It was an age without outlets for information. If you wanted to have a chance at figuring out that secret sauce to get to the next level or beat that boss, there was magazine or back issue roulette. There was admitting you suck to your cooler richer friends to beg them to tell you how to beat it. There was the tiny chance that the official guide you had to special order might mention the thing. Then there was the dialup internet where loading to the nipples of a single image took longer than most boys, and by the time the whole image loaded 1 in 3 was holding a self serviced d-pad controller of their very own. Times were different, and so were the frustrations. If you wanted to learn, you went to the library on the other side of town. People read newspapers for information and it had classified-craigslist that was like paying Twitter by the word to try and sell your broken junk. Those of us that didn’t rage, blew on our cartridges like we were making a magical wish to a genie.
Wow, this is quite incredible. I point out someone’s lack of emotional control/stability, and you seem to think that implies that I am the one who is a child. I lived through the magical before times, friend, and I still didn’t conduct myself like this.
Do you always argue for your own perspective? I subtly indicated that this was not how I act, and I did not try to justify such behaviors. I simply stated a softening perspective of how people are a product of their environment and the perspective benefits of the present information age. It is adding real world abstracted complexity to something phrased in idealized binary simplicity that might make someone with a troubled childhood self-conscious or uncomfortable and instead bending perspective to nostalgia. It is a kindness with empathy for people I know that have changed and turned their life around, and for those with potential because binary labels and oversimplification can be harmful.
This is remarkably accurate, although to be fair, newspapers actually reported news back then, rather than journalistically fellating a group of shadowy billionaires. Different times.
I suppose I just don’t associate with people who have such low emotional control and stability. I don’t play with those who scream or are toxic in chat, and I certainly wouldn’t have associated with anyone like this back in the split-screen days. That behavior is quite absurd and indicates a larger overall problem.
I really hope this is a joke. If not, wtf?
It was an age without outlets for information. If you wanted to have a chance at figuring out that secret sauce to get to the next level or beat that boss, there was magazine or back issue roulette. There was admitting you suck to your cooler richer friends to beg them to tell you how to beat it. There was the tiny chance that the official guide you had to special order might mention the thing. Then there was the dialup internet where loading to the nipples of a single image took longer than most boys, and by the time the whole image loaded 1 in 3 was holding a self serviced d-pad controller of their very own. Times were different, and so were the frustrations. If you wanted to learn, you went to the library on the other side of town. People read newspapers for information and it had classified-craigslist that was like paying Twitter by the word to try and sell your broken junk. Those of us that didn’t rage, blew on our cartridges like we were making a magical wish to a genie.
Wow, this is quite incredible. I point out someone’s lack of emotional control/stability, and you seem to think that implies that I am the one who is a child. I lived through the magical before times, friend, and I still didn’t conduct myself like this.
Do you always argue for your own perspective? I subtly indicated that this was not how I act, and I did not try to justify such behaviors. I simply stated a softening perspective of how people are a product of their environment and the perspective benefits of the present information age. It is adding real world abstracted complexity to something phrased in idealized binary simplicity that might make someone with a troubled childhood self-conscious or uncomfortable and instead bending perspective to nostalgia. It is a kindness with empathy for people I know that have changed and turned their life around, and for those with potential because binary labels and oversimplification can be harmful.
This is remarkably accurate, although to be fair, newspapers actually reported news back then, rather than journalistically fellating a group of shadowy billionaires. Different times.
You’ve never seen a rager? That’s almost mild.
I suppose I just don’t associate with people who have such low emotional control and stability. I don’t play with those who scream or are toxic in chat, and I certainly wouldn’t have associated with anyone like this back in the split-screen days. That behavior is quite absurd and indicates a larger overall problem.