Tip.It Times - 25th September 2011

[Jruskey2013]

Is it supposed to be so blatant and glaring?

[Kimberly]

Wow.. Definite bias in the first one.

These sort of responses are baseless and fatuous.

They're editorials. There's supposed to be bias.

 

Yes, editorials are opinion based. Most people will naturally get upset with ill-formed opinions though, especially when asked (or practically baited into, since controversy is the coin of choice) for their responses to the articles.

 

I can sympathize when most of the criticism received must be "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE," but not all constructive criticism is like that.

[gompo]

If it was an achievement Id agree with you, but it isnt. Achievements are accomplished when the playing field is level and when there is something to achieve. This is RS. The playing field isnt level because its simply a time-served game. The more you play the higher youll raise your scores in theory. It bases nothing on skill. The achievement is fun, nothing more. In some cases it may not even be an achievement with the likes of botting and account sharing being suggested. Why should I applaud this achievement? You may well think its all great and hunky dory but dont expect me to.

 

Although quite funny I dont think youve got the gist of my professional comments. Many RS players are either considered or consider themselves professional. My point was pro players do not play RS. The Koreans are some of the most hard-core and the best gamers in the world. Their pros get paid, have sponsorship and all the trimmings. They play games which require much more brainpower, tactical decisions and thinking on their feet. They have a level playing field and they cant cheat at their profession. Theyre celebrities in their own right, theyre some of the best at what they do. I respect that and if people are prepared to pay them then fine by me. Theyre earning their own money.

 

RS is a fun game and I love playing it in my spare time. In order to be jealous I need something to be jealous of. Scores, when they may not be legally achieved or the player is supplemented in some way by the taxpayer to do it? Celebrity.....this is RS so lets calm down! Playing ridiculous amounts of hours in the hope of keeping up with scores? The achievement...what achievement? Im a lot better than that. Im jealous of people who own Nissan GTRs, who have 6 packs and Playboy photographers.

 

 

achievements are also made on a personal level. do i, being disabled, measure my ability against young strong physically fit runners in a 100 yard dash? or is my achievement awesome just to be able to get up and make it to the restroom in time?

 

my abilities are not what others may be, but for me, my achievements are no less important.

 

as far as a level playing field, i doubt seriously that the "professional korean league", plays on the piece of poop computer that i do (not saying i could compete with people who get paid to play video games even if i did have a computer many times better) so..... how can i compete, even if i had the skills?

 

i remember playing chess against one of those guys that i watched him beat dozens of players, most at 3-4 at a time in literally seconds. i beat him. i beat him that one time, probably could not do it again in a million years, but i accomplished it, i am proud i did it, why shouldnt i?

 

the goals i set for myself in anything is no less important to me than things you set for yourself.

 

for example, i wouldnt spray liquid bodily waste on a Nissan GTR if it were on fire. why, you ask? well because i dont think they are all that. i think beer tastes like the previously mentioned bodily waste and playboy is kinda tame for me (oh wait, do you mean body sculpting 6 packs? if you do, i am sorry, personally i would rather have a huge dispenser for the above mentioned bodily waste). does that make your idea of what is worth being jealous of less important? i do not believe it does.

 

as i am not young and i do not know how the younguns think anymore, so their idea of "professional" may mean something other than it does for me. to me it dont mean anything more than you receive payment for a job. if you receive payment for your job, that, almost, by definition means you are a professional. i do not know many players in RS but the ones i do know have never referred to themselves or others as "professionals" and if anyone is stupid enough to pay anyone to play RS they are an idiot, but then again i feel that way about any video game. so being a "professional korean video game player" is funny as heck to me. i would rather pay to watch paint dry than watch a video game being played.....

 

but that is just me. it dont make it less important to the people who do, but as i have always said.... it is only worth what i am willing to pay for it, if i want it, cost isnt an issue, but if i do not, it aint worth a dime to me.

 

always keep this in mind, the lowest paid "professional" drivers i know of drive school buses, would you trust those drivers with the life of your child just because they are professional? believe it or not, lots of payola involved as well so not "legally" achieved. that is just for bus driving?

