ITT: ""Villains"" who were actually right

yeah I was

Attached: 1369655274504.jpg (1920x1080, 231K)

Attached: That's bullshit.jpg (570x558, 260K)

Attached: f16.png (354x357, 4K)

He was and is right. Only retards who can't think for themselves are unable to understand that.

Based

Attached: 1550989931486.jpg (680x459, 53K)

Just replace the word with comfy and the argument is very sound

thanks user

Attached: 1381723305455.jpg (1280x720, 71K)

He was entirely right. If a game is fun to you, then keep playing, but you can't just use it as an objective testament of quality.

How?
What is 'good' then?
What is the measure of quality?
What is the purpose of a game, and how does one determine how it succeeds?

Attached: nagito_komaeda_sprite.png (350x340, 116K)

>words describing subjective things are worse than other words describing subjective things
brainlet.jpg

you can't describe good game design, you have to feel it.

Good

Attached: man-who-did-absolutely-nothing-wrong.jpg (199x253, 7K)

>words describing subjective things are worse than other words describing subjective things
Yes, that's how it works. Vague words that can apply to anything are worse than specific words that mean something when trying to explain why other people should play something.

That's why you used the word "brainlet" to insult someone instead of just "bad".

check these filenames then check this I am alive fool.

Attached: 1550468481540.gif (241x328, 3.89M)

You can list situation where the game succeeds at implementing an idea and explain why.
Like maybe you could say
>this plot twist was very interesting because in hindsight you could tell something was up and the reveal gives more weight to previous actions
or you could be a faggot and say
>the plot was good

Not him but the way I see is that video games can be broken down and have their individual parts measured (story, music, art direction, voice acting). Of course different genres will have different priorities but doing this works way better than whenever or not the experience feeling good to you or not.

Jusy saying a game is good because it is fun or comfy is a weak argument that provides nothing to the discussion.

Calling something "fun" is succinct. Children describe what they enjoyed in detail. There's a reason someone doesn't go on a long winded description of what particularly they enjoyed on a fucking forum.

Im actually back to defending the people who thought his claim was retarded. If you have fun with something you dont need to justify why you find it fun. Of course explaining what you like about it offers insight to others but if you just like something dont let others judge you for it.

Detail is not inherently a bad thing, psuedos can speak with few words or many, but the truth is not found merely in the amount of words, but the meaning they convey.

Or do you actually like pages of "based", "cringe", and "seething"?

>There's a reason someone doesn't go on a long winded description of what particularly they enjoyed on a fucking forum.
Because they're brainlets? "Succinct" doesn't answer any questions.

>If you have fun with something you dont need to justify why you find it fun.
You also don't need to shit up a thread by posting something that means nothing.

fun thread

Why argue at all? It's not like anyone is forcing us.

So...wait. If something is fun because it has the merit of genuine quality its fun for real...but like... Fortnite isnt fun?

It...makes more sense then that I care to admit.

So what's the problem with fun? It's not a buzzword. It's a way to explain why you like something. There's things that "make you think", things that "make you sad", and things that are "fun". It's just if you don't happen to agree, you get your panties in a wad because someone likes something you don't.

The OP image doesn't look like they were replying to a question. Looks like they were just saying they thought the games were fun without a storyline which in all honesty, Quake is.

He's only half right. When a game is fun then the person who had fun playing it has reasons as to why they enjoyed it, regardless of whether or not they can convey those things well. It's only a buzzword when they're backed into the corner with facts about the poor quality of the game and attempt to defend it by saying it's fun.
It's more of an umbrella term for a certain kind of enjoyment gotten from a game and definitely can be explained better, but isn't inherently a buzzword.

I hope you are senpai, I hope you are

Attached: 1471637557750.png (1165x1075, 728K)

you see user, in my mind, I was always undoubtedly right. It just took others years to get to my level of knowing I was right. You're welcome.

Attached: 1550912676743.jpg (1920x1080, 77K)

99% of posts on this website are meaningless garbage. I doubt saying a game is fun is really the end of the world compared to most the trash that you see in the average thread.

He was right, but just said it poorly. Fun is a result. Saying a game is good because it's fun is like saying it's good because it's good. Why is it good/fun? What leads to that?

Based as fuck

Attached: 1543300930394.png (379x345, 29K)

Since OP is clearly a faggot can we turn this thread into a best of Yea Forums thread? Personally I think pic related along with OP’s and the famous “video games don’t have to be games” pic is the holy trinity of Yea Forums desperation.
>inb4 dumb phone poster
I was at work and the thread was about to die, I couldn’t rely on anyone else to do a proper screen cap and it was too hilarious to let go.

Attached: F267F0CD-FCFE-4F8A-9FE0-28C0C54FA3C8.png (750x1334, 247K)

you're all a bunch of retards stuck up your own ass

fun is subjective

fortnite is fun to a lot of people

dorf fort is fun to others

the hero Yea Forums deserved....

