Official thread to take potshots at fitz

sweener2001 · Post by **sweener2001** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:27 am

i only read back a few posts, but i fail to see the point in debating with fitzroy about anything.

things are or should be the way he thinks, and everyone else is stupid. it never changes.

you guys might as well be yelling at brick walls.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:38 am

sweener2001 wrote:i only read back a few posts, but i fail to see the point in debating with fitzroy about anything.

things are or should be the way he thinks, and everyone else is stupid. it never changes.

you guys might as well be yelling at brick walls.

You'd think I'd learn not to get dragged into these discussions eventually. Not yet, though!

gllt · Post by **gllt** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:30 pm

The ________

Where arguments is serious matter.

You fill in the blanks

h4tred · Post by **h4tred** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:52 pm

things are or should be the way he thinks, and everyone else is stupid. it never changes.

Kinda noticed.

Thought byuu was calling the shots on the emu, its his, not whoever's......

FitzRoy · Post by **FitzRoy** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:28 pm

h4tred wrote:
things are or should be the way he thinks, and everyone else is stupid. it never changes.
Kinda noticed. Thought byuu was calling the shots on the emu, its his, not whoever's......

The decisions have never been mine, the forum is a place to make propositions and put reasoning behind them. This debate wasn't a contest to remove simulated scanlines. I derided the cult of the scanline and got hit with the usual hallowed ground, intended consequence gospel. That erked me, so I broke their world.

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:38 pm

I edited out the above. Don't start that here again, please.
Take it to another forum if you guys want to fight.

blargg · Post by **blargg** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:45 pm

FitzRoy wrote:The decisions have never been mine, the forum is a place to make propositions and put reasoning behind them. This debate wasn't a contest to remove simulated scanlines. I derided the cult of the scanline and got hit with the usual hallowed ground, intended consequence gospel. That erked me, so I broke their world.

The best way to make an argument based on reasoning is to put forth reasons, and when they are challenged, elaborate on them or reconsider. The worst way is to make assumptions that the other participants are being irrational, and when challenged on your arguments, resort to name-calling. You may feel certain that the other people aren't coming from a rational position, but if you're wrong, you are the one killing the argument, not them. Your arguments are laden with condescension, which just sucks to try to participate in.

Snark · Post by **Snark** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:46 pm

FitzRoy wrote:That erked me, so I broke their world.

AHAHAHAHAHAH!! Aww man sorry... (AHAHAHAHAH!!!!)

Well there you have it. You guys (and your worlds) have been broken. And now, forever crippled, shall you roam the earth. Serve you right for arguing with Fitzroy. As for me, I'm just glad I didn't actually took part in the debate and thus avoided getting my world broke.

h4tred · Post by **h4tred** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 7:02 pm

Serve you right for arguing with Fitzroy.

Never did. Just found that a argument over scanlines would probably be enough to put a dev idea out of commission.

Now byuu, you at least now know what my plan was. It was the old plan that I was considering picking up ever since the shader patch/hook DLL.

FirebrandX · Post by **FirebrandX** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 7:19 pm

The funny thing is, I will continue to use scanline effects on my emulators. Nothing has changed at all, yet somehow my world has been broken. That's cool with me. I'll live in a blissfully broken world full of scanlines and scale multiples.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:56 pm

sweener2001 wrote:things are or should be the way he thinks, and everyone else is stupid. it never changes.

Aerdan-ism at its finest, people.

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:33 pm

What happened after I posted, if anything? I'm curious, because I don't remember that crazy 'broke their world' (...are you serious?) being there beforehand.

If anything, my mind broke from that statement. Apparently arguing on the internet breaks people's worlds. Who knew?

I suppose 2 + 2 = 5 now.

Post by **odditude** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:45 pm

Metatron wrote:I suppose 2 + 2 = 5 now.

it does, for very large values of 2.

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:49 pm

CURSE YOU DECIMALS! CURSE YOUUUUUU!

King Of Chaos · Post by **King Of Chaos** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:30 am

sweener2001 wrote:but i fail to see the point in debating with fitzroy about anything.

You guys fail to remember...

FitzRoy · Post by **FitzRoy** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:33 am

Snark wrote:
FitzRoy wrote:That erked me, so I broke their world.
AHAHAHAHAHAH!! Aww man sorry... (AHAHAHAHAH!!!!)

Well there you have it. You guys (and your worlds) have been broken. And now, forever crippled, shall you roam the earth. Serve you right for arguing with Fitzroy. As for me, I'm just glad I didn't actually took part in the debate and thus avoided getting my world broke.

