By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - The sjw review by eurogamer on Kingdom Come: Deliverance

DonFerrari said:
JWeinCom said:

1.  I didn't say I was worried about the anti-sjw agenda.  I said I was bothered by people who misrepresent information to support it.  If people were presenting information honestly, I'd have no real objections.

2.  And I said why I wasn't concerned about it.  Has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with their stande, it's just that I don't visit their website.  There are billions of websites.  I only tend to worry about the ones I actually use.

3.  I don't believe I said that at all. I said I didn't have enough information to comment on that.  I'd rather it be accurate, but I'm certainly not about to do any indepth research on the Czech republic in the 1600s. 

4.  Yup.  You got that one right.

So, what I was saying was, I care more about people misrepresenting information to support an anti-sjw agenda on a site I use (btw, I'd be equally bothered if people were doing so to promote a pro-sjw agenda, but I just don't see much of that here), and that I don't care about what people say on a website I never use.

You somehow got from there to I'm worried about any anti-sjw stuff whether honestly presented or not, and that I'm more concerned about this than people trying to get everything censored, which is a topic I never addressed at all.

I trust that if you are making an effort in good faith to understand me you will stand corrected.

1 - So are you worried about the reviewer that is misrepresenting and interpreting the game to fulfill a SJW agenda?

2- I really don't think there is more than one website for every 7 habitants on earth.

3 - So you are worried about the historian being correct, but not enough to care and check as you did OP?

You should follow more topics in this site, as there is a lot of pro-SJW stuff and distortions to support it in several posts and topics. But if you haven't seem ok, since you don't like both distortions I'm ok.

I got to it based on your answers and portrayal, so even though it was a hyperbole (exaggerating to show it doesn't make sense, I believe it is called reduction to ridiculum), but yes I stand corrected.

1.  I'm not worried about the reviewer, but my lack of concern has nothing to do with the reviewer's agenda.  If the review was on a website I actually used, I might care.  

2.  Don't think that was the relevant part of what I said, but you'd be surprised.  http://www.internetlivestats.com/total-number-of-websites/ 

3.  This was a pretty easy thing to check.  The amount I cared was proportionate to the amount of effort it would take to investigate.  To actually check the historian's accuracy, I would have to start sending emails, research 1600s Czech Republic, and so on.  

In other words, I cared enough to click the review and read it.  I don't care enough to engage in a research project.  I'd say that's pretty typical human behavior.

4.  Looking at the hot topics on the front page, there are 4 that are to one extent or another complaining about sjw stuff.  Two of them I'd say are generally fair, one (this) is misleading, and one is absolutely batshit.  I see no topics actually promoting any kind of social justice.  That's not to say there's not stupid stuff on both sides within the topics, but on this site, it seems like the anti-sjw people are the ones really pressing the issue.  Of course, that's just what I notice, and I'm not claiming to be perfectly unbiased.  Could be certain things are flying under my radar.

5.  It's reductio ad absurdum... but that's not the same thing as hyperbole.

In a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, the "exaggeration" has to actually be a logical and necessary extension of the original argument.  For example, if I said "Nintendo games are always better than Sony games" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" Then that would be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument because the exaggeration would actually have to be true if my premise were true.  If I said "Nintendo games are usually better than Sony's" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" then that would not be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, because that exaggeration would not have to be true if my premise were true.

In this case, your hyperbole didn't necessarily follow from what I was saying.  That's an appeal to the extremes fallacy.  In general, reductio ad absurdum arguments only work when someone takes an extreme and rigid stance.  Otherwise, it doesn't work.

But, if you stand corrected, then that's fine.  



Around the Network
AlfredoTurkey said:

I just wish that someone like Rockstar would make a game that deliberately shits all OVER these nazi fuckers. Make a game that is all-white, sexist and which objectifies the female body to the point of overkill. And then, when they get called out for it? Simply release a press kit with two words.

FUCK OFF.

Yakuza, really. Just not  by rockstar.



JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:

1 - So are you worried about the reviewer that is misrepresenting and interpreting the game to fulfill a SJW agenda?

2- I really don't think there is more than one website for every 7 habitants on earth.

3 - So you are worried about the historian being correct, but not enough to care and check as you did OP?

