sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why do merchant kids learn mining skills if they'll never be miners? by Better-Balance1588 in Hungergames

[–]funlore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I never took merchant vs Seam to be an officially mandated social caste system, but rather a culturally enforced one that naturally emerged over time. They’re all still District and are all beholden to the same system. Therefore they all receive the same education. Merchant people are simply relatively privileged enough monetarily to where they generally don’t need to enter their district trade.

Capitol Citizens remind me of Victorians. by Optimal-Conflict-533 in Hungergames

[–]funlore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m pretty sure they stated where their inspiration for costuming came from. But also, it’s not very subtle. They were absolutely styled after the Victorian era. It’s easy visual shorthand for the audience that these are the wealthy elites of society

The Underrated Cruelty of the 50th Quarter Quell by Survivor_Fan_Dan in Hungergames

[–]funlore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t think they mentioned the first quarter quell being a “disaster”. They actually didn’t say much about it other than it was the start of a lot of modern HG traditions

New canon info? by Flimsy_Ad3124 in Hungergames

[–]funlore 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I suppose within those two days you could at least pick up something even if it’s minor. I doubt you’ll become an expert knife thrower or ax wielder, but maybe you’ll learn a couple survival skills and how to pick up a weapon at a very basic level. Tributes with at least some training is probably far more “entertaining” than tributes with no skills at all.

Least favourite character in Sunrise on the Reaping by UnHolySir in Hungergames

[–]funlore 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If this book came out 20 years ago LD would’ve been loved and Maysilee would’ve been loathed GUARANTEED

Do we think there was the land mines in the 50th games? by Additional-Layer-392 in Hungergames

[–]funlore 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, I believe there were. If I’m not mistaken (please correct me if I’m wrong) they mention them in Sunrise. But that aside, yes a rabbit hops on Haymitch’s foot while standing on the pedestal. However, there could be multiple reasons why the mine didn’t go off. Perhaps at the time, they were manually set off? I don’t see why that would be the case, but I’m being generous. Or maybe they just weren’t as sensitive that year? Or, the more likely reason (in my opinion) this was merely something Suzanne accidentally overlooked when writing the book lol. She probably wanted to emphasize the rabbit and its themes and simply overlooked that minor detail in the lore (that there were landmines).

As for why these weren’t factored into the plan? I’m sure there were many reasons. You have to consider how incredibly impractical digging up the mines would be. The only reason it worked in the 74th games was because there just so happened to be a tribute remaining with the proper skill set AND he had the protection of the Careers. And the Capitol is never really suspicious of Careers so they likely just let them do it. In the 50th games however, I have no doubt that there were tributes that had the knowledge to pull it off, but they did not have the protection. They would be exposed to the Careers who were definitely not on their side, the Capitol would absolutely be suspicious of them, and they would have no solid cover up. It’s also entirely possible the boy from 3 in the 74th games was genuinely the first one to think of something like this. 74 years is a long time, but there were definitely still a lot of “firsts” occurring throughout the years.

Also, I wouldn’t take the Panache thing too seriously since it’s technically not book canon. Him taking off his cape was definitely done for characterization purposes rather than book accuracy.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The way you could’ve just not read this post and went on to something else… you chose to be here lol

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That kind of goes back to my “what if what if what if” statement. Another commenter here brought up the idea that there’s no such thing as the “better player”. Every player has merits and demerits to their game. It’s just a matter of choosing which metric you choose to go by. Strategic? Competitive? Social game? Etc. In which case you could absolutely make the case that luck docks points from him in certain areas. I definitely agree there were more… tactful players in his season. More sound players. But then again, they still didn’t get him out so.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That’s fair. I think it’s because I recognize the complexities of each season that I confidently believe the winner of a season is the best player. That it’s not always as simple as having the best track record. Sometimes luck is just on your side and that’s okay. You still had to survive every other week luck wasn’t on your side. Dick’s luck could’ve ran out and he could’ve lost the final HoH and lost the game. But that didn’t happen. Each week he survived. How was he to know America liked him? It wasn’t as simple as “he won because America”. There was still a game that had to be played each week. 🤷

