The problem with Paper Mario: Sticker Star

#141quietisgoodPosted 11/21/2012 8:59:38 PM
wiiking96 posted...
Hey TC, can you try to explain again why the Paper Mario series has traditionally been story centric? That would help.


considering he's continuously failed to do it, I doubt it.
---
Hypothetically, if the only choice you've got is to do the wrong thing, then it's not really the wrong thing, it's more like fate.
#142Watt64Posted 11/22/2012 1:52:20 AM
quietisgood posted...
wiiking96 posted...
Hey TC, can you try to explain again why the Paper Mario series has traditionally been story centric? That would help.


considering he's continuously failed to do it, I doubt it.



Why won't you stop saying that the TC "fails" at eveything when it's really you? Don't try and deny it: you're a troll. And i'm not just throwing that word around. Eveybody here knows you are, and if you reply back saying "LOL", or "you fail at *insert word here*", then you'll just be proving it even more.

Why don't you just keep quiet. After all, quiet IS good. ;)
---
"Hi, mister! I'm Watt. Can I, um, get out of here?"
#143quietisgoodPosted 11/22/2012 7:23:31 AM
Watt64 posted...
quietisgood posted...
wiiking96 posted...
Hey TC, can you try to explain again why the Paper Mario series has traditionally been story centric? That would help.


considering he's continuously failed to do it, I doubt it.



Why won't you stop saying that the TC "fails" at eveything when it's really you? Don't try and deny it: you're a troll. And i'm not just throwing that word around. Eveybody here knows you are, and if you reply back saying "LOL", or "you fail at *insert word here*", then you'll just be proving it even more.

Why don't you just keep quiet. After all, quiet IS good. ;)


damn bro, u mad.
---
Hypothetically, if the only choice you've got is to do the wrong thing, then it's not really the wrong thing, it's more like fate.
#144Attack_A_HorsePosted 11/22/2012 7:31:54 AM
I think the TC is really good at muffling his points behind well-written English. When you strip his points down, quietisgood is actually right. Obviously the TC enjoys the discussion in this topic and it makes him come off as more sincere/credible. I think that's why more people are siding with him although he's re-iterating the same things over and over with broken logic.

On the other hand, because quietisgood uses less than stellar grammar (what else is knew 8->) and throws around the word "lol", everyone dismisses him as a troll. It's clear he isn't taking this topic as seriously as some of you are but that doesn't mean his points are any less valid.

Just my two cents.
#145Kingboo83Posted 11/22/2012 8:02:23 AM
Attack_A_Horse posted...
I think the TC is really good at muffling his points behind well-written English. When you strip his points down, quietisgood is actually right. Obviously the TC enjoys the discussion in this topic and it makes him come off as more sincere/credible. I think that's why more people are siding with him although he's re-iterating the same things over and over with broken logic.

On the other hand, because quietisgood uses less than stellar grammar (what else is knew 8->) and throws around the word "lol", everyone dismisses him as a troll. It's clear he isn't taking this topic as seriously as some of you are but that doesn't mean his points are any less valid.

Just my two cents.


Because it's not like you and the other guy (and I'm pretty darn sure you two are the exact same person now) weren't able to exactly refute his points or come up with any examples of your own to try and dismiss his arguments, right? You just basically kept saying "nope, that doesn't prove anything--try again." Maybe everyone else is on TC's side with this, because 1. we either understand where he's coming from, and you and Quietisgood are both beyond "educating," because you're all one of those people who if they're stuck in believing whatever they strongly feel to be true in, they're beyond swaying in opinion; 2. you won't comply with him and give him a definition of what "story-centric" really means in your mind. And you didn't even attempt to refute his points in his last quote to you, now. You just went on ahead and made this post, completely skipping his points again. And 3. you both are question-begging. I don't even think you both know what you even really want TC to say. He can give clear examples and reasons to why a Paper Mario game is more story-centric than the usual, but none of this seems to matter in y'all's mind. I think this is a hopeless argument on both ends, personally.

Just my two cents.
#146Counterpwnt(Topic Creator)Posted 11/22/2012 10:36:29 AM
Okay, I'll just make a whole new post later. I may or may not repeat things I've already said.

I'm in a poker game right now, and it's Thanksgiving, so I'll post in a little while.

Let's drop all the potential personal attacks and get down to business.
#147quietisgoodPosted 11/22/2012 11:34:17 AM(edited)
Kingboo83 posted...
Attack_A_Horse posted...
I think the TC is really good at muffling his points behind well-written English. When you strip his points down, quietisgood is actually right. Obviously the TC enjoys the discussion in this topic and it makes him come off as more sincere/credible. I think that's why more people are siding with him although he's re-iterating the same things over and over with broken logic.

On the other hand, because quietisgood uses less than stellar grammar (what else is knew 8->) and throws around the word "lol", everyone dismisses him as a troll. It's clear he isn't taking this topic as seriously as some of you are but that doesn't mean his points are any less valid.

Just my two cents.


Because it's not like you and the other guy (and I'm pretty darn sure you two are the exact same person now) weren't able to exactly refute his points or come up with any examples of your own to try and dismiss his arguments, right? You just basically kept saying "nope, that doesn't prove anything--try again." Maybe everyone else is on TC's side with this, because 1. we either understand where he's coming from, and you and Quietisgood are both beyond "educating," because you're all one of those people who if they're stuck in believing whatever they strongly feel to be true in, they're beyond swaying in opinion; 2. you won't comply with him and give him a definition of what "story-centric" really means in your mind. And you didn't even attempt to refute his points in his last quote to you, now. You just went on ahead and made this post, completely skipping his points again. And 3. you both are question-begging. I don't even think you both know what you even really want TC to say. He can give clear examples and reasons to why a Paper Mario game is more story-centric than the usual, but none of this seems to matter in y'all's mind. I think this is a hopeless argument on both ends, personally.

