Incline Tim Cain says there are no bad games only different preferences and budgets... Agree? Disagree?

[cpmartins]

The existence of Dustborn has made this thread redundant, as it's a genuinely bad, objectively terrible game with no redeeming traits.

Tim Cain says as long as one person likes something it can't be objectively bad, and the developers surely like their own game.

Then "bad" as a concept does not exist. You can find "people" that like to eat human feces. You can find someone out there, even counting those with severe mental retardation or even worse, aboriginals, who like anything. That is obviously absurd.

 

[Beastro]

The existence of Dustborn has made this thread redundant, as it's a genuinely bad, objectively terrible game with no redeeming traits.

Tim Cain says as long as one person likes something it can't be objectively bad, and the developers surely like their own game.

Then "bad" as a concept does not exist. You can find "people" that like to eat human feces. You can find someone out there, even counting those with severe mental retardation or even worse, aboriginals, who like anything. That is obviously absurd.

Let us first consider this point in the sense of taste, and the rather, as the faculty in question has taken its name from that sense. All men are agreed to call vinegar sour, honey sweet, and aloes bitter; and as they are all agreed in finding these qualities in those objects, they do not in the least differ concerning their effects with regard to pleasure and pain. They all concur in calling sweetness pleasant, and sourness and bitterness unpleasant. Here there is no diversity in their sentiments; and that there is not, appears fully from the consent of all men in the metaphors which are taken from the sense of taste. A sour temper, bitter expressions, bitter curses, a bitter fate, are terms well and strongly understood by all. And we are altogether as well understood when we say, a sweet disposition, a sweet person, a sweet condition, and the like. It is confessed, that custom and some other causes have made many deviations from the natural pleasures or pains which belong to these several tastes: but then the power of distinguishing between the natural and the acquired relish remains to the very last. A man frequently comes to prefer the taste of tobacco to that of sugar, and the flavour of vinegar to that of milk; but this makes no confusion in tastes, whilst he is sensible that the tobacco and vinegar are not sweet, and whilst he knows that habit alone has reconciled his palate to these alien pleasures. Even with such a person we may speak, and with sufficient precision, concerning tastes. But should any man be found who declares, that to him tobacco has a taste like sugar, and that he cannot distinguish between milk and vinegar; or that tobacco and vinegar are sweet, milk bitter, and sugar sour; we immediately conclude that the organs of this man are out of order, and that his palate is utterly vitiated. We are as far from conferring with such a person upon tastes, as from reasoning concerning the relations of quantity with one who should deny that all the parts together were equal to the whole. We do not call a man of this kind wrong in his notions, but absolutely mad. Exceptions of this sort, in either way, do not at all impeach our general rule, nor make us conclude that men have various principles concerning the relations of quantity or the taste of things. So that when it is said, taste cannot be disputed, it can only mean, that no one can strictly answer what pleasure or pain some particular man may find from the taste of some particular thing. This indeed cannot be disputed; but we may dispute, and with sufficient clearness too, concerning the things which are naturally pleasing or disagreeable to the sense. But when we talk of any peculiar or acquired relish, then we must know the habits, the prejudices, or the distempers of this particular man, and we must draw our conclusion from those.

 

[Hell Swarm]

The existence of Dustborn has made this thread redundant, as it's a genuinely bad, objectively terrible game with no redeeming traits.

Tim Cain says as long as one person likes something it can't be objectively bad, and the developers surely like their own game.

Then "bad" as a concept does not exist. You can find "people" that like to eat human feces. You can find someone out there, even counting those with severe mental retardation or even worse, aboriginals, who like anything. That is obviously absurd.