Before the scanline crowd goes and makes themselves look even more ridiculous (with the exception of blargg who is impossibly cordial about everything), this wasn't in regards to preferences. It doesn't actually bother me that you want your pixels separated for any reason, or that you disagree with the market abandoning this characteristic forever. What bothered me was the importance and assumptions built into them. Claiming that because they were there, game designers automatically both wanted them there (without exception) and utilized them to some end in their designs. I doubt VERY MUCH either was true and have seen nothing, absolutely nothing in the form of logic or evidence that was posted in rebuttal to change my mind. And believe me, I've changed my mind on a dime when confronted with the evidence. Just recently, I suggested against Qt. I was wrong.

So you can call me stubborn, you can accuse me of your own tendencies (h4tred), but you can't honestly expect me to believe that artists considered every contiguously colored object to be dull and in need of a broad, indiscriminate pinstripe texture. That flies in the face of any rational, thinking person. And that people go on forums and peddle this nonsense to newbs who don't know any better is nostalgia gone way off the deep end. That is the dogma I broke, and about damn time somebody did.

Perhaps the most pathetic part about all of it is how hypocritical these people are. The real system did not have savestates, but I see the same people going apeshit about bsnes not having them. The real system certainly never expected you to have this kind of convenience in the cheat system, or digital quality audio, but I haven't seen one complaint about how inaccurate bsnes is to give you something better.

I've waited a little to see what this apparent opportunity to pile on would produce. Sweener has been waiting a long time to smack me with his wiimote. And what the hell is Metatron doing in here? Still think I'm a fucking moron for suggesting people buy gold a year ago. Get over yourself.

I'm breaking this off from the main topic. Let out all your pent up rage, post lame old internet jokes that promote groupthink. I hope byuu lets you do it, just for a day, it's good for the system.

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:05 am

...Gold? What the blazing hell are you talking about, because I have absolutely no idea; search is not coming up with anything.

Anyone know what he's referring to?

Also Fitz, I think you're an idiot for spending what is clearly hours arguing condescendingly about scanlines. And everything else.

FitzRoy · Post by **FitzRoy** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:13 am

http://board.zsnes.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... ht=#157206

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:16 am

...So, uh, care to tell me where in that post I say you're an idiot for buying gold?

No really, I'd love to see the invisible words that said that.

Hint: I was laughing at you being a windbag.

FitzRoy · Post by **FitzRoy** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:26 am

Metatron wrote:...So, uh, care to tell me where in that post I say you're an idiot for buying gold?

No really, I'd love to see the invisible words that said that.

Hint: I was laughing at you being a windbag.

Umm, okay, I've seen signatures longer than that post. I'll try not to wear my wrist out so much next time.

Panzer88 · Post by **Panzer88** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:44 am

it seems to me there is a deeper underlying issue here than scanlines. but I'm no pyschologist.

FirebrandX · Post by **FirebrandX** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:15 am

I'll say it again:

The whole debate started when one side (willow & Fritzy) wanted byuu to REMOVE features from bsnes for their own selfish reasons. The reasoning was that since they themselves did not see a need for certain effects or scaling control in fullscreen, clearly nobody else should want them either. When I opined otherwise, I was basically told I'm in error since my "personal tastes" differ from their "logical reasoning". Hence, they are correctly justified in wanting certain features removed from bsnes according to Fritzroy.

At any rate, I'm glad byuu sided with "irrationallity" and left the features intact. Call me crazy, but I don't see the point in tailor-making a public emulator to only suit the needs of one person named Fritzroy.

Post by **odditude** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:20 am

anybody else want popcorn?

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:14 am

FirebrandX wrote:I'll say it again:

The whole debate started when one side (willow & Fritzy) wanted byuu to REMOVE features from bsnes for their own selfish reasons. The reasoning was that since they themselves did not see a need for certain effects or scaling control in fullscreen, clearly nobody else should want them either. When I opined otherwise, I was basically told I'm in error since my "personal tastes" differ from their "logical reasoning". Hence, they are correctly justified in wanting certain features removed from bsnes according to Fritzroy.

At any rate, I'm glad byuu sided with "irrationallity" and left the features intact. Call me crazy, but I don't see the point in tailor-making a public emulator to only suit the needs of one person named Fritzroy.

Hey, weren't you the dude making that 3D Firebrand model?

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:22 am

For all the negative comments from both sides here, FitzRoy has helped out a lot. Both by testing every last SNES game ever released for bugs, and by helping to refine a ton of things that everyone agreed should be. Not to mention the artwork. Seriously, the UI in the earliest versions was dreadful; I'm a terrible designer.

Problem is that now we have things really refined and professional, and so most changes are now at a point where it's extremely difficult to get broad consensus. I wish I could say the resulting infighting surprises me, but alas.

I'm also growing tired of working on the UI, sans this Qt rewrite. I'll probably back off the UI stuff once it's complete.