The only logical take to pointless internet drama xd.
| Flag: | United Kingdom |
| Registered: | May 20, 2022 |
| Last post: | December 30, 2024 at 12:05 AM |
| Posts: | 780 |
The only logical take to pointless internet drama xd.
"If you disagree with someone, it doesn’t mean you need to be better than them to have your opinion. That’s fine. The problem arises when you express an opinion about how someone is acting, and then you begin to act in a similar, if not the same, way; that’s when you become hypocritical.
Regarding your point about Valorant being purely for fun: If that were the case, the Valorant community would be asking for new modes in the game. However, I would love to see any proof to support that claim, because since the release of Swiftplay, it seems that not many people care about new modes, to be honest.
"If you want to be so competitive and shit on others who you think are not good enough play that. Don't spoil other's fun playing ranked and getting tilted." Your assumptions are unfounded—what evidence do you have to support that I am ever toxic and/or spoil anyone else's fun?
"You may be one of the few players who doesn’t prioritize having fun while playing. The majority of the player base plays for enjoyment, not to be criticized online. If someone doesn’t want to take the game seriously like you do, you can’t force them to. Everyone is not equally skilled. Just because you’re investing hundreds of hours into the game and improving doesn’t mean it applies to everyone else. Perhaps when others play seriously, they perform worse than they would if they were just having fun. Also, the fact that someone is in the lobby with Shroud doesn’t automatically mean they are at his level or better."
This entire argument reflects what I stated in my original point: "Games are what you make of them. If you are having fun like sinatraa, who doesn’t particularly care when playing ranked, you are a rare breed. You must understand that not everyone is like you and that you will face criticism, just as those who are overly serious will face differing opinions." This is you switching your entire argument purely to hurt mine rather than just sticking to yours and using a good point/Evidence to support what u said originally and it seriously didn't work.
"The reason to criticize Shroud was because of his toxicness."
You seem to misinterpret my points entirely. You stated, "The reason to criticize Shroud was because of his toxic behaviour," yet you respond to others criticizing Shroud with your own toxic comments, adding to the negativity.
"Shroud has always talked trash. He tries to stay relevant by praising the game he’s playing and bashing other games. If he really knew what he was doing, how did his venture with Spectry fail so miserably?" Again, you’re just providing more ammunition for my initial point of being toxic in response to toxicity.
"I hate it when people are toxic online. You can have your opinions, but it’s not cool to attack someone's personal life." Yet you said yourself that "he has such a big ego and superiority complex that he feels entitled to criticize people who have lives outside of gaming." You don’t know if he has a big ego or a superiority complex; you’re attacking someone personally. This lack of self-awareness is troubling. It’s hypocritical to criticize someone else while displaying the same toxic behavior you condemn.
I asked for evidence to support your claims, and you provided none. You used the replies to add no extra value, merely insulting both me and Shroud based on your unfounded assumptions. You also used this entire discussion to rally others to agree with you, which renders you the real 'yes-man' in this situation. You have not countered my actual points, nor have you attempted to understand my perspective.
Your attempt at character assassination is tragic. You have shown that you know nothing about me and failed to engage with my arguments. I truly hope you can learn from this experience and become a better person in the future. Have a good day or night, sir or ma'am."
Honestly, I didn’t even watch the clip fully, and I don’t care what Shroud said in the first place. My comment wasn’t about that. If Valorant were made purely for fun, people wouldn’t try to climb the ranks and improve in every match. They would just play Swift Play mode every time, log off, and go outside, repeating the same cycle each day.
There’s a big difference between having fun while taking a game seriously and just playing for fun. Personally, I don't play Valorant to escape a long day. In fact, people who do that might need to re-evaluate their priorities. Generally speaking, if you don't take games like Valorant seriously, you’re likely to perform poorly, unless you’re extremely talented.
You mentioned, "He is telling him to go play another game and become better. How will he become better at this game if he does not play?" From what I observed, the game Shroud was playing relied heavily on game sense. If you're entering a high-skill game without that awareness, it can seem like the player being criticized is out of their depth. If your aim was to promote understanding, why focus solely on Shroud’s negative actions instead of considering that "he said this, maybe he meant it in this way"?
If you’re supposedly better than Shroud, how can you claim in comment #23 that "he has such a big ego and superiority complex that he feels entitled to criticize people who have lives outside of gaming"? If what Shroud did was so immoral, why are you making similar assumptions and negative comments about him?
In #24, you stated, "lol..funny.. But hey, at least FNS has achieved something in Valorant. He didn’t just run away after failing, unlike Shroud." This is mocking him and reflects the very behavior you criticized Shroud for. If you believe his actions were so terrible, why are you doing exactly the same thing?