 

i do not cheat at RS. that, to me is like cheating at solitaire, why bother? i am not ashamed of the time i have put into RS (well, maybe i am, that is a lota time!!) but as i do not "achieve" much at all in RL (short of peeing, pooping, eating and sleeping) i do use RS to give me a little bit of feeling like i have done something.

 

*snip*

"or the player is supplemented in some way by the taxpayer to do it?"

*snip*

 

i kinda take exception to that statement. i did earn the disability i receive. in the US this is a trust and what i get is not supplemented by the taxpayers (well.... according to the politicians anyway) there isnt a day goes by i wouldnt rather earn a real living rather than the pittance i get off the dole. to suppose otherwise is just making yourself out to be the first half of "assume".

 

we can hopefully agree to disagree, i do believe time is important, you may not. you think the koreans are professional, i think they should get a real job. we each have our ideas of what is worth reverence and who we may accidentally "worship" but we should consider that just because we think one thing is an accomplishment doesnt mean it is any less to someone else.

 

thanks,

gompo

[Blyaunte]

Wow.. Definite bias in the first one.

These sort of responses are baseless and fatuous.

 

Really -- I thought the bias was rather obvious. You refer to only one (1) diety -- not the many that are purported to exist.

 

THAT is a bias.

[Sona]

Considering his/her targeted audience in the first article, why would you call it biased? The majority of English speakers are likely to be more familiar with elements from a monotheistic tradition given the society that they likely grew up in.

 

You have your biases. Writer has his/her's. Doesn't make yours or theirs any less valid in an opinion piece.

[Syd]

I just didn't really get the point of the first one. Celebrity worship? References to religion. What?

 

I clicked the first link due to interest about RS religions, simply because of the fact I happen to have large (6 hours) religions exam tomorrow, and had been studying the subject for quite alot... Like a few above said the article had too narrow point of view - I have to agree with that. It made it look more like a rant about writer being annoyed why is someone getting recognition for something they do not "deserve." Meaning playing the game more (and certainly not better) than others. Using words like "sickening" and stuff to describe this doesn't really bring in the points from me. Now I'm probably getting thumbs down for reading comprehension fail, but that was just what kind of a taste the article left.

 

Though I have to admit this article had alot more potential and ambition behind it, than most of the articles in Tip.It Times. In overall it could've made an interesting essay, if the writer didn't get too much stuck in his own opinion. I guess this was to provocate people in to thinking, so on that point it did its part.

 

A bit more objective point of view wouldn't really have hurt. Otherwise it was readable (rather long) article.

 

Didn't read the other one - wasn't really interested in the subject. :unsure:

 

PS. Very nice response on this thread by gompo. =D>

[Blyaunte]

Considering his/her targeted audience in the first article, why would you call it biased? The majority of English speakers are likely to be more familiar with elements from a monotheistic tradition given the society that they likely grew up in.

 

You have your biases. Writer has his/her's. Doesn't make yours or theirs any less valid in an opinion piece.

 

Considering that his/her target audience can be, and is, multi-cultural in nature, isn't it rather presumptuous to assume that they all believe in the same god?

 

:rolleyes:

[Crocefisso]

Considering his/her targeted audience in the first article, why would you call it biased? The majority of English speakers are likely to be more familiar with elements from a monotheistic tradition given the society that they likely grew up in.

 

You have your biases. Writer has his/her's. Doesn't make yours or theirs any less valid in an opinion piece.

 

Considering that his/her target audience can be, and is, multi-cultural in nature, isn't it rather presumptuous to assume that they all believe in the same god?

 

:rolleyes:

Let me get this straight: I am allegedly biased because I did not mention enough Gods to satisfy a multicultural userbase? If this is so, you have massively misunderstood not only the point, but the entirety of the article too.

[Blyaunte]

Considering his/her targeted audience in the first article, why would you call it biased? The majority of English speakers are likely to be more familiar with elements from a monotheistic tradition given the society that they likely grew up in.

