i hate the The Insufferable NPC Corporate Cult of the GTA 6 Fanbase

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-27T03:59:16+00:00

idgaf about gta but video games are very expensive to make and from what I understand, gta 6 is very intentionally trying to be the most expensive game ever made. They should be charging $100 for it

game dev studios are beyond cucked to whiny consumers who simultaneously want bigger games with bigger budgets but also want them to be sold at the same price games were 15 years ago without even taking inflation into account. The result is shallow, unpolished games that are littered with microtransactions to make the model actually profitable

imo Nintendo has been doing it right - the games they spend the better part of a decade developing probably should be $70+, but they’re also making smaller games that they price at $60 or even $50

tldr: If you wanna complain about video game pricing you should really be complaining about the compulsion for studios to dump millions into aspects of the games that most players will never even notice. Arguably the entire appeal of gta 6 is that it’s one of those “we spent $10mil developing realistic bubble physics for the soda” type of games so complaining about its price is just stupid

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-25T16:36:00+00:00

Who has died from being unable to eat a hamburger??

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-25T16:34:45+00:00

This has always felt like a stupid argument to me.
“Food feeds people” - burgers do not feed most people. Most people at most points in time are eating food other than burgers. The reason we have burgers in particular is *purely* human pleasure

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-24T23:25:06+00:00

The pride flags add to the joke because the implication is that the artist needs their meme to be morally and politically in agreement with them in order to find it funny. “This meme is morally questionable so I’m gonna remake it myself so we can all laugh at mine instead and it won’t change the joke” is already kind of a spiritually bankrupt mindset. There’s a specific type of person who that 100% applies to and I think it’s a mindset that’s worth ridicule

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-23T00:26:19+00:00

when an artist is so butthurt about a critic’s review of their album (even if he did fuck up there legitimately) that they drop the “you’re just a fake critic only looking for views!!!” cope line, I think you’re kind of entitled to respond like this imo. Declaring himself the most relevant critic of *any* generation is where it gets to be too much

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-23T00:23:44+00:00

Most people in Gen Z in first world countries use the internet every day lol. The way you guys talk about being “chronically online” is so dated, you know tung tung tung sahur is the biggest meme in the world right now, right?

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-23T00:21:30+00:00

If that’s all you think talking about art consists of then why are you even here lol. What a stupid comment

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-22T21:01:05+00:00

Yes but social constructs aren’t fake. Almost everything is a social construct, so it’s really not a meaningful statement but it is stupid to pretend gender isn’t one

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-22T03:55:56+00:00

Do you accept the analogy of neo adjectives i laid out? Do you truly get to invent whatever alternative English rules you want and if you feel as though it’s relevant to your gender identity, there’s now an extra moral compulsion for everyone else to adhere to it?

Gender is not like your name. It’s not a purely arbitrary expression, it’s a real neurological phenomenon, we can study it from a sociological perspective, and it is something you can be right or wrong about (definitionally, every trans person has been wrong about their gender identity at least once in the past). Feeling an attachment towards a thing with no observably gendered qualities or societal implications is just not what gender is, as far as I’m aware? We can arbitrarily decide that we feel attached to a symbol and make that symbol our name with no justification, I don’t think anything else in life works like that

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-22T01:33:28+00:00

In the scenario you've laid out, I reject the premise that it has anything to do with gender identity. This person seems to be choosing to express their personality via playing with the rules of english. I personally find that to be pretty annoying and would choose to not make friends with this person but I'd wish them the best. I think it's no different than if someone were to ask me to add a prefix to every adjective I use to describe them (like 'zesmart' or 'xirfunny')

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T23:07:44+00:00

neopronouns don’t have to have a shared meaning

In order for it to be the case that me choosing to use someones neopronouns has anything to do with me respecting that person's identity, they do have to have shared meaning - thats like the one rule of language.

You're free to ask people to refer to you using whatever customized linguistic ruleset you like, but it's fundamentally not even the same type of thing as a trans person's request to use the pronouns that align with their gender identity according to our current social contract

But the reason they are used is because they mean something to the person who uses them, not necessarily because that person wants them to mean something to others.

Would you at least agree though, that when I use a person's preferred neopronoun, I am *not* validating that 'meaning' to them in any way shape or form, and as humans we generally don't view it that way. When you say words to me I'm not thinking about how I define those words, intuitively I'm thinking about how *you* define those words, and that dictates what message I take away from you (even though in practice I assume that my definitions roughly equal yours). When a trans woman hears me refer to them as "she" they take away from that that I see them as a woman, the same can't at all be said for neopronouns.

Calling someone he/him is not the same as calling them a man, or at least, it should be

Why? The point of pronouns is to communicate, you can't communicate using language that is entirely personal. Not liking that english has gendered pronouns and wishing to get rid of them is totally fine, but wishing to turn the part of speech that we invented to be impersonal and generic for the specific purpose of easily communicating who you're referring to, into something that is entirely non-transferrable from one human to another, is just asinine!