In #19, you wrote, "Seriously. Also, not to forget complaining and criticizing every game he left. He has insulted CS, Valorant, Overwatch, etc. His own game, 'Spectre Divide,' is a flop copy of Valorant." It seems hypocritical to criticize someone for pointing out areas for improvement in games. I can’t speak to the specifics, but if you provide some context, it might look like Tenz saying, "Honestly, this agent feels broken," or "this feature feels off." The role of prominent content creators and professionals is to help improve the game, not just sit idly hoping for fixes. Also, regarding your comments about Spectre Divide, Shroud isn’t even the creator—he’s just the Lead Gameplay Advisor. If you looked into it, you’d find that he initially only planned to be an angel investor, but they sought his input because he’s a top-tier FPS pro, which makes sense for any game development company.
In summary, if you’re going to make points like this, it’s fine to reference what Shroud said, but many of your comments come off as presumptive and misinformed, likely based on your own experiences or feelings about the situation. You don’t know Shroud personally, and the accusations you’ve made can’t be verified. They seem more focused on tearing down rather than providing constructive criticism. If you think you're superior, why are you behaving similarly to him?
I feel I need to add a middle-ground here, Yes it is okay to play games for fun and yes it's okay to play games competitively, the disconnect here is that shroud is playing a fairly competitive game imo and he wonders how people enjoy hyper competitive games while playing badly putting it bluntly and just putting it across in a horrific way, I get that too because of valorant comp and etc.
The important thing to remember is that while it's "okay" to enjoy or take a game seriously, Valorant isn't made to be a fun casual game, Swift play or spike rush is meanwhile games like Stardew valley and Detroit become human are games which u should relax and have fun in while u can enjoy or take either seriously, they are made for one purpose or the other.
All in all, Games are what u make them but if u are having fun like sinaatra who never particularly cares when they play ranked, etc your a rare breed and you'll have to understand that not everyone is like you and you'll get criticism, same in the opposite.
The issue is that when it comes to "the reason most people become more engaged during discussions of GC, it often quickly devolves into just blatant sexist remarks" It doesn't matter whether it's a poorly designed course aimed at making money through drop shipping, or advice on relationships or fitness—there will always be misguided opinions and bad information out there. The real problem is that some individuals struggle to separate the person giving the advice from the advice itself. This inability to recognize the factors influencing someone's perspective is what keeps people stuck in negative attitudes. If you give someone advice and they respond with, "No, you're just an idiot," of course, you won't want to offer your advice again. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle of people responding in kind and therefore everyone stays ignorant.
I don't give gifts on Christmas normally, I tend to go for meaningful messages or memories in the cards and maybe some personalised gifts, spending like 100 on a necklace or something for my mom or sister just doesn't feel like I'm actually celebrating, more like I'm just buying them off with some expensive jewellery.
Sage players are often smart because they don't take on another valuable role they aren't familiar with. Similarly, many Chamber players exhibit the same behaviour however they are likely also cs:go players on top of that
Everyone gets u have no life but he was asking a genuine question
The responses above lack any intellectual justification and instead attack with poor arguments. If we're going to use flawed reasoning, I could argue that if he has terrible mechanics, then why does he earn more than the entire team you support combined?
Idk how u guys take someone picking up a seriously experienced and accomplished player as a bad thing for fnatic, the delusion is so wild on this site.
The interesting part about the comments regarding FNS isn't just that his personality comes off as more appealing; it's that his demeanor is fundamentally more toxic and adheres to a no-excuses mentality. This mindset is similar to that of numerous egotists who play Valorant. In contrast, Boaster represents the complete opposite of this, Also those who exhibit toxic behavior often stem from a place of insecurity.
People like FNS may have a significant number of achievements, and I don’t want to downplay that. However, he tends to talk a big game, which likely comes from deeper insecurities. For instance, when he says something like, "Why is he peeking that? It doesn't make sense," it suggests that rather than learning from the situation and being prepared for the next round, he feels compelled to explain why a play is foolish. This is a defensive mechanism to avoid appearing foolish himself.
As for Boaster, it doesn’t matter what I say about him; his personality speaks for itself. He exudes confidence that shows just how secure he is as a person through his actions. If FNS exhibited the same level of security, then many of my observations wouldn’t hold true, and people would likely come to his defense.
the fact this has 16 likes says everything about the popularity, no wonder they are trying to boost it
My friend told me about this situation, but she didn't take action because she was too afraid of the potential consequences. The low conviction rate and the involvement of a close family friend, who had family support, made her hesitant. It frustrates me that people are quick to support harsh laws while rejecting the updates needed for laws that are clearly unfit for purpose.
