Jump to content

MT Zehvor

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,142

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by MT Zehvor

    MT Zehvor

    Posted

    Tournament will run from sometime soon until mid January (rough guess, depending on how times work out). With that said, if you're hoping for one from Christmas or just can't play until after then, we'll probably be able to accommodate for that.

     

    All that's really required is just finding a time with your opponent that works for a FT3 match.

     

    I'mma go ahead and add everyone on here who was could join (depending on time constraints) in to a group PM for the tournament. If you were one of the people who wanted to join but wasn't sure you'd be able to due to hardware, can you PM me or add me on Skype as soon as you know you'll have a Wii U/SSB4 and can participate? (assuming you get one, that is)

     

    Actually, while we're at it, can everyone on here who has Skype add me as a contact on there? (My Skype ID is MT Zehvor) This tournament will be spanning multiple websites, so Skype's a bit more convenient for communicating. If not, that's fine, I can usually serve as a two way mouthpiece.

     

    -MT

    Voltex

    Posted

    Figured I'd join in on this before you all screwed up a list of best evers too badly.

     

    Heroes
    Samus Aran (Metroid)
    Pit (Kid Icarus)
    Mega Man (Mega Man)
    Agnes Oblige (Bravely Default)

    Villains
    GLaDOS (Portal)
    Ridley (Metroid)
    Majora (The Legend of Zelda)
    Master Hand (Super Smash Bros.)

     

    Reasons:

    If this were specified as Wind Waker Link, I'd go for him, as I like him quite a bit...but no other iteration of Link has enough personality for me to consider it (even if Pit's personality is obnoxiousness incarnate)

     

    Agnes vs. Layton is the battle of the top two blandest protagonists this side of the 21st century not featured in a FPS. That said, I'll go Agnes, because she at least seems to have some character flaws...which is at least worth something I guess.

     

    Ganondorf is overused, Ridley less so. If nothing else, at least Ridley doesn't happen to be behind literally every single major plot point in the Metroid series (well maybe that's unfair, Vaati did something somewhere if I remember right)

     

    -MT

    GSR

    Posted

     

    If they localize this, they'll probably say his family immigrated to the US or whatever. But I seriously doubt anyone would buy that.

    This is what I expect they will do if the game is localized. Since the story takes place entirely in the past, the connection to Phoenix might not even have to be mentioned in the game itself (depending on certain factors in the game itself, of course).

     

    However, there are a couple things that could stop this from working quite so elegantly. The biggest would be if there are shared locations between this and the Phoenix Wright series. Particularly the series' most distinctive natural landmark, Gourd Lake.

     

    In any case, as people have pointed out, the games have never been all that realistic, even in the original Japanese versions. Allegedly, the first case of the first game takes place in 2016, but all the cell phones are incredibly low-tech by today's standards.

     

    Hopefully Gourd Lake just won't make an appearance, or if it does, they'll call it something else for the American release (assuming DGS takes place in Japan). Wouldn't be too hard to work around, as I'm sure any scenery from 100 years ago would look very different.

     

    -MT

    Queen of Noise

    Posted

     

     

     

     

    I've been fairly silent on a lot of these goings on but I figure that now would be a good time to step in and talk.

    I like the sentiment here, but I am also concerned about the 'if you aren't with me, you are against me' mentality. I know for a fact that many people that are on my side of the aisle (the political right) are strongly supportive of the right for gay people to live their lives how they please. We may not all support gay marriage or civil unions, and we may not all see it as 'right', but the vast majority of us will absolutely defend the right for you to live how you please.

    I want you to read very, very carefully what you just wrote there, because it's an inherent contradiction. You say that we are free to live our lives as we please, so long as it does not offend your sensibilities or notion of right or wrong. So long as we don't offend you, we are free to do as we wish. So long as we don't do the things you don't want us to do, we have your support.

     

    Do you not see how wrong that is? Can you not see how I am being dehumanized? Can you not see how I cannot live my life as a normal human being just because you don't like who I am? Why can't I celebrate the same things that you? Why am I not allowed to experience the joys of marriage just because I would choose to do so with a man. Why can't I experience life like a normal person just because I find girls just as cute as guys? Why do I not feel like a normal human being even though I know I am? Why am I stuck being a second class citizen?

     

    Do you not see the lunacy of it? Do you not see the madness? Do you not see how you are essentially saying, "I completely disagree with you as a person and who you are, but I still support you except for basic rights that everyone else enjoys." Do you not see it? You are delegating me to the closet. You are telling me to stay in there. You are telling me that you support me in everything I do, so long as you don't see it because you might be offended.

     

    You are not an ally. You are not helping us. Your message is not comforting. It does not make me feel good. It does not fill me with confidence. It does not make me feel normal. It does not make me feel like a human being.

     

    Whether you are willing to recognize it or not, Toa Nidhiki05, you are a part of the problem.

     

    I've never said any of that. I never said you can do whatever you want as long as it doesn't offend me, and I never said you should hide who you are if it offends me. I really, really don't know where you read that from my comment. You know what? I think you should be able to do whatever you want, even if I disagree with it. You should be able to live your live as you wish, just as I can live life the way I wish. As for the marriage thing, my stance on marriage is exactly what Barack Obama's was in 2008. It may not be 100% what you agree with, but it is far closer than you may think.

     

    That aside, your reaction really disappoints me. I'm suggesting everyone team up to stop oppressive regimes in the middle east from executing gay people. How is that not something we should and can work to end? Why focus only on the plight of gay people here? America is not the only place in the world. In virtually every middle-eastern country it is either a crime to be homosexual or you will be killed for it. I want that inhuman barbarity to end. If that's not enough for you, I don't know what is. If you don't want or accept the help of people who may not agree with you 100%, I doubt those problems will resolve any time soon, and that is a crying shame. All that does is spread the alienation between us, and that doesn't do anything to solve problems.

     

     

    Saying "there are worse problems in the world than what you're facing, so stop complaining about yours" is not exactly welcoming us with open arms.

     

     

    I never said that either. I said there are people dying because of who they are, and we need to work together to stop it.

     

     

    But you also used it as an excuse to say "See, I'm totally tolerant" while at the same time markedly refusing to be totally tolerant. It doesn't work like that. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

     

    I don't think he's using as an excuse for anything. He's said up front that he doesn't agree with the practice, but he's willing to support it as a right, and also wants to work to stop inhumane killing of others. Doesn't get much more obvious than that.

     

    -MT

    Queen of Noise

    Posted

    I've been fairly silent on a lot of these goings on but I figure that now would be a good time to step in and talk.

    I like the sentiment here, but I am also concerned about the 'if you aren't with me, you are against me' mentality. I know for a fact that many people that are on my side of the aisle (the political right) are strongly supportive of the right for gay people to live their lives how they please. We may not all support gay marriage or civil unions, and we may not all see it as 'right', but the vast majority of us will absolutely defend the right for you to live how you please.

    I want you to read very, very carefully what you just wrote there, because it's an inherent contradiction. You say that we are free to live our lives as we please, so long as it does not offend your sensibilities or notion of right or wrong. So long as we don't offend you, we are free to do as we wish. So long as we don't do the things you don't want us to do, we have your support.

    I don't believe he ever said anything of the sort, and I'm not really sure where you got that from. As far as I can tell, the main point of his post was that He's concerned about the mentality of "either be with me or against me," because there are many people on his side of the aisle who are willing to defend people's rights to engage in certain activities regardless of whether they approve of them or not, and creating a "be with me or against me" mentality runs the risk of isolating those people.

     

    That's all he said. He didn't say anything about wanting to restrict your freedoms if it offends him; in fact, I believe he said the exact opposite.

     

    -MT

×
×
  • Create New...