|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #18074 on CommentsLevel 144 Comments: Faptastic
OfflineSend mail to nppl Block nppl Invite nppl to be your friend
- Views: 15552Online Pass
302 28 Total: +274
latest user's comments
|#62 - You boil water in a kettle and you serve tea in a tea pot||07/23/2014 on Mein Tea kettle||+1|
|#10 - Mother ****** that's a tea pot not a kettle. [+] (3 new replies)||07/21/2014 on Mein Tea kettle||+21|
#27 - anonymous (07/21/2014) [-]
That white space is probably gonna get bigger when the blue's gone... I don't blame the Scots for wanting to leave, I just wish we could set the border to be just north of Birmingham. Build a 60 foot wall across the Country. Give the southerners Ebola or something...
|#8 - It was written in blood...||02/08/2014 on name your move||+1|
|#8 - Sounds good to me [+] (3 new replies)||01/31/2014 on Potato ice creams||+74|
|#7 - Sounds about right [+] (73 new replies)||01/30/2014 on Eyedea||+498|
#637 - lotlizard (02/03/2014) [-]
Hey man, just wanted you to know that I saw this comment the other day and decided to check this game out. Thank you so much for letting me discover this freakin masterpiece of a game.
I just got finished with the campaign a few minutes ago and made it a point to track this comment down so I could thank you.
#307 - AdminsGayLover (01/30/2014) [-]
I really wish I had gotten out of spec ops what everyone else did. I did not connect with Walker at all, I could not feel like I was in his shoes. I got angry when he kept going into Dubai after I felt from his orders he should have turned around, and as he kept going I felt like he was making all the terrible decisions and not me like the developers wanted me to feel. I would love to have another so I could have another chance, but as it stands this game disappointed me and I'm sad that it did.
#233 - anonymous (01/30/2014) [-]
#187 - anonymous (01/30/2014) [-]
I fucking love that game!
#140 - anonymous (01/30/2014) [-]
Two words....white phosphorus....
#127 - anonymous (01/30/2014) [-]
Remembering that send chills down my spine
#532 - anonymous (01/31/2014) [-]
Okay, yeah, first part generic first person shooter and I got bored. How long does it take to get amazing?
#611 - thundagawd (01/31/2014) [-]
A few hours in when the first moral decisions start coming into play, for me it was the white phosphorous chapter, seemed like a sensible decision concerning how the odds were stacked against us, but exactly how extreme the impact my decision had wasn't obvious until I traveled down and cut through the wreckage where I see disfigured corpses fucking EVERYWHERE and a bunch of survivors trying to crawl away while their skin melted off, and then once I actually got to the end of the military camp and saw what lies beyond the gates. My jaw fucking dropped because I wasn't expecting them to go that far to get their message across.
That was probably the best thing about the game, you play it like you would any other military shooter. but whenever you make decisions you normally wouldn't think twice about in a game like Call of Duty or Battlefield or whatever, they shit all over your moral compass for it and show you how much of a terrible person you are.
#476 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
And you really believe games can be art?
I, for myself, believe that if you dare classify video games into the category of "art", you will "snowball effect" into the "everything can be art" argument quite rapidly.
Would you have any interesting arguments that could prove me otherwise?
#483 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
What is your "lowest" standard for art? can a book be art? A movie?
If you say no to both, why?
I googled the definition of art and got this.
"the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination"
If that doesn't apply to books and movies (granted not ALL books and movie qualify, just as not all paintings and drawings do) then I don't see how you could apply it to an image.
If you'd like to have an actual debate, I do have more points to hit on, but if you're just being a troll I'll save my breath... metaphorically speaking.
#490 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
No, no. I am myself a writer, and I want to have an earnest debate.
Being a writer, I obviously believe that literature can be art and movies too (I wrote several screenplays). To me anything that has been created by a human being for the aesthetic pleasure of other human beings is art.
The problem is: I have trouble considering video games to be delivering a form of "aesthetic pleasure." They seem to be nothing more than abnegation and mere entertainment.
#516 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
So my argument is this: What does a book do? It tells a story. And a Movie? It tells a story but does so in a more direct way that isn't as open to interpretation as it provides the visuals and dialog. A video game also tells a story but you get to interact with the story. A video game is sometimes more of an expression of creativity than a painting if for no other reason that the method by which is was able to be created.
