I fail to see how I am being evasive. I will be more than happy to discuss this further with you. I am just not willing to do it in the comments section of a video game review for the reasons I stated earlier. So you are welcome to hop on over to TDH (I will link the site if you want) to continue the chat. OR You can continue to research the issue on your own and find your own answers – as to why people sometimes turn against something after repeated stimuli (be it a belief, something in pop culture, etc).
The choice is yours. But, as for my involvement, those are your only 2 choices. …you are really living up to your nickname atm
As I mentioned before, I am not to type out paragraphs worth of info in the comments section. 1. it is an annoying format for long posts 2. it is rude (towards the community) - by clogging sh*t up 3. it has nothing to do with what people came here for So you are welcome to stop by TDH and discuss it if it interests you that much and you are not wanting to research it yourself
We have clogged up the comments section far to much already with this...which has nothing to do with the review for this game. And everyone here knows you will never stop (which is how you got your nickname that everyone knows you by). So you can either: a. Look up the info yourself (pretty easy to research and better than me typing it all out in the comments section) or b. You are welcome to stop by TDH to discuss this further.
@Gelugon_baat There is no exact amount/number. It varies by person, by situation, how important the thing is to a person, etc. It would take a lot for a christian to turn against their religion BUT it would take far less for a person to turn against a band/something in pop culture.
The later happens all the time. People like a band...there is over saturation...people turn against the band. But, by the same token, some people never turn against the band. So, as I said, there is no set answer or amount. It does happen, but the conditions needed vary widely
@Gelugon_baat @rawsavon Fatigue in that sense is the same as desensitization. The stimuli no longer elicits the same response due to desensitization/fatigue. It is pretty common. Another effect is actually changing one's view and taking the opposite stance - harder to achieve, but it still happens.
Most/many are not coming here for 'the message'. They are coming for a review about the quality of the game. The message is something they have to endure. Now if the message was in a special part of the review and clearly marked where we could avoid it, then you would have a point...we could just bypass that section.
Your comment of "Furthermore, if there are people who "turned" against the message, they are already people with very different sets of personal values in the first place" is patently false. I would invite you to read up of the effects of repeated stimuli...though I know you won't, so no point in going there. But the long and the short of it is that people will often turn against something they previously supported due to 'fatigue'. It can be seen in various parts of life - religion, bands/pop culture, etc.
I don't know what you mean by, "do tell what you said to a real preacher", but I would tell them the exact same things I have said here...and have.
It doesn't make the same repeated message any less tiring. The more a preacher uses their pulpit for the same sermon, the less of an impact it has. And, not only that, the preacher runs the risk of turning their patrons against that very message. Personal views and biases are expected. We all have them, and they permeate everything we say and do. But they become annoying to others (and even turn people against things they would otherwise support) when that is all a person talks about.
Reading their reviews is like talking to my dad…now stay with me for just a moment on this one. My dad is an uber fundie. He is a nice guy, mind you, but EVERYTHING he talks about in some way relates to God, Jesus, the Bible, and religion…everything. Eventually it becomes so tiring and grating that not only is the message lost but it also has the opposite effect – it becomes annoying and turns people away (the opposite of what he intended).
Now back to the author of this review. They may or may not have a point in their review/all of their reviews. But they hammer home their own political agenda SO much that it has lost all meaning and is just annoying as all f*ck now.
>"And it's frustrating that a game about the struggle to find balance in a family is subtly skewed to put more focus on Dan...but not Linda's professional future"
Who didn't see these comments coming in the review?
rawsavon's comments