Attached: 1539279776414.png (1017x956, 635K)

Not for long

Attached: violence.jpg (500x377, 65K)

seething faggot.

Why does the person have to go in depth explaining what they enjoyed when they are discussing whether something can be enjoyable with or without a storyline? I bet that person was replying to some dumbass "games without story aren't fun" post

Dumb phone poster
I want to fuck white Korra.

>every time you make a conclusion you must present evidence and an argument to support it
no I mustn't

Remove challenge from there and I agree, it is pretty well known that overcoming challenging things is fulfilling, I don't see how that needs elaborating

You dont have to go in depth to say "I liked GAME because the story was good" instead of "I liked GAME because its fun". If you played it you probably thought it was fun otherwise you wouldn't play it. It's a pointless statement that tells nothing.

"challenge" is still subjective along the same lines as that other stuff. Some "people" think tutorials are challenging

Attached: 1543629857787.webm (854x480, 2.95M)

Saying something is well written is about as descriptive as fun. Most people are have strong enough reading comprehension to infer that when someone says a game is fun, it's fun ,i.e., the gameplay is entertaining to them.

This post just drives the point home that most of Yea Forums are jaded morons who probably haven't played a video game in years, yet come here just to spread their misery to everyone else.
Reddit is unironically a better place to discuss video games at this point because of posters like this.

>this happened 8 years ago
Fuck.

Attached: 1405078822182.jpg (550x366, 60K)

So uh... then its more a matter of arguing what is quality. How do you quantify an opinion?

I might screencap this. Because this could be used against the shill horde.

Based af

Think outside of the box, imagine someone saying a game is bad but every time you ask them why they just say "because it is". It's just really redundant and adds nothing when explaining your reasoning would already pass the message. It's like the difference between
>MGS2 is bad
>MGS2 has bad writing
>the relationship sequences in MGS2 felt very hamfisted
Notice how the last one already implies you think the story is bad while providing something the other guy can dissect.

If we are considering retards in discussions then you can't have a discussion

DOOM is fun, and I wouldn't change a damn thing.

he's right. it's not a coincidence that the adjective "fun" doesn't exist in any language.
when you say "it's fun", you just mean "i enjoyed it" so it's not an argument at all

That's literally not what the dude in the OP is doing though. He just said he though Quake and Duke were fun without story and then some autist rolled up telling him he couldn't use that work because it's a buzzword. I agree with you that if someone could only use fun and when you asked them to go into detail, they just said " because it is", they are an idiot. That's not always the case. It's okay to call something fun.

Why the fuck do you think this is cap worthy?

Yeah, Touhou is another good example of this subjectivity. Some people think normal mode with continues is challenging while others prefer higher difficulties, explaining why you think normal is challenging would offer more while giving the other guy a line to work with.

At the time in chapter 5? Yes.

My major point is, if you think you are going to be convinced that something is good that you don't think is good, no amount of evidence is going to change your mind. And it's a fruitless endeavor for the person to even try to argue it.

Retard

Always right, did nothing wrong

Attached: 1524455832217.jpg (1920x1080, 134K)

that's only true if you're a close minded idiot discussing in bad faith, so roughly 95% of the internet and 99% of Yea Forums I guess

Attached: 1519876585388.jpg (480x608, 126K)

Exactly. And where was this discussion taking place, might I point out?

Fun isn't a reason, it's a conclusion. Nobody's going to type out all the reasons why a game is fun when they can just say the game is fun, and defend their position if they get questioned on it. The first user wasn't giving a detailed review, he was just giving his overall impression. The 'fun is a buzzword' user is still a massive autist.

And it feels fun.

If I got what you said right you are talking about cognitive dissonances. While it is true that people will have their resistances when it comes to being proven wrong, it is not impossible to break them with arguments. The only way the bubble won't burst is if it gets reinforced by having your visions validated, and even them you will still need to explain yourself in the first place because people will want to know the logical process you went through to get to that conclusion ( is correct by calling it a conclusion), otherwise self doubt and denial will be the only solutions left.

Just because it's very very likely that most discussions and topics end in shit doesn't mean they all will. The detailed posting is for those cases even if it's a waste of time in most threads

Attached: 1544482846186.jpg (640x427, 33K)

>it is not impossible to break them with arguments
Have you really ever been talked into enjoying something? I envy you. Maybe.

This user knows what's up.

It's not hard to change filenames and then say "lol check the filenames for proof"

Attached: 5JrsuQb.jpg (621x654, 74K)

>Have you really ever been talked into enjoying something?
Persuation is a thing you know? Even if you dislike something it doesn't mean your mind will close to any information that contradicts your attitude. It is definitively possible to be convinced that you enjoy something by presenting arguments to why something can be enjoyable in the first place.

This guy has a minuscule IQ for thinking you're justified in using one word "conclusions" in an anonymous opinion exchange. Nobody knows you, for all we know you could be a toddler who's entertained by gestures and funny faces. Therefore in a context like this "fun" is by all means a complete buzzword