A painting is a fairly straight forward thing. Colors on a canvas that depict an image. Any video game is inherently more complex and the mechanics of computes that are leveraged in able to make these things possible, to me, personally, is an impressive display of human creativity. That is my more flimsy argument.
Video games can interact with the player in a way a painting book or movie simply can't (barring choose-you-own-adventure books). A game can, in the instance of Spec Ops: The Line, make you believe you are doing the right thing. Force the player to be okay with the actions they are taking in the name of the greater good, and then reveal to the player that the actions not only were detrimental, but ultimately unnecessary.
The game has now made you feel moral responsible for something you did. It took advantage of the oversaturation of "go here, do this" style of game mechanics and made you regret doing something without question.
It evokes emotion. Something all art aspires to do. I can assure you there are people that have felt more playing video games than they have looking at a painting.
A story, creativity, and emotion. If that isn't art, what is?
#524 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
"I can assure you there are people that have felt more playing video games than they have looking at a painting."
Perhaps, and that is exactly what I am arguing against at the moment. Video games are a simpler, quicker art. You get into it easily and you get fun in a quick way. A great epic like "War and Peace" or Bach's Brandenburg Concertos pull the human mind to a colossal extent of its capabilities in intellect, emotion, knowledge and aesthetic sensibility. These works require effort and investment; but the greater the effort, the greater the reward.
"The game has now made you feel moral responsible for something you did. It took advantage of the oversaturation of "go here, do this" style of game mechanics and made you regret doing something without question."
Very weak argument, I believe. Any storytelling can do this. You can be rooting for the protagonist and then realize that he was doing something horrible all the way through. Also, seeing it is more powerful than living it, because you have a more objective view of it all.
#542 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
To say video games are more digestible and therefore a lesser medium is like saying a painting is a lesser medium than a book as a book requires the ability to read the language it was printed in while a painting requires "less effort and investment".
Yes, a book can manipulate you into thinking something, but a game can make you do it. A game can have you slaughter innocent people unknowingly and then reveal to you what you have done. While a book can do something similar, say have a protagonist do the same thing and have you agree with his choice to take the action, the game wins as you yourself are actually perpetrating the act. You set it in motion, not an authors words.
#587 - anonymous (01/31/2014) [-]
Ah, yes, because you don't interact with books. You don't, for example, READ it for hours. Movies? Pshaw, are you meant to WATCH those? The very idea.
#503 - anonymous (01/31/2014) [-]
"If there is anything I have learned in my travels across the Planes, it is that many things may change the nature of a man. Whether regret, or love, or revenge or fear - whatever you believe can change the nature of a man, can. I’ve seen belief move cities, make men stave off death, and turn an evil hag's heart half-circle. This entire Fortress has been constructed from belief. Belief damned a woman, whose heart clung to the hope that another loved her when he did not. Once, it made a man seek immortality and achieve it. And it has made a posturing spirit think it is something more than a part of me."
Entertainment? Yes. You could say the same thing about every single movie, painting and play that has been made. Shallow? At times, yes. Again, same with every other medium. However, that extra immersion; being a part of the storyline, talking to the characters, watching your decisions unfold, for better or for worse... That makes any book/movie I've experienced pale in comparison.
#519 - anonymous (01/31/2014) [-]
Good to know you weren't after an earnest debate, after all.
#531 - anonymous (01/31/2014) [-]
If you've never played Planescape: Torment, then I can understand. Hopefully, one day, you do. Then you could possibly understand why I'd compare it to the works of Shakespeare.
Hint: The primary themes are that of atonement, torment, and the possibility that in the end, there are some things that are just not possible to atone for. Love, betrayal, and using someone that loves you to their end, down to convincing them to bind their soul for you.
The idea of atonement, and the sins of your past following you. You can have all the good intentions in the world, but some sins will not wash away. Whatever The Nameless One did in the past, they were so terrified of the judgement waiting in the afterlife they shattered their soul simply to buy some more time, in the hopes they could atone for what they had done.
That's not even scratching the surface, and you're honestly going to tell me that THAT doesn't count as art?
#533 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
Hmm. That does sound rather interesting...
