AWKWARD ZOMBIE

At the request of 2 proletariats and no one else, a serious talking thread.

Thread Rules
Violating these rules might get you some sort of punishment? I don't know I'm not a mod

1) Do not whine about the debatability of a topic

2) No parting shots. We know what you're up to, "Even though I think your opinion is fucking stupid we should stop arguing" people.

3) Report posts, don't derail discussions, don't play mod

4) No racist or discriminatory posts

5) Tone: While it's not a rule to see all viewpoints as equal, but you are expected to be able to keep civility enough to debate any topic, no matter how contentious.

6) If talking about something in the news, post sources.

7) If you're introducing a talking point, please try to make it interesting and detailed, so there's something to actually talk about.

Shock of shocks, the rules basically boil down to 8) Don't be a piece of shit.

---------------------------------Topics---------------------------------------
"Why It's Okay to be a Snob," by Syobon

Note, if you ask and if I think it's okay, I'll link your topic in the OP. I put Syobon's there because he was first and I didn't want it to be blank I guess.

Alright, some other things about that thread:

-Debates that are specifically about religion, politics, sexuality, go in Taboo Topics (or TMI thread for the latter, depending on how serious the discussion is). However, it's okay if a discussion segues into these territories for a while.
-While it would be better to focus on the current discussion, nothing is stopping you from talking about something else - as long as you're not trying to stop the ongoing discussion. Debate about whatever you want, and let others do so too.
-We expect a certain level of seriousness in this thread. We're watching you, so watch yourself.

What's the difference between this and Taboo Topics

This thread is to debate stuff that isn't Taboo. Philosophy, for example.

Some philospohy is considered taboo. Like Objectivism.

I honestly think there's just as much chance of people getting upset and/or getting into arguments in this thread as in TT.

Am I banned yet?

I think it's a little redundant but whatever

I say we just give it a shot and see what happens.

So anyway, I was going to post my argument about why it's okay to be a snob, but I'm already at almost a full page in Word and I don't know how to cut it down. So I'm just going to post the tl;dr and explain my thoughts throughout the discussion that may or may not ensue.

"It's okay to be an elitist prick who looks down on people who consume inferior goods (eg. casuals) because that's the only way we're going to get better things"

Elaborate on how that equals getting better things.

How do you define inferior goods?

Are you talking about a cost/value ratio?

Who decides when a product's cost outweighs its value?

Isn't the value of any given product defined not only by its monetary cost but the emotional value attributed it by the purchaser?

For example - one given individual might place more value upon a fossilised shark tooth than a small natural diamond; Would that be wrong of them - given perhaps that fossilised shark teeth are equally as rare as diamonds?

Exactly the questions I was hoping for. e: Wow, still ended typing a whole wall of text, at least now I'm slightly happier with it. I hope it's not too long-winded.

There indeed is no such thing as inherit value, and a media product is worth as much as the entertainment it brings to you, specifically. There is no accounting for taste, or so they say. However, there is often a distinction that can be made. There are people who engage themselves to learn more about a form of media, who play, watch or read more of it, who try out different kinds in order to find the one they enjoy the most. They often acquire a more ‘refined’ taste. These are the snobs, the hardcore gamers, the hipsters or what not.

Then there’s the other kind of people. You know what I’m talking about, almost all of you have a group of people you look down upon. The Twilight lovers, the CoD fanboys... These are generally people who are new to the media or have only experienced a limited part of it. Often they are called scrubs or casuals in the gaming community. Note that I'm talking about people with limited experience, not just people with certain tastes. I have friend who’s played tons of shooters, from Timesplitters through Battlefield, Unreal Tournament and Team Fortress 2, as well as a ton of other genres. He just happens to like Call of Duty the best. He actually fits in more with the former groups since he has a more defined taste, for example despite enjoying MW3 he still thinks MW2 was the best one and he hated BlackOps.

The point I'm trying to make is that corporations aim to make cheddar, so they will try and appeal to the largest possible demographic, often referred to as mainstream. That's all well and good, but it generally means that the product will be as easy-access and straight forward as possible. This unfortunately often comes at the cost of depth. Let me illustrate with two examples:

- Remember the first time you watched ‘generic action movie’? I think most of us thought it was the hypest shit. But after realizing there were a dime a dozen of these, and indeed watching dozens of them, our enthusiasm quickly toned down.

