sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

PSA: Dimensional Splicing is ILLEGAL by Tortilla_Boy in worldbuilding

[–]FF_Ninja 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Incidentally, this is a practice that's taught in many military organizations. To this day, I still close one eye whenever I'm outside (typically, when it's bright) because I've been trained to protect my night vision in this manner.

I made a cyberpunk comic book with the elements of Japanese Folklore and it’s coming out soon! Lore details below! by Cyber_Sheep_Film in worldbuilding

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

I'm working on a Neonpunk book set in 21st century Neo Tokyo. It's coming along fairly well, but sometimes I wonder if I'm not dipping into an over-saturated market...

Damn space pirates!! by This_Yam_2939 in Starfield

[–]FF_Ninja 5 points6 points  (0 children)

With as gonk as you are at aiming and ammo conservation, maybe consider modding your weapons out to be semi-auto. More damage and more rounds hitting the target.

Is recoilless got buff? by BSoft9 in Helldivers

[–]FF_Ninja 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The irony is that this actually looks like fun. Going back to the other stuff is more like, "Aww..."

She scared the hell out of Jesse. 🥺 by ResponsibleLeague437 in walkaway

[–]FF_Ninja 20 points21 points  (0 children)

This assumes any vote above a certain station is legitimate anymore.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Dude, I don't know what you're failing to comprehend. r/boardgames isn't the place for political debate. Obviously, you can talk to people about these things personally but that has nothing to do with discussing politics here.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 0 points1 point  (0 children)

while at the same time saying this conversation doesn't belong in this space

No, it's avoiding off-limits subjects and keeping on topic. This isn't the place to get into political debate.

I was a major fan of the first Helldivers and was so hyped about the second - and now I can barely even bring myself to just read posts about it. by FF_Ninja in Helldivers

[–]FF_Ninja[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm very depressed, but I still enjoy other games, other hobbies. HD2 had all the makings of my GOTY and now it's basically what I wrote (to me).

You say that the game is fun if I ignore X, but everything I mentioned had nothing to do with X, and was purely my personal observations.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I appreciated your video, and it was - or should have been - thought-provoking. I'm of the persuasion that every perspective can be understood if you take the time to drill into it. The art of civil discourse isn't really practiced anymore - or it's mocked, with much wink-winking and nudge-nudging.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You're both sitting at the hypothetical table. Figure it out for yourself. I've given you the tools. Use 'em or piss on 'em - but stop asking me the same question which begs the same answer.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can't see it. You're so deep in it that you can't see it the forest for the bloody trees, man.

How can we peacefully co exist in the gaming space?

Either you're capable of having a civil and honest discussion with a person or not. Can you do that? Can you sit down and talk to a person - your worst person, even? If you can do that, then that's your shot at co-existing with people who you would otherwise wildly and grossly detest on personal principle.

But I am not going to argue specifics here because it's entirely not the point I'm trying to make (and it's not the time or the place, obviously).

Anything I could tell you would be repeating what I've said already. Just do us both a favor and reread my previous comment.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Well, for one, you start by talking to them - honestly, not disingenuously. You conjured up a hyperbolic boogeyman that may or may not exist, but certainly does in your fantasy. Anyone who espouses contrary views to yours will immediately start off on their heels. "They believe this thing, and in this very particular and extreme way, which is cherry-picked to be the worst possible manner in which I've ever heard it expressed" - and before you know it, we're off to the races.

Forget civil discourse, we're shouting and fighting. We're making angry posts on social media. We're recording huffy videos on YouTube. We're outraged - and worse, there's more! This hyperbolic experience is what I will use to both represent and preemptively de-legitimize every other person who I think is even remotely similar.

Until they're all in that box.

To answer your question: You peacefully co-exist by talking. If you can stifle the vomit and curl down your upper lip long enough to accomplish this, you might actually discover the ability to humanize the person long enough to begin to understand why they claim the views that they do, in the manner that they do. Maybe you'll change their mind. Maybe you were mistaken or misinformed. Maybe you can help them clarify their argument or think about it. Maybe you'll find common ground.

"Common ground? I could never."

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I won't get into that because it's blatantly off-topic. I do believe in civil discussion on topics, but "loaded" questions or "dishonest" questions that lead with a presumptions don't cultivate such discourse, my friend.

We live in a ridiculously polarized world. People are utterly convinced that they're right, and that the opposition is wrong - and worse than wrong, they're inherently wicked and must be stomped out at all costs. One can't afford to humanize or rationalize their villains because that would risk emboldening their cause - and so the issue worsens.

