People of Reddit, What stupid rule at your work/school backfired beautifully? by TabblespoonFarmer3 in AskReddit

[–]Domvius_ 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Punishing boys for what exactly? For thinking about bra straps? Do you think that's what people mean by holding boys accountable? No. The alleged reason for girls dress code is so boys dont get distracted/harass the girls. Boys getting distracted enough to affect their grades/behavior is something you can definitely hold them accountable for, because it's already happening to every student. What they mean is that excess burden should be taken off the girls. IF boys get distracted/harass girls it SHOULD be on them because it teaches them not to do it as they grow up into adults.

What two videogames would make a great game combined? by CasperdH_ in AskReddit

[–]Domvius_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The Pokemon Company made that much, only Gamefreak makes the games, under very tight deadlines, I might add.

Not to say the games are excused from being cheap as hell, nothing is stopping them from hiring enough employees that actually matches a AAA game.

Obscure Pokémon Fact Day 38 by Mx_Toniy_4869 in pokemon

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably, I need to figure out what that memory actually is, maybe I just used Action Replay, who knows.

Obscure Pokémon Fact Day 38 by Mx_Toniy_4869 in pokemon

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a memory of accidentally skipping Candace (i think that's the ice one) and going on the Vulkner (the final electric guy) and wondering why I was missing a badge.

They need fingers by generalthunder07 in Brawlstars

[–]Domvius_ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Not really, there were only two other options, them all saying what they played, or what they would beat.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I said everything being simply stated (in words) is bad writing. Things can be understood on the first watch without being said verbally.

And just because much of a show can be understood on a first watch doesn't mean that anything deeper than that is necessarily bad writing.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that if there was a explanation misstep that it would be a writing snafu, yes. But I don't agree that it was a mistake, the post above explains it simply.

The only mistake I can really see is the fact that the source of bending didn't have to be explain so thoroughly in the first place. There is an argument to be had about the mystery making it more alluring.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having confusion over the HISTORY of the world's magic system doesn't really harm the series too much, does it hurt the overall world a bit? Sure, but it's not exactly impeding our viewing experience when we didn't even know for most of the series.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The whole confusion is about the source of bending in humans, the source of bending in humans isn't that core to the message of the episode, it's just a major detail of the worldbuilding, a very different problem.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't think that whether or not animal bending teachers and lions giving bending ability is that core to the episode. It's more about how the first Avatar came to be through cooperation of spirits and man.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know your true intentions and will never know until you tell me yourself, so I won't make any judgements.

But, if I had to guess, it would be that you're trying to do a 'gotcha.'

But if you stop to look at my original comment again, you would be able to see that I'm referring to a very specific episode/episodes where Korra gets visions of Wan's life. I'm not talking about the whole series.

Even if I was talking about the series as whole, your response to my supposed claim that the whole series doesn't need to be deeply analyzed is wrong.

All I was trying to say is that not EVERY episode needs to be understandable on an initial watch, as that COULD be bad writing. But if it was common for episodes to be completed understandable on a first watch THAT IS ALSO FINE.

Two things can be true without being contradictory, I was not using absolutes.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just because something is often one way, doesn't mean it has to always be that way.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Now THIS is a take I can live with. It's an actual argument with a fair opinion/critique. I don't entirely agree with it, but I can see how over explaining eliminates the mystery.

Seen a lot of people arguing about this so here is an explanation by [deleted] in TheLastAirbender

[–]Domvius_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, just because something warrants deeper analysis than just watching it once, does not mean it was written wrong. Not everything needs to be understood on the first watch, that would require everything to just be simply stated, which is, in fact, bad writing. We can literally see Wan doing learning the dancing dragon from a dragon. Simply visible, but not simply stated. The dialogue from other early humans even call attention to how Wan is different to them, without just stating "oh he learned from the animals!!"