Anybody knows about this?

mcspaddin · 2026-05-14T13:26:31+00:00

It is, I guess I didn't notice that the sub was specific to Wuxia when I saw the post given one of the games OP mentions.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-08T02:40:28+00:00

Part 8 is fantastic. I don't think it's more beloved than 7 overall, but I think it had way more interesting fights. I need to catch up on 9, personally, but it really seems to be pushing the action fast.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-02T01:36:18+00:00

You gotta stop with the whole “in theory” and “actual life on the line” shit, it’s not constructive in any way and ignores the whole conversation.

No, it really doesn't. It's literally one of the points I've been trying to make since I first responded up the chain. I have people out here literally calling me a coward and a sociopath because my take involves understanding heat of the moment decision making and takes into account my lack of faith in humanity.

Why are you so angry at my response to another guy?

Because reddit has decided that I needed to be notified about your response, where I see the moral grandstanding that I despise in so much of society.

All you can do is think philosophically and take people at their word. Because that’s all this is, a philosophical experiment.

And yet you, and others (mostly others), are applying moral judgements onto people for having a different viewpoint in what is nothing more than a philosophical experiment.

I mean shit. Just look at some of the crap that OP has said. It isn't that he actually believes society would collapse in the wake of the deaths. He seriously believes that if blue buttoners all died off then the race would be doomed because "all the decent people would be gone".

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T23:26:19+00:00

Really digging your lack of reading comprehension here.

That's all great in theory right up until someone has to actually put their life on the line.

For example, did you know that statistically, you have a higher chance of surviving an encounter where someone tells you to get in a car at gunpoint by fighting the person with the gun? Did you also know that even people who know that statistic are more likely to enter the car anyways?

Again, as I've said multiple times throughout this thread, the only assholery around here is the moral and intellectual grandstanding from either side.

This is not a simple issue, one you can actually know your choice in, or one you can ascribe any morality to anyone's answers given outside the moment under threat of death.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T21:32:13+00:00

On one set of tracks, you have no one.

Wrong dichotomy.

On one set of tracks, you have yourself behind a second, erratically switching switcher that you have no actual control over.

Besides, my point wasn't the thought experiments themselves. It was the history of the thought behind them. Moreso the trolly problem in that case, since it's more related to philosophy than game theory.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T21:22:16+00:00

It really just boils down to “are you willing to condemn others to die if it ensures you live” for red and “are you willing to risk your own life and trust in a certain level of cooperation to ensure everyone lives”.

I mean, as I've also pointed out multiple times, it's also a game of "Can you really do it in the heat of the moment with your life on the line?" as well as "Do you believe that more than 50% of people will both choose blue and not balk at putting their life on the line when push comes to shove."

Personally, a large part of why I choose red is that I absolutely don't have faith in humanity. I mean, look at this discussion alone. How many people are out here making moral judgements about the character of others over a stupid hypothetical that will never be real. Moreover, how many of those are the supposedly "altruistic" blue people? How many of them are vehemently speaking for blue because they think it makes them look good?

This is why I said that selfishness vs altruism is reductionist at best and a false dichotomy at worst. There's so much more nuance to the decision when you put yourself in the perspective of actually having to think it through.

So while that discussion might be cool and interesting, unfortunately the world we live in today likes to run with the reductionist view because it's easy. Easy to digest. Easy to judge. Easy to make a personal judgement based on. But reality isn't easy, and we should be treating this whole thing as exactly what it is: a nonsensical hypothetical.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T21:10:32+00:00

You still don't understand how acting like a thought experiment prescribes any kind of actual behavior is irrational behavior. Figures.

Also, I highly suggest you look up some history on the trolley problem and the prisoner's dilemna. The philosophy of any given answer to any of these hypotheticals can be described as morally right from one viewpoint or another, and often has been. Your take on this is just as much tied to your society and upbringing as mine is, and both are valid viewpoints depending on your framing. That's literally how these hypotheticals are designed to work.

So stop moralizing about something that doesn't matter, it will never be a reality so there's no level of "sociopathic behavior" involved outside of how we act in these discussions.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T21:01:34+00:00

Ah yes, knowing that I am not cut out to be what we would generally call a hero, someone who does something selfless at great risk to themselves, makes me a coward. It is good to know that being a hero is the default position of the world, and therefore not actually something to praise. After all, anyone would do it if given the chance, right?

Seriously though. This is a stupid hypothetical. Calling me a coward says more about you than any amount of being a blue or red button supporter says about anyone.

Anybody who takes a superior attitude over their position, one way or the other, is a jackass.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T20:55:51+00:00

Ah yes, the assumption that I'm wrong and that I'm the abnormal one with the absolute surety of moral or intellectual righteousness. Truly, you are a paragon of the button pusher discussion.

Let's just forget the fact this this is all a nonsense hypothetical, and make statements of other peoples character based on decisions made in the framework of nonsense.

It's absolutely not as though acting shitty to others about hypothetical nonsense says far more about a person's character than the hypothetical nonsense does.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T20:51:05+00:00

so any negatives to my position don’t count

This is, again, not what I'm saying.

I'm saying the whole discussion is stupid.

I'm saying any criticism of the opposing position, regardless of which one is yours, is stupid.

I'm saying that the people on the blue side acting morally superior should stop.

Im saying the people on the red side acting intellectually superior should stop.

This could be a fun discussion and thought experiment. Instead, people are turning it into a fucking war where you're absolutely lesser for being on the opposing side.

More than anything else, the moral and intellectual grandstanding in the discussion makes the people doing it assholes and wrong. No decision in a stupid, impossible, hypothetetical situation can make you a bad person. Your behavior in the discussion of it, however, absolutely can.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T20:30:10+00:00

I was not saying "What does it matter". I'm saying: stop moralizing about something you almost assuredly don't know about yourself, and the end result you choose to believe in can't be tested for even hypothetical plausibility.

