HJU_wpfakAA2co8.jpg
[Hide] (473.9KB, 2048x1448) >>116072
>And it died because it devolved into only NON-anime sperging.
No, it died because people just stopped posting. And so the only thing left was the "sperging" because they were the only people still around.
>We all know its you by this point
And? Notice how you didn't refute how I paraphrased the entire incident, indicating my summation of events is correct. And is actually a rather interesting thing I've been noticing as of late across every imageboard. How there's newfags flooding in and making a fuss left and right about all these oldfags who want to continue things the way they've always been, and proceeding to make it an issue that these oldfags are there saying things they don't like and are going to spend every waking moment making THAT the issue. Not that there's a foreign element who came to a place that was never theirs and demanding that everyone else conform to them.
>>116074
>Who stated his intent to continue shitting up the thread indefinitely
Yes, about when you guys keep bitching about the same problem and refuse acknowledge that you're the one causing the problem you're bitching about. Why should I endlessly tolerate you fags whining about a problem you're actively causing?
>You aren't even doing this about threads from several months ago anymore
The Hell are you talking about?
>You don't even do this to true enemies
You mean the companies that don't give two shits in making any games or merch that I would actually be interested in buying? Or the influencers on platforms that I don't even use because I have standards? Who are my "true enemies"?
>but people in the same community who often agree with you on almost everything important
No, they don't, otherwise there wouldn't be an argument over something even as simple as playing a different game. Which I can understand on a level because what I'm doing is pointing out that you, yourself, are contributing to the problem, not the companies who are just throwing (Biased) ideas at a wall and seeing what sticks.
You guys keep bringing up my time in the SKG threads, so let's go with that example. You have a game like The Crew, an open-world racing title that does sound rather sick on the premise that it takes place across the continental United States but suffers from the issue that it's always online, and you make it a rule to avoid always-online titles. With that circumstance in mind, you have two options: break your rule or play something else. And it's not like you're lacking in open-world American racing games. There's Test Drive Unlimited (Made by the same guys, and was the returning premise for TC3) in Hawaii and L.A. Rush in California. Then you have a game like Fuel which has one of the biggest maps in gaming the size of Conneticut. If you want a cross-country trip, EA released NFS: The Run, with there being two versions of the game you can play (The HD version or the Wii/3DS version). And I can go on about all the other similar sandbox driving games (Mad Max, True Crimes, Driver), but I think that's sufficient enough to prove my point. Every time I bring something like this up, people there immediately lose it and act like The Crew (Or whatever game) is the "only game" that has ever existed and will ever exist.
Do you see the issue? The only counter I've seen is people pointing out that if a game like The Crew is accepted then "more' companies will make games following it's practices, but this counter ignores the problem that The Crew (For this particular example) will only be accepted if people play the game. So if you don't play The Crew and play something else, where is the issue (Apart from companies not caring about the money they lose releasing endless games no one wants)? Then the counter goes to saying that these games need to be prevented from existing at all, which only then exposes that what you want is to become the Thought Police and prevent people from having "bad ideas" before they can ever have a chance to exist. And once the discussion reaches that point, there's nothing left to argue because you're firmly established that you want to be like Tipper Gore or Joe Liebermann, except under the guise that it's a for a "good cause".
>Ironically for a supposed libertarian
I don't believe I ever said I was.
>you evidently won't accept any world where people think, act, talk, or purchase in any way even slightly different from yourself
As I have said and will keep saying, you do whatever you want, just don't be offended when I correctly call you stupid for doing something stupid. And don't make it my problem when you want me to care about the results caused as a result of your stupid actions.
>and would rather see everything around you go up in flames
Is it? Is it my fault that you put your hand on a hot stove just to defy my advice that the stove is hot and my burn you, and then blame me for your handing get burnt as this would have "never happened" had I just kept my trap shut? The funny thing is that, when I do, you then STILL turn around and blame me for not warning you. Meaning no matter what I do, everything that happens is my fault and not yours.
>When you mentioned participating in the Anime you finished thread, it briefly warmed my heart a little. Then you doubled back, and now we're back to this shit again. It sucks.
Have you ever considered that it's your attitude that's the problem and nothing to do with me at all? I mean, I like to think that I'm the same shittalker I was back when the board first started in 2018. And assuming that to be the case, what does that say about you and your expectations and attitueds? That you cannot handle someone who's been a resident and active contributer of the board since the very beginning.