I'll check it out someday and tell you about it.
One thing: do not forget that themes must not only be interesting in themselves but must also be brought out and up in a skillful and creative manner.
But I will check it out; I'm writing it down.
#501 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
no, that applies to anything; there are just as many movies, books, or pictures sculptures or ANYTHING else that people have put no feeling into, or were anything more than moneymaking. just because the big popularized fore-front of them is like that ,does that mean that the entire medium has no artistic value? almost every game has a story, or a series of mechanics that are intended to teach a moral or life lesson. or bring up topics that need to be talked about more. i have never felt as much about any movie than i have about games. And if that isn't something worth noting then we need to redefine art as a whole.
#508 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
Let's not redefine a whole fucking concept because your childish mind cannot accept that certain things are more aesthetic than others.
I can agree: video games have a few great aesthetic capabilities, but these few are florid features. I do not believe a video game is intrinsically art for the aforementioned reasons.
Yes, they are creative and they do have storytelling involved in them (a highly aesthetic enterprise), but their core—their medium specificity, if you will—is "interactivity."
If you call video games "art," you must also call sports "art" and push-pin is certainly not poetry (demonstrated by John Stuart Mill in his book "Utilitarianism).
Bear in mind that I admit to the fact that video games are aesthetic enterprises, please.
#514 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
sports are not art because they are not "worked on" per say. They are created in cultures over large periods of time. a big company doesn't just create the rules of a sport and sell it. an indie developer couldn't create a sport whenever they get inspiration for one and distribute it among a group of people or underground community or for public consumption. no one would spend their lives refining the skill of creating a sport. with electronic video games, it allows people to create games in the exact same way someone would make music or art. It allows us to put our heart and soul into this living breathing world that can go far beyond any movie or book, allowing the player to live within the world crafted by the artist, and experience living within it.
#520 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
You're starting to win me over a little...
Interesting point of view, you have, but a tad unstable.
I still have one small point, and you will most likely disagree: I believe interactivity diminishes an artistic experience rather than enhances it. Mostly because it is simply easier on the artist (and thus less creative/skillful), as the player is doing half (or more) of the job by "being" the protagonist.
#529 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
i can see your point there, however, consider this.
There are often many pictures, for example, abstract art, where ambiguity is a part of the experience; it leaves it up to the viewer to decide what the art its self means. I feel that the "interactivity" is much the same thing: it enhances the ambiguity, allowing the player to make of it what hey wish, however the creator can limit the freedom of the player, leading them down a theoretical hallway in order to give the player an experience that the player can feel connected to. (PS, i feel that by the viewer being a player, they can care more about the character they are acting as, and experience fear or sadness or joyousness far more when it is their own life at stake rather than some other person they dont know) or the creator can widen it, allowing the player to experience the world in their own way, interpreting what is happening on their own, and making their own ideas of what is happening. (a good example of this would be fallout 3)
#530 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
I agree. Seems that video games do one thing and movies and literature another.
No point in comparing them, they are apples and oranges; all up to preference.
I prefer oranges, by the way.
Have a good day, and it was nice arguing with you (unless you believe we should further this debate a tad more...?)
#536 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
well, do you still not believe that video games are art? Well, look at the similarity to it all; Look at the legions of people that are adamant fans of metal gear solid, star wars, star trek, pikmin, Pokemon, star trek, the enders game series, hitchhikers guide to the galaxy... just.. EVERYTHING. these people put their heart, soul, blood, sweat and tears into their creation and then millions of people have responded, devoting large portions of their lives to spreading the message that they carry, the feelings that are in them, and the beautiful things that they are. there are communities, both large and small for every great game, movie, song, book, and piece of art that has ever seen the light of day. These things bring people together, all of them the same, regardless of the medium, people always find a way to express themselves. humanity is a beautiful thing, and the things we create reflect that.
#539 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
Of course humanity is a beautiful thing... I do feel a bit patronized, right now, but I will ignore that.
I simply think that art should be segregated in meaning from "beauty", "aesthetics" and so on—especially "entertainment."
The pleasure you are liable to get from "Hamlet" is great than the one you can get from "Pokemon" or "Two and a Half Men". And if you truly believe otherwise, then you only know your side of the question, for, believe you me, I've been a child and I've loved Pokemon, Family Guy and Simpsons and whatever; but taste develops and matures with time.
