Jump to content

Mr Poltroon

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5949

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    66

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by Mr Poltroon

    Mr Poltroon

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, NowItsAngeTime said:

    Hmm the dialogue is definitely very 'localized' but I don't mind it but I guess I can see why people can hate it but I guess they're pure to professionally written Japanese teen dialogue.

    The protagaonist sounds like a literal joke. Like he seems he's either savvy to being in a dating sim, he's an otaku, or he's just a weirdo dumbass.

    I really, really like this sort of dialogue, so I'm all for it.

    The protagonist can be really random at times, but it's generally just him trying to entertain himself, or get along with others. He's actually a pretty nice guy, without being so in the overly bland way many protagonists are. Instead of being the straight man, he can easily take on both roles. But he's also a bit deeper than this. Somebody comments that when he isn't at school with his friends he's way less crazy and hyper. I really like this, as well.

    MaggieROBOT

    Posted

    Thank you so much. I never knew the paid version was accessory more than anything. I've been putting this story that I know I'd love with all my being on the back-burner because I was convinced the free version would be the inferior experience and that it might be worth it to stay my hand in hopes of it one day being completed.

    Thank you.

    Zakamutt

    Posted

    On 01/02/2018 at 12:41 PM, Narcosis said:

    Skip any of these or half-ass them and you'll get a monstrosity of an english TL in the kinds of SP's late translation attempts or Hikari Field's level of translation "quality".

    While I do agree that having all of those passes would guarantee some level of quality, they should not all prove essential for a somewhat acceptable translation. Hikari Filed's translation is several steps below acceptable at the moment. Several steps below a great deal of translations which most definitely did not have repeated TLC passes.

     

    Clephas

    Posted

    I believe I'm too stingy with my money to actually fall trap to these seemingly predatory practices.
    I also have trouble finding worth in a lot of online stuff. I remember buying an announcer pack on a free-to-play game ages ago because it was at 75% off or something and I still regret it to this day.

    I can be a victim to impulsive buying, and I will buy games I hardly ever play, but I am too sceptical to buy most DLC and especially not microtransactions.
    I think it was the Paradox games that had a ridiculous amount of DLC. It's even difficult to tell what I'm buying half the time. There was this bundle with a bunch of stuff in it, which seemed like a good deal, but turned out to have mostly cosmetic stuff that I'm, honestly, not interested in.

    Clephas

    Posted

    The main reason I liked Kamidori was due to its story, specifically, due to its mostly lighthearted tone, and its... ideals. The creation of a self-suficient city of hard-working, good-hearted people; establishing cooperation with other races; and the protagonist just generally working hard to please as many people as possible (you know, gettin' all the girls, ya see?).

    ...Whilst I realise that maybe what I listed could be cons in someone else's eyes, I would like to ask, out of curiosity, how the story in this title compares.

    Clephas

    Posted

    Quote

    Anyways, Chrono Box is definitely a must read for horror/ mystery fans in my opinion. It's one of those stories I wish I could forget, just so that I could experience it all for the first time again. 

    I've been training, as of late, and I think I've gotten pretty good at dishing out concussions.
    So, want any help with that?

    Clephas

    Posted

    Perhaps it is not yet time to ask about the story, but I do have a question about the tone.
    The main reason I liked Kamidori was due to its story, specifically, due to its mostly lighthearted tone, and its... ideals. The creation of a self-suficient city of hard-working, good-hearted people; establishing cooperation with other races; and the protagonist just generally working hard to please as many people as possible (you know, gettin' all the girls, ya see?).

    ...Whilst I realise that maybe what I listed could be con's in someone else's eyes, I would like to ask, out of curiosity, how the story in this title compares.

    Mr Poltroon

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Narcosis said:

    In fact, mindless praise hurts a lot more than mindless bashing. Latter can be ignored, former is a road fraught with lies, that leads to nowhere.

    Joy? :wafuu:

    Please elaborate on why mindless praise is bad, keeping in mind that "mindless" inherently means that the person is in no way attempting to think critically. This goes for mindless bashing as well, except I perceive the latter as being capable of hurting people for very little reason and gain.
    And why can't mindless praise be ignored, much like bashing?
    I'd also further ask what's the issue with roads fraught with lies, but that's going off on a bit of a tangent and I already know people generally disagree with me on this count.