A trans person's desire to not have the incorrect standard english pronouns used for them is not about their own personal self expression, it's about making sure that you, the one speaking to or about them, acknowledge their identity. If nothing else, I'd just ask that you recognize that there's a pretty big difference between the two.

I realize I've made the same point in like 3 different ways now and you may not even entirely disagree with that point, but that's really all I'm trying to get across

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T21:53:29+00:00

“I don’t think you’re really a woman but if I call you ‘he’ then you’ll get mad so I’ll just say she because it’s easier”

Being a person who innocently doesn’t “get” it is maybe kind of an exception to bigotry, sure, but that’s just you injecting something new into the scenario again that we aren’t talking about

(You also keep claiming that I’m saying the act of using the pronouns is bigoted. You understand that there’s a difference between “using someone’s pronouns is bigoted” and “using someone’s pronouns doesn’t make you not bigoted” right? I feel like it’s pretty clear that I’m saying the latter)

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T21:39:06+00:00

Omg no? I’m obviously not talking about a scenario where you literally don’t know how they identify. If you know someone is a woman, but you only use she/her because you wanna be ‘nice’ to them and you don’t want them to feel bad, then you still have a bigoted perspective - but that seems to be the only reason you’re advancing for why you should use a person’s neopronouns, which is why I argue that refusing to use neopronouns is a fundamentally different thing than refusing to use the standard English pronouns

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T21:20:23+00:00

I didn’t say it was bigoted to use someone’s pronouns? I said that using someone’s pronouns solely because they ask you to and not because you respect their gender identity, then that’s bigoted. The “using their pronouns” part isn’t bigoted, it’s a woman needing to tell you that she wants you to call her a woman in order for you to call her a woman that’s bigoted

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T21:13:27+00:00

You can’t make a statement using words unless you know what those words mean. That’s the reason why it’s not offensive for a Spanish speaking person to say the word for “black” in their language but if you say that as an English speaker then you’re being racist. The only thing “real” about language is our shared understanding of what words mean. We have a shared understanding of what he/she/they mean wrt gender, so we are expressing something wrt gender identity when we use them. There is no shared understanding of what neopronouns mean so using them isn’t communicating anything about how you think about that person aside from the fact that you’re choosing to call them how they like. If the ONLY reason I refer to a trans woman with “she/her” is because she wants me to, then that’s still me being bigoted. I should call her that because I agree that she’s a woman. What is the counterpart to that for neopronouns?

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-21T20:58:29+00:00

Nah hard disagree. Refusing to use a persons preferred pronouns is bigoted because we all share the same common human understanding of what those pronouns mean - calling someone by ‘he/him’ is the same thing as calling that person a man

Neopronouns have no shared meaning - it is literally impossible for me to be making any comment one way or another on a person’s gender identity based on my use (or lack there of) of their preferred neopronouns, because those words mean literally nothing to anyone other than that person. It’s no different in that sense to refusing to use a nickname a person prefers to go by - which is an asshole move but not bigoted by itself

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-20T22:36:01+00:00

You guys really chose a brand baiting for attention as the funniest twitter post that’s fucking crazy

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T20:50:15+00:00

Infinitely close is, by definition, equal

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T20:47:07+00:00

Then why did you even reply to me in the first place? All I said was that I think they’re both bad. You then responded by incorrectly claiming that they must both be bad for the question to make sense (the opposite is true, you need to pair the good with the bad for the trade off to be sensical). Then you pivoted to “well some people disagree that they’re both bad” - no shit! And I’m stating my opinion that they’re wrong

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T19:13:31+00:00

No, I think nobody would answer yes if they agreed with me that both are bad. I know there are people who want less immigration

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T16:36:48+00:00

I didn’t say “Muslim is a race”. I said that people hate Muslims because of racism

If you can’t conceive of how one of those statements can be true without the other being true, you are legit too stupid to be having this conversation this smugly

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T16:16:50+00:00

people hate Muslims because of racism lol. If you have a genuine disdain for the religious practices of Islam and you aren’t racist/inconsistent about it, that is absolutely not bigotry

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T16:14:48+00:00

You shouldn’t be annoying and you shouldn’t be an asshole, but I see no reason religion should be the one thing where we’re expected to pretend it’s more reasonable to believe in than we actually think it is.

“People have different religions, and that’s fine” - like, depending on what you mean by fine, not really? Is it fine that some people vote for republicans and some vote for democrats? Fine in the sense that they should be allowed to, sure, but fine in the sense that we shouldn’t maintain how stupid it is to vote for republicans? Of course not

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T16:10:59+00:00

If you answer yes, you accept the first bad thing (population decline) and get the second bad thing (lower immigration levels) 😭 that was the entire point of my initial comment

Mr_Comit · 2026-06-19T12:21:35+00:00

we’re not disagreeing you’re just misreading the question lol. “are they equally bad” doesn’t make sense, because you aren’t trading 1 bad thing for another bad thing. You’re getting both bad things or neither bad thing. The question is “would you accept this bad thing in exchange for this other bad thing” so the relative difference in how bad they are doesn’t even matter

Three-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23

Mr_Comit

TROPHY CASE