I don't enjoy Rap and nobody is going to tell me otherwise. It's annoying and the culture is a bad influence on youth that needs to be phased out. I mean have you guys seen this kid? https://www.google.com/search?q=6ix...4qvcAhXPV98KHX3iDA0Q_AUICygC&biw=1196&bih=700 What a joke
Yeah let your creativity go man. Check out Dtile on insta, facebook or if you have neither just google it. We can draw your projects or we have prefabs of the tiles in sketchup so you can design anything you want. Just pm for more info, I don't wanna break this discussion.
People like feeling like a badass, and that's basically what rap does. It's a play on surface level emotions, like porn and spartan abilities. There's nothing of substance or depth to most of it.
Most of rap is just a bunch of Trolldats screaming their qualifications at each other over the telephone *Edited for douchebaggery
Who doesn’t like to hold a giant stack of $100’s up to their face like it’s a telephone? I know I do it all the time.
I love snipe tower on Guardian. That’s from an offensive and defensive standpoint. I love the set up required to hold the position but at the same time I love trying to out flank the opponent to take the position. I have read The Pit receive some hate around here lately, but it’s my favorite map of all time. Those two maps make for the most enjoyable and strategic gameplay in my opinion.
No no no. That's not right. You can't have an opinion. You are objectively wrong and you will see that eventually.
Unless your definition of strategy is looking down hallways and making sure nobody crosses, I think you're completely wrong about The Pit offering the "most strategic gameplay"
"Those two maps make for the most enjoyable and strategic gameplay in my opinion." This is not just demonstrably untrue, but possibly the furthest claim from it. Both the Pit and Guardian could be argued as the most 1-dimensional maps in Halo 3 at just about any level of play and any gametype that were ran on them - and frankly, that's really not up for debate. "I love snipe tower on Guardian. That’s from an offensive and defensive standpoint. I love the set up required to hold the position but at the same time I love trying to out flank the opponent to take the position." And this is the part where I get to say, no. You don't. Holding towers is fun because you get to kill people as they helplessly pile bodies at your doorstep, it's essentially an accepted version of Tower of Power but without the turret. No one, and I mean NO ONE, enjoys dying repeatedly over and over trying to breach an unbreakable tower setup that 1: takes no mental willpower to hold, and 2: is pretty much mechanically impossible to break outside of forcing error on the defending team. Which means you don't actually like Guardian, hell you don't actually like the sniper tower. You just like holding control over something, which is entirely different. And I could make an argument that there's a much higher level of satisfaction to be achieved from not holding anything at all.
What if you enjoy defending it more than you don't enjoy attacking it. Wouldn't that mean all in all you like the tower or am I wrong about what I think.
Yes. 100% of people crave that 'rubber-hits-road' reality that a well-designed map, game, car, shoe, or whatever brings out. But the fact is that close to 100% of people are imperfect in their understanding, analysis, and integration of this kind of experience. This is due to intellectual laziness, perhaps due to cultural forces, biological, economic, or whatever, but the ultimate choice to be lazy rests in the body (mind is part of this) of the individual. So lazy maps that are hailed as revolutionary, or excellent, or interesting, are only doing the people that play on them a disservice by reinforcing an unseen laziness; these premises will never be checked. And if they are, it will destroy far more than just that one bad idea. The problem is that 100% people crave that reality and integrational achievement but they cannot access it because it is hidden, obscured, covered up, choked out, derided, or just ignored because of their own laziness, the laziness of others, and the power of the lazy connective tissues in our minds (metaphorically and literally speaking). This is where the frustration lies. I like sitting in Sniper Tower on Lockout because I suck at Halo 2 and have no confidence in my run'n'gun sniper play; my thumbs just aren't responsive enough. It sucks for me, because every game does devolve into a 2T ratrace where one team is on BR tower and the other is camping the sniper. It's boring, but I like it because I don't have to think AND act - I only have to react. This sucks. I like Guardian because of its soft, cool atmosphere and because the pathing is 'cool', suspended above nothing but built out of a gigantic tree - the mysteries that need solving from the aesthetics are what sell me on the map, not the gameplay. Same with Epitaph. Same with Isolation. Same with most of the maps I make. Same with Halo, originally. And in each of these examples, gameplay gets sucked down the drain of one team here, one team there, the biggest sightline and most obvious one between two bases. Now... @Xandrith "Okay [gang]. To figure out who is at the top, all we have to do is come up with a consensus about the ideal map maker, and compare everyone to that ideal. Then you can rank order people/maps by comparison." In Peterson's world, there is no form, as subjective function dictates conceptual categories. "A beanbag and a stump are both a chair." Yeah, and my **** is a pen, if I really want it to be. And hey! If enough people say it is too, then all dicks are pencils! I mean, come on. Put down the Maps of Meaning for a moment. How do you determine the ideal? Is it based on who can integrate the subconscious desires of people the best? And then, since it is a consensus, is this not going to entirely subjective? That appears to be what you suggest later in this post. If that's the case, then the ideal map designer will design Midship over and over again. Chris[t] Carney will be hailed as the messiah, and 343 will be treated as innovative for their merging of the old and the new, as is exalted in the continuation of the scene I cite below. That is what people crave, because laziness is stronger in the near 100% of people than is integrity, especially when integrity of any kind is frowned upon for too many reasons to get into. Consider this still from a pretty good Gary Cooper flick. The whole point of the scene is that his character is attempting to present his philosophy of integrity to the board, who want him to compromise. Most people don't ever make it to this point with their design. Look at my current pinnacle, Thanatos. I was able to squeeze so much out of this that was better than anything I'd done before - pathing was wonky, thin, there were options for multi-layered combat, with lots of opportunities for gunfights to evolve and change positions... but I could not get around the ingrained 2Tower **** that I've gotten so used to, and without even thinking about it. How did I attempt to solve the problem? With a wall (technical a rock pillar and some aesthetic stuff) - with pragmatism. I could have gone in and moved the Villa to the other side of the grotto, but no, that was too much work, and I'd already set up the lighting to accentuate the cove's entrance. So, I'm stuck with a huge, wide open sightline that covers the entirety of the map, with little rat-races below, just like Lockout, just like Guardian, just like Midship. The map does not serve its own purpose, because at a genetic level, I am still playing by the 'classical' rules when I am trying to get over them with all my efforts; it serves the purpose of something else entirely, the purpose of 'easy' gameplay and accessibility, not accentuation and encouraging of good gameplay. It is a mixed experience for this reason (and others). The ideal level designer will design for the game. The game suggests an ideal method of play. The play necessitates the derivation of certain design principles. Integrating and concretizing these principles is the challenge of the level designer. It does not matter what the consensus it, because this kind of 'rubber-meets-road' reality will be readily apparent to those who grasp the game, the principles, and the desire for integration. ### Multi, write a book. I'll read it.
The difference I'm seeing is feeling VS thinking. You can feel good about something without thinking the same thing is good, and vice versa. In the most recent example, Yevah feels good on sniper tower, whereas repeatedly dying trying to storm said tower isn't something you would think is good.
So, the argument youre making here is that when your taste changes, it reveals what it always was. It may be surprising, but i wholly disagree with that. Change is just change. Even if you move away from a certain type of music or you dont appreciate the gameplay of holding a tower anymore, it doesnt mean that you never did. And our tastes are ever changing. So does that mean the way we see life the day we die is our ‘true’ self? The answer is no. I think its an important part of showing respect to people to be able to simply accept that they see something differently than you do, but instead you try your hardest to rationalize things in a way that they either have to make sense to you, or they are wrong. No amount of words you could come up with will stop people from enjoying the things they do.