I find it funny that many game companies tried to do the "give game enemies unique names in hopes people will refer to them as such" but it really only stuck with Mario.
How many people remember what a stalfos is? or a kerog?
I find it funny that many game companies tried to do the "give game enemies unique names in hopes people will refer to them as such" but it really only stuck with Mario.
How many people remember what a stalfos is? or a kerog?
I'm not necessarily sure about that; it's more a matter of how unique the enemy is and if there's another name you can use for it (e.g. most people'd call a stalfos just a "skeleton" but for things like octorocks or leevers there aren't any generic names to use)
i dont think goosebumps books ever came into print i think they just mystically appeared in public school libraries one day already in mediocre condition
I find it funny that many game companies tried to do the "give game enemies unique names in hopes people will refer to them as such" but it really only stuck with Mario.
How many people remember what a stalfos is? or a kerog?
I'm not necessarily sure about that; it's more a matter of how unique the enemy is and if there's another name you can use for it (e.g. most people'd call a stalfos just a "skeleton" but for things like octorocks or leevers there aren't any generic names to use)
Indeed, I thought of this too.
You can call podobos fireballs, but what name is there for a Goomba but a Goomba.
I like the idea that Zelda is the same story being retold by different cultures, because it's similar to the idea that Mario games are mostly different performances put on by a travelling troupe of actors.
Hm. There's also a matter of how readily available the actual name is. Like, in Zelda they're constantly throwing the monsters' names at you, but in a lot of games the names were only in the manual or something.
I like the idea that Zelda is the same story being retold by different cultures, because it's similar to the idea that Mario games are mostly different performances put on by a travelling troupe of actors.
My headcanon with this interpretation is that there is more than one Legend of Zelda but certain thematically similar games- (Twilight Princess to A Link to the Past, or Link's Awakening to Phantom Hourglass, that kind of thing) are retellings of each other.
Business Scrubs. Moldorms. Freezards. Real Bombchus.
I count Tingle as an enemy because in Four Swords Adventures if you were too slow to pick up items he would take them and sometimes an entire swarm of Tingles would descend on you.
I can remember a handful of E-series robots by number... E-102 Gamma, E-123 Omega, E-1001 Egg Pawn, E-2000 which afaik didn't have a name but had a big health bar in Sonic Heroes...
why would anyone want to have sex with someone they despise
like i could see finding someone you dislike attractive, but like i wouldn't ever want to screw such a person in a bajillion years
I think it's the same reason why a normal person would get angry at a dishwasher for not doing a good job cleaning the dishes, but would continue trying to use the dishwasher until it becomes too much trouble.
That analogy makes me feel horrible. I'm sorry.
Given that these people look at women as the Other and objects, it's not an inappropriate analogy...
So I guess, since I don't personally consider gender to have inherent meaning beyond (biological) sex, that either I don't have a gender identity, or my gender identity changes with how I feel at any given time, whether I feel (say) more female or male.
Though, come to think of it, I don't really identify as a particular gender. Because, when I think of myself and the roles I could take on in a social situation, there's just no real "cues" which I inherently associate with a gender "flavor" -- for example, I could take on a leader or follower role, but while some people might think of leadership as an inherently male thing, I don't -- I don't associate either role with either gender.
Even when I think of something for which biological gender is inherently meaningful -- sexuality and sexual attraction (for reference, I'm heterosexual) -- I don't think of my attraction as being part of my "role" as a person of my (biological) gender.
For example -- and pardon my phrasing it a little flippantly: I don't think that boning a chick is inherently manly. Having (or desiring) sexual intercourse with women is clearly related to the issue of sexuality and gender, but I see it as just something that men are predominantly capable of doing (specifically the insert-tab-A-in-slot-B part of it) and predominantly biologically inclined to do (based on brain chemistry). But, in my view, it's not inherently part of what I would call "manliness" -- that, instead, is just a collection of societally assigned traits (such as physical strength, gruffness, aggressiveness, boldness, lecherousness, etc.) that people stereotypically associate with and expect of people who are biologically male. And I'd rather these stereotypes be dispelled, and that people be dealt with and perceived on an individual basis, without unreasonable presumptions/biases about what they're like based on their chromosomes or sex organs.
But if "male" is to be defined separately from one's biological gender (i.e. sex), which dictates one's anatomy and sexual activity preferences, then...is it just a set of societally-defined stereotypes? Or if not, then what is it? What does it mean to be male, other than (biologically) having a penis and a Y chromosome (and secondary sex characteristics), or (socially) having traits stereotypically associated with being male, such as personality traits I mentioned above or wearing clothing deemed to be made for males?
Right now, my "patch" solution is to postulate that there exists an inherent meaning to (in this example) "male", and that while I may not know/understand what it means, it clearly means something to at least some people.
(Let me know if I'm offending anyone. Apologies in advance to Wilhelm since he seems to be annoyed at the way I talk...)
But the reason they were the worst thing ever was because if you let even one get past you not only lost the mission immediately, but in the end cutscene the Great Fox would be damaged to remind you of your failure.