You should follow more topics in this site, as there is a lot of pro-SJW stuff and distortions to support it in several posts and topics. But if you haven't seem ok, since you don't like both distortions I'm ok.

I got to it based on your answers and portrayal, so even though it was a hyperbole (exaggerating to show it doesn't make sense, I believe it is called reduction to ridiculum), but yes I stand corrected.

1.  I'm not worried about the reviewer, but my lack of concern has nothing to do with the reviewer's agenda.  If the review was on a website I actually used, I might care.  

2.  Don't think that was the relevant part of what I said, but you'd be surprised.  http://www.internetlivestats.com/total-number-of-websites/ 

3.  This was a pretty easy thing to check.  The amount I cared was proportionate to the amount of effort it would take to investigate.  To actually check the historian's accuracy, I would have to start sending emails, research 1600s Czech Republic, and so on.  

In other words, I cared enough to click the review and read it.  I don't care enough to engage in a research project.  I'd say that's pretty typical human behavior.

4.  Looking at the hot topics on the front page, there are 4 that are to one extent or another complaining about sjw stuff.  Two of them I'd say are generally fair, one (this) is misleading, and one is absolutely batshit.  I see no topics actually promoting any kind of social justice.  That's not to say there's not stupid stuff on both sides within the topics, but on this site, it seems like the anti-sjw people are the ones really pressing the issue.  Of course, that's just what I notice, and I'm not claiming to be perfectly unbiased.  Could be certain things are flying under my radar.

5.  It's reductio ad absurdum... but that's not the same thing as hyperbole.

In a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, the "exaggeration" has to actually be a logical and necessary extension of the original argument.  For example, if I said "Nintendo games are always better than Sony games" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" Then that would be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument because the exaggeration would actually have to be true if my premise were true.  If I said "Nintendo games are usually better than Sony's" and you said "Then you're saying Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4?" then that would not be a valid reductio ad absurdum argument, because that exaggeration would not have to be true if my premise were true.

In this case, your hyperbole didn't necessarily follow from what I was saying.  That's an appeal to the extremes fallacy.  In general, reductio ad absurdum arguments only work when someone takes an extreme and rigid stance.  Otherwise, it doesn't work.

But, if you stand corrected, then that's fine.  

1 - ok

2 - Yep it was just me making fun of your billions... surprised that it really spiked that high, there may be a plethora of shit on that count =]

3 - Nope, even reading the comments from the review on EG would give you the answer, also the fact that the reviewer "talked to one historian" instead of fact checking, writing all the historian said and other things that would undermine his already flimsy speculation. Because he tries to say the realistic portray is based on "you can't prove there weren't black people over there" while his presented evidence is that "perhaps there could have been if one black person had detoured from the silk road all the way to that small land and got someone pregnant". Which in fact would make in quite few generations a lose of any significant color against the normal tan from peasants daily on the field. All the research you would have to do is called thinking.

4 - funny because on my front page I rarely see things that aren't either gaming or shitting on Trump... at this moment besides this topic there is another one talking about race that I didn't even entered but probably is a batshit contest on what configure a racial determination.

 

5 - Hyperbole isn't the same thing reductio ad absurdum for sure. Still that is one way to do it.

Amplifying what you said to the extreme from what I can tell is a reduction ad absurdum, since if just pushed further from what you said (since you didn't say anything on the contrary or that could invalidate the inference at the time).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Ka-pi96 said:

From the middle ages? Stop being racist! Japan based games should have Portuguese people from the very foundation of Japan. There's no evidence that there weren't Portuguese people wandering around Japan back then so we might as well assume they were!

You have a good point.

Also since theories of human origin is from Africa and we all have DNA from there and we don't have pictures from prior to 1900 I demand that all games from before 1900 have only black people, since you can't prove everyone wasn't dark skinned =]

 

And also since Portuguese used slaves and there is one drawing of a dark skinned samurai, I think all samurai games Nioh and Tsushijima included need some black main player.

The protagonist of NiOh is a blonde Irishman whereas the historical figure he's based on was a brown haired Englishman from Kent. If they're willing to take liberties such as those, then they could do pretty much whatever they want to including making a black samurai.

Last edited by Leadified - on 22 February 2018

DonFerrari said: "Amplifying what you said to the extreme from what I can tell is a reduction ad absurdum, since if just pushed further from what you said (since you didn't say anything on the contrary or that could invalidate the inference at the time)."

