About the sales of SMG, one thing to remember

[Final-Fan]

fkusumot said:

Final-Fan said:

fkusumot said:

omgwtfbbq said:
why would Sunshine be a better comparison than NSMB? DS and Wii are going to have similar user bases, both in terms of size and makeup. Gamecube has a much smaller and more focused user base. NSMB is absolutely the best game to compare galaxy with.

No. This is the trap that people fell into when trying to predict sales for SMG and used NSMB as the reference. 2D Mario is a different genre than 3D Mario. You can can compare the two and come up with lots of similarities but at root of it all they are very different games that appeal to their own distinct crowd. The comparison between the two can give you indications and you might adduce some small a priori noema that will help engender further investigation. Straight up comparison such as looking at sales for NSMB and assigning that some predictive value for SMG sales is not relevant because they are two radically different games.

I honestly can't remember the last time a poster used an English word I was totally unfamiliar with.

(W3NID) noema (noun) in Husserlian philosophy: the objective aspect of or the content within an intentional experience -- distinguished from noesis

That seems kinda ... obscurely hyperspecific for this discussion. Also, I don't understand what exactly the "intentional experience" is. Could you please elaborate on what you mean by an "a priori noema"?

On a related note, is there any specific reason that that one sentence had such an abundance of 'college words'?

 Husserl thought that the way we talked about comparisons was important and should be very specific. The intentional experience is the active one and may exist before hand, in principle, a priori. Specifying the noema keeps this in the objective vice the subjective realm. The analysis is a little like Kant's in the Critique of Judgment. So in the comparion you might find an element that is common to both SMG and NSMB is used to different ends and in an apparently not ironic sense. When you compare them their will still be tension between the modality of both uses.

Anyway, sorry for geeking out like that. All my graduate and post-graduate studies were in Philosophy, Greek Philosophy and the Early Church Fathers like Augustine up to Aquinas.

The sentence in question was what it was to very narrowly define what type of comparison could yield grist for discussion. 

I believe that you completely failed to define "intentional experience".  I suppose I could have been more clear that I was looking for a definition instead of an identification. 

A bit of Internet research tells me that "Intentional experience refers to real entities, objects that actually exist.  Frege pointed out long ago that when somebody is thinking about the moon, it is not just the idea of the moon but of an actual, intentional experience in which the moon is the appearing reference or phenomenon." 

This contrasts with what I might naturally presume the term to mean, that is, an experience one has intentionally, on purpose as opposed to involuntarily -- such as the "look and feel" of playing the two games.  Instead it seems that "intentional experience" only means something akin to a real-world reference instead of an abstract idea. 

Am I wrong?  I'm kind of dashing this off in a futile attempt to not be late for work. 

[edit:  source]