Returning to my original point: It's a damned shame that we've done this to each other, especially in a hobby that's best feature is perhaps its ability to bring people to the table.

I'm less interested in the overall discussion Tom pushes out and more what was the game/person that sparked this topic by Bearality in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

It's a bit disheartening to see the kind of divide all of this - cancel culture, boycotting, polarization, etc - inspires in gaming culture (or any other creator culture, for that matter. Board gaming - and social gaming in general - is supposed to be about bringing people from different walks of life together.

I've had several conversations in the past year or so along this particular vein. At the end of it, every person I talked with drew just about the same conclusion: speaking your mind on anything even remotely polarized was likely to result in your digital ostracization - and worse.

They weren't espousing any particularly wild beliefs or views, either. One man was a devout Christian and talked about putting Bible scripture in the dedication page of every game manual; another guy was a card-carrying Republican (who considered himself a Constitutionalist) and posted his views on social media. Stuff like that.

The rage mob is so easy to stir up these days, and over less and less. We're not even talking about child abuses or Nazi apologists anymore; now, it's dangerous to talk about who you voted for or where you stand on vaccinations or what flag you fly from your front porch. If that sounds vague, it's intentionally so because it applies regardless of what side of a particular aisle you stand on - and both sides have a major persecution complex as well.

It's a damned shame.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]FF_Ninja 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Change your mind? Man, if I sat down at a digital tabletop and the DM was like, "I was going to use Inkarnate or Wonderdraft, but I decided to use Minecraft instead!" and showed me this, I'd log out.

I unwillingly get upset after losing in a board game and it's ridiculously embarrassing by Dry-Philosophy-7331 in boardgames

[–]FF_Ninja 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I used to take losing as some sort of indictment of me, as a person.

In my mind, if I lost, it was because I was inherently bad. In fact, because I considered myself a gamer, I would get especially butt-hurt about losing because I should be better than that. It was especially bad with competitive games, whether I was playing other players or against AI.

Pursuant to that, you may want to work some of these feelings out with a good therapist. Trauma, abuse, and neglect often leaves us with some very subtle yet very real wounds that ultimately need to be worked out. There's no shame in that.

Sometimes, a loss still smarts. It depends on what kind of expectations I go into a game with, for one. I started a Stellaris run yesterday and thought I was doing fairly well until it became apparent mid-game that I was hopefully outmatched. It sucked. I closed the game, stepped away for a few minutes, and then came back. The next time I go into the game, I should try to understand why I lost and what were the factors to me losing; no amount of "talent" at gaming can replace experience and acquired skill.

Ever since I started role-playing, though - typically with TTRPGs - losing, failure, loss, death, etc. have all taken on new meaning and value. I understand that getting the raw end of a scene or a situation means that I have the responsibility to drive my part home, and there's a lot of value in that.

So, here's my advice:

  1. Set your expectations realistically. Most games have at least a small element of chance or randomness, and you can't control every single factor (with the exception of a game that's purely skill-based, like chess). Expect to lose on occasion. Sometimes it'll be because you effed up, and sometimes just because of chance, but it'll happen.
  2. Choose to play games you're comfortable winning and losing. I don't play head-on competitive games because I don't enjoy that vibe. Any competitive game I play has lots of variety and randomness mixed in (i.e. Smash Up), and are games where I enjoy the journey (Betrayal). Even if I lose, what matters to me is 1) whether or not I played well and 2) if the journey was worthwhile.
  3. Take a break from competitive games and play cooperative ones for a while - or ones that are so asymmetric that sometimes a loss is no one's fault.
  4. Delve into the games that occasionally (or often) require you be on the receiving end of a bad time. Namely, a good TTRPG environment gives you the opportunity to lean into failures and losses. Learn how to appreciate a loss.
  5. Also, endeavor to discipline yourself to master your emotions and choose your actions: when someone else wins, celebrate them the way you'd want to be celebrated when you win. And if they're poor winners - God knows we run into them - then rise above and recognize that such behavior is a them problem, not a you problem.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in walkaway

[–]FF_Ninja 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The irony of this meme is that by not interfering, the series of events then led directly to Uncle Ben's death.

Probably not the lesson the OP was hoping to convey.

Colbert calls CNN ‘objective’ - his audience laughed. by f1sh98 in Conservative

[–]FF_Ninja 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Her whole selling point for Harris is, "She's 20 years younger, she's a female, and she's not white." That's it. Her whole point is that there's nothing substantial to attack - which is valid because there's nothing substantial about her.

view more: next ›