Let us first consider this point in the sense of taste, and the rather, as the faculty in question has taken its name from that sense. All men are agreed to call vinegar sour, honey sweet, and aloes bitter; and as they are all agreed in finding these qualities in those objects, they do not in the least differ concerning their effects with regard to pleasure and pain. They all concur in calling sweetness pleasant, and sourness and bitterness unpleasant. Here there is no diversity in their sentiments; and that there is not, appears fully from the consent of all men in the metaphors which are taken from the sense of taste. A sour temper, bitter expressions, bitter curses, a bitter fate, are terms well and strongly understood by all. And we are altogether as well understood when we say, a sweet disposition, a sweet person, a sweet condition, and the like. It is confessed, that custom and some other causes have made many deviations from the natural pleasures or pains which belong to these several tastes: but then the power of distinguishing between the natural and the acquired relish remains to the very last. A man frequently comes to prefer the taste of tobacco to that of sugar, and the flavour of vinegar to that of milk; but this makes no confusion in tastes, whilst he is sensible that the tobacco and vinegar are not sweet, and whilst he knows that habit alone has reconciled his palate to these alien pleasures. Even with such a person we may speak, and with sufficient precision, concerning tastes. But should any man be found who declares, that to him tobacco has a taste like sugar, and that he cannot distinguish between milk and vinegar; or that tobacco and vinegar are sweet, milk bitter, and sugar sour; we immediately conclude that the organs of this man are out of order, and that his palate is utterly vitiated. We are as far from conferring with such a person upon tastes, as from reasoning concerning the relations of quantity with one who should deny that all the parts together were equal to the whole. We do not call a man of this kind wrong in his notions, but absolutely mad. Exceptions of this sort, in either way, do not at all impeach our general rule, nor make us conclude that men have various principles concerning the relations of quantity or the taste of things. So that when it is said, taste cannot be disputed, it can only mean, that no one can strictly answer what pleasure or pain some particular man may find from the taste of some particular thing. This indeed cannot be disputed; but we may dispute, and with sufficient clearness too, concerning the things which are naturally pleasing or disagreeable to the sense. But when we talk of any peculiar or acquired relish, then we must know the habits, the prejudices, or the distempers of this particular man, and we must draw our conclusion from those.

This quote is retarded. It says people are wrong to enjoy sour things despite many sour foods being quite enjoyable to eat. It's trying to argue that there is a subjective truth in flavour profiles and only of the narrowest of kinds. It's the exact kind of quote a midwit takes as gospel because they lack the intelligence to understand why the quote sounds good to them but in reality is incredibly stupid. It's 2000's atheist youtuber.

 

[Beastro]

The existence of Dustborn has made this thread redundant, as it's a genuinely bad, objectively terrible game with no redeeming traits.

Tim Cain says as long as one person likes something it can't be objectively bad, and the developers surely like their own game.

Then "bad" as a concept does not exist. You can find "people" that like to eat human feces. You can find someone out there, even counting those with severe mental retardation or even worse, aboriginals, who like anything. That is obviously absurd.

Let us first consider this point in the sense of taste, and the rather, as the faculty in question has taken its name from that sense. All men are agreed to call vinegar sour, honey sweet, and aloes bitter; and as they are all agreed in finding these qualities in those objects, they do not in the least differ concerning their effects with regard to pleasure and pain. They all concur in calling sweetness pleasant, and sourness and bitterness unpleasant. Here there is no diversity in their sentiments; and that there is not, appears fully from the consent of all men in the metaphors which are taken from the sense of taste. A sour temper, bitter expressions, bitter curses, a bitter fate, are terms well and strongly understood by all. And we are altogether as well understood when we say, a sweet disposition, a sweet person, a sweet condition, and the like. It is confessed, that custom and some other causes have made many deviations from the natural pleasures or pains which belong to these several tastes: but then the power of distinguishing between the natural and the acquired relish remains to the very last. A man frequently comes to prefer the taste of tobacco to that of sugar, and the flavour of vinegar to that of milk; but this makes no confusion in tastes, whilst he is sensible that the tobacco and vinegar are not sweet, and whilst he knows that habit alone has reconciled his palate to these alien pleasures. Even with such a person we may speak, and with sufficient precision, concerning tastes. But should any man be found who declares, that to him tobacco has a taste like sugar, and that he cannot distinguish between milk and vinegar; or that tobacco and vinegar are sweet, milk bitter, and sugar sour; we immediately conclude that the organs of this man are out of order, and that his palate is utterly vitiated. We are as far from conferring with such a person upon tastes, as from reasoning concerning the relations of quantity with one who should deny that all the parts together were equal to the whole. We do not call a man of this kind wrong in his notions, but absolutely mad. Exceptions of this sort, in either way, do not at all impeach our general rule, nor make us conclude that men have various principles concerning the relations of quantity or the taste of things. So that when it is said, taste cannot be disputed, it can only mean, that no one can strictly answer what pleasure or pain some particular man may find from the taste of some particular thing. This indeed cannot be disputed; but we may dispute, and with sufficient clearness too, concerning the things which are naturally pleasing or disagreeable to the sense. But when we talk of any peculiar or acquired relish, then we must know the habits, the prejudices, or the distempers of this particular man, and we must draw our conclusion from those.