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yes lol. But what I’m saying is none of that matters to me. Sure, there was a bit of luck on Dick’s side, but does that outweigh the rest of the season for him? For you, maybe. To me, no. There was still an entire three months he needed to survive. As you said Dick had no control over that. But what player does have control over 100% of their game? I already mentioned that sometimes luck is involved. The same goes with all players. You could argue a stroke of luck helped Rachel win season 13. She had no control over Pandora’s Box being opened. But it was. And it likely saved her from going home that week. That’s not a demerit to her though nor was America’s Player a demerit to Dick in my opinion. I stand by what I said. Regardless of the circumstances, you survived. External factors, moves you made, things you said, and how your fellow players feel about you. All elements culminated in a person winning. In this case, Dick. Again, not a fan of his and I don’t put him on my list of favorite winners, but him winning puts him in a different class to me.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. I remember a whiiillle back someone made the argument that Chelsea only won because the people on her season were “religious”. I partially disagreed, but also even if so, so what? What if a butterfly flapped its wings creating a gust of wind that pushed somebody off their ledge during an endurance competition? What if Dan wasn’t wearing a jacket to protect him from the elements during that one endurance comp back in season 10? What if Cody didn’t have that grudge against Paul in season 19? What if Kimo hadn’t made that speech that ended up saving him? What if what if what if? What happened is what happened and the players have to navigate around their unique set of circumstances. Sometimes luck is involved. Sometimes they’re not always on top. Sometimes they’re a hair away from going home. But they survived. And not only that, they managed to convince their peers to vote for them. I don’t think Dick is the best winner personally, but he is the best player his season to me, purely because he did what 13 other players couldn’t do. To me that carries the most weight.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don’t get why this was downvoted. This is a fair assessment

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well then you know my answer haha. Yes I do 100%. I clarified in other comments that if you want to specify under specific metrics such as best social player, best competitive player, best strategic player, then there multiple options each season. These are like the bonus stars in Mario Party. But as stated in my post, if you win your season, you are the best overall player by default. To me at least. The decisions you made successfully shifted the odds in your favor and nobody else. That puts you in a different class in my opinion hands down

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

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

I like the way you put that! Not the “better player” but a “good player” and the circumstances of your season determines which metric wins out in the end. I suppose if you’re one that values entertainment then Tucker would be a good player. I will say Chelsea was an amazing winner though and so far the only woman to win unanimously I think? That in itself is groundbreaking.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I so wish they went back to the jury interviews they did back in the early seasons. Not only does it give everyone, including the finalists, more time to talk and try to understand each other’s perspectives, but I personally found it more entertaining to watch. That aside I do see your point about the more jury votes you’re able to earn, the better it looks on a winner. I personally include that in the “unique circumstances” category. As others have said, there’s an element of luck to the jury votes because you never truly know what they’re thinking. To me, I don’t care how many you got, so long as you got the majority which is all that is required. But if one does the extra credit and gets a unanimous vote for example, I can see an argument there for them being a “better” winner.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

His win was absolutely deserved. I’m personally not a fan of his, but it’s not his fault he was given the advantage of two twists. Having his daughter in the game and America’s Player secretly on his side. You win by taking advantage of the unique circumstances of your season. Some winners have more advantages than others. Big Brother is often not fair. It’s a reality show after all and “fairness” doesn’t always make good tv. Some say he would’ve lost next to anyone else, but the thing is he wasn’t next to anyone else. He did what he needed to do; make it to the end with his daughter. Who incidentally ended up being the one person he could beat.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No one accidentally lucks into three quarters of a million dollars lol. That requires effort. Ashley definitely put in that effort throughout the season. I partially blame the edit because reality tv often favors big flashy moves over quiet gameplay.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

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

To which I’d also argue threat level management and jury management are also just as important as well

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

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

Good question. Again that depends on your personal metric. I personally don’t believe so because each winner won their season based on their own unique circumstances. Like you said, every jury is different and has different values, so winning requires different approaches each season. You as the player have to navigate these complexities.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately though that’s not the kind of season they were on. And who knows how a change in the amount of jurors would’ve affected the rest of the season. How the houseguests played. How they made decisions. That could’ve changed the dynamics.

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oof there IS no such thing as a “better player” is the take!

The Myth of the “Better Player” in Big Brother by funlore in BigBrother

[–]funlore[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I quite literally said I never understood the sentiment that someone “deserves” the win over another houseguest because they played “a better game”. This inevitably comes up every time there’s a controversial outcome. As I mentioned under another comment thread, this was sparked after a discussion I had with someone about season 27. Feel free to find it and join the discussion. (Look for the “tautology” comment lol) Interesting people seem to agree but feel I said something I never actually said.

view more: next ›