The internet might make a modern update of Videodrome interesting.
The film drew on the experience of seeing some stray bit of programming at 2 in the morning and being deeply disturbed, that's basically a way of life now that we have the internet.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
I don't have much to add to this line of conversation, except...
As long as I can remember, I've felt like I was "meant" to be a girl
I remember being like 3 years old and envying the little girl next door because she was a girl and I wasn't
Then when I became a teenager, I learned about this idea of gender as a social construct
So I thought "well, what if I consider myself a man, but just an effeminate man who likes superficially 'girly' things?"
And I tried that
But it didn't work
I still wasn't happy
Which suggests to me that, at least for me personally, there's something about me that's inherently female
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
i dont think goosebumps books ever came into print i think they just mystically appeared in public school libraries one day already in mediocre condition
It always amused me how universal the dog-eared Goosebumps books seemed to be
They were commonplace at all 3 elementary schools I went to
Shame David Cronenberg doesn't make those kinds of films anymore.
His son does, but he's not as good yet.
His son?
I miss early Cronenberg. I can understand not wanting to be shoved in a box, and his core themes are really not that different, but I wish he would commit more acts of violence against cinematic decency.
Shame David Cronenberg doesn't make those kinds of films anymore.
His son does, but he's not as good yet.
His son?
I miss early Cronenberg. I can understand not wanting to be shoved in a box, and his core themes are really not that different, but I wish he would commit more acts of violence against cinematic decency.
I never really thought of myself as transgender the way CA described it, but have always had some vague fascination with wanting to be more feminine and/or treated in a feminine way. Seems to become stronger with age, too.
Comments
That does seem like the simplest way to think about it, yes.
How many people remember what a stalfos is? or a kerog?
Dunno about Kerog.
Kerog sounds like a frog of some sort.
Or a Kuriboh, I guess.
Those laser eye turret things.
It's a while since I played Zelda, I think I'm doing pretty well here.
I count Tingle as an enemy because in Four Swords Adventures if you were too slow to pick up items he would take them and sometimes an entire swarm of Tingles would descend on you.
I don't know if the enemies in Star Fox had names?
Also Andross, Wolf, Leon, Andrew Oikonny, Panther, General Scales, Sharpclaws, the Galdon, Drakor, the RedEye tribe, the Aparoids, the Aparoid Queen
And 'missiles', which was pronounced like 'mistles' rather than 'miss aisles', and which were the worst thing ever
Regional language differences are fun.
So I guess, since I don't personally consider gender to have inherent meaning beyond (biological) sex, that either I don't have a gender identity, or my gender identity changes with how I feel at any given time, whether I feel (say) more female or male.
Though, come to think of it, I don't really identify as a particular gender. Because, when I think of myself and the roles I could take on in a social situation, there's just no real "cues" which I inherently associate with a gender "flavor" -- for example, I could take on a leader or follower role, but while some people might think of leadership as an inherently male thing, I don't -- I don't associate either role with either gender.
Even when I think of something for which biological gender is inherently meaningful -- sexuality and sexual attraction (for reference, I'm heterosexual) -- I don't think of my attraction as being part of my "role" as a person of my (biological) gender.
For example -- and pardon my phrasing it a little flippantly: I don't think that boning a chick is inherently manly. Having (or desiring) sexual intercourse with women is clearly related to the issue of sexuality and gender, but I see it as just something that men are predominantly capable of doing (specifically the insert-tab-A-in-slot-B part of it) and predominantly biologically inclined to do (based on brain chemistry). But, in my view, it's not inherently part of what I would call "manliness" -- that, instead, is just a collection of societally assigned traits (such as physical strength, gruffness, aggressiveness, boldness, lecherousness, etc.) that people stereotypically associate with and expect of people who are biologically male. And I'd rather these stereotypes be dispelled, and that people be dealt with and perceived on an individual basis, without unreasonable presumptions/biases about what they're like based on their chromosomes or sex organs.
But if "male" is to be defined separately from one's biological gender (i.e. sex), which dictates one's anatomy and sexual activity preferences, then...is it just a set of societally-defined stereotypes? Or if not, then what is it? What does it mean to be male, other than (biologically) having a penis and a Y chromosome (and secondary sex characteristics), or (socially) having traits stereotypically associated with being male, such as personality traits I mentioned above or wearing clothing deemed to be made for males?
Right now, my "patch" solution is to postulate that there exists an inherent meaning to (in this example) "male", and that while I may not know/understand what it means, it clearly means something to at least some people.
(Let me know if I'm offending anyone. Apologies in advance to Wilhelm since he seems to be annoyed at the way I talk...)
seems like all day today I thought about wanting to be feminine
and my iTunes account is tied to the e-mail that I no longer have access to
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh
The film drew on the experience of seeing some stray bit of programming at 2 in the morning and being deeply disturbed, that's basically a way of life now that we have the internet.
His son does, but he's not as good yet.
I'm surprised you didn't know about it.