#544 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
so now you are saying that things like TV shows aren't an art, as a whole? or just specific instances of them?
Because i would certainly say that specific instances of anything could be called not art. two and a half men, the recent call of duty's/battlefields and anything with the words Michael bay on them all included.
But could you honestly say that an entire medium as a whole could never be considered art simply for being in a certain medium? That is EXACTLY the same concept as saying an entire colour of humans could never be considered people simply for being in a certain colour.
#547 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
"That is EXACTLY the same concept as saying an entire colour of humans could never be considered people simply for being in a certain colour."
Not even close to truth; that is not even similar; we have defined what a person is and color has nothing to do with it.
Also, I'm not saying that video games aren't art because some are of low quality. I was saying that video games, intrinsically, cannot be art because of their medium specificity: interactivity.
Now, you've changed my mind: I agree with you, video games can potentially be art. But they are of lower quality because of this same component: interactivity. It sets them a strata lower compared to novels and movies.
#549 - jumperzero (01/31/2014) [-]
okay, i will leave it there, except for one thing.
"We have defined what art is and medium has nothing to do with it."
I can understand you feeling that personally, interactivity sets them lower than other mediums, as that is something that is standard across all games and in fact, defines a game. And i hope that one day, a game comes to you that will change your opinion of that, but at least I've done my job.
#546 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
My mistake, I misread your comment.
Objectivity can still be had via multiple viewpoints.
Objectivity is lost whenever you take on a first person perspective, not just with video games. And in books, the fix to said loss is the same. more viewpoints or an objective one.
Objectivity could even be a bad thing. Were you to know the truth of an event without suspense experiencing the even from the first person and having a warp view of what transpired, you would be unable to identify with a character who has a more limited scope. Now it isn't always bad, but neither is subjectivity. So your argument is moot.
#551 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
Objectivity in a thematic sense, not in a "plot" or viewpoint sense.
Objectivity of understanding it by seeing other people do it, not doing it yourself. It permits you to weigh the situations and their ideas with more care. Also, characters can be more thoroughly developed through non-interactive fiction as they are able to take a life of their own in the author's unaffected mind.
That's really my point, in the end: novels and films and plays are about people and the interesting, dramatic situations they go through in their lives; video games are about entertaining an audience. Entertaining. There is a difference between art and entertainment.
Finally, the video games that take on serious themes and characters normally end up looking a lot like movies (Heavy Rain, Fahrenheit), and usually are of lower quality than watching a movie (because of the interactivity component, I'd wager).
I'm sorry for rushing these points, but I really have to go soon. Please hurry with the reply if you have one.
#567 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
I see your point, and I understand where you are coming from. That said, I think there is merit to both not interacting at all and absorbing a pure story, and experiencing a story first hand and having the illusion of choice. If you firmly believe that there is no merit to a game forcing a player to make tough decisions and bear any moral weight, then I have no further arguments, and you and I simply have different definitions of what art is at it's base.
This isn't a bad thing, and I don't hold it against you. I wouldn't even be having this conversation if I thought there weren't two ways about it.
#568 - pkrbarmovie (01/31/2014) [-]
My definition of art is "Creative and/or skillful endeavor which's primary purpose is aesthetic pleasure." Do you have anything to say against this?
I believe video games are ENTERTAINMENT and not ART.
I believe you only know your side of the question and have never read the great classics of literature such as "David Copperfield", "The Idiot", or "War and Peace".
"I wouldn't even be having this conversation if I thought there weren't two ways about it." Did you just basically admit you were close-minded unless you thought the problem to be prone to pluralism?
#580 - retardedboss (01/31/2014) [-]
You have agreed that a book and a movie can be art. Are they not also for entertainment? Also the condensation is unappreciated and unnecessary. While I haven't read any of the things you named I have read The Stranger and I have read Of Mice and Men and Hamlet and many other literary works of art.
And my quote in no way makes me close minded. I am saying I believe it to be one way, but am aware there are other interpretations.
If you'd like to insult me again don't expect a reply.
|#168 - **nppl rolled a random image posted in comment #227 at Wha…||06/27/2012 on Omegle funny||+10|