Re: immature gamecube kiddies dissing the dreamcast back in the day
Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2022 2:46 pm
nice necro, love this thread tho so good job-drez01- wrote:This thread is really something special. The luls
https://dreamcast-talk.com/forum/
nice necro, love this thread tho so good job-drez01- wrote:This thread is really something special. The luls
i did not dip, because half a year ago i already made 2 post explaining to "mstar" why i made this thread after he too said i need psychiatric help on PAGE 2 of this thread........ after that there was nothing more to be said...... so i left.Zoarb wrote: -POV asks where the community is, makes three posts, and dips:
you know......you should not be so quick as to label people you disagree with as being mentally ill, i mean it could be something else......like how i always felt like i was a woman inside, so i put on my cousin's school girl uniform which caused the skirt to rip, which greatly greatly upsetted her back in the 1990s. but i guess what i'm trying to say is, i hold decade long grudges like most woman do because the anima side of my consciousness is much stronger than the animus side, you know?Zoarb wrote: Enough waffle. Let's address some of things that observably state "op should seek therapy" about this post.
OH, I SEE.......I SEE.Zoarb wrote: So good for us GC fans
Zoarb wrote: Verdict: DC wasn't mentioned. Not relevant in this context. Next.
oh you didn't read that....so that's why.Zoarb wrote: TL;DR
Sean697 explicitly said that "the games were not console exclusive. But were on GameCube first". while this indicated that he knew sonic adventure games and skies of arcadia were playable other platforms, the fact that he continued to insist that those games had indeed came out for the gamecube first.......shows that he had no prior knowledge that skies of arcadia and the two sonic advanture games were originally dreamcast games, as the dreamcast was released long before the gamecube, he would've known that, if he knew the games were originally dreamcast games in the first place......the fact that he persisted in saying that they had came out on the gamecube first is proof that he didn't know, and had no prior knowledge that they were on the dreamcast first.Zoarb wrote: As in, THAT version was on GC first. Def not a prime example of "kiddies" "damaging the DC's rep" as everything listed is easily verified one way or the other with a quick Wikipedia search.
so you argued that "sonic advanture DX" and " sonic advanture 2 battle" were gamecube games, therefore the ports should count as having been released on the gamecube first.Zoarb wrote: every game listed (aside from Skies of Arcadia as it was listed here) was only on GC. As in, THAT version was on GC first.
i'm guessing you werent around back then, when the gamecube fanbase was relentlessly going into planetdreamcast forums and making post like "the dreamcast sucks it doesn't even have sonic advanture/skies of arcadia/PSO like the gamecube!!!!!!!". in the second post of this thread i talked about how i went to planetgamecube and defended the dreamcast by telling the kiddies there that sonic adventure games were originally dreamcast games, only for them to accuse me of being desprete and counting gamecube games like SA1 as dreamcast games, for according to them, sonic adventure had never came out on the dreamcast.Zoarb wrote: Def not a prime example of "kiddies" "damaging the DC's rep"
if somebody asks you a question in the form of "hey Zoarb! how can you not be better than me?" would you consider this to be dissing you? i don't know how'd you feel about that, but i personally would consider that question to be a form of dissing me in the form of a question.Zoarb wrote: "How can the DC lineup be better...?" A simple question. An inflammatory one? It could be argued. But a question, nonetheless. And it seems they at least know the great DC games came over.
i took it seriously because he didn't sound like he wasn't being serious at all. i don't think you should excuse him to such extent by claiming he was just kidding; he clearly wasn't.Zoarb wrote: HOW CAN YOU TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY? Even if they were serious, I can guarantee THEY are the minority. No one still thinks this. The wii has its fans. I'm one of em. But mainly for my light gun fix.
let me phrase your above statement so you'd understand: "But blueagent.......your issue seems to be that you think Lost Planet was only made for the PS3 at the time. And it was. So, you're just wrong. Come down off that high horse dude. The Xbox360 got Lost Planet. Not Lost Planet for the PS3 with the playable hot chick Luka plus other new battle maps. It comes down to name semantics, I get it. But there's a reason that wording, and phrasing is so important here. VERDICT: They're right. Lost Planet was released for the PS3, and not the Xbox360. Lost Planet was released on the Xbo360 but not the PS3. How many of these are based around this argument? If there are anymore, I'm just gonna copy and paste the following verdict: Version title semantics make them correct, and you incorrect.Zoarb wrote: But your issue seems to be that they think SA2 Battle was only made for the GC at the time. And it was. So, you're just wrong. Come down off that high horse dude. The DC got SA2. Not SA2 Battle. It comes down to name semantics, I get it. But there's a reason that wording, and phrasing is so important here.
