PS2 Weekend

[ehowton]

Supercar Street Challenge:
Supposed to be able to modify your own 'supercar' then race it.
In reality, you can make few changes, most of them gay, and when it comes to race time, they steer like boats.


Monster Jam:
If your son has Monster Jam Hot Wheels, you can race them.
In one-player mode, there's no orientation - the camera is all over the place, so you really never know where you're going.
Though steering is fun & easy in two-player mode, and there's plenty of power, watching the screen too much made me want to vomit.


Hot Wheels World Race:
Same cars and tracks as in the movie; drive real Hot Wheels cars you own.
Not too shabby in two-player mode, if your stomach can handle the loop-de-loops and upside-down-at-times twisting tracks after playing Monster Jam.


Vigilante V8
Shoot your opponent.
This is rather good, if you can get past the PS1 graphics. I cannot.
I'll buy this again if they ever release a PS2 version.


SpyHunter
Complete secret-agent missions.
Excellent, excellent game. Beautiful graphics, fantastic car as far as acceleration, steering, choice and use of weapons.
Except for the bug my son found (coming off the weapons van in Frankfurt, steering over the road boundary, and driving into the woods past the rendered area until he fell off the map, leaving himself suspended in mid-air under the floating island) by far my favorite pasttime in front of the console with him. We had to complete many single-player missions to unlock the two-player games, unfortunately, but he enjoys both.


Gran Turismo4
Best. Driving simulation. Ever.
My son almost never selects a big-block rear-wheel drive American-made V8. Unless we're racing on the dirt track in Arcade mode. I love the countersteering, the anticipation of turns, and sliding around corners. My poor son sits there in his iconoclastic vehicle the entire race trying to point any one direction, spinning hopelessly out of control for the duration of the race.

Comments

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

Have you really considered the impact of your use of 'gay' as a negative descriptor?

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Yes.

I use it synonymous to 'queer' (which now means something else as well). There's no winning - proper English or not. My misuse of the word has been pointed out. If I use it enough, I'm hoping its denotation as well can be considered for revision.

You can't please all the people all the time...

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

Are the changes available to the cars disadvantageous, curious and strange, or stupid?

...the last is not synonymous with 'queer' at all.

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

All of the above, really. With a portion of odd and retarded thrown in for good measure (the last not being synonymous with 'queer' either). The word is so...perfect. And yet I never connotate anything homosexual about it out of context.

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

do you think it's important that you don't intend to connote anything homosexual? Do you suppose your attitudes toward homosexuality are conveyed, or that other attitudes are conveyed instead? Do you suppose your acquaintances, some of whom may be homosexual and in the closet, feel comfortable talking to you after you call a car gay?

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Yes, else I wouldn't have brought it up in this thread, as that is usually the perception of the word. And I have been challenged on my use of this word by acquaintances of many persuasions, even by those who's orientation was not known to me at the time.

Comfortable? Definitely.

To know me, is to love me. Wit above harm.

That and the fact that I sing musicals throughout the day...

"What mirror where?"

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

Do you see a problem with trading the connotation of 'homosexual' with 'bad' in your usage?

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Yes.

However, that's not how I use the word, 'gay.' I think on it as a play on words. Riddles within riddles. Those who are enlightened usually ask me about it. I refuse to pander to anyone else.

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

That's some elitist crap. The whole point of language is to communicate, not to fail to communicate.

[ehowton.livejournal.com]

Granted, my statement was a little over the top (even for me). Unlike most people I know however, I actually spent a full year trying to be more compassionate and understanding of others (as that is one of my admitted shortcomings). It didn't work out so well for me, but I did learn a lot about myself in the process. One of the strengths that I identified in myself, is that I am not a respecter of persons. I speak to our janitor daily with the same politeness and respect I give the CEO on the occasions I have to talk to him.

If language was used solely for the purpose of communication, there would be no tongue-in-cheek, Dorothy Parker would have died an unknown, and Shakespeare's work would have been deemed unnecessary (not saying he didn't convey ideas, but surely he could've simply written a dissertation as opposed to acting out...)

I understand your point of view, and deeply respect your opinion (based mostly upon your comments in unixadmin; not only do I have a thirst for life, but for the English language as well. Though nothing you say will dissuade me from my use of the word in question, I never mind my motivations being challenged, and believe you are a perfect candidate to do so!

[drax0r.livejournal.com]

I think its fairly clear from the context that he didn't mean to imply that the changes you could make to the cars in the game were of a homosexual nature.

Words, in and of themselves, only have the power you give them.

In this case, gay is used as an abstraction is not meant as an epithet.

To quote Carlin: There's a different group to get pissed off at you in this country for everything your not supposed to say. Can't say Nigger, Boogie, Jig, Jigaboo, Skinhead, Moolimoolinyon, Schvatzit, Junglebunny. Greaser, Greaseball, Dago, Guinea, Whop, Ginzo, Kike, Zebe, Heed, Yid, Mocky, Himie, Mick, Donkey, Turkey, Limey, Frog. Zip, Zipperhead, Squarehead, Crout, Hiney, Jerry, Hun, Slope, Slopehead, Chink, Gook. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those words in and of themselves. Their only words. It's the context that counts. It's the user. It's the intention behind the words that makes them good or bad. The words are completely neutral. The words are innocent. I get tired of people talking about bad words and bad language. Bullshit! It's the context that makes them good or bad. The context. That makes them good or bad. For instance, you take the word "Nigger." There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word "Nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole who's using it that you ought to be concerned about.

Refusing to bow to the will of the PC police, we brazenly continue to use language as we see fit, and in doing so, help it evolve. In this case, as with everything else I've heard ehowton say, the statement lacks hate, which is really what we should be attacking. There's none of that here.

[bsdcat.livejournal.com]

I'm bringing this up at all because I don't think it's meant as an epithet - because there is a disconnect between intent and what is actually conveyed.

By all means, use language any which way you want - but don't pretend that you are in strict control of your meaning when you say things. Language depends as much upon the receiver for meaning as the sender.

[celtmanx.livejournal.com]

"Have you really considered the impact of your use of 'gay' as a negative descriptor?"


Dude this is so gay!!!