Gaming Studies

[Drighton]

Originally posted by Neonlare
Please... Just, read through this ok?
 http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/Leon_1990/0589.png" target="_blank">http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/Leon_1990/0589.png

wow, um. Could that be any less on the topic of boobs, boobs in videogames?

[MrMister]

In Blitzball, the ball is too heavy to float, and it doesn't sink  because it's always being held or propelled quickly. Think of passing a medicine ball around under water.

The people in Spira aren't human, that's why they can breath underwater. No humans can use magic. No humans can jump fourteen feet in the air and flip, kicking the ball with such a spin that it passes any goalie, all by pumping his legs in the water.

Haha.

[Neonlare]

Originally posted by Drighton

quote:

Originally posted by Neonlare Please... Just, read through this ok?  http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/Leon_1990/0589.png" target="_blank" http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/Leon_1990/0589.png<" target="_blank">>http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y88/Leon_1990/0589.png< /a>

wow, um. Could that be any less on the topic of boobs, boobs in videogames?

Was aimed at the "sciencey-crap" posts, there games and thats all, they need no explanation...

I'd like some to tell me why Mario has lives and Baiten Kaitos has Cards and floating Islands!

[Almeidaboo]

I'm not that serious...am I?

[Razor]

You could always have those boobless characters like for example..
erm, Pauline, from the adventures of Jumpman vs the barrel throwing hairy cab driver!

[Drighton]

Originally posted by Almeidaboo
I'm not that serious...am I?

LOL, that combined with the suicidal smilie in your sig just made that post gold!

But I'm running on VERY little sleep and I can't even make sense of my last replies, so just ignore me today.

[Kijuki_Magazaki]

lol that breastsize part being a pro made me burst in laughter.

Nice metroidology.

Most of them are quiet good. Keep them up.

[Archem]

What I want to know is how the "Magic Bag" theory works. This theory states: Any and all video game characters capable of obtaining items and/or weaponry can and probably will carry as much of it as possible. Recent releases like the Halo series and Far Cry are successfully attempting to remove this general theory, and with great success. The probable cause of the existance was, at first, the low amount of said items and/or weaponry. As time rolled on, developers began to realize that, being video games, they could make up these things instead of basing them off of real-life things. They, of course, overlooked the possibility of their plans. The newer games have less weapons and compensate by reducing the carrying capacity to only two or three items each. This is successful because now strategy is incorporated in the mix. Also, now each weapon has a purpose. Half-Life 2 tried to steer closer to this without giving up a well-appreciated feature by reducing ammo capacity and increasing the number of armed enemies. The theory can be proven with the idea that most game heros are in a party, so that the burden can be divided; biomechanically enhanced by way of special Samus-like suits, chemicals, cyborg experimentation, or a combination of the four; well-trained heros, often in a military scene or with harsh living conditions; magically gifted; or just not stated. Through personal experimentation, I have concluded that, although probably an extremely heavy load, nearly twenty weapons plus a few extra items may be carried by a single person. This, obviously makes one heavier, bulkier, hindered, and a bigger target for enemies. Of course, I experimented without weapon straps and with large models. With a set of fourteen or less weapons, all of medium or less sizes (excluding RPGs and sniper rifles and the like), the magic bag is unneccessary. If worked with properly and trained for use and transportation of heavy loads (or lighter weapons made of space-aged metal alloys), most things are possible. But what about games like Zelda? 99 arrows and 99 bombs (larger than Link's head, mind you) seems unreasonable. My theory is that things are portrayed as larger than they really are to give the player a good idea of where something is and where it is going. Often with these style of games, magic can be used as a catch-all for explaining the over-encumbance of bulky items. Unfortunately for you, the reader, I do believe I have answered my own question. I wasn't intending to do so... If I have overlooked anything, please feel free to fill in the gaps. But NEVER visit the GAP.

[GaryCXJk]

Originally posted by Neonlare
Was aimed at the "sciencey-crap" posts, there games and thats all, they need no explanation...

I'd like some to tell me why Mario has lives and Baiten Kaitos has Cards and floating Islands!

