That makes me feel so much better.Crimsane said:I suppose the definition/boundary varies from person to person, but my idea of a fan is someone who enjoys and supports something and possibly offers input on how to improve it, while a fanboy has more of an addiction to that something and is rabid in his defense of said something, while not really being objective or open to other ideas at all.4thegreatergood said:While I do acknowledge the difference between fan and fanboy, as I am a fan, what is the boundary? You know, what purpose? I feel like I'm losing it.Crimsane said:There's a difference between a fan and a fanboy. Fans are good and serve a purpose, fanboys are just useless.
On second thought, I should have fixed those run-ons...Neonbob said:...no...it still hurts.Berethond said:I fixed it for you.speedhed4 said:What I've noticed with all generations of consoles (i.e NES,Genesis,PS3,360, Sega CD, etc.), you have these idiots who think one console will dominate all of them, when really each system is good in its own respects, and of course there will be technical problems with all of them. I feel that the Wii is a good casual gaming platform, PS3 with the 6-axis motion sensitive controller is good for racers, and I only own a 360, but I'm not a fanboy because I've played Wii and PD3 over at a friend's house a few times, but I like using the 360 for shooters, because I rarely need to look at controls because I have this abillity to just automatically know what do. I want to know what you think each system is best at, and why, without adding fanboy opinons.
See how much easier it is to read?
Ahem.
Periods are your friend!
<color=white>Unless you're a woman or have a girlfriend.
I think the only "need" that is fulfilled by fanboys is that of a company.
If they can get a bunch of rabid supporters, they are much more secure financially.
The rest of society, however, has absolutely no use for them.
Because burning people is not an approved method of energy generation.