Reductio ad absurdum is not amplifying anything.  It is taking a position to its logical conclusion.  I'll go back to the Nintendo example.

If I say Nintendo games are always better than Sony games, then the means always.  In every case.  If I truly believed that, I would have to believe that every single Nintendo game is better than every single Sony game.  Saying that I think Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4 is not exaggerating or changing my position.  It is something that would HAVE TO BE true if my original statement were. 

On the other hand, if I said most Nintendo games are better than Sony games, that's a different story.  Me believing that Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4 DOES NOT follow from this.  I can believe that Nintendo games are mostly better without believing this.  If you claim that I do believe Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4, then you are altering my position, which would be dishonest.

In the case of this topic, me saying that I care more about the OP than Eurogamer's review does not mean that I care more about anti-sjw stuff than sjw stuff in general.  I can in fact care more about this post than the review without necessarily caring more about anti-sjw stuff in general.  

Furthermore, just because I didn't say anything to the contrary doesn't mean anything.  Let's suppose I inferred that you want to suck Stan Lee's penis.  You have not said anything that can contradict this inference.  That doesn't mean I am justified in assuming you would want to suck Stan Lee's penis.  You can't just infer something because someone hasn't said anything to contradict it.  For an inference to be valid, you must actually be able to support it.  (This btw is a valid reductio ad absurdum.)

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/30/Appeal-to-Extremes



Around the Network

Did the witcher 3 had the same problem with the sjw reviews?
Ive been playing the game and so far only white people.



monocle_layton said:
Almost like their influence is over exaggerated and only an issue because we keep mentioning them...

How much longer are we actually gonna live in the SJW world? Fucks sake people grow a pair of balls and realize they’re not some superior beings. They’re idiots like any of the other idiots. Just stop giving them the attention they fucking want and maybe we won’t have to keep complaining about these whiny people

I agree that they're people who act like idiots and often think they have power/influence when they really don't and should be ignored, but the problem is there are a lot of spineless companies/businesses who will give into these people's apparent complaints (AKA complaining about dumb shit) because they shit themselves at the sight of any potential 'controversy', and I put controversy in quotations because there is no real controversy it's just a small minority of people complaining about shit they don't like, but yet these companies still give in anyway since they're apparently too dumb or scared to see that.

Then when they give in, it makes those people feel more empowered that if they keep complaining about dumb shit that they can eventually get their way so they keep doing it. Just look at the recent banning of grid girls from F1 or whatever, it only took some supposed feminists complaining for them to immediately get scared and get rid of them, even though the women who were grid girls voted against it since they were fine with their jobs. 

Last edited by FloatingWaffles - on 22 February 2018

Leadified said:
DonFerrari said:

You have a good point.

Also since theories of human origin is from Africa and we all have DNA from there and we don't have pictures from prior to 1900 I demand that all games from before 1900 have only black people, since you can't prove everyone wasn't dark skinned =]

 

And also since Portuguese used slaves and there is one drawing of a dark skinned samurai, I think all samurai games Nioh and Tsushijima included need some black main player.

The protagonist of NiOh is a blonde Irishman whereas the historical figure he's based on was a brown haired Englishman from Kent. If they're willing to take liberties such as those, then they could do pretty much whatever they want to including making a black samurai.

Sure they can do whatever they want since they are the dev. (and there is story about a sole black samurai). That still doesn't mandate that they do it even more when they are trying to be historically precise and factual.

JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said: "Amplifying what you said to the extreme from what I can tell is a reduction ad absurdum, since if just pushed further from what you said (since you didn't say anything on the contrary or that could invalidate the inference at the time)."

Reductio ad absurdum is not amplifying anything.  It is taking a position to its logical conclusion.  I'll go back to the Nintendo example.

If I say Nintendo games are always better than Sony games, then the means always.  In every case.  If I truly believed that, I would have to believe that every single Nintendo game is better than every single Sony game.  Saying that I think Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4 is not exaggerating or changing my position.  It is something that would HAVE TO BE true if my original statement were. 

On the other hand, if I said most Nintendo games are better than Sony games, that's a different story.  Me believing that Animal Crossing Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4 DOES NOT follow from this.  I can believe that Nintendo games are mostly better without believing this.  If you claim that I do believe Amiibo festival is better than Uncharted 4, then you are altering my position, which would be dishonest.

