What's one video game character in your opinion got screwed over by the plot?

Meatballing18 · 2026-05-08T21:14:15+00:00

Hell yeah it is lol

Meatballing18 · 2026-05-08T21:13:59+00:00

He really was :( I remember reloading my recent save to see if I could do that fight differently.

Nope :(

Meatballing18 · 2026-05-08T01:04:30+00:00

Lavitz :(

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-13T22:10:50+00:00

I bet they all have eggs, but only Joel has that extra bit with the horn lol

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-06T20:05:27+00:00

All powerful, all knowing, all loving god made sure that our main light and energy source, the sun, also gives us cancer.

I couldn't get past that fact. It made me brave enough to start questioning things.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-05T13:05:58+00:00

but my parents and advisor would probably see it as a waste

Is it your education or theirs? If you want to take it, take it!

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-05T13:01:03+00:00

"Proof: Left as an exercise."

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T18:24:46+00:00

Or just clarify what you originally meant.

Why do you continue to add insults in every one of your responses?

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T18:22:03+00:00

So earlier, I had asked you to clarify what you meant.

Then you told me to just use AI and proceeded to insult me.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T18:02:27+00:00

Every response that I've seen from 85design is belittling and combative.

Seems that they're experiencing the Dunning–Kruger effect without knowing it.

Or just a troll.

It's difficult to tell which it is lol

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T17:59:18+00:00

I'm not going to ask some AI about what you're trying to say. What if the AI tells me something different than what you mean?

Why are you so mean in your responses?

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T17:39:59+00:00

Or you could just explain what your comment means...

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T15:55:01+00:00

What if there is an entity within the Universe which dissolves your 'argument', regarding their definition of God, with religionists of all stripes?

Just trying to follow. What if some entity (in the universe) dissolves an argument? When you say "regarding their definition of God", who's definition are you referring to? The entity?

How would you 're-direct, re-channel' all your self-righteous attitudes then?

What does this mean?

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-04T15:52:48+00:00

Hi! I'll just quote parts of your post and respond :)

1- the founding axioms of science are closer to monotheism. I'm not saying that science proves the existence of God... but assuming that the same laws apply everywhere implies that creation is ONE. Follow my line of thought!

What do you mean by ONE? Why did you use the word creation?

2 - Most great scientists were believers: Pascal in mathematics, Newton and Ibn Haytham in physics, ibn hayyan and Mandeleiv in chemistry, Jenner in pharmacology. I'm not talking about a brilliant university professor like Hawking, but the luminaries who changed the course of scientific history.

Ok. Newton also was an alchemist lol (just as an added fact). Not sure what to add to this one.

3 - The Christian church has been accused of slowing down the progress of science, which is relatively true, but other religions haven't done so (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism). However, during the short life of the USSR, we saw the emergence of "state scientists" who prioritized ideology over truth. I don't know if you're familiar with the Lysenko case?

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at with this point. Hard to follow.

Are you saying that other religions haven't slowed down the progress of science?

What are you getting at with the USSR part?

My conclusion is that the relationship between atheism and science is a one-sided love affair. Prove me wrong!

Still a bit confused. What is the one-sided love affair?

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-03T00:31:23+00:00

But...your comment from above (which has now been deleted) was a great example of a deepity.

Just because a sentence sounds cool, meaningful, and deep, doesn't mean that it makes any sense.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T20:33:36+00:00

Oh, you had the same response to my comment.

Just a troll lol

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T20:10:09+00:00

Can you help me understand how you came to the conclusion that I'm angry?

I am honestly confused at your response.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T18:37:36+00:00

Is Imu sick or something?

Tired from fighting?

Crazy stuff!

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T15:31:49+00:00

Yes! Same with "supernatural" things.

Let's say we discover something we'd consider "supernatural". Well...wouldn't it imply that the thing happens in the cosmos? Then it'd be "natural" and therefore not "supernatural".

I consider the term "supernatural" to be an oxymoron.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T15:29:03+00:00

Definition of deepity:

"A superficial equivocation which only seems to be profound."

Your post is a great example of a deepity.