 

You have your biases. Writer has his/her's. Doesn't make yours or theirs any less valid in an opinion piece.

 

Considering that his/her target audience can be, and is, multi-cultural in nature, isn't it rather presumptuous to assume that they all believe in the same god?

 

:rolleyes:

Let me get this straight: I am allegedly biased because I did not mention enough Gods to satisfy a multicultural userbase? If this is so, you have massively misunderstood not only the point, but the entirety of the article too.

 

Oh -- I've understood the article well and good enough -- I am merely stating that your bias towards a Christian mono-theistic standard demonstrates your inability to understand that there are people who may worship other gods (or no gods whatsoever), and don't share your sense of morality and the net effect of the iconic/hero worship cycle ...

 

Frankly, I find your "holier than thou" stance to be somewhat arrogant, but that's to be expected when someone believes in only one god, and doesn't accept that other gods may or may not exist within the same universal framework.

[Steph]

Wow.. Definite bias in the first one.

These sort of responses are baseless and fatuous.

 

It's not bias, it's an opinion.

 

As I said in one of my original comments, you never acknowledge the perspective you are so against. You don't state what case the "Fangirls" of Runescape players would put up.

I have no problem with any of your articles, as they are well thought out and usually make a point. They're just selfcentered and ignorant of any alternatives. I'd like to see you bring up and give your opinion on the otherside's case, just once.

[The_Fray]

The first article just didn't captivate me enough to keep reading, hence I did not even make it through even half of it. I see that it has generated a fair bit of interest so I am sort of wishing I had finished it, but if I did start it again I still have doubts about finishing it. :lol:

 

Second article was decent, but it failed to tell me something that I did not already know. But I guess I should not hold it against the author as others may not have come to such conclusions by themselves and the article will help them in the future.

 

A disappointing Times week for ME.

[Nifflin]

Blyaunte, it's better not to take his articles seriously. Ever. All he does it represent a polarized opinion with absolutely no regard for any other arguments. Need I remind anyone about the other gems he has written? An article asking for the old dangerous randoms back to help combat bots. An article claiming that people who love dungoneering are "shallow customers." He has multiple precedents of baseless, senseless, mindless opinions presented as facts. It's as though the Tip.It Times is trying to flamebait us by publishing his articles. In my opinion it's better not to take the bait.

[Alg]

It's as though the Tip.It Times is trying to flamebait us by publishing his articles. In my opinion it's better not to take the bait.

Deep down, we're publicity [bleep]. Don't tell :-$

[Crossed_Body]

Wow.. Definite bias in the first one.

These sort of responses are baseless and fatuous.

Your article is baseless and fatuous. (see what I did?)

 

But yeah, Nifflin conveyed my feelings well.

[Quyneax]

It is always saddening to see girls talking of how they want to be like the promiscuous Katie Price, or boys of their admiration for the criminal 50 Cent.

No it's not. And you give no arguments as to why this should be a reasonable opinion.

 

"Whereas these heroes encouraged virtues such as bravery, modern idols – mere humans, after all – encourage largely superficial qualities, such as 'beauty,' 'fashion,' and so on"

What do you think various sports champions embody, or environmentalist celebrities? And what do you think the Greek heroes encourage, virtues like suicide out of shame? Mutilating the body of your enemy after a great victory?

 

"Though this is an accomplishment, in the greater scheme of things I cannot see the magnificence of it that seems to have others so excited."

I can. So? You not seeing someting doesn't mean it's not there.

 

"Players from across RS society – be they skillers, clansmen, role-players or anything else – all feed into this sickening culture of fawning over these people."

It's not sickening. And yes, various 'kinds' of players adore various celebrity players. So?

 

"All of these factors detract from the very achievement we're praising them for (not to mention exposing the 'normal' guy claims as bogus), and rest assured many of these famous players would prefer to keep such revelations on the quiet."

No they don't. Also I do not believe any of the very high xp players (e.g. 1b+) really call themselves normal players, only normal humans aka someone with a big hobby (or addiction as you prefer). Also I don't believe any of the top players want to keep quiet that they recieve donations; Suomi for one is very open about it.