In the case of this topic, me saying that I care more about the OP than Eurogamer's review does not mean that I care more about anti-sjw stuff than sjw stuff in general.  I can in fact care more about this post than the review without necessarily caring more about anti-sjw stuff in general.  

Furthermore, just because I didn't say anything to the contrary doesn't mean anything.  Let's suppose I inferred that you want to suck Stan Lee's penis.  You have not said anything that can contradict this inference.  That doesn't mean I am justified in assuming you would want to suck Stan Lee's penis.  You can't just infer something because someone hasn't said anything to contradict it.  For an inference to be valid, you must actually be able to support it.  (This btw is a valid reductio ad absurdum.)

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/30/Appeal-to-Extremes

You forgot you yourself cared about the anti-sjw and included the "dishonest" modificator. While only after several rebuttals included that you also don't like when SJW are dishonest on their argument, and justified yourself saying that it's because in VGC (which is where you care about) the SJW is almost unseen. So you can't really invalidate that how you portrayed before on the thread wouldn't lead to a interpretation I had.

Nope bringing something off-topic that wasn't discussed and saying that since that person didn't say anything about it then he supports or not it is completely different than being on topic on what the person posted and following that line.

Your Stan Lee comparison would be valid if I said something like "I like Stan Lee so much that I would want to kiss him, rub my naked body on him, have sex with him", and you infer that I would also want to suck his dick (because it is reasonable to infer that by doing sex, sucking the dick would be part of it, even thought it isn't totally assured).

So when you put all your arguments against OP, anti-SJW, etc and dismissed or accepted the behavior of the reviewer and/or historian ("because it would be to much hassle to go and read the comments or look if the argument itself made any sense) you put all indicators leading to that conclusion and none on the contrary. And following your stan lee argument I didn't infer you like to be anal rapped or that you want to be a soccer player because even though you never said in this thread that any of both aren't true, you also didn't gave any indication of they being.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

FloatingWaffles said:
monocle_layton said:
Almost like their influence is over exaggerated and only an issue because we keep mentioning them...

How much longer are we actually gonna live in the SJW world? Fucks sake people grow a pair of balls and realize they’re not some superior beings. They’re idiots like any of the other idiots. Just stop giving them the attention they fucking want and maybe we won’t have to keep complaining about these whiny people

I agree that they're people who act like idiots and often think they have power/influence when they really don't and should be ignored, but the problem is there are a lot of spineless companies/businesses who will give into these people's apparent complaints (AKA complaining about dumb shit) because they shit themselves at the sight of any potential 'controversy', and I put controversy in quotations because there is no real controversy it's just a small minority of people complaining about shit they don't like, but yet these companies still give in anyway since they're apparently too dumb or scared to see that.

Then when they give in, it makes those people feel more empowered that if they keep complaining about dumb shit that they can eventually get their way so they keep doing it. Just look at the recent banning of grid girls from F1 or whatever, it only took some feminists complaining for them to immediately get scared and get rid of them, even though the women who were grid girls voted against it since they were fine with their jobs. 

Also don't forget the times companies listened to the dumb shit, made a product to please the vocal nuisance and were met with financial failure... funny enough the vocal nuisance used that as evidence that people are racist/misogynists for not buying the material (even if the SJW themselves didn't buy, like Anita complaining about game while not wanting to buy any) the customers didn't ask for.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Leadified said:
DonFerrari said:

You have a good point.

Also since theories of human origin is from Africa and we all have DNA from there and we don't have pictures from prior to 1900 I demand that all games from before 1900 have only black people, since you can't prove everyone wasn't dark skinned =]

 

And also since Portuguese used slaves and there is one drawing of a dark skinned samurai, I think all samurai games Nioh and Tsushijima included need some black main player.

The protagonist of NiOh is a blonde Irishman whereas the historical figure he's based on was a brown haired Englishman from Kent. If they're willing to take liberties such as those, then they could do pretty much whatever they want to including making a black samurai.

Wasn't there demons and shit in Nioh as well? So yeah... they took a whole load of liberties. Not giant enemy crabs level, but still

Last edited by Ka-pi96 - on 22 February 2018

Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702