    9 hours ago, Zakamutt said:

    Mindless bashing and mindless praise both seem like they have damaging effects to me. It is possible that you are more thick-skinned than average and the current attitudes are not good for people less so.

    I don't see what you mean by this. I assume you're talking to Narcosis, and in that case, I'll simply ask you to elaborate on why mindless praise is damaging, or in what way.

    Mr Poltroon

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, Zakamutt said:

    But what if you don't want to have no conversation, but just want to look cool to your likeminded buddies, whoever they may be? Then giving reasons for your opinion would be an inefficient strategy because people might like things for other reasons than you do, so you'd be different. Uncool! Clearly the best option is to shit on things as vaguely as possible so you don't have to justify yourself, because god knows you're neither confident enough to logically defend your opinion nor bothered enough to actually articulate it in such a fashion.

    #sheeple

    (I disagree with you on underrated, though you have a point as I have seen it used both ways in a way that is somewhat above the barber's estimation. Perhaps he is using a more society-wide estimate, while we are using something biased by like 2-3 popular topics in the community created by people with poor diction?)

    Sadly, I have no buddies, so that's entirely irrelevant for me, leading to this opinion of mine.

    As for underrated, I think it's more a case of generalisation than it is of poor diction. The meaning "not enough people like it" ends up pretty much meaning "not enough people know about it" in most cases. Or at least, that's the impression it gives. I'd elaborate a bit, but I want to sleep, so, my sincerest regrets.

    (Note: I have a terrible tendency for writing things out of order. It happened in the blog itself, in my previous post, and it's happening now. For instance, I'm starting with my last paragraph, and I quite literally mean this one, which will be followed by the previous, and then finally the first one.)

    Mr Poltroon

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, Fred the Barber said:

    I'm confused: if it's okay to say something is "underrated' with the intended meaning that not enough people appreciate it for the quality one perceives it to have (that part about appreciating and quality are inseparable from the definition of "underrated," BTW; if you were trying to drop that part of the definition, then I think you're simply incorrectly redefining the word to "not well-known," which in practice isn't what people actually mean when they use it), why is it not okay to call something else "overrated" with the intended meaning that too many people appreciate it for the quality one perceives it to have?

    I maintain what I said. Actual usage of "underrated" tends to stick to things that are simply not well known. Usage that is meant to say "Only 7/10? This is totally underrated!" is much more limited. This, of course, is based on my personal experiences of where I've seen them used.
    So to reiterate, usage of "underrated" does not typically infuriate me because when I see it used, it's to claim too few people know about it, or tried it out. Therefore, I am not saying that underrated doesn't mean what it does, I am saying that because I hardly ever see people using it the way I don't like, I don't mind the word. On the other hand, it's incredibly rare to see someone use "overrated" in a way that's not simply saying "I don't see why people like this".

    18 minutes ago, Fred the Barber said:

    I'm not saying the word "overrated" isn't overused (which it certainly is) or incorrectly used (which it probably also is); I'm just saying that the statement "Sword Art Online is overrated" is a perfectly rational thing for me to say. Moreover, to be clear, I agree with you that I'm expressing an opinion when I do that; it's not some factual statement. Actually trying to argue over whether or not something is "overrated" would be pretty silly. But having a discussion wherein various people express whether they think something is overrated doesn't really seem fundamentally problematic to me (if arguably a little uninteresting, unless there's further elaboration on why people perceive it that way, and also perhaps arguably somewhat contradictory, since if everybody thought something was overrated, it would seem that, by definition, at least some of them were demonstrably factually wrong).

    I never said my hate was quite rational. Most of it is just me disliking contrarians and party-poopers.
    It's the difference between saying "I don't like X", which is clearly structured like an opinion, and "X is overrated", which is structured like a fact, and a ridiculous thing to say, at that. I also have extreme problems with "X is crap" and such. It's an issue with the way people say things, and how often they say it, more than the word itself.

    This is why I'll never complain at anyone directly for using it. I won't constrict anyone's way of expressing themselves without a better reason than me just not liking it, but the fact remains that the way people phrase things as if they were facts bothers me (only if they're negative, at that) to no end, and "overrated" is one of the worst offenders, prompting my rant.