 

"Reaching the top ranks, after all, is usually an exercise in egoism more than anything else. If there were no public forum for flaunting levels and XP – ie, if people were unaware of who the best players are – then there would be little to no incentive to max out."

Egoism as in, for your own enjoyment? I should hope so. And I disagree to the second point. I enjoy levelling faster than other people and I enjoy having a higher rank in some skills, but I certainly want to max out regardless because I want to complete the game.

 

"I'd argue that such determination is better channeled into a more productive medium."

You do not provide any arguments however.

 

"The idea of gaming for leisure has been overblown into a competition"

Competitions for leisure. Pretty common in sports.

 

"After all, it's not inconceivable that some might do so purely out of enjoyment. But it's implausible that this would be the case for more than a select few. For the most part, the desire to beat others in a list that measures someone's ability to click on things is driven by a desire to be known for something, to feel victorious, perhaps even superior."

Because of the select few/most part I read this as: people do not enjoy feeling victorious, superior or known? Which is bogus.

 

"Part of the problem is the RS mentality in which a vast majority of players feel superior to those with lower levels than them and inferior to those above."

There is no problem, according to me. And I don't think that players with lower levels feel morally inferior in any way, though they may feel they are lower-levelled and have achieved less within this game. I would agree that many players feel that, within the game, in-game achievements are very important, but I sincerely doubt that a 'vast majority' feels inferior outside the game for being lower-levelled.

 

"But the skilling is only half the cause of renown. As previously mentioned, these people have to drum up awareness of themselves and their superiority to feel as if their effort has been vindicated. Many adopt the façade of a laid-back average gamer. I cannot accept this as anywhere close to reality, as the interview we published shows."

Erm - I don't think the interview with Suomi shows that he is an average gamer, nor does he "adopt the façade". People sooner adopt a façade of excellence to stand apart from the common gamer to promote awareness.

Also what you can or cannot accept really isn't too relevant to your argument unless you give a reason that your judgement is to be trusted.

 

"There is little that can be done to remedy this unfortunate situation."

What unfortunate situation? I do not think it is unfortunate that people adore other people.

 

"There is also a degree of achievement to maxing out on skills and so on, but one must also realise that it neither involves actual talent, nor can it be considered an achievement outside of the context of RS."

I disagree. It is not easy to max out, and whether it is stubbornness or determination or addiction, it requires a talent (natural or learned) for finding a way to enjoy the game even when it's at its worst. That ability to enjoy even what you would not neccesarily choose to do if all activities were equally worth doing, for the sake of achieving something beyond that, is very useful. In addition, I considering maxing out to be an achievement. Naturally people who have not heard of the game won't recognize it. But that goes for any sort of achievement - if I wrote a brilliant novel and I told someone about it who hadn't heard of literature at all, that would remain a very abstract achievement. Basically, achievements can only be appreciated by those who have context, naturally, and perhaps the number of people who have context on RS are more limited than those of the people who know of literature, but that doesn't make maxing out less of an achievement.

 

I do not mind an opinion being posted - it promotes discussion, and that's what these forums are for. I would however prefer to see an opinion supported by reasoning rather than statements alone.

[enfield]

The first article made the argument that our worship of rs players is misplaced because "all skills boil down to clicking", which is talentless, without skill, etc.

 

The thing is, I could say the same thing about life - say it all boils down to movements - which is true, but pretty useless to say. Sure, movements and vocalizations, or in rs, clicks, are mechanically simple to execute, but not all clicks are the same. There is a great deal of room for talent, skill, and thoughtfulness to be involved in deciding which ones to do when, and how. Deranged and spastic clicking won't get you far in Rs.

 

I don't think it was necessary to slight the players who players worship to make the point that the worship is foolish. Worship of *anyone*, regardless of talent or skill seems unhealthy to me.

 

And I think the author's conceptions of these worshipped players are not very accurate. Many don't have the egos the author seems to think they do (the reason being that the highly ranked players turn out to be people not predisposed to developing them - they are often driven due to other reasons). And the author read Suomi's interview! How could he dare to even speculate Suomi has an ego. He eats steamed vegetables. He doesn't have an ego! He eats steamed vegetables.