First of all, get lost if you think the explaination is bullcrap. You obviously never heard of entertainment value.

Second, well, I was going to start about Hyrule, about why their technology still is way behind in certain things, and since you already explained the only theory possible for the magic bags, I'll just stick to it. Seriously, magic bag has the word magic. No need to explain that. It's like discussing why different rupees can still split up into smaller values, and why they even have different values if they all have the same size.

Third, even in the artwork Tifa's breastsize is way above average, while, say, Elane or Aeri[(s)|(th)] have normal sizes.

----------------------------

Gaming Studies
Issue #8
Hyrule
Legend of Zelda series - History

In history, certain developements determine the future. Same goes for Hyrule. But during the ages, only the non-human beings change. Technology stayed practically the same, even though there was a timespan of over a thousand years. How is this possible?

Many Nintendo fans know the world of Hyrule. It's from the Legend of Zelda series. It is mainly known for princess Zelda and our hero Link, but also for the Medieval style. But best of all, it's where both the Master Sword and the Triforce are located.

Now, the question is, why is it still a low-tech place? For that, we will need to look into the history of Hyrule.

Hyrule was created by three Goddesses, Din, Nayru and Farore. We call this day year 0 Hyrulian Chronology. Around year 1000 H.C., the four different groups, the Gorons, the Zora, the Gerudos and the Hylians, settle in different places across Hyrule. Most sources agree that this happens 1000 H.C. years after the creation. Also, many sources agree that around 2000 H.C. the first Link and Zelda are born. It is then that we see the first Hyrule (Ocarina of Time), a Medieval country. Even Termina (Majora's Mask) has the same style, though we also have a planetarium.

A few centuries later the great flood will exist. It isn't certain when this flood came, but we do know that Twilight Princess was before the big flood, and this was still low-tech.

Next comes Wind Waker. Still low-tech. This is due to the fact that Hyrule had to be built up from scratch. It might even seem lower-tech. However, we do know that from this time all the way to the last Link in the Hyrule timeline (Aventure of Link), which was around 3000-4000 H.C., Hyrule stayed a low-tech place.

The reason can be found back in two reasons. The first reason is the fact that Hyrule is always under attack by evil, in this case, Ganon. Surely they could have tried to create strong weaponary, but would that make a diference? Also, the Hylians trust too much in the hero, that they don't even try to ban Ganon by themselves.

The other reason is the fact that they rely on the Goddesses. They know they exist, the Triforce is proof of that. Plus, with magic, what use is technology?

It is a fact that people, even in our times, rely too much on the Gods, or in our case, God. This had stagnated technology in the Middle Ages and up to the Renaisance. People thought that technology was a sin against God, that science was as if you were to insult Him (it has never even been proven God is male). We could go on with our technology because of the Renaisance, because we were free to think about life. And because we were no longer dependant on God.

This, however, is different with Hyrule. The Hylians actually believe in the Goddesses, they have the Triforce. But this might also change. Many in the real world don't believe in God, because of the suffering, or because we have never seen God in person. The Hylians might eventually think the same way. Maybe Hyrule will have some advanced technology after all.

[Drighton]

Originally posted by GaryCXJk
They know they exist, the Triforce is proof of that.

This is key. They know it exists, and I assume more than a few people have seen it. People don't really have that in the real world - some tangible evidence of God's existance.

BUT, if they did have it, would it be enough? Eventually you'll have someone say, "That isn't from God, you made that. How do we know for sure? blah blah blah."

If you think about it, He tried to give us that tangible evidence. Unfortunately, the Jews didn't accept him and killed him. I guess you can't blame God for withholding the tangible evidence. :p

because we have never seen God in person.

Even were it possible to see God and live, people would make excuses as to what they saw, rather than accept what was in front of them.

"I was hallucinating."
"Swamp gas reflecting off of one of Venus's moons."
"Cheap tricks, smoke, mirrors, and lighting."
"An illusion caused by excess hydrocarbonated fellimentholate in everyone's diet."

It is a fact that people, even in our times, rely too much on the Gods, or in our case, God. This had stagnated technology in the Middle Ages and up to the Renaisance. People thought that technology was a sin against God, that science was as if you were to insult Him (it has never even been proven God is male). We could go on with our technology because of the Renaisance, because we were free to think about life. And because we were no longer dependant on God.

Well what you say is correct to a point. It is the people that hold society back, not religion. The religious leaders of the past can be held responsible primarily, since it was they who lead the charge against "witchcraft". They were, unfortunately, overzealous and failed to properly lead their followers, throwing in their own perceptions and interpretations of what God really meant to say. God never prohibitted science.

Its a known fact that jet airplanes were available to Nazi Germany, and had they used them they probably could have won the war. Had they used them, and mass produced them we also would have had jets sooner than we did, and quite possibly more advanced. This is a perfect example of how one man, Hitler - who decided against using jets in WWII, was responsible for holding back technology. His reasoning for doing so was based on war, not religion.

The technology for cleaner fuel (water/hydrogen) for cars was available in the 60s, but not implemented because of the impact it would have had on the economy. The only thing that has changed since then is the increase in pollution. Even now there is a possibility to run cars off of your own trash, but it is not being put to use.

Besides that, it takes time for technology to develop. Scientists knew that they could crush an atom with a resulting release of energy decades before WWII, but they just didn't have the means to do so.

Mankind has been tripping over their own feet ever since they became independant from God, and they then turn and blame Him for their problems, which have resulted from their own actions.

But, to pull this away from a God discussion, technological advances are made slowly. Everyone pretty much views an advance in technology with only the major events in mind, like the first transatlantic ship. But they forget about the smaller discoveries that were required to make those larger discoveries possible. Sometimes these larger discoveries are multiple smaller discoveries that were made in order to create said larger discovery. Example: Scientists had to create a new element in a lab (it acutally existed in quantities too small to make a difference, but they didn't know that) in order to create the atomic bomb (was it plutonium or uranium?).

[Kijuki_Magazaki]

Originally posted by GaryCXJk

Third, even in the artwork Tifa's breastsize is way above average, while, say, Elane or Aeri[(s)|(th)] have normal sizes..

LMAO, so damn true XD Well I guess they must have some difference  somewhere =P

And about LoZ, that's pretty good explanation.
Though there always seem to be some rise in technology at times, like the clocktower in MM and the laboratories. Then again, it was very minimal. Hyrule ppl are just too lazy. And well the medievalness is also what gives the game the touch it has XD

[WarxePB]

Well, if you think about it, humans have been around for at least 6000 years (or more, depending on the theory of creation you believe), and it's only been after the Industrial Revolution (about 250 years ago) that we've developed cars and computers and such.
I think, before the flood, the people of Hyrule, Termina and the other countries of the Zelda world were at a point of starting their own Industrial Revolution and developing engines and robots. Maybe, in Twilight Princess, there'll be some more advanced stuff. But then the flood happened, and all their technologies were destroyed, so they had to start over. Maybe, if the Revolution Zelda is after AoL, Hyrule could be at the same point as before the flood technology-wise.

[Moosetroop11]

I must say I thoroughly enjoyed all this talk about Tifa's breasts.

[Drighton]

Originally posted by Moosetroop11
I must say I thoroughly enjoyed all this talk about Tifa's breasts.

Indubitably good lad. Tea and crumpets. Fish and chips... cherrios.

For more talk about breasteses, tune in to Oprah or The View.

[GaryCXJk]

Originally posted by Drighton
Well what you say is correct to a point. It is the people that hold society back, not religion. The religious leaders of the past can be held responsible primarily, since it was they who lead the charge against "witchcraft". They were, unfortunately, overzealous and failed to properly lead their followers, throwing in their own perceptions and interpretations of what God really meant to say. God never prohibitted science.

That may be true, but if I were to say that, I would have this religious crap on the internet from angry mothers who have their head stuck up into their bums. So I did it to not offend anyone, since I also might make a seperate sub-site for the articles.