This quote is retarded. It says people are wrong to enjoy sour things despite many sour foods being quite enjoyable to eat. It's trying to argue that there is a subjective truth in flavour profiles and only of the narrowest of kinds. It's the exact kind of quote a midwit takes as gospel because they lack the intelligence to understand why the quote sounds good to them but in reality is incredibly stupid. It's 2000's atheist youtuber.

I teied tracking the part down about acquired taste but couldn't locate it.

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

That some some to like sour tastes doesn't reflect upon that universal for the same reason that "good bad movies" and guilty pleasures are those very things because they very much are terrible, there is just some quality that resonates with some people despite being bad.

 

[luj1]

Only a soy infused homosexual could say something like that

 

[Hell Swarm]

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

Prove it

 

[Dark Souls II]

"There ain't no bad meals, maybe you just don't prefer to eat the diarrhea tofu salad" - Tim Cain, don't know who that is, but let me guess, did he work on the mediocre game franchise "Fallout"? That's what I thought.

 

[Beastro]

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

Prove it

Next you're going to ask me to prove that all babies love to suckle milk from a breast that said breast milk is a good thing?

 

[Hell Swarm]

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

Prove it

Next you're going to ask me to prove that all babies love to suckle milk from a breast that said breast milk is a good thing?

There are plenty of babies who don't respond well to breast feeding. So no, all babies don't love to suckle milk. It's something some mothers have to really work with and grind into their children.

 

[Beastro]

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

Prove it

Next you're going to ask me to prove that all babies love to suckle milk from a breast that said breast milk is a good thing?

There are plenty of babies who don't respond well to breast feeding. So no, all babies don't love to suckle milk. It's something some mothers have to really work with and grind into their children.

That is from not knowing how to properly suckle and health related issues that interfere with their ability to, not because they do not instinctually seek out breastmilk.

It's for the same reason that people don't like to eat shit despite the outliers that wind up becoming coprophiles.

 

[ropetight]

While babies have taste buds, they don't have formed tastes.
If you give babies different food, you can pretty much "train" them at right age to eat any kind of food.
https://thenourishedchild.com/flavor-training-for-babies/

Why are we discussing baby food preferences on Tim Cain thread?

 

[Beastro]

Why are we discussing baby food preferences on Tim Cain thread?

Because it's a subset of the ideas around good and bad that at the heart of the discussion here. Cain is being relativistic and that's BS when there are things that are good and bad in the world even if nuances muddy the water.

 

[cpmartins]

That people like sour tastes doesn't mean anything because people start out not liking them. All babies love sweet tastes and all babies hate sour ones.

Prove it

Next you're going to ask me to prove that all babies love to suckle milk from a breast that said breast milk is a good thing?

There are plenty of babies who don't respond well to breast feeding. So no, all babies don't love to suckle milk. It's something some mothers have to really work with and grind into their children.

That is from not knowing how to properly suckle and health related issues that interfere with their ability to, not because they do not instinctually seek out breastmilk.

It's for the same reason that people don't like to eat shit despite the outliers that wind up becoming coprophiles.

But remeber: As long as one person out of the 8+ billion people DO like to eat shit, it's not bad.

 

[blessed king of longing]

its a silly discussion in the first place because people like Tim have no objective standard from which they derive good or bad

 

[sser]

A bad game is just a good remaster waiting to happen

 

[Taxnomore]

There are no good games.

 

[0sacred]

If there were no bad games that'd mean any retard can make a good game. Checkmate, Tim.

 

[Star Citizen]

Tim cain in the membrane

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Since all classic games that I loved/still love are now considered by the majority as bad games with bad design, I agree with Tim.