|
On August 27 2005 19:47 camooT wrote:
MMORPGs tend to more addictive because of the social aspect. same thing can happen in starcraft, but not too many people actually make friends on bnet.
Yea I've thought about that, a friend of mine plays WoW and he has loads of WoW friends, they actually met up once.
But when I think about it I have no StarCraft friends that I don't know in the real world. StarCraft is a lonely game.
|
You've got a friend in me
You've got a friend in me
When the road looks rough ahead
And you're miles and miles from your warm. nice bed
You just remember what your all pal said
Son, you've got a friend in me
Yeah, you've got a friend in me
You've got a friend in me
You've got a friend in me
You got troubles, then I got 'em too
There isn't anything I wouldn't do for you
If we stick together we can see it through
'Cause you've got a friend in me
Yes, you've got a friend in me
Now some other folks might
Be a little bit smarter than I am
Bigger and stronger too. Maybe
But none of them will ever love you
The way I do
Just me and you, boy
And as the years go by
Our friendship will never die
You're gonna see, it's our destiny
You've got a friend in me
You've got a friend in me
Yes, you've got a friend in me
|
I think its more because they don't have anything to control with BW other than the player's win/loss record
In MMORPGs, you can control their character, level, stats, items, drop rates, ect but BW doesn't have any of that, just a record that players re-start all the time with new accounts
The article did say that this will be applied in casual games, too so maybe that includes BW
|
On August 27 2005 17:58 camooT wrote:Show nested quote +I'm not going to respond to the other things you said, because your responses were laughable, and the reader can see that. congratulations, you win by ad hominem.
I think you need to look up ad hominem.  It makes you look silly throwing words around like that.
The ironic thing is that I gave a reason why I did not respond to your points. You made that (false) statement, and then proceded to not respond to what I said.
Most of you guys are closet Statists.
|
I can't wait for the day when they put a time limit on Sex and Sports because they're too addictive... I'll be laughing.
|
i'm well aware of what the term means, having attended a year of debate meetings, thank you.
you imply that my arguments are not worth addressing because they are "laughable," suggesting my person as being "stupid." this is how you conclude your argument. i can't reasonably come up with another name for that than ad hominem.
Most of you guys are closet Statists.
A bunch of you are mini-fascists.
make up your mind  .
|
On August 27 2005 20:28 camooT wrote:
i'm well aware of what the term means, having attended a year of debate meetings, thank you.
you imply that my arguments are not worth addressing because they are "laughable," suggesting my person as being "stupid."[/quote]
To be technical, you just commited a strawman fallacy. I said I was not going to respond because the arguments were laughable (just reread them). That's an attack on your arguments.
That can't be interpreted as me saying that your arguments were bad because you are stupid. It just can't.
this is how you conclude your argument. i can't reasonably come up with another name for that than ad hominem.
It isn't a logical fallacy, which is why you were struggling to find a name.
make up your mind .
Those don't contradict. 
And you still won't respond to what I said.
-------
don't dodge the question. you could also argue that this is your car, why can't you do with it what you like? the government has these restrictions in place to keep people safe. likewise with gaming, a three hour restriction to keep you from wasting your life away.
I didn't dodge; I answered why I have no problem with it. The "it's your car" argument is ridiculous; it's your body, so who cares what you do when on someone else's property? That statement is identical to yours.
anyway, i've said this before -- labeling the problem doesn't fix it. "it's the parent's responsibility" isn't a valid argument if the problem persists.
Your first statement is true; labeling a problem doesn't fix it. However, you are getting confused with your second statement. It is the parents' responsibility (or in this case, the family's and the gamer's). However, that doesn't mean that the State must step in if they don't solve the problem. In doing so, the State utilizes resources taken from others, which causes more problems (you have to look at every result of an action). Because the gamers are only hurting themselves and their families (if they let them), there is no need to utilize the police power of the State to step in.
|
I didn't dodge; I answered why I have no problem with it. The "it's your car" argument is ridiculous; it's your body, so who cares what you do when on someone else's property? That statement is identical to yours.
so why does the state make you have to have a driver's license and mandatory auto insurance before allowing you to drive? government restrictions that benefit society!? NO WAY!
