Poll: 90% of everything is shit
- Thread starter KP Shadow
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Everything as in Everything, or Everything as in Per?
Everything: If one takes all things into account (I.E. 90% of universe)
Per: If one takes things in sections (I.E. 90% of Google results)
I cannot agree or disagree until you specify more clearly
Everything: If one takes all things into account (I.E. 90% of universe)
Per: If one takes things in sections (I.E. 90% of Google results)
I cannot agree or disagree until you specify more clearly
No, 90% is less than perfect with descending levels of quality down to the extreme 10% at the bottom tier, pretty much the way that quality as a whole is graded.
There are very few things that people can not enjoy because they are just that bad, it is mostly because most things in that 90% inversely appeal to a smaller number of people.
To put it another way, Halo is 'better' than Ico bcause it appealed to a larger numer of players. The same goes for Hee-Haw which lasted 20 years and it's 'superiority' to FireFly which lasted a single season.
You might say that Ico and FireFly are in that narrow upper 10% but the numbers don't reflect that. There are other authors who were William Shakespeare's contemporaries and predecessors who were at the time (and still are by certain circles of intellectuals)better writers than he was(some of whom his plays were adapted from)but his style reached both the unwashed masses and the (ig)Nobility as well, giving his work staying power beyond the works that only the Intelligensia could enjoy.
Taste can't be represented by any number of any kind as it can not be accounted for.
There are very few things that people can not enjoy because they are just that bad, it is mostly because most things in that 90% inversely appeal to a smaller number of people.
To put it another way, Halo is 'better' than Ico bcause it appealed to a larger numer of players. The same goes for Hee-Haw which lasted 20 years and it's 'superiority' to FireFly which lasted a single season.
You might say that Ico and FireFly are in that narrow upper 10% but the numbers don't reflect that. There are other authors who were William Shakespeare's contemporaries and predecessors who were at the time (and still are by certain circles of intellectuals)better writers than he was(some of whom his plays were adapted from)but his style reached both the unwashed masses and the (ig)Nobility as well, giving his work staying power beyond the works that only the Intelligensia could enjoy.
Taste can't be represented by any number of any kind as it can not be accounted for.
Seriously dude, how did you get probation'd for a post that a guy just a few posts above you got away with (I'm ignoring the fact that it wasn't even probation material)Julianking93 said:
On topic, I think it's lucky games cost quite a bit to make because it means only about 70% of them are shit, however the rise of the Wii will certainly raise that percentage.
Well it depends on your taste but tell me this, if everything was good then how would we have a have a reference point to tell it was good?
corn?AkJay said:
and I don't think 90% of everything is shit. that's just pessimism taken to the next level and thinking like that accomplishes nothing. And you guys all agreeing don't think your in that special 10% (2% for people) do you? I say that thinking most other people are shit makes you shittier than they are.
And I'm just gonna take a leap and assume that the OP is a big yahtzee fan.
I honestly have no fucking clue, but I'm not gonna ***** about it here out of fear of getting suspended or banned.Chesterfield Snapdragon McFisticuffs said:
[sup/][sup/]PM me if you'd like to discuss it[/sup][/sup]
Well considering that 10 hours ago I got so sick of life that I took an overdose of 50 painkillers (for the third time in a month) I would have to agree.
Craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawling innnnnnnnnnn my skiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin.Iron Criterion said: