I get where you’re coming from, but imo I feel like the quote applies to video games and their publishers a good bit. At least nowadays.
Everyone wants to be The Next Big Thing, everyone wants their game to be the only one people are playing.
Comment on Sony is losing exclusives as their games get ported to PC with AI
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks agoLittle offtopic incoming:
“when everyone’s special; no one will be.”
I never agreed with this statement. If everyone is special, then everyone is. In example in game Overwatch everyone has special abilities and are nothing alike anyone else. Everyone is a specialist in their own field. Everyone is special.
Zahille7@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Yeah, this is really annoying and tiring. Especially multiplayer live service games are designed in a way that you have no time to play anything else.
iamthetot@piefed.ca 3 weeks ago
It’s a quote from a villain. You’re not supposed agree with it or him.
Zahille7@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I’m not using the quote for the source, I’m using the quote for what it says.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
The source of the quote actually doesn’t matter to me. I judge the quote itself.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
But in the source of the quote, there’s a 1h55m parable to go along with it and why you shouldn’t agree with it.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
As said, I don’t care where the quote comes from and what reasons they present in 2 hour movie. I apply the logic of the quote to the discussion we have here, and decided to not agree. It is my personal opinion independent from the film. BTW I watched the film too.
iamthetot@piefed.ca 3 weeks ago
You said you “never agreed” with it, past tense. I assumed you meant in all contexts, including its original context.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
I never agreed with it in all context I read it. I can’t disagree with a context I never read. I don’t know why you make it this complicated. I simply do not agree with it. Nothing to discuss about it.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
This isn’t necessarily true. A good villain is often written to make a good point that is to some degree or another true. Its just that they go try to achieve their noble goal in the worst way possible.
Ganondorf in The Legend of Zelda Wind Waker is a pretty good example. Even though I didn’t like a lot about that game, the writing of his character was great. He wanted to see the peaceful wind Hyrule had, for in his own land “the wind always brought death.” Which itself is a pretty noble cause. The problem is his way of achieving it: taking it away from Hyrule.
Another one that could be argued is Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker: his desire is better social support for people that are socially marginalized (well, one of them at least), a point I genuinely agree with, socially awkward people should have access to better social support. However, he tries to achieve it in literally the worst possible way, and I don’t agree with the way the character goes about it.
It makes the villain more believable. No person does something evil just for the sake of being evil. Well, maybe some do, but most don’t. They usually believe what they are doing is a noble cause, and it usually is (like, providing better for my family says the thief, or ridding the world of bad people says the assassin, etc). They just use awful ways to do it, instead of better, less deadly and injurious ways.
Obviously there are exceptions, but that’s doesn’t mean all villains are evil just for the love of the game.