However, that doesn't mean that the State must step in if they don't solve the problem. In doing so, the State utilizes resources taken from others, which causes more problems (you have to look at every result of an action). Because the gamers are only hurting themselves and their families (if they let them), there is no need to utilize the police power of the State to step in.
ok, here's my logic, try to keep up.
1.) a social issue is brought to light. (gaming addictions)
2.) a solution is proposed (time restrictions)
3.) businesses potentially lose profit -- probably not much. the game is still there.
you're arguing that it's wrong to waste government resources on social reform programs. that might apply to social security, welfare, and a host of other shit, but it costs practically nothing to force these companies to rewrite their programs. besides, what do you think taxes are for? insulation? the state collects resources from its people to help improve the standard of living for all. this includes defense, social programs, wages, etc. etc.
you don't seem to understand that investing in the welfare of its people is probably the best way to accumulate wealth for a nation. if social problems are ignored, they impact society as a whole, which hurts the nation and its potential for prosperity.
It isn't a logical fallacy, which is why you were struggling to find a name.
arguing that you're right and i'm wrong because my posts are "laughable" is a logical fallacy.
|
|
|
On August 26 2005 03:51 LetMeBeWithYou wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2005 03:10 NotSorry wrote:
That has to blow for MMORPG, I mean completely cuts out the possiblity of any end game raid in WOW, and raids in most other games for that matter. Yes. Especially MC takes over 5 hours ~_~;; Though look on the bright side. They'd never have to suffer 5 hours of ultra boring in MC
I know what you mean, but atleast Ragnaros is still somewhat fun.
|
On August 28 2005 00:09 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote: Show nested quote +On August 27 2005 17:58 camooT wrote:comparatively, china is in a much worse state as far as personal rights go. compared with most of the world though, it is heaven . WTF in China ive seen a man stabbed to death on a crowded street and people going along without even having a look at him, was told by varius friends better not to help when I see a woman being raped. HEAVEN??? The one thing I regret most in my entire life was the trip to china.
what part of down town pusan did you confused China with?
|
|
|
On August 28 2005 00:43 haduken wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2005 00:09 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote:On August 27 2005 17:58 camooT wrote:comparatively, china is in a much worse state as far as personal rights go. compared with most of the world though, it is heaven . WTF in China ive seen a man stabbed to death on a crowded street and people going along without even having a look at him, was told by varius friends better not to help when I see a woman being raped. HEAVEN??? The one thing I regret most in my entire life was the trip to china. what part of down town pusan did you confused China with?
I forgive u for having one name of Korean city in ur head.
U have no repect like the people on that street, and u should start to learn to write online only what u can say the same offline.
Sure u would like to make those things happened in Korea, only Amnesty International is saying something different.
|
On August 27 2005 17:56 HnR)hT wrote:
The U.S. constitution says what the government CAN do, not the other way around. Similarly, it is assumed that the people are free in all instances unless specified otherwise, in accord with the liberal philosophy described in the declaration of independence. However, the constitution is now routinely ignored and violated by the government at all levels. The country was essentially libertarian for the first century and a half of its existence, but is moving closer to totalitarianism.
And what the government is doing is following the constitution and the powers granted. Like promoting the general welfare. Or how about the "elastic clause" making all laws necessary and proper to execute the foregoing powers. We have an independent judiciary to put the brakes on legislation which truly violates the constitution. The country in it's first century and a half was totalitarian to most of the population (women, minorities, poor people) but left the little things to the "people". Yes, not having the right to vote is the perfect libertarian ideal. Now, more people have the IMPORTANT, FUNDAMENTAL, liberties secured and having to put up with the latest seatbelt law is the cost. A fair trade by any standards.
Evolving standards. The government has been granted this ability to get involved in our lives for the purposes of and within the limits set forth in the Constitution. And the policies are decided as they should be, democratically. There are still fundamental liberties which will not be taken away even today. But to say that we all have the right to no government finds no ground in history or reality.