[Guest jrhairychest]

achievements are also made on a personal level. do i, being disabled, measure my ability against young strong physically fit runners in a 100 yard dash? or is my achievement awesome just to be able to get up and make it to the restroom in time?

 

my abilities are not what others may be, but for me, my achievements are no less important.

 

as far as a level playing field, i doubt seriously that the "professional korean league", plays on the piece of poop computer that i do (not saying i could compete with people who get paid to play video games even if i did have a computer many times better) so..... how can i compete, even if i had the skills?

 

i remember playing chess against one of those guys that i watched him beat dozens of players, most at 3-4 at a time in literally seconds. i beat him. i beat him that one time, probably could not do it again in a million years, but i accomplished it, i am proud i did it, why shouldnt i?

 

the goals i set for myself in anything is no less important to me than things you set for yourself.

 

for example, i wouldnt spray liquid bodily waste on a Nissan GTR if it were on fire. why, you ask? well because i dont think they are all that. i think beer tastes like the previously mentioned bodily waste and playboy is kinda tame for me (oh wait, do you mean body sculpting 6 packs? if you do, i am sorry, personally i would rather have a huge dispenser for the above mentioned bodily waste). does that make your idea of what is worth being jealous of less important? i do not believe it does.

 

as i am not young and i do not know how the younguns think anymore, so their idea of "professional" may mean something other than it does for me. to me it dont mean anything more than you receive payment for a job. if you receive payment for your job, that, almost, by definition means you are a professional. i do not know many players in RS but the ones i do know have never referred to themselves or others as "professionals" and if anyone is stupid enough to pay anyone to play RS they are an idiot, but then again i feel that way about any video game. so being a "professional korean video game player" is funny as heck to me. i would rather pay to watch paint dry than watch a video game being played.....

 

but that is just me. it dont make it less important to the people who do, but as i have always said.... it is only worth what i am willing to pay for it, if i want it, cost isnt an issue, but if i do not, it aint worth a dime to me.

 

always keep this in mind, the lowest paid "professional" drivers i know of drive school buses, would you trust those drivers with the life of your child just because they are professional? believe it or not, lots of payola involved as well so not "legally" achieved. that is just for bus driving?

 

i do not cheat at RS. that, to me is like cheating at solitaire, why bother? i am not ashamed of the time i have put into RS (well, maybe i am, that is a lota time!!) but as i do not "achieve" much at all in RL (short of peeing, pooping, eating and sleeping) i do use RS to give me a little bit of feeling like i have done something.

 

*snip*

"or the player is supplemented in some way by the taxpayer to do it?"

*snip*

 

i kinda take exception to that statement. i did earn the disability i receive. in the US this is a trust and what i get is not supplemented by the taxpayers (well.... according to the politicians anyway) there isnt a day goes by i wouldnt rather earn a real living rather than the pittance i get off the dole. to suppose otherwise is just making yourself out to be the first half of "assume".

 

we can hopefully agree to disagree, i do believe time is important, you may not. you think the koreans are professional, i think they should get a real job. we each have our ideas of what is worth reverence and who we may accidentally "worship" but we should consider that just because we think one thing is an accomplishment doesnt mean it is any less to someone else.

 

thanks,

gompo

 

That’s a lengthy post there Gompo so I’ll address the relevant points. Quite correct achievement is personal. That’s the way I view RS and that’s one of the reasons (amongst others) I don’t hold the top ‘x’ in high regard. More about this at the bottom of my post.

 

You’re entitled to take exception to anything I say. That’s debate. However that’s a two way process. I’m entitled to take exception to anyone who claims taxes that I pay to play RS all day. In the US that may be a different system but here in the UK there’s plenty of fraud that goes on. The govt has been taking steps to combat this.