"Sinatraa's ex has withdrawn from the case, and this decision is unrelated to the effectiveness of the American legal system.
According to a 2021 article by The Guardian, rape is one of the easiest violent crimes to escape justice in much of the world. In the U.S., only 19% of reported rapes and sexual assaults result in arrests, and just around 6.5% lead to a conviction. I can provide the link to this source if needed, but I want to keep this brief.
For survivors, the decision to pursue a case is ultimately personal; they know what happened to them, and the trauma they carry is immense. Often, the involvement of the courts, convictions, and police only adds to their suffering. Speaking from the experiences of people I know who have faced these situations, the court process seems to offer little in the way of healing.
When someone asks, "But why not tough it out and seek a conviction to protect others?" I reference The Guardian's statistics. Only 6.5% lead to a conviction, which highlights the vast disparity in outcomes. To further illustrate this disparity, I will also refer to https://rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system.
This issue extends beyond the points already discussed; https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6994185/#S4 is also an excellent study if you're interested in looking further into it. I believe your perspective is fundamentally flawed; it is well-known that the U.S. justice system regarding sexual violence is biased in favour of the perpetrator from the outset.
ur unironically getting so pressed over a comment like this, seek help.
longest was when i didn't play for like 9 days but it only lasted like 6
i have no clue who many people on either of these teams are but eggster nightz and poppin went crazy in different games here, thoughts on them actually being good in pro play?
I can't do that anymore my alt is plat and my main is ascendant, it just feels too ass
Honestly, Section 7 is so vast and riot just doesn't care, u likely did something wrong however I can almost guarantee you'll never get it resolved, Good luck unironically.
They aren't dumbasses, they just haven't seen him or likely tried to analyse the gameplay and what he did good or bad, dgzin makes very little mistakes which is important for top tier duelists
The reality is often people have a misguided assumption that dgzin, keznit, etc are all egoists who cannot "play with the team" like their god aspas or derke or literally anyone from NA so they get misguided hatred
Siko lost by 3 rounds against a team who competed at the biggest event this year, no way your gonna call them t4 lmao.
I appreciate you for trying brother, however above I think it might be better to focus less on the comments "men are better at x y z and instead focus on the fundamental fact that women and men are just different, it's much less confrontational and it might work better in the future, just some advice and I appreciate the comments.
I advise you to find evidence supporting your claims. I looked into this, and it is quite challenging because there isn't much evidence available, and to my knowledge, studies on this topic haven’t been created. Please avoid making statements like, "biologically, there is 0 difference in skill between men and women," without clarification on whether you're referring to physical sports or video games. It's unclear, and it represents a misinterpretation of my argument. I was discussing both physical sports and video games, as evidenced by both of my sources, This indicates that you may not have a thorough response to my actual points. Regardless of whether we are discussing video games or physical sports, your statement is still factually incorrect.
It’s disappointing because, as someone who claims to care about the significant issue of game changers being misinterpreted, you should be more open to considering the intricate and challenging details surrounding this topic.
What's especially disappointing in your response is that it suggests you didn’t even examine the sources. If you had, you would have recognized that one of them pertained to video games, not just physical sports.
"biologically, there is 0 difference in skill between men and women." this is an ignorant take mostly made by people who don't understand or who haven't looked at basic scientific studies on the facts. https://www.acsm.org/news-detail/2023/09/29/acsm-releases-expert-consensus-statement-the-biological-basis-of-sex-differences-in-athletic-performance this is from the American college of sports medicine and it says in the first few statements of KEY FINDINGS "Biological sex is a determinant of athletic performance" if u want to read further into it I highly advise it because it doesn't just shit on women and say "men better" with the final key determination which says "The rate of improvement in athletic performance of women has exceeded that of men in the last 100 years across a multitude of sports as women have gained access to training, equipment, facilities, and opportunities."
"the difference comes socially; 10-20 years ago, boys could freely play video games as kids, but girls would often be shunned, pushed away from it, dissuaded by parents etc. It wasn't socially acceptable for girls to play, but for boys it was fine." I don't get the point of this because while yes, people were shunned for it and not given the same opportunities, if u really wanted to do something u could've still done it, just because people u know disagree with u does not = u needing to listen to their bullshit and therefore, in my opinion u should go after what u wanted to do despite the fact, I feel if u really cared about it you would've done such and I will accept that with some things such as football it was physically impossible to do so I understand there are barriers there, but on the contrary of that "if u really wanted to do something u could've still done it" comes into effect here, women wanted their ability to compete in these sports back so eventually they gained the momentum and the support to make it happen and it's turned out to be severely positive for I feel everyone involved. everything I've said here I feel also fits into "This of course has the knock-on effect, that nowadays, 20 years later (2024) the boys who grew up playing video games are much much better, especially at the pro level, since they have grown up playing video games their whole lives. considering being an esports player was a dream for many young boys, but was completely denied for many young girls."