- 'Game' is a typical, big budget AAA title. It’s made to appeal to as big of a demographic as possible, so it’s easy to pick up and features straight-forward no-nonsense gameplay and story. It’s a fun game, but it unfortunately lacks depth. Someone who hasn't played a game like it before would probably be blown away. He'd spends hours and even days mastering it and trying to improve himself even further, and after reaching a high level he’d be content showing off his acquired skills. A more experienced gamer however, would quickly figure out the game as there's nothing truly innovative (since innovation is taking risks and companies don't want that) and get tired of it, since he's played too many like it before and there's no further depth for him to explore.

The problem I'm trying to address here is that there's a stigma in our current society that everyone's opinion has equal value. This stems from the previous point that there is no thing as inherit value, and it differs from person to person. While this is true, one must take into account that there are two main extremes media can develop towards at this point.
1. Companies keep making generic mainstream media, eventually everyone gets tired of it but it's still sort of fun and it's not like they can pick anything else since companies don't dare to take risk. Eventually culture devolves into a mediocre grey where nothing stands out.
2. Enthusiasts make their opinion known to the companies so they have a better idea what kind of risk they can take. They also talk to newbies and teach them to appreciate more obscure media. This is important as there are such things as "acquired tastes". People often scoff at wine lovers because normal people can't taste the difference, but what they don't realize is that there is an entire extra "dimension" from which they can derive joy. It's like this for every media, once you learn to sense the subtleties you gain a greater appreciation for everything as a whole.


The point I'm trying to make here is not "shut up and listen to the elitists", not in the least. I merely want people to openly discuss their opinions again and by openly I mean listen to each other and try out their suggestions. But most of all I want arguments of this kind
"Well I like it and even though you listed X reasons why it sucks I’m still having fun so you should just shut up"
to disappear.

I see where you're coming from (even though you didn't specify media in your first post) but wouldn't that be able to achieve without being "pricks who look down on others"?
Enjoy something, tell others about it, don't be like "your shit suuuuuuuuucks, check THIS out instead, it's the SHIT!" and you will get some to actually look at it and maybe become fans of it, buying it in the process.
IMO, if someone enjoys it, it has a right to exist, even though it's "inferior shit" when looked at more objectively.

I wished too that more people would buy things I like (so they would actually be localized so I can actually BUY them. I'm looking at you, Capcom.) and because of that I am kinda rustled at companies who don't take any chances and just sell the same thing again and again. I can understand them wanting to make a high profit, but for example if the game already exists, they could at least localize it in other countries, since it's not as expensive as making a whole new game. Also they should think of the long run. Game you're looking forward to doesn't get localized -> be rustled about it -> not buy anything from that publisher anymore -> more loss for the publisher than if he had localized it.

I kinda lost track just now didn't I?

@Syobon's wall o' text:

I guess you could say that's why these days I find a lot of artwork unremarkable and passé - I've seen so much of it over the years that I'm aware of when something has been drawn only to meet the 'minimum requirements' needed to make it qualify as a 'finished product for general consumption by a given target demographic' - and I'm aware of the flaws and such in certain works - especially that of upstanding member of society artists and comic makers.

However, appreciation of artwork is very much a subjective thing - in fact, especially so - and I myself am not above 'faving' a piece of work which others would themselves deem unremarkable or passé.

To clarify on this point though:


Do you mean you want people to stop liking things because of another person's opinions? Or do you mean they should just be more receptive to that person's opinions - and agree that on certain grounds something is bad - but be free to continue liking the something even though it is bad?

I expect that you don't mean you want people 'in the know' to force others to stop having fun, but I do find that statement kinda hard to wrap my head around because it can be interpreted a number of ways.

My goal is that people don't use "but I'm having fun" as an argument any more. People can have fun (duh) with whatever they want, but in a discussion that's not a sufficient argument. Examine your feelings and try to explain them, so you can tell developers and others what actually makes a piece of media good. Again, the problem is that the pieces with more depth often require more investment to fully appreciate, so people can be quick to badger out with incomplete arguments like that.


Yeah, I worded that incredibly badly, I put in the "pricks who look down on others" part because that's the insult often thrown to the heads of those who try to explain "Yeah X is good I guess if you've never played Y or Z or even Gamma before, you should really check those out".

While I was indeed talking about media, I think it might actually be applied to every consumer product (although there price is usually a much bigger factor).