VERDICT: They're right. SA2 Battle was released for the GC, and not the DC. SA2 was released on the DC not the Gamecube. How many of these are based around this argument? If there are anymore, I'm just gonna copy and paste the following verdict: Version title semantics make them correct, and you incorrect.
ZPC is not listed as a cell-shaded game anywhere nor historically had it ever been credited nor acknoledge in the gaming industry as the first cell-shading game, no reviews by gamespot/IGN had indicated it was cell-shaded either . just because you saw a youtube video saying that ZPC was the first cell-shaded game, doesn't mean its true.Zoarb wrote: -Quite a common misconception. However, you both are wrong. It was ZPC from 1996. So to answer your question, that's the reason "why didn't more of the dreamcast fanbase stood against that back then?" It's because you both were wrong lol.
i was not wrong in saying that "windwaker ripped off jet set radio", because you seem to have no memory of the time when nintendo had drastically changed the zelda 3D tech demo in spaceworld from its original realistic art direction..........to a cartonny cell-shaded one like jet set radio, only very shortly after jet set radio had been released on the dreamcast.Zoarb wrote: - (Idk if I've ever met anyone with RedPanda in their username that had anything productive to say, but let's keep going). Again, ya both are wrong.
i reckon that i can when i have an informed opinion, rather than a bias like marcus had. my experience with cellshaded games i mentioned in my fist post made me realized that a non-fully cellshaded game like zelda windwaker, which i tried out on the gamecube kiosk in 2004, does not look better than a fully cell-shaded one like JSRF which i played on the xbox back in 2005, especially when we compared them in the context of purely cellshaded graphics quality, which was what marcus was doing.Zoarb wrote: You can't judge personal experiences. Or personal taste.
so if i go into the ps4 forums and claimed that i had just bought a dreamcast console for the first time in my life in tye year of 2022, and then screamed that "dreamcast games still has the best graphics to this day and every other ps4 games couldn't measure up to its beauty" in the same manner as marcus had said, then the ps4 fanbase would be unjustified and wrong in rediculing me for what i said, because, as you put it, others can't judge my personal experiences or personal taste, am i right?Zoarb wrote: A person's personal history has no basis in the timeline in which the media was released.
this had nothing to do with gamecubers dissing the dreamcast, this was about gamecube kiddies being stupid by saying that the GC had more games the ps2 and xbox, hence why i brought out the number of total games for the ps2 and xbox, without mentioning the DC myself.Zoarb wrote: Lol! That's just factually incorrect. And I'll concede that they're omission of the DC is noted. It doesn't seem to be out of disdain. Just out of ignorance.
so you're saying the dreamcast community would be unable to indulge in their idle pursuits if they perform a total count of all the games the dreamcast had?Zoarb wrote: My response? Enjoying life lol. Going outside.
i said what i said because the GC was never in a fight with the DC, therefore the GC did not defeat the DC and i don't consider sales to be relevant as i don't work as a salesman at nintendo. the DC was however was defeated by the Ps2.Zoarb wrote:
The GC did win over the DC. It sold more units. Is that considered "defeating?" I wouldn't say so
i did not meant that the DC dying didn't benefit the GC, i was criticizing Samuel Roberts and co for saying the death of the dreamcast was a good thing as it benefited the GC.Zoarb wrote:
You're gonna look me in the face, and tell me the DC dying didn't benefit the GC? And again, depending on the wording, these versions were exclusive the gc for the time. Some still are.
Agjsdfd said the Gamecube had more games than Xbox, and Ps2. all i did was listed the number of games to prove him wrong, i never even ridiculed him, but that according to you is shaming?Zoarb wrote: Are you one of those people who shame people getting into a new hobby because of their ignorance to something brand new to them? Because you seem like that kind of person lol.