As a thinking exercise what does anyone think of: Two hundred years ago people were burdened by laws the way they are now, but laws were often unenforceable. Meaning for the people they were free to ignore the law as if it didn't exist. In all honesty I think that's the greatest squeeze on our liberty: forensic science, video surveillance. Not the laws themselves.
|
I have read all those 7 pages.
Very interesting. CamooT, you're a smart guy, I like the way you debate!!!
2 T_T:
There are things that people cannot handle by their own. If there is a war, government utilizes people who can fight. You say that the families should handle that? Can they?
Well, another issue is drugs. Everyone should decide for his own if he wants to become addicted to drugs? Ideally, yes. In fact, very many people use drugs because they get simply caught. And they cannot resist. They want to, but they cant.
Now, society has 2 options: to ask the government to prohibit drugs selling, because it is evil the society ITSELF cannot fight or let it as it is giving some very freedom-thursty personalities an option (buy or not to buy) and making 12345678 people including kids narcomans(I didnt know the english word). society chooses to have a law. Freedom-thursty people feel sad. Others feel happy. Netherlands says that US government are comunists, facists and so on.
Simple as it is.
|
On August 28 2005 02:05 PlayJunior wrote:
Netherlands says that US government are comunists, facists and so on.
Simple as it is.
I beg your pardon? That's the most upside-down comment I ever heard...
|
|
|
w0000t nobody has posted something worth for camoot to read???
Isnt that the purpouse of teamliquid.net forums? waaaiiiit.... it isnt!!!
So get off your high horse bitch, people are not here to please your writting taste, morons and dummies have the right to post their silly posts too, and you seem to be the only one frustrated about that, a simple "omg, moron!" reply to them is more than enough k?... good.
Anyway, too bad somebody said what i was going to say (in a more stupid way tho) but well, i say this chinese crap is absolute bullshit but i am against ANY prohibition that doesnt affect a 3rd person.
This includes Drugs, abortion(please no debates about that right now), euthanasia and the right to play for over 3 fucking straight hours omfg!
And by the way, if kids are dying because of games, shouldnt the government stab their parents in the face instead of passing idiotic laws?
|
On August 28 2005 02:34 Veigh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2005 02:05 PlayJunior wrote:
Netherlands says that US government are comunists, facists and so on.
Simple as it is. I beg your pardon? That's the most upside-down comment I ever heard...
I meant that selling drugs is normal in Netherlands but is crime in US. But Netherlands people dont make post about how facist US is for not allowing drugs. Democracy, etc. I meant the opposite thing, if it isn't clear from the post (not the last sentence you quoted), I am sorry.
Gaming has obviously became an evil in China, with 2 chineese boys jailed in Japan for cheating, some chineese boy killed his friend because he sold the sword they had got in a shared account, and some people using kids in China to play 10 hours a day like bots to earn cyber-money and then to convert it to real money. It is evil in China, not in US, and goverment has decided to limit the playing time. Note that they are not giving you any civil or other penalties, they just reduce your game level. It is not so facist, T-T, is it?
|
On August 28 2005 03:16 baal wrote:
w0000t nobody has posted something worth for camoot to read???
Isnt that the purpouse of teamliquid.net forums? waaaiiiit.... it isnt!!!
So get off your high horse bitch, people are not here to please your writting taste, morons and dummies have the right to post their silly posts too, and you seem to be the only one frustrated about that, a simple "omg, moron!" reply to them is more than enough k?... good.
Anyway, too bad somebody said what i was going to say (in a more stupid way tho) but well, i say this chinese crap is absolute bullshit but i am against ANY prohibition that doesnt affect a 3rd person.
This includes Drugs, abortion(please no debates about that right now), euthanasia and the right to play for over 3 fucking straight hours omfg!
And by the way, if kids are dying because of games, shouldnt the government stab their parents in the face instead of passing idiotic laws?
I didnt get whom this guy is mad at. Please help
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