"The reason why trans players are 'better' in GC is obvious; they were boys during their childhood!"
from https://www.brown.edu/news/2017-02-27/gameskill
"the research showed that people who played the most matches per week (more than 64) had the largest increase in skill over time. But playing lots of games wasn’t the most efficient way to improve skill. Looking at the data another way — in terms of which groups showed the most improvement per match rather an over time — showed markedly different results. That analysis showed that, over their first 200 matches, those who played four to eight matches week gained the most skill per match, followed by those who played eight to 16 matches." essentially it's like working out in a lot of ways, if u do lots of reps of heavy weight you'd assume you'd become stronger, but rather your just more injury prone and if u space it out and lift slightly less weight you'll consistently improve more over time, so while yes men have had more time to compete, everyone had the same amount of time to practice and I know stories of male footballers who were playing football for fun way before they became part of a club, so on one hand, yes you're right but women can still fairly easily catch up, and if they just enjoyed playing they'd already have been practicing, I would also like to make clear that esports does not have a long shelf life like football or other sports, people often retire around 25/30 apart from rare cases considering that fact it should be a lot easier for women to "catch up" especially if, like in Valorant they know they have a scene to work around, obviously there's opposing factors there like "oh we can't practice effectively due to toxic people or weird men being creeps" my advice for that would be, find a 5 stack and start to go hard to strats and improve your aim/movement and other repetitive things in dms or tdms.
basically, tl:dr
some things your so off base, some your right on and some ur completely denying facts, but some just lack a severe amount of context on or plain out ignorance on and some your just completely right on, if I didn't reply I didn't feel the need to explain further, the point is that u need a much bigger discussion about this if u want anything to actually change, like leo faria does when he comes on and explains formats or rulings etc, it would be nice to have someone like him for specifically gc and explaining why everything works like it does and whatnot. i hope anyone who reads learns something from it
Average Valorant fan sees someone happy and appreciative of their position and prays on their downfall
no idgaf abt that i just wanted to know what was going on
i just got back and valyn trent and shit are playing for g2 gozen wtf happened.
Bro if u don't want to improve, don't play ranked, if u do want to improve, do play ranked.
very simple formula
I see people shitting on Joe Rogan and then turning around and saying Theo Von, The first thing i see when i go onto his YouTube is him having a podcast with Donald Trump.
To put into context, I don't give 2 fucks what your political beliefs are or whether we agree, but putting any sort of politician on your platform to me is instantly unlikeable unless u give the other side the context or the platform to do the same
People always say this is a brainrot podcast but it's the only podcast which has very high tier guests and doesn't try to mob them and make them look bad
Nope, Just very generalized "this is the stuff you'd get on a test for x y and z"
My Media one has sections focused on specific stuff like Editing, Recording, Audio, etc
Another option, think about checking out the local libraries. I've rented out psychology books in the past so I'd assume they have school books available for rent.
Bro, there were tons of physic books left, Both physics and maths never sell out that fast
Bro this just reminded me, i saw in the charity shop recently tons of school books for 2 pound each (textbooks and base level national 5's) for Americans this would be equivalent to SATII or AP courses, I went round a little late because i was busy and all the psychology ones were gone but i got 2 good media ones (Advanced higher and National 5) so yippee
I asked for a source, and you said "This is where it comes from" and never linked or sent anything. How are any of these sources reliable? They all, in some way, have ties to or reasons to lie for Mazino's sake.
Edit: You linked a Mazino Glazing thread which includes maybe one questionable thing about Mazino and a bunch of, with all due respect, irrelevant people jumping in saying "omg I met them and they are so good". This isn't a reputable source. The people involved are unrelated to what is actually going on and are not even talking about it. How can you call this the "unbiased, no-context facts"? This is a bunch of nonsense stuck together hoping it'd stick, lmao.
It's a fundamentally superior game in terms of the actual gameplay and versatility but when it comes to the gunplay and how easy it is to just go kill I feel it'll just fizzle out eventually
There's no way your debating who is better when one isn't even playing
Ardiis being smart. u should've known not to comment that..
Discord