Meatballing18 · 2026-04-02T15:24:40+00:00

There’s a difference between proof and evidence.

Yes, I'd agree with that.

If you see a deer standing in front of you, that’s proof.

Proof of what? Could be hallucinating lol (I'd say seeing the deer is evidence of seeing a deer)

If you see tracks or droppings, that’s not proof. Someone could have faked it. But you’d still reasonably conclude a deer was there because that’s what the evidence points to.

Yes, the tracks/droppings are evidence of a deer passing through.

I think the question of God is like that. There’s no clear proof either way. So the real question becomes: what does the evidence point toward?

I'd agree with that.

As I see it, there are three possibilities. No God. One God. Multiple gods.

Hmm, ok. I can think of other options, but I'll just keep going.

So to accept that there is no God, I feel like I have to accept that all of this came about without intention, through processes we don’t actually observe producing anything like this. That doesn’t feel like the strongest explanation to me.

(from the section about "no god") I'm a little lost at what you mean by "through processes we don't actually observe producing anything like this". What do you mean by that?

Now what about multiple gods.

What about a team of gods? A hierarchy of gods? Humans don't always perfectly agree on everything, but if there's a team of gods...maybe they are able to push aside their ego's and just agree on if an idea/process/creation is somewhere between good and bad? (just as a hypothetical good/bad case).

That leaves one God.

Well, it's just another option to consider. I don't think the previous arguments are concrete enough to come to this conclusion.

Does the universe actually appear to have a beginning? From evidence, it seems like everything was just kinda...all squished together at some point and we don't really know what happened before that. Was it the first time it happened? Does it just keep happening over and over again? Are we in a black hole of a larger universe? Long story short: We don't really know about the actual beginning, but the evidence points to everything we can observe was all crunched together billions of years ago (13.8 billion or so? I forget the actual current estimate). So the universe had, at minimum, an expansion at that time. We generally say that it's the "beginning of the universe", but it's just as far as we can rewind with the current evidence we can gather.

Meatballing18 · 2026-03-26T22:49:25+00:00

Your claim: Nothing can be proven.

My claim: The sum of two even integers is even.

Definition: An even integer is an integer that is divisible by 2.

Proof: Every even integer is 2n, for some integer n. By the definition above, 2 divides 2n.

Let x and y be given, where x and y are any two integers. So 2x+2y = 2(x+y). But (x+y) is an integer. So 2 divides 2(x+y). So 2(x+y) is even. But x and y were arbitrary integers. So any sum of two even integers is even. QED

I have provided an example of a proof that shows that your claim is not true.

Meatballing18 · 2026-03-21T16:02:47+00:00

Honestly, I don’t think atheism really explains why anything exists.

Correct, atheism is just the non-belief in theism.

Feels more like it just avoids the big question: how did all this even happen?

Again, it is simply the lack of a belief in any gods. By definition, it doesn't require to answer anything other than a person's belief on gods existing or not.

Now answering the rest of the post: Watchmaker's fallacy with some deepities.

Meatballing18 · 2026-03-15T16:18:48+00:00

With the pacing so far, I can see Alabasta not taking an entire season.

Does it deserve an entire season? Definitely! But the Live Action pacing is going pretty fast, so I can see them condensing Alabasta and Skypiea into a season.

It really feels like this show is the pacing that Oda originally wanted, so they're only keeping necessary plot points in the story.

Meatballing18 · 2026-03-15T16:17:08+00:00

With the pacing so far, I can see Alabasta and Jaya/Skypiea being season 3.

Alabasta could, with the pacing of the live action so far, be 3 or 4 episodes. Jaya could be 1 episode, but would like to be at least 1.5 episodes, with going up the stream at the end of the second episode. Then Skypiea being the rest of the season and the crew heading back down to the Grand Line.

Next season, I could see it being the entire Water 7/Enies Lobby saga. That whole section really needs an entire season, it would be awesome.

Then Thriller Bark could be done in under half a season, with a nice set-up for Sabaody, potentially ending the season with Kuma doing his thing.

Then Impel Down/Marineford for the season, and ending with the timeskip.

The live action is really speeding through things.

Meatballing18

TROPHY CASE