Are you aware that the year 0 A.D. did not technically exist? Indeed. Think of 0 A.D. as a hypothetical time period that never existed. It is a snapshot in time where major players of the classical ages were placed in an observatory. This is your chance to see them 'duke it out'. Your job as the player is to create the hypothetical and recreate the historical.
It's called suspension of disbelief, and there are times when it's a good thing. Situations may include books, movies, video games, and other works of fiction.
If utilising your imagination leads to automatic loss of all of your self esteem, perhaps you need more self esteem.
My point is that if a work of entertainment requires me to imagine myself to be insultingly dumb without a good explanation then immersion simply fails.
I'm not saying you can't have a plot device to fill in the gaps or a universe that has fantastical things, but if we have a setting that requires me to forget the laws of universe without some crutch (either magic or sci-fi) then I'm not going
Fine. They magically created the concept of "0 A.D." to illustrate that while attempting to be historically accurate, it is still essentially fiction and fantasy ultimately designed to be fun. How's that? Good enough for the ol' ego? Okay, wait, I've got a better one...
The only reason there wasn't a year "0 A.D." is because the people who created the calendars back then weren't as smart as you are and didn't fully understand the concept of zero-offsets, and this game gives you the chance to see what an ancient civilization -- including its calendar -- would have been like if they had been ruled by someone so amazingly intelligent that mentioning "0 A.D." in the context of the real history that was not ruled by their stunning intellect is, to them, insultingly dumb.
There ya go. That has to be at least as good as invisible entryways to magic universes, which I should point out is implicitly implying that you, a stupid muggle, are too dumb to see even when crowds of rambunctious children vanish into them.
The only reason there wasn't a year "0 A.D." is because the people who created the calendars back then weren't as smart as you are and didn't fully understand the concept of zero-offsets
Actually, retroactively re-dating the dates before AD 1 wasn't considered until the Anglo-Saxon historian the Venerable Bede, who was familiar with the work of Dionysius, used Anno Domini dating in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People, finished in 731. In this same history he also used another Latin term, "ante vero incarnationis dominicae tempus" ("the time before the Lord's true incarnation"), equivalent to the English "before Christ", to identify years before the first year of this era, thus establishing the standard of not using a year zero (i.e. ordinal, not cardinal numbers), even though his work did show that he did grasp the concept of zero.
thus establishing the standard of not using a year zero (i.e. ordinal, not cardinal numbers), even though his work did show that he did grasp the concept of zero.
Well damnit, man! You have to help me out here. I'm trying to save an ego!
Harry Potter!!
That's a kids' book. And the writing and the plot shows it! Whenever they're in a tough spot they just make up some new magic spell - which for whatever reason wasn't used previously.
The number one offence in HP was that fundamentally flawed game (Quiddich or something) where the game is over and won by the team that catches the flying ball. How ridiculous.
Speed 1 (but definitely not Speed 2) was much more realistic and believable that HP, with more realistic characters. Anyway, why are
Someday somebody has got to decide whether the typewriter is the machine,
or the person who operates it.
What the devil? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you aware that the year 0 A.D. did not technically exist?
Indeed. Think of 0 A.D. as a hypothetical time period that never existed. It is a snapshot in time where major players of the classical ages were placed in an observatory. This is your chance to see them 'duke it out'. Your job as the player is to create the hypothetical and recreate the historical.
It's called suspension of disbelief, and there are times when it's a good thing. Situations may include books, movies, video games, and other works of fiction.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
It's called suspension of disbelief, and there are times when it's a good thing.
If I, the player, have to actively suspend belief at the expense of my self esteem, the entertainment has failed.
Re:What the devil? (Score:3, Funny)
If utilising your imagination leads to automatic loss of all of your self esteem, perhaps you need more self esteem.
Re: (Score:2)
If utilising your imagination leads to automatic loss of all of your self esteem, perhaps you need more self esteem.
My point is that if a work of entertainment requires me to imagine myself to be insultingly dumb without a good explanation then immersion simply fails.
I'm not saying you can't have a plot device to fill in the gaps or a universe that has fantastical things, but if we have a setting that requires me to forget the laws of universe without some crutch (either magic or sci-fi) then I'm not going
Re:What the devil? (Score:4, Insightful)
Fine. They magically created the concept of "0 A.D." to illustrate that while attempting to be historically accurate, it is still essentially fiction and fantasy ultimately designed to be fun. How's that? Good enough for the ol' ego? Okay, wait, I've got a better one...
The only reason there wasn't a year "0 A.D." is because the people who created the calendars back then weren't as smart as you are and didn't fully understand the concept of zero-offsets, and this game gives you the chance to see what an ancient civilization -- including its calendar -- would have been like if they had been ruled by someone so amazingly intelligent that mentioning "0 A.D." in the context of the real history that was not ruled by their stunning intellect is, to them, insultingly dumb.
There ya go. That has to be at least as good as invisible entryways to magic universes, which I should point out is implicitly implying that you, a stupid muggle, are too dumb to see even when crowds of rambunctious children vanish into them.
Re:What the devil? (Score:5, Informative)
The only reason there wasn't a year "0 A.D." is because the people who created the calendars back then weren't as smart as you are and didn't fully understand the concept of zero-offsets
Actually, retroactively re-dating the dates before AD 1 wasn't considered until the Anglo-Saxon historian the Venerable Bede, who was familiar with the work of Dionysius, used Anno Domini dating in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People, finished in 731. In this same history he also used another Latin term, "ante vero incarnationis dominicae tempus" ("the time before the Lord's true incarnation"), equivalent to the English "before Christ", to identify years before the first year of this era, thus establishing the standard of not using a year zero (i.e. ordinal, not cardinal numbers), even though his work did show that he did grasp the concept of zero.
Re: (Score:2)
thus establishing the standard of not using a year zero (i.e. ordinal, not cardinal numbers), even though his work did show that he did grasp the concept of zero.
Well damnit, man! You have to help me out here. I'm trying to save an ego!
Re: (Score:1)