Just my two cents.


here's my two cents, if you can't comprehend basic things, you shouldn't bother posting.
also, how the hell am i question begging? am i the one continuously asking irrelevant questions? (give me your defintion of story-centric, give me an example of a story-centric game etc etc etc)
oh and, tc's reasoning (as i've mentioned previously, but i understand reading is a hard thing to do) for the series being story centric is the following: the game has characters, the game has a story, the game has a long description on mariowiki and the game has characters on a boxart those things and these things DO NOT PROVE that the game is story-centric by his own definition. am i "question begging" by asking someone to logically explain his point?
---
Hypothetically, if the only choice you've got is to do the wrong thing, then it's not really the wrong thing, it's more like fate.
#148Attack_A_HorsePosted 11/22/2012 11:33:00 AM
Kingboo83 posted...
Attack_A_Horse posted...
I think the TC is really good at muffling his points behind well-written English. When you strip his points down, quietisgood is actually right. Obviously the TC enjoys the discussion in this topic and it makes him come off as more sincere/credible. I think that's why more people are siding with him although he's re-iterating the same things over and over with broken logic.

On the other hand, because quietisgood uses less than stellar grammar (what else is knew 8->) and throws around the word "lol", everyone dismisses him as a troll. It's clear he isn't taking this topic as seriously as some of you are but that doesn't mean his points are any less valid.

Just my two cents.


Because it's not like you and the other guy (and I'm pretty darn sure you two are the exact same person now) weren't able to exactly refute his points or come up with any examples of your own to try and dismiss his arguments, right? You just basically kept saying "nope, that doesn't prove anything--try again." Maybe everyone else is on TC's side with this, because 1. we either understand where he's coming from, and you and Quietisgood are both beyond "educating," because you're all one of those people who if they're stuck in believing whatever they strongly feel to be true in, they're beyond swaying in opinion; 2. you won't comply with him and give him a definition of what "story-centric" really means in your mind. And you didn't even attempt to refute his points in his last quote to you, now. You just went on ahead and made this post, completely skipping his points again. And 3. you both are question-begging. I don't even think you both know what you even really want TC to say. He can give clear examples and reasons to why a Paper Mario game is more story-centric than the usual, but none of this seems to matter in y'all's mind. I think this is a hopeless argument on both ends, personally.

Just my two cents.


Lol, I didn't provide any examples? I'm begging for questions? Maybe "y'all" should:

1. Learn to read.
2. Learn to break up large amounts of text using the "Enter" key.
3. Realize it's irrelevant what other people's opinions of story-centric is. The TC provided his definition and that is what we're discussing.

And yes, I do this the TC should make a fresh post because this topic is a mess.
#149Attack_A_HorsePosted 11/22/2012 12:28:46 PM
Also, some of you should re-read the first page of this topic to:

1. See that more people disagree with the TC.
2. See how the TC changes his logic/points as the topic goes on.
3. See some of the most absurb statements about the PM series made by the TC. (The PM series is an interactive cinematic experience? Really?)
#150Kingboo83Posted 11/22/2012 12:29:29 PM
Ha ha. Now I'm convinced you both are the same person. As if you couldn't have made it any more obvious.

Quietisgood:

What "basic things" else do I need to be able to comprehend? Who are you to tell me I'm not able to comprehend the situation? Again, you're just resorting to your usual "if you can't comprehend," etc., etc., with anyone who tries to refute your standpoint. You're question-begging in the sense that you're implicitly asking something from TC that he has been trying to make valid for you by his definition of story-centric, which I thought applied with the context of it, personally, but you just keep presenting it all off as non-specific or irrelevant in some manner, as you can do that without your own definition. Maybe he wouldn't have to keep repeating his question if you would just give your definition of what a story-centric game is, despite how "irrelevant" you think it may be (which does not "stop" you from being able to do that--it would even help your argument in this case somewhat if you just did and make you more credible).

Okay. What does that have to do with...uh...anything? Yes, the TC knows the game has characters. Yes, he knows it has a story, etc. His definition for a story-centric game was: "A video game with more emphasis placed on story-related elements than gameplay-related elements. What else would it be?" And I thought the arguments (not just his) presented for that were true in a lot of sense, based on that definition alone. Maybe if you really did give your "own" definition, and then provided some examples of how the game mended with said definition and refuted his, your argument would be more validated. But you just sit there on the sidelines and pass off anything anyone would throw at you, subjective or not, from what I've been able to tell so far. (But even as far as subjectivity goes, you demand, in your own words, "anyone who thinks Paper Mario is a story-centric game obviously doesn't know what story-centric really means.")

Attack A Horse (nice alt. name, btw):

Oh, ha ha. Look at you. Resulting to more personal attacks and having a condescending undertone, to make up for your own flawed reasoning. Yeah, I said "y'all." What of it, buddy?

1. No, you first.
2. How about stick to the actual discussion and argument at hand, something you're starting to prove you've become incapable of.
3. And how is it irrelevant? Because you now say it is? Someone else's "opinion" is now irrelevant? Oh, as if this whole argument hasn't been based on prejudiced standpoints, because not everyone might agree with that definition--but how are we supposed to even then know what story-centric really is, or "is" for that other person, if they can't even come up with their own terms or examples of said definition? You can only really just then sit in the back and act like a court judge; able to push off anything as "irrelevant," or doesn't count with already-explained-and-provided-for-definition, just as you've been doing, because you yourself haven't provided your own guidelines to follow and apply in a definition to refute back the argument and examples with, based on your prejudice.

Anyways, I can't believe I'm arguing this much with a troll (yes, I'll call you a troll, because that's exactly what you've pretty much proven yourself to be). Have fun going nowhere with this.