Zoarb wrote:
-Verdict: Op should get a negative point here. Because while the post is factually incorrect,
Zoarb wrote:
The wording here makes it hard to decipher is they're saying the PS2 is considered the best console ever, or the GC. Which, if I'm not 100% sure on the meaning of the phrasing, I'm not judging it.
again this is not about attacking the DC, that post was about JLF1 saying that the gamecube had more JRPGS than the PS2, which i said was wrong, and i would be right in saying so.Zoarb wrote: in this post, there is no attacking the DC going on. It's not even mentioned. At this point, you're just pointing at the Nintendo fanboy, and screaming "look at this idiot."
surfer_dude said that the GC sold 22 percent more than the PS3 in its first year. when a gamecuber brings a last generation console into a next generation console war discussion, is he not allowing the gamecube to participate in the next generation console war? also by gleefully pitting sales numbers of the gamecube against the ps3, is he not inferring that the gamecube had won against the PS3?Zoarb wrote: Not what was said. A simple observation of the ps3 having a slow start
you've always take everything i said very seriously (which i indeed was) and be very quick to point out how wrong i was, whist counting each and every one of them into your tallies. yet when Anonymous said something which was factually wrong, such as how the gamecube beat the ps2, 360 the ps3..........you then immediately jump to his defense and excused him by claiming that i should not have taken him seriously in the first place.Zoarb wrote: Don't take it seriously.
again, the topic being discussed was not DC dissing. that guy said that said the gamecube had 8 flight sim games, it didn't.....so i was correct in stating that he was wrong.Zoarb wrote: Stop being a salesman for the DC. It wasn't mentioned. Not relevant in this context. Next.
again this is not about the DC, this topic is about that guy saying that the Gamecube had up to 40 or 50 RPGs, and i called him out on his BS.Zoarb wrote: Factually incorrect. But again, not about the DC
you need to recount those tallies, as again, not all the stuff i wrote were about dreamcast dissing.Zoarb wrote: Final tally OP is 2 and 19
i did, you just didn't want to see what you don't want to see, and you had erroneously thought that everything i wrote had only to do with one topic of gamecube kiddies dissing the dreamcast, when that was not the case.Zoarb wrote: bring something damning.
speak for yourself, man, but thanks for the encouragement nonetheless.Zoarb wrote: You should be a politician. Because you seem to be good at saying so much, while saying nothing.
not at all....actually my proficiency with the english language is not on par with you, as is my grammer, because english not my native language, though i supposed i was also an lazy student who dropped out of high school so i can fervently play with my dreamcast everyday for the whole of 2002. so you weren't being petty at all i think.Zoarb wrote: Did you capitalize anything here? But that's petty.
cherry picking? i brought out valid arguments against you, which you were not able to rebuke. that's cherry picking?Zoarb wrote:Way to cherry pick and twist what is being said. Like I said, you should be a politician, because you seem to be great at saying so much, while in reality saying so little.
holding a grudge is not depression, it not classified as a mental illness unless depression negatively impact every aspect of one's life over an extended period of time alone.Zoarb wrote: If you really kept a grudge for that long, that isn't healthy. And implies you need mental help.
that doesn't change the fact that you were ignorant, which led to you misinterpreting and understanding alot of stuff i said, that is your own fault, not mine.Zoarb wrote: I will concede, I was outside being an active kid when all this was going on
you openly asked everyone on the forums to public-ally to judge me to see if i need therapy or not.Zoarb wrote: And your assumptions on "seeking therapy" as me labeling you "a crazy person" is overall damaging to topic of mental health in our society.
i have never asked other students in psychology class to judge each other to see if they need therapy with the malicious intention of having others see them as being mentally ill.Zoarb wrote: Please be more careful in using such absolute language. I understand that English is not your first language. But please know that wording is very important.
Real talk. This isn't worth my time. I have nothing to prove to you. I have much to say. However, I value my peace over proving how incorrect you are of your claims, or proving your blatant misrepresentation, or cherry picking of what I have said.Zoarb wrote: Like I said, you should be a politician, because you seem to be great at saying so much, while in reality saying so little.
theres no victory unless you make people realize why they were wrong to disagree with you in the first place. but all i heard from you was "I don't want to talk to you now, maybe next year"Zoarb wrote:
To those who care, just look at the previous posts in this thread, and you will see the full context which has been conveniently omitted from blueagents posts in response to myself.
blueagent. You have intentionally misrepresented what I had said, and used hyperbolic, and absolutist language to paint me in the worst possible light with what you have chosen to show, as well as omit. It shows me that you have no interest in actual discourse.