 

I wasn’t going to bring this up but what the hell. My partner is a project manager for a disability organisation and before that worked with benefit claimants to get them into work. The people who work in her organisation have some quite debilitating disabilities to the quite horrific (one guy’s spine is held to his head via a titanium wishbone. His brain is literally in danger of being completely skewered by his spine. He has to treat every day as his last day (his consultant’s words!) yet he still goes to work 3 days a week and volunteers). They all work, they’re all proud of doing so and they don’t accept excuses for not working. In her previous job she’s met people who play games all day and that’s it. Most didn’t want to get jobs as they just wanted to play games (yes unbelievably they told her that!). The only reason the claimants came in is because they’d get their money stopped.

 

This may shed some more light on why I don’t take the rose-tinted spectacles view of the ‘top’ players. Public achievements are nothing if the accounts are traded, botted or the player is falsely claiming public money to gain some sort of advantage by spending so many hours at the comp.

[Crossed_Body]

This may shed some more light on why I dont take the rose-tinted spectacles view of the top players. Public achievements are nothing if the accounts are traded, botted or the player is falsely claiming public money to gain some sort of advantage by spending so many hours at the comp.

Those are some pretty serious accusations/insinuations. Care to provide any evidence to even support those suspicions?

[Guest jrhairychest]

This may shed some more light on why I dont take the rose-tinted spectacles view of the top players. Public achievements are nothing if the accounts are traded, botted or the player is falsely claiming public money to gain some sort of advantage by spending so many hours at the comp.

Those are some pretty serious accusations/insinuations. Care to provide any evidence to even support those suspicions?

 

Yes. The wife.

[gompo]

*snip*

 

This may shed some more light on why I dont take the rose-tinted spectacles view of the top players. Public achievements are nothing if the accounts are traded, botted or the player is falsely claiming public money to gain some sort of advantage by spending so many hours at the comp.

 

*snip*

 

many of your points are correct, there is fraud. but it seems you only assume people who are disabled and or play RS are responsible.

 

i believe you to be mistaken.

 

as RS is the only online game i play and, as i stated earlier, i am old, i have a question..... is RS the only online game that sells accounts? only one that has gold farmers? the only one with macros?

 

if so, i can see your point, RS is wrought with fraud and deserves your ire!

 

otherwise, i would imagine there is no accomplishment in any computer related game, after i know there are people out in the world who can do anything they want on the computer so fraud is probably everywhere and the only way anyone can claim to be who or what they say is while dealing with themselves.

 

so while you do not know me, all i can say is i am a man, i have no reason to cheat myself either in RL or on RS. you can be cynical all you wish to, and in all honesty, i do not blame you as you do not know me, and believe as you will.

 

i have earned my levels and there are probably more players out there who have done the same thing.

 

thanks,,

gompo

[Sona]

Biyaunte. Please allow me to clarify. Monotheistic tradition suggests not only the Christian God (and their numerous derivatives), but also that of Judaism and Islam, both of which are also sizable contenders. According to numerous census data released (though I admit the data on children and young adults is lacking somewhat), that does indeed seem to be majority insofar as individuals who declare themselves as religious - only 15% of the population in the United States and 18% (18-47%, depending on what poll you're looking at) of the population in Europe, for instance, declare themselves as a part of a non-religious group.

 

... Of course, he could have some sort of Christian agenda. I dunno. I'm not him. But from someone who doesn't seem to have a seething distaste for religion, I'm ... really not getting the holier than thou vibe.

 

In other words, I just piped in here out of fairness. Any writing with a religious inclination to it tend to draw attacks - warranted or unwarranted. And, let's face it. We've the right to criticize him (as a few have been :P), so doesn't he have the right to criticize society as well? Free speech inevitably means that you'll find opinions that radically differ from yours.

 

Why can't we go back to arguing about shoes and bots? ):

[Guest jrhairychest]

*snip*

 

This may shed some more light on why I dont take the rose-tinted spectacles view of the top players. Public achievements are nothing if the accounts are traded, botted or the player is falsely claiming public money to gain some sort of advantage by spending so many hours at the comp.

 

*snip*

 

many of your points are correct, there is fraud. but it seems you only assume people who are disabled and or play RS are responsible.

