AegisReflector

You guys do realize that debates can happen without a flame war occurring, right? I'd like to think that this is both the fault of members and staff alike not doing what the board's intentions seem to be. Members here are way too sensitive and the staff appears to let it happen. I mean, sure, some of the topics get locked when things get really out of hand, but I've seen a whole lot of junk posts in debates like the Abortion topic or the Feminism topic that's a waste of space, and are usually the catalysts that fuel the wars in the first place.

The other side is that if the Debate Pit is truly "the scholars place to have mature conversation", then why are half the posts I see on there filled with sloppy grammar, meme pics, one run-on sentence, or quoting someone and then just adding a sentence further like "I agree fully to what you are saying, kudos."? I think a rule needs to be established that the posts in the Debate Pit need to have correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation, have a decent length (just a short paragraph even), and isn't simply a meme pic proclaiming "FAITH IN HUMANITY RESTORED" with that stupid image of the guy raising his fist. It's more or less the reason I don't really post here anymore because the Debate Pit was kind of my main board after I pretty much expressed everything I could about the MLP episodes I've watched.

What annoys me about the Debate Pit is that there are topics that are just downright stupid to look at for a board that identifies itself with serious political, philosophical, and social topics.

"Do you like Canadians?" is one of these topics that I feel need to be moved to the General Board. It's not so much "passionate debating" as it is just asking a stupid question.

The Blue Devils

 

Are colors are black white and obviously... blue.

So is mine! But then again it is a pretty common mascot around the country. I hate it though because Duke University is associated with them, and I hate the Basketball team.

You also can't really compare a music artist who's only gets recognized for how many people listen to their songs to a gaming industry giant who's created a flood of quality games in the past few years that any person with a rational thought process would be quick to acknowledge and only a blind hater would dismiss, but I can see this is going nowhere

Uh, why not? Aren't we speaking from an economic standpoint? Sales don't determine what games are good or not, just look at CoD. The same applies for the music industry and television series.

Where did I even state that the Wii was not without, albeit a few, quality games? Yeah, you had your DKCR, Skyward Sword, Mario Kart Wii, No More Heroes, and Muramasa, but that in no way compares to the libraries that both PS3 and 360 produced. How does that make me a hater when I've had the utmost respect for Nintendo up until the Gamecube? Literally, I have every single Ninty system including Virtual Boy, so just because my opinion doesn't correlate with yours doesn't make me a hater.

 

tbf, with the exception of Other M(and maybe Return to Dreamland), all the games you listed there were highly received by most outlets, with both critics and gamers

Justin Bieber has many accolades by critics. Does that mean his music's good? Absolutely not. Just because he's a cash cow doesn't make him anymore of a good artist than Rebecca Black.

@Artemis is really the only person left that I remotely speak to, so I guess that's something lol. I used to have a lot of friends when I first joined but they either left or forgotten about me because of my absence.

Hey. I liked it. I had hours upon hours of fun with it, and know a good game or two.

 

You can go play your shooters on you blocks of hardware. I'm happy with my Nintendo.

See, this is exactly why I hate the Nintendo fanboys. They only assume that all PS3 and 360 is good for is FPS titles because of the extreme marketing campaign Call of Duty (which, by the way, I hate with a passion) and Halo has gotten. Seriously, there are more genres than shooters in their libraries. Persona 4, Final Fantasy XIII, Soul Calibur (the actual fighting ones), Lost Horizons, Gran Turismo, Skullgirls, Skyrim, Diablo III, Darkstalkers, etc., all popular franchises that don't have a Wii port and do not focus on shooting. So before you blindly go on a limb and tell me something completely false without actually playing the consoles themselves, maybe you should, uh, play the consoles.

Just because it's on the Wii doesn't automatically make it bad.

Notice that MANY critically acclaimed games that have came out in the past generation (BioShock, Red Dead Redemption, Halo, Diablo III, Fallout, Grand Theft Auto, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy XIII, etc.) did not have a port for the Wii. The reason: because Wii had a shitty processing engine and was only three times the power to that of the Gamecube. When a gaming company announces a new system, you bet your ass I want it so that the games can stun me with excitement all over again. Wii didn't. It was only filled with first-party disappointments and casual garbage. Even established franchises like Call of Duty and Soul Calibur couldn't make a solid port because the developers were confused on how to program shit with the motion control gimmick, which quickly came and went.