    Unlike "X is bad", "X is overrated" is a more direct judgement on people.
    X is bad -> there are flaws ->  which implies people who like it are wrong  VS  X is overrated -> other people are wrong -> because there are flaws
    It's the difference between "This piece of art is terrible, (why do you like it?)" and "You are wrong for liking this piece of art."; One doesn't cast an immediate judgement on other people's opinions*, and the other does just that.
    Again, not exactly a rational thing, but even if "I think X is overrated" is used, the whole "judging other people" remains, even as an opinion. It's a troublesome word I just don't like.

    *Something I heavily dislike. Who am I to impose my thoughts on others? I should state my opinion and have others comprehend it, and I should try to comprehend theirs. Discourse does not come from blindly denying what one does not agree with, or taking some sort of imaginary high-ground. And the first step to discourse is certainly not "All those people are wrong for liking this".

    Another issue is that when somebody says something is overrated, other kindred souls flock, forming a vocal majority and making the whole thing quite ridiculous, because a majority cannot ever claim something is overrated, by its very definition.

     

    I know I have some extreme opinions about the way people communicate. I know I'm an idealist, and also a hypocrite, but these remain my honest thoughts, fuelled by emotion. If arguments are to be had, let them be civil an constructive, without hate. Mindless praise doesn't need such limiters, as it hurts no one, unlike mindless bashing.

    Mr Poltroon

    Posted

    18 hours ago, Zakamutt said:

    It's probably not poetry day any longer in Sweden, but whatever, I tried.

    Emphasis on tried.

    https://clyp.it/g2upd3z4#

    I'm thinking about whether I want to provide my own translation enough that I do this right now, as 2am approaches. Huh.

    EDIT: it's pretty bad, doesn't rhyme, but at least I could write it in thirty minutes. I suppose that's something.

    Huh, even not understanding the language it sounds fairly beautiful to the ear. (I mean, as much as a northern language that mostly sounds like somebody's trying to clear their throat can. No offence, of course :sachi:)

    I don't think I can read 'beautifully' in English, but I'm pretty sure I can in Portuguese.

    Fred the Barber

    Posted

    British rule also rules.

     

    You are one who finds the individual line especially important and is easily jarred. I can't say I see what you mean when you claim that the inclusion of such effects is jarring or that they interrupt the 'flow'.
    And so I wonder, what is flow?
    To me, flow is weather or not I can uninterruptedly read through many lines without anything that makes me pause to attempt to comprehend something that should be easily comprehensible. Compare deep, philosophical lines or lines with many meanings to them, where pausing is intended, with lines where the 'that' pronoun is used so many times I have no idea who's referring to what and what that 'what' it is.
    Hyperbole aside, the small -- mere milliseconds even -- pauses that arise from certain somewhat ambiguous or oddly structured sentences are what I consider "interrupting the flow", and I must admit: To me, those asterisked sound effects do none of that to my person. I'd bet the odd beginning of the previous sentence/'paragraph' might've made you pause (or just about most lines written by me). That's breaking the flow, the way I see it. Not spotting a few asterisked sound effects.

    So I can't say I'm convinced. I think asterisked sound effects can be used for good, especially in more comedic situations; Like a *drowns* amongst a line or a line full of *sob sob*s. Things like Stare and Sob without asterisks make sense when it's something the character is actually pronouncing. When it's a sound they make, not pronounce, I think writing it down without asterisks is a poor solution. And I still don't know what to put when writing a cough down.

    So the solution is removing them entirely? Not always ideal, especially when there's no accompanying narration to indicate that a sound was made and/or heard. Assuming you're like me and you can't write a cough down, do you just remove them all?
    Oh crap, I accidentally wrote the character's illness out of the translation. Too bad.

    Outside of dialogue it's a free for all. Feel free to rewrite the entire thing if it makes you happier.

     

    On the topic of colons (which is not the topic we were on, but the one I just forced us to be on), I must ask: Is the way I've used them in this post correct? (here's me sneakily trying to get you to do the work for me lolevil)

     

    (As an aside, would "Put the seatbelt on yourself" give you pause? I actually stopped to think whether a line like this meant that one should should put the seatbelt by themselves, or that they should put it on their person -- a small redundancy, the sort of thing that pops up in daily speech.)

×
×
  • Create New...