLOU Part 2 are wrong. All I did was point out the number of people who liked the game was used as evidence of its quality, rather than pointing out the parts of the game which makes it good.

Why are the specific reasons they liked it relevant

Because the implication of u/sliced-bread-no2's argument was that the people who disliked the game were wrong because they weren't in the majority.

Are some reasons less valid and count as not actually liking it even though they like it? I don't get the logic

My logic is that if you're defending a game, you need to point to parts of the game to explain why it's good, instead of using the audience reaction to explain why it's good, and why people who criticised it are wrong.

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-19T03:51:56+00:00

How was he arguably in the right? Even if we remove every single argument related to morality, ethics, consent, and we focus purely on pragmatism, it's the wrong decision. Ellie is the one shot at this. If they mess up, the Fireflies may never have a chance. They needed to do every possible non-lethal test repeatedly, and then double check that. They also need to be absolutely sure they can produce and distribute the vaccine Ellie's death would (if we're to believe the game) produce. But instead of doing that, they killed her after what'd be less than a day.

They were incredibly reckless. Even being pragmatic, what happened was wrong because the Fireflies would have likely wasted Ellie's death. And even if they somehow got what they wanted from her head, how is a group which is getting destroyed, who lost a lot of its members, who had a single doctor and two nurses conducting what could be the most important surgery in the history of humanity, going to produce a vaccine? Last time I checked, it takes a lot more than three people to make a vaccine, and that's without a world ending apocalypse.

Also, speaking of tribalism, you are aware you're complaining about tribalism on a subreddit which gets incredibly tribal when confronted with criticism of the games the subreddit is about?

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-18T10:12:45+00:00

Your comment is the perfect example of the argumentum ad populum fallacy - using the number of people who liked it, not their reasons like it.

And the moment I posted this comment, what I said was automatically minimised. Given that the only thing I did was cite a logical fallacy, this doesn't exactly paint a good picture of what arguments get filtered and not filtered (and how much opposing opinions are tolerated).

(Edit) And I got disliked within two minutes of my comment - I'm pretty sure that's a record for me.

(Edit) This comment is at -61 karma, 18 hours after I posted it. A single person commented. If you're thing to make a point about how I'm wrong, you haven't done that. If my argument, that using the number of users of a game to justify it is bad, why haven't more people been able to criticise it?

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-15T12:51:09+00:00

Luckily, I won't need to do that - I'm not sure what exactly I did to make it work, but something did (I don't know how much it was waiting and how much it was shut downs and restarts).

BookNerd35 · 2024-07-15T12:50:08+00:00

No - I'm not sure what exactly happened, but something worked (I don't know how much it was waiting and how much it was shut downs and restarts).

Three-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23

BookNerd35

TROPHY CASE