Again, from an economic standpoint, it was great with the soccer moms/casual crowd, but as for gaming, not a chance. PS3 and 360 definitely beat it.

Soul has more rep in the American market though, and since most of the competitive scene is here in the States, I would think Namco with go with someone like Ivy, Yoshimitsu, or Cassandra seeing as how they have a huge fanbase. I think a character from Tekken is a high possibility too.

I'm just bugged that he tried to make the game anti-competitive. I guess it's because I like the competitiveness of games in general, but is there something inherently wrong with a game having a competitive aspect to it? Sure some people played Melee at the tournament scene but plenty of people just played the game on a more casual level. I think things should have continued on that same path so that both crowds would be happy. I guess he didn't like seeing people turning his game into "srs bsns".

There's a problem when you have a fascist organization (Smashboards.com) overlooking all of the nationally recognized tournaments and making a universal ruleset that sucks. I'm glad they axe their "Unity Ruleset" a couple of years ago since TOs were getting pissed off at all the strict bullshit they enlisted. You can't take an obvious casual-oriented game like Brawl and make it into something competitive; you would have to mod it. This is why people make stuff like Project M, because it's way easier to use Melee's engine rather than Brawl's shit.

Honestly, the competitive scene IS ruining the competitive scene.

There are many more amazing games out there for the Wii. Just gotta go through GameStop's shelves with an open mind. If it's a first party Nintendo title, there's a good chance that it's expertly designed, and worth your money.

Other M? Kirby's Epic Yarn/Return to Dreamland? Super Smash Bros. Brawl? New Super Mario Bros. Wii?

Yeah, no. Their library was definitely not extensive enough.

Well, Sakurai stated that Namco might be getting some rep with a third party character, so my guess it'll be someone from Soul Calibur or the Tales Of... series. I highly doubt Pac-Man will fit the cause because he doesn't have an established fanbase anymore.

I just hope 4 is way better than Brawl. Brawl was really a disappointment and I cannot believe it is the sequel to Melee. All because Sakurai wanted to make the game as "anti-competitive" as possible. You realize you can do that by not royally screwing up the physics that were perfected in Melee, right?

Wii definitely was a bad console, though. Probably not from an economic standpoint, but quality wise, it was shitty. The graphics processor was not far off from Gamecube, shovelware/crapware up the wazoo, terrible controller design, motion sensor gimmick that only lasted for about 3 years before getting really old, crappy online, not much selection with multiplayer games, etc. Nintendo just got too greedy with this one. They put in so much time with an effort to create a "casual", "family friendly" system that they completely forgot to put quality into their gaming library.

Pretty much the only games that are worth buying the Wii for are Donkey Kong Country Returns, Super Mario Galaxy 2, No More Heroes, Mario Kart Wii, and Muramasa: The Demon Blade.

Well, @Artemis' post got my attention and made me remember this forum haha.

I'll be sure to get my hug after I find solid Internet access again where I'm not in the backwoods hahaha.

Hai!

Buh, who might you be?

I believe we all go to the afterlife, regardless of crime, status, race, etc. It's a never-ending mass that's encompassed by your wildest desires and you have nothing to worry about. I WOULD like to believe that. I don't believe in God but I'm not a pure non-theist where I think I'm just gonna rot in the ground after I die. That would be, well, boring! I want to do something with my soul for many years to come.

Who really knows, though? We can only ascertain what happens to us when we meet thy maker.

I loved the Dreamcast's gaming library but you have to admit that the controller was awful. So bulky and uncomfortable to hold. In fact, why do kickass retro consoles like the Nintendo 64 have such poorly designed controllers? Meh, technological design has been great to us in the last couple of generations, I suppose.

I used to play Soul Calibur and Sonic Adventure 2 all the time. Phantasy Star Online was another great one but for some reason it kept freezing everytime I tried to do anything concerning the internet haha. Other than that, I think that was pretty much my gaming library (I know, lame). My brother had Crazy Taxi and Tony Hawk Pro Skater but I never was really into those.

What exactly constitutes being "socially awkward" anyways? Just not fitting in with the norms of the people that surround you or just doing something that is completely foreign to any situation just because you don't understand how to react?