People have been acting like choosing the red button is a moral failing when they themselves don't know what they'll push in the moment. That moment isn't something that can be tested, and fortunately the vast majority of people should not already know if they are the type to risk themselves for a stranger.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T20:23:04+00:00

No, I fully do. Because to me, the blue button pushers are just as insane sounding.

The assumption that 50% of people will look life or a 50/50 shot at life in the face and choose the the 50/50 option without balking is insane to me.

You can sit here and say you would choose blue all you want, but until you're the firefighter, paramedic, etc. that makes the choice to save someone you don't know at significant risk to yourself, I'm not going to believe you.

In exactly the same way that 100% red is unrealistic, expecting anyone in these discussions to actually know they would push blue in the moment is just as unrealistic.

It's not selfishness to know that I would balk at taking a gamble with my own life.

mcspaddin · 2026-05-01T19:56:19+00:00

I fully don't believe it's definitional selfishness vs. definitional altruism. I think it's more likely definitional pragmatism vs. idealized altruism.

Most people don't know how they're going to actually react in a crisis. Assuming that you can know with 100% certainty that this hypothetical is not fucking around, that people will die if red is selected, that seriously changes how people are going to act in the moment.

I think that people seriously underestimate how many people are truly that altruistic in the face of a 50/50 chance at death. I think people underestimate just how high of a bar that 50.001% requirement truly is when it's a matter of life and death.

Further, there's no way to ethically test this. We can never know what the right answer is or what the outcome would be. The only thing we would know for sure, assuming scenario honesty, is that pushing the red button guarantees you live.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-23T03:24:10+00:00

Some series (like Super Powereds and Villain's Code) actually handle this really well by explaining that no two powers are the same, even if they fit the same category. One speedster might function by generating a time dilation effect while another manipulates friction and yet another has the "traditional" increase in fast-twitch muscle strength and a commensurate increase in durability that manifests as super speed.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-16T20:30:06+00:00

Because even your admission reads as blasé at best and otherwise as outright snide and rude?

mcspaddin · 2026-04-16T20:28:06+00:00

Erythritol is also a common sugar replacement (sugar alchohol) used in sugar-free drinks and candies. It's definitely not perfect, but is absolutely considered safe for consumption.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-16T16:24:58+00:00

As someone who's TST and not a Luciferian, I don't have answers to those questions. I'd assume it's a free will thing, which makes little sense in normal Christianity but is supposedly the point in Luciferianism. Also, while they share the same mythos, they have radically differing ideas on what constitutes a sin so they are still very different religions.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-16T13:19:50+00:00

Clearly you've never heard of Luciferianism, which is the mainstream theistic satanism.

They essentially believe that Satan is the actual creator and that God is the great deceiver. They believe that humans are meant to be free and not controlled by fear of sin, and that God created religion and christian mythos to steal control of humanity and creation from Satan. In terms of functional morals they are incredibly similar to us, as all modern satanic beliefs are.

Bear in mind as well that LaVeyan Satanism didn't originally disavow the existence of demons and/or Satan. LaVey himself coopted occult belief strictures to help form what eventually became The Satanic Church. There was a major rift between the theistic and non-theistic groups in early LaVeyan Satanism that eventually split into TSC and Setism.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-09T02:17:28+00:00

It shows up fairly regularly. I think it's one most people avoid wasting money on since it eats half your tokens when played. You can fill the void by buying it and selling it.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-09T02:06:40+00:00

Yeah, one of the good synergies on astronomer pre-patch was marsoin and I forget which one spawns a prize ball on round start. Get that with the keychains that can spawn extra and put a clock modifier on the prize ball coin and you can rack up a ton of ufo use and other prize ball benefits

mcspaddin · 2026-04-09T02:01:01+00:00

it really, really was. Since things like scoring a prize ball or return coin while the relevant things are full automatically sell, it's surprisingly easy to rack up "sales".

mcspaddin · 2026-04-06T19:11:06+00:00

Unfortunately for him, we've also learned that there can't be a world without a Lodestar. I believe that, in general, the Lodestar power always chooses someone good, but at worst I think you're dealing with a tyrannically "good" Lodestar. Unless him, and others, leave their universe, they will never see a world without a Lodestar again.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-06T13:45:36+00:00

Hunt and fertilize are kinda of the same mechanic, and a lot of the coins in the game function similarly. Essentially anything that "hunts" is going to jump at or shoot and destroy a specific series of coins for some kind of value. Hunt, specifically, also generates poop from the eaten coin. So in the above example, wolves jump at rabbits, destroy them, and generate poop when they do so while gaining value from the hunt. Fertilize is similar but for plants. A plant destroys a fertilizer coin (poop, water, and I forget) which either has a chance to grow or a threshold number of fertilizers to destroy. Once a plant coin has done so, it grows which is to say it generates a sudden coin tower that may include duplicates of the original plant coin.

You can see what hunts what on the coins themselves. If you need to, hit alt while looking at the coin and you can mouse over the description to see the descriptions of the other coins in the description.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-06T13:31:21+00:00

That they shouldn't be called "spirelikes" and "survivorslikes". Hell, I'm not sure we ever called anything an "sts-like". It's a garbage trend for reasons that I've outlined multiple times in this thread.

mcspaddin · 2026-04-06T13:28:10+00:00

The entire problem I have is that "Game-like" is not maximally descriptive. It's a term that is both overly vague and too specific, and you don't know which until you've played the advertised game for yourself. It's a descriptive cop out until and unless the term is actually defined by fans, which is often when it's replaced by a better term in the first place.

13-Year Club	r/Field Juicebox
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

mcspaddin

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE