Splash's Claim That The Critic Never Gives An A+ To Games Starring Non-Humans...

[LoganRuckman1]

http://videogamecritic.com/2600ff.htm#Frogger,_The_Official

http://videogamecritic.com/colecofl.htm#Frogger

http://videogamecritic.com/snesce.htm#Chrono_Trigger- Yeah, it's by the RPG critic, and has human main characters, but I'm posting it anyways.

You were saying?

I would post the many, many A's and A-'s that he has given to games starring non humans (the Sonic games, Psycho Fox, Diddy Kong Racing, which has a higher score than Mario Kart 64, by the way, the Crash Bandicoot games, etc.), but apparently, an A or A- isn't good enough for you.

I would also point out that one of the Mario games that he gave an A+ (Super Mario Bros. 3) prominently features animal powerups (the raccoon and Tanooki suit and the Frog suit), one of them (Super Mario Kart) features Yoshi, Koopa Troopa, Bowser, and Donkey Kong Jr., and another (Mario Kart 7) also features several non human characters, but Mario's not good enough, either.

I know that's not a huge list, but it still proves that you're wrong. And it would be a lot bigger if I included A's and A-'s.

[darkrage61]

Can we seriously consider banning Splash if he keeps on trolling with this "non-human bias" nonsense?

[LoganRuckman1]

[QUOTE=darkrage6]Can we seriously consider banning Splash if he keeps on trolling with this "non-human bias" nonsense?[/QUOTE]

No, I say we keep him. He's good for entertainment value.

[Splash1]

Oh wow, a tiny less-than-8bit frog from an old Atari game with no real personality to it in said game. That really counts.

Putting on dorky little fursuits doesn't make someone cool. ACTUALLY TURNING INTO THOSE ANIMALS OR OBJECTS OR CHARACTERS might. The only time Mario ever actually turns into something is with the Boo suit. Other times, he's just putting on glorified furry costumes. I don't even want to know what he does to Yoshi when no one's looking. Not to mention, even Yoshi cannot really save such a shallow franchise. ...Okay I wouldn't say the entire series is shallow. There are fun games involving Mario, but most of the platformers are way overrated. And Mario Kart? While it CAN be fun at times, even that's a bit overrated.

And you may think I'm trolling, but I'm not. I'm actually dead serious. The whole bias you refuse to acknowledge exists not just in VGC, but in a lot of people as well.

[m0zart1]

[QUOTE=Splash]Oh wow, a tiny less-than-8bit frog from an old Atari game with no real personality to it in said game. That really counts.[/QUOTE]

They're all pixels.  And in this case those pixels depict a non-human.  So, yes of course it counts, based on your own criteria.

[QUOTE=Splash]And you may think I'm trolling, but I'm not. I'm actually dead serious. The whole bias you refuse to acknowledge exists not just in VGC, but in a lot of people as well.[/QUOTE]

The two are not mutually exclusive -- lots of trolls are dead serious.  The fact that you are serious only makes you a more annoying (and disburbing) troll, not less.

[Sut1]

LoganRuckman - this post is far more constructive than calling the guy a retard and perhaps what you should have posted something similar in the other thread.

I think we all know Splash's opinion on non-human characters now, frankly I think it's bizarre and unfounded but he has a right to his opinion. However do we need another thread on this subject ? Wasn't there a previous thread on this ? Groundhog Day.

[Splash1]

I would really like to know what people's opinion on the definition of "Troll" is.

[Splash1]

I'm just asking, what's your definition of a "troll" if you seriously think I'm a troll.