It's like how doctors classify anybody who doesn't like to express their feelings and whatnot a victim of the "Autism Spectrum". It doesn't mean anything if these symptoms are so vague/basic that you can pretty much label them to anybody who isn't a so-called "social butterfly".

I mean, yes, sometimes when I'm with a group of friends or in an atmosphere with strangers, sometimes they can get on my nerves with their behavior, but I wouldn't necessarily classify them as "awkward" unless I actually see signs of them having a problem through use of body and face movement. I usually act in a reserve manner around my family but I get unleashed when I'm with my friend circles. So, I don't know, I don't think I'm socially awkward and I've never encountered a situation with anybody else being it.

Out of the shadows for a quick post.

Hey.

I see a lot of people hate the Junction System in FFVIII. This makes me sad. I thought it was the most enjoyable gameplay mechanic in the entire series.

It is because unlike Final Fantasy II where you leveled up your stats by commands (which could get horribly abused when you can attack your own party members and this can actually raise your HP/Attack stats), VIII combines the traditional EXP system with a new one that summons the magic in your arsenal to customize your unique stats at any time during the game. This is great for when you want to experiment your characters for certain bosses. For example, Zell is obviously the Monk of the game, so your best bet is to put Ultima into his Strength stat. However, if you're going to go into an area that's filled with water creatures, switch that out with 99 Thundaga and his attacks will be even more affective. The system works to your advantage by not being so limited, as you can draw as many spells from enemies as you want.

Also, I'm willing to bet the developers thought that some abuse would be in store if players could draw unlimited amounts of spells, so that's why they had the monsters level up as you do to make the game more challenging. If they didn't, the game would be really boring and battles could be won with one simple punch to the face.

Let me just say that I absolutely LOVED KH1 and really enjoyed Re: CoM and KH3D. However, the rest of the games, in my opinion, are utterly forgettable, especially since the gameplay in most games are what frustrates me the most.

The reason why I think KH1 is still the best game in the series is that the combat system was very basic, but very challenging. Without reaction commands, you actually had to plan your strategies, and without stiff movement, you very rarely could totally run away from the battlefield. Drives I thought were unnecessary seeing as how the enhanced Limit commands can easily obliterate opponents even if you're at a very low level. Not only that, but I feel like the atmosphere for KH1 had a very solid balance between Disney's world and Final Fantasy's world, a depth of seriousness with the mix of the always cheerful and prideful ways that Mickey Mouse's crew can provide. In KH2, I felt the story shifted way more towards the Final Fantasy franchise and the only thing left from Disney's end was the worlds themselves. Maleficent is no longer a main antagonist, which disappoints me. Instead, we have very cliche antiheroes who turn out to be pawns in use of thirteen other cliche villains that even a fifth grader could predict. Gets old after a while. I want a unique villian to peak my interest, and Xehanort just doesn't cut it for me.

Don't get me wrong, though. KH2 wasn't a real BAD game, but it just didn't stand out to me like the previous games in the series. I did applaud the use of new Disney characters and a more fluent battle system, but these changes came at a price for more cliches and a less challenging gameplay system.

I think one of the problems is that there's too many duplicating topics that all convey the same thing. Why don't we just make a general hate topic or something? Because pretty much all I see on the pony boards are "I HATE EQUESTRIA GIRLS" or "HATERS SUCK". This is most likely why I don't even bother posting in them anymore because there's just too much stupid drama.

Oh the pacman eyes is actually a bit of a jibe at the westerners. The Japanese have always found our eyes to be really huge. In a way it's a racist stereotype

Not at all the case. It's because the modern formula for anime design was based off of Osamu Tezuka's work Astro Boy, which in return was based off of the classic Disney cartoons from the 30's featuring Mickey Mouse and friends.

Also, not all Anime eyes are big and wide.

I guess I got shot down in flames again, maybe it is a cultural thing. I just don't understand the massive pacman eyes and simple mouth movements. The whole style just comes off as cheap and tries to hard to compensate by being overly cute/violent/mysterious/.

You could say the same things about the modern day episodes of Family Guy and The Simpsons. The characters literally have very stiff moments like they have a rod up their butt and their mouths move awfully stale-like compared to 90's animation.

Found the topic for me! A novel idea!

Is there anything good so far in the Spring lineup? I've only seen Red Data Girl, Karnival, and Suisei no Gargantia this past month.

Also, I should list my favorite anime to get it out of the way: Dragon Ball Z, Evangelion, Fullmetal Alchemist, Inuyasha, Lucky Star

The reason why I became an Otaku is because the modern animation industry in America is slowly dwindling in my opinion.

The main reason why I love anime is the fact that it has many different genres and ways of storytelling. You have action, comedy, romance, horror, ecchi, erotic, psychological, etc. Not to mention the fact that despite the way Japanese animators clearly base their talents on the grandfather of anime, Astro Boy, in terms of design, anime DOES have a noticeable difference in character rendering and art styles. Samurai Champloo was inspired by Naturalism, Japanese cutprints, and hip hop culture/urban art while Cowboy Bebop had the style of steampunk, Romanticism, and futurism; they were also created by the same guy.

Looking at American animation, and even its history, there's always been an emphasis on slapstick comedy or action adventure. There's really no in-between. I haven't heard of an animated series that dealt strictly with romance, slice of life, horror, psychological, or mecha (I guess you can make an argument for Megas XLR but it was actually created by in-house Japanese animators). It's always "smart" comedy (Animaniacs, Ren and Stimpy), adult humor (Family Guy, The Simpsons), or action (pretty much the entire DC Block and classic Filmation superhero shows). If the animated industry gained at least a little more diversity within its directions then I would be okay with it. Disney did exactly this when they first started out and during the Disney Reinassiance but it seems that ever since The Simpsons came out, more shows are focusing on lame taboo humor and pop culture references rather than keeping a story with solid character development. There's nothing wrong with comedy, I'm just tired of seeing this formula in every damn animated show I see.

Now, to answer your questions:

I'm not sure if ponies are classified as Anime but I don't think so.

MLP isn't under anime since it was made in America. Animation that's done in-house over in Japan is classified as "anime". For shows like Avatar: The Last Airbender that are made in America but obviously have an anime influence in design, it's considered to be under "western anime", though there isn't an official term yet since the style isn't popular currently within the American animation industry.

The characters in mlp are pretty simple but can convey such a wide variety of emotion and expression without resorting to the lame tactics that Anime does, I wish I could be more descriptive but I can't.

Anime does express a TON of emotion and expression. The problem is our cultural differences. The Japanese express themselves differently from Americans, which is why in certain anime sometimes things that may not seem all too dramatic to us may be for them. Localization of these differences are very difficult to do. Without further description, I really don't see why you would think this, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

I think a good cartoon should be simple and wacky like Ren and Stimpy the ponies are also quite simple and wacky at times.

Animation should be classified as a general art form. I'm getting tired of people responding to the form as being "childish" or that it should focus strictly on humor and making people laugh. Just because Disney used this formula to popularize the medium doesn't mean that it's the law of the form. Animation should be whatever the creators and animators want it to be. Modern Disney flicks like Aladdin and The Hunchback of Notre Dame weren't at all wacky and silly. They had dramatic storylines and great character development. Claude Frollo and his "Hellfire" segment definitely wasn't light-hearted, it was dark and serious, but still, it was put in for a reason. To convey emotion. Anime does the exact same thing albeit a bit differently. While American animation tends to use action and movement as a way to express thought, Anime focuses more on the psychological aspect, in which we enter the character's mind. To me, I find this a tad more effective because I know what the character is feeling. If I just see a character move around in an awkward manner, they aren't really connecting to me at all.

And I don't see why everything has to be perfect and sexy, some of my favorite cartoons are pretty gritty like Ratfink and Beavis and Butthead. I really don't like the story lines. I think they try way to hard to come off as "epic" with far fetched and dragged out fight scenes.

"Perfect and sexy"? Just because Rule 34 exists on the Internet doesn't mean all Anime is like that. Sure, there are a lot of anime that deal with taboo sexual practices, but have you seen America? We make fun of sex to the point where it's now simply mechanical and not filled with emotion at all. And what do you mean by "perfect"? You mean the way they draw the characters and environments in a fine tip? If you see anime like Crayon Shin-Chan or Panty and Stocking, you'll find that this is simply not the case. I will give you the dragged out fight scenes though, as Dragon Ball Z, Bleach, and Naruto succumb to this formula, but I don't see any fault with it.

Overall, it's your opinion. Just giving my two cents into it. By the way, did I mention I love animation? =P