We are all laughing at you and talking about how unhinged you are coming across in dm's and in other places.
you worded your statement here in such a way, to describe youself as being there from "the beginning, and end of the Dreamcast" as you yourself had put it, which gave me the impression that you've been a dreamcast owner since its launch, and yet......Zoarb wrote: I was around for the 16-bit console wars. And the beginning, and end of the Dreamcast. Phantasy Star Online is my 2nd favorite game of all time. I have 14 ways to play the first episode physically in my collection right now. it is right below Sonic 3 & Knuckles as my favorite game.
to be fair I don't think theres anything wrong with you telling us that you bought your first dreamcast console back in 2008, but it's just that.....you told us you were actually around back when the dreamcast launched, but you also said that you never bought a dreamcast console until 2008. how curious.Zoarb:
Sonic 3 & Knuckles: Is a game I go back and beat annually just because I get the urge.
Phantasy Star Online: Is a game that took years to get it's hooks in me. I first tried it on a CD-R on my first Dreamcast in 2008
source:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230000000 ... ome_games/
well it definitely doesn't sound like you were talking about selling the burned CD-R of PSO in 2008 either, so you must surely be talking about getting the dreamcast console for first time back in 2008Zoarb:
I may like Phantasy Star Online far more than someone who didn't play it until late 2008 has any right to.
source: https://www.reddit.com/user/Zoarb/
https://www.neoseeker.com/forums/1461/t ... ost-youth/Zoarb wrote: -POV asks where the community is, makes three posts, and dips:
Zoarb wrote: you need mental help. I'm not even being a jerk here. I would tell my friends the same thing.
you claim to respect people with mental illness, yet you openly admitted that you'd laugh at others whom you perceive as being emotionally unstable.Zoarb wrote: We are all laughing at you and talking about how unhinged you are
Agjsdfd never said the dreamcast was a new hobby back in the 2010s.....the fact is, you called the dreamcast "a new hobby" for yourself; which accurately corresponded to what you said about being a first time dreamcast owner in 2008Zoarb wrote: Are you one of those people who shame people getting into a new hobby
the fact that you claimed wikipedia was around during the dreamcast days of the early 2000s, is another tell tale sign you are in fact much younger than you'd be willing to tell us.Zoarb wrote: as everything listed is easily verified one way or the other with a quick Wikipedia search
Zoarb wrote: op should seek therapy"
Zoarb wrote: you need mental help.
Zoarb wrote: OH MY GOD! Talk to people!
Zoarb wrote: My response? Enjoying life lol. Going outside.
you wanted me to get psychiatric help, but then you thuggishly declared that I have no friends to talk to, and don't go outside and have no social life.....before accusing me of never being interested in having civilized discussion with you.Zoarb wrote: It shows me that you have no interest in actual discourse.
since you said you never owned a dreamcast console until 2008 and have not been a member on planet-dreamcast forums in the early 2000s, yet you would argue with me over what happened on planetdreamcast and insists to me that jet set radio wasn't the first cellshaded game?Zoarb wrote: So please, stay away from assumptions and stick in the realm of reality based on factual evidence.
Zoarb wrote: TL;DR Every point made
Zoarb wrote: TL;DR
Zoarb wrote: Idk if I'm going to respond to each point properly
you refused to read all 3 of my messages, then accused me of having never replied to you....are you for real?Zoarb wrote: you will see the full context which has been conveniently omitted from blueagents posts in response to myself.
spoken like a true gamecube fan who said he bought his first dreamcast in 2008.Zoarb wrote: So good for us GC fans
the dreamcast did not have to die for the benefit of the Nintendo fanbase, because sonic adventure and pso were already playable during the Dreamcast era, but then again you said never had a DC until 2008, so no wonder you'd feel that wayZoarb wrote: You're gonna look me in the face, and tell me the DC dying didn't benefit the GC
i've been a member on pso-world since 2007, under the name "coolaid".Zoarb wrote: in dm's and in other places.
I am doubtful, considered you listed yourself as a student in 2016 on your psoworld profile. you also talked about your college roommate on reddit back in 2021.Zoarb wrote: I was around for the 16-bit console wars.
you have made 3 posts in total on this thread, only for me to revealed that despite your claims of being around the dreamcast scene back then, you've never actually owned a dreamcast console back in the 2000s, a fact which you tried so desperately to hide from us, albeit in vainZoarb wrote: You have made 5 posts in total on these forums. All in this thread. You have contributed nothing to this community and have only made a laughingstock of yourself.
you too stand alone in this thread, as none of your friends have the guts to stand for you here....to this very day.Zoarb wrote: No one is on your side here.