 

i believe you to be mistaken.

 

as RS is the only online game i play and, as i stated earlier, i am old, i have a question..... is RS the only online game that sells accounts? only one that has gold farmers? the only one with macros?

 

if so, i can see your point, RS is wrought with fraud and deserves your ire!

 

otherwise, i would imagine there is no accomplishment in any computer related game, after i know there are people out in the world who can do anything they want on the computer so fraud is probably everywhere and the only way anyone can claim to be who or what they say is while dealing with themselves.

 

so while you do not know me, all i can say is i am a man, i have no reason to cheat myself either in RL or on RS. you can be cynical all you wish to, and in all honesty, i do not blame you as you do not know me, and believe as you will.

 

i have earned my levels and there are probably more players out there who have done the same thing.

 

thanks,,

gompo

 

Sorry but youve not read my comments on the issue here properly. Youre focussing on just the disabilities and that only RS is involved. That is quite incorrect.

[Crocefisso]

Considering his/her targeted audience in the first article, why would you call it biased? The majority of English speakers are likely to be more familiar with elements from a monotheistic tradition given the society that they likely grew up in.

 

You have your biases. Writer has his/her's. Doesn't make yours or theirs any less valid in an opinion piece.

 

Considering that his/her target audience can be, and is, multi-cultural in nature, isn't it rather presumptuous to assume that they all believe in the same god?

 

:rolleyes:

Let me get this straight: I am allegedly biased because I did not mention enough Gods to satisfy a multicultural userbase? If this is so, you have massively misunderstood not only the point, but the entirety of the article too.

 

Oh -- I've understood the article well and good enough -- I am merely stating that your bias towards a Christian mono-theistic standard demonstrates your inability to understand that there are people who may worship other gods (or no gods whatsoever), and don't share your sense of morality and the net effect of the iconic/hero worship cycle ...

 

Frankly, I find your "holier than thou" stance to be somewhat arrogant, but that's to be expected when someone believes in only one god, and doesn't accept that other gods may or may not exist within the same universal framework.

 

How on earth is an article criticising player reverence for other players remotely biased towards monotheism? Any real life Gods mentioned are only periphery, and serve to illustrate the point of player attitudes towards one another. This is not bias - it's coincidence.

[Crossed_Body]

How on earth is an article criticising player reverence for other players remotely biased towards monotheism? Any real life Gods mentioned are only periphery, and serve to illustrate the point of player attitudes towards one another. This is not bias - it's coincidence.

I don't think you can equiparate players admiring some players that excel at their areas of interest, to people blindly following the commands of an entity(ies) that might or might not exist.

[Alg]

Biyaunte. Please allow me to clarify. Monotheistic tradition suggests not only the Christian God (and their numerous derivatives), but also that of Judaism and Islam, both of which are also sizable contenders. According to numerous census data released (though I admit the data on children and young adults is lacking somewhat), that does indeed seem to be majority insofar as individuals who declare themselves as religious - only 15% of the population in the United States and 18% (18-47%, depending on what poll you're looking at) of the population in Europe, for instance, declare themselves as a part of a non-religious group.

The three main monotheistic religions worship the same god and have many of the same beliefs. Since they're also more or less the primary religions of the western world (Read: Where most 'Scapers are), it's likely that most of them would at least have a basic understanding of the references that he uses, since they show up in many other aspects of popular culture.

 

If Wikipedia is to be believed, the four largest religions are either Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, or Christianity, Islam, nonreligious, and Hinduism, totalling 5-6 billion adherents (read: most of the world). The absence of Buddhism in the second list might be because of different definitions used in whatever survey they use, since Buddhism can be atheistic. Of those, the Abrahamic religions, and especially Christianity, are the primary religions of North America and Europe. I'm assuming Tip.It's users come mostly from those two continents, so it's not a stretch to say that if Croce references Christianity, most of his readers will get the reference. The same can't be said if he decided to reference Zoroastrianism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

 

Seems kind of like Blyaunte just wants an excuse to complain, facts be damned.