Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 134
- 2
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Tarkov does look mechanically like a game I'd be interested in, but the gameplay doesn't interest me as much. Its more that I dont get anxiety when playing games. Which might seem like 'oh then its perfect for you', but no, it just means I repeatedly suck at them. Anxiety is a feature of human psychology, not just a bug. It gives you some degree of heightened awareness and increased focus.
This looks very interesting. Combined with me bouncing off a few other recommendations, I think I've figured out why I have a problem with many shooters: engagement distance. So many "shooters" these days are basically melee distance. Everything is tight corridors, with enemies popping out right in front of you. Most engagements take place 0-15 meters away from the player. Almost every 4 person co-op shooter that follows the mold of left 4 dead is like this.
Halo on the highest difficulties is nearly impossible to win at 0-15 meter distances. Most covenant weapons were not instant hit. They have travel distance, but most human weapons are instant hit. So optimal engagement distance is more like 15-50 meters. And the maps often allow you to actually fight at those distances. Its also why I think the flood levels are so hated and controversial.
If you've ever actually shot a modern firearm you'll realize very quickly how insane a 0-5 meter engagement distance is. 5-15 meter engagement distance makes some sense within buildings. In a city environment between buildings it can be more like the 15-50 meters. Outside of cities engagement distances in modern combat are like hundreds of meters, and most of the killing is done by artillery rather than small arms. So many games going for that close engagement distance nerf the hell out of the weapons to force it to happen.
Rising Storm 2: Vietnam is my favorite realistish shooter; the firearms are done exceptionally well in my opinion. But it's also purely PvP, so.
Overall I think it's easier to sell realistic mechanics in a PvP package than in a PvE or solo one - the latter two are usually about power fantasies, and I guess it's more convenient to make players feel powerful by letting them get a good eyeful of the enemies they're obliterating with their overpowered player weapons.
More options
Context Copy link
What about the grittier WWII shooters then? I'm occasionally playing "Hell let loose" with some friends and on average you die not even knowing what hit you.
Is there a single player mode? Multiplayer is usually just not fun for me unless it's PvE
No, unfortunately not. It does seem to check all your other boxes though. The grittier WWII Shooters in general tend to have a weightier feel for the weapons, people die in just 1-2 shots and engagement is usually at a considerable distance.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link