D
Deleted-355425
Guest
Give it a nice title and people will pay for it.
C'mon...3DS Ambassador...seriously...Ambassador
not a new new 3ds i take it?
Give it a nice title and people will pay for it.
C'mon...3DS Ambassador...seriously...Ambassador
C'mon...3DS Ambassador...seriously...Ambassador
Where can I get a new 3DS XL (AUS) now?
Out of stock @ 365games.co.uk
Thanks in advance!
Thanks but
Expected stock arrival 2015-01-13 *
I can't wait anymore. I'm going to cry.
help
You're just jelly of those of us in the Amby club. (^:
it was my understanding that the max for the 3ds is 32 because of the format FAT limits to 32 i think something like that derp derp
Well if you're chomping at the bit for one Amazon £250. I nearly bought one myself as I've no patience whatsoever but found one on eBay, even tho I hate eBay for £210.
Hm, and here I was, hoping that even if the time came when my posts were needed again, there would be a long time afore an event of that nature transpired; again, it seems I was wrong, as I noticed some confusion regarding bits of my latest post that were no-ones fault but my own, most pressingly, that I did not give a definition of the concept of "fanboy"; and as such, I will now make a case-in-point regarding some of the debate by being transparent and communicative, and correcting my mistakes and better defining those things which were ill-defined, as I am no prophet or religious scripture that should need to be "interpreted", but rather, I aim towards making understandable, clear, and direct point(s); having failed in this previously, I will try and remedy that here (and make a bonus sidenote or two).
As to the first sidenote; I commend those who disagree with me, but actually do read what I write and write replies in a rational, civil manner and actually try and counter my points as opposed to using tricks such as Ad Hominem*, or deliberately saying "I didn't actually read everything person X said, but I'm going to argue against it/what little I saw anyway, even without full context or understanding", or simply ignoring half of the points and only replying to a few specific ones, without admitting that "I only reply to X, because Y was actually correct".
Let's start then with the definition of a "fanboy", as there have been a couple of good cases in point since my last post that I can use to give a clearer idea.
Firstly, out of the two interpretations that were made, the latter is the one closest to my definition; that is, that "fanboyism" means blatantly defending all facets - even the shadier ones - of the thing one is a fan of even in the face of said things actions in reality, and using faulty arguments along the lines of "Well Y isn't bad, because X exists, and X is worse"**; and also to give out things that are actually personal opinions as facts and exaggerating things, such as was given an excellent example of earlier by some user, who quite literally said that GW was better than Sky, and listed a number of features that would supposedly make GW the superior choice, while remaining completely ignorant towards two main things;
Firstly, that what features one is actually looking for is subjective, and not everyone wants - or cares for - the exact same features. E.g., in the specific case of one solely wanting to play imports, or at least considering the option to play imports to be of any importance, then GW is factually the better choice, simply by merit of that you can't do that with Sky (at the time of writing, at least) and "that's that"; same thing with if e.g. installing .CIA's (again, at the time of writing, as one cannot do that with Sky at said time) is an important feature for one. However, this is subjective; for someone who simply wants to play ROMs, for legal backup-reasons or otherwise, both of the carts are quite capable of doing that, and then one would have to look at e.g. how you would go about doing that on both carts (if it's equally simple to get started, how much work has to be put in to use them, if you have to do something in particular to be able to do it etcetera), if they can both play the same amount of ROMs etcetera and base it on that, and then GW might actually not be the superior choice; it is subjective (to take an example, it could easily be argued that getting set-up with GW is more work than the Sky, and that some people just "can't be arsed" or "doesn't consider the benefits to be worth the hassle"; and that is not just "them being lazy and stupid", that is them knowing what they want and going with the option that best suit their wants and needs). Additionally, the exaggerating; saying things like "being able to update games for online play" in a context where it's said as if it's a unique feature of the one or the other, when it actually isn't.
Secondly, a clear property of a fanboy is trying to push their particular choice/product upon others, e.g. by
1. Instead of first asking e.g. "Hey, what do you need? Oh, X, Y, and Z?" and then (and only then) replying with something along the lines of "Well, in that case I'd say that you should go with Q, because they will be capable of doing X, Y, and Z for you; but just so you know, P applies to all of that".
2. Saying things along the lines of "Oh, you've made a decision for X? No, don't go with that, hold out and go with my thing instead!" (there was some user posting a case in point for this earlier)
3. Claiming the superiority of their own choice/product by showcasing the Pro's, but little to no (or meaningless) Cons regarding their own choice/product, and doing the exact opposite for the competing choice/product (a case in point here was that some user made a list that supposedly would show that GW was ultimately superior for everyone at the moment, but failed to mention a number of things, including but not limited to that Sky works on the latest firmware, which GW doesn't, and also committing wholly to the "upholding their definition of "best" as a fact based on that product X has features that they themselves might want, but others might ultimately not care for/about).
And thirdly, a common property of fanboys - that it can be argued is not required to be a "fanboy", but that I consider important enough to at least be mentioned - is that they get emotionally vested in their choice. This is a common human trait that has undergone much research, even in the specifics of the psychology of fandom, and I cannot possibly write it all down here, but a few (heavily) shortened points and examples regarding the mechanics of how it works are;
1. One has been raised with X, and as such, self-identifies with X to a very high degree.
2. One has chosen X and cannot (for whatever reason) also choose Y, and as such, get insecure in their choice when faced with the possibility that X wasn't the best choice, and as such assert the superiority of X to restore their own internal mental balance.
3. Out of a general/not inherently fandom-related psychological insecurity, one has to assert oneself as being superior in most (and extreme cases, all) things, and will as such default to considering everyone that do not agree with their specific choice of X to have made an inferior choice.
And this is of course just scratching the surface; for those interested in further reading, I'd recommend starting with something by Freud (as mad as the man was in most respects, he made more than a few points that still hold up to this day) specifically regarding attachment, and the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophys article on emotion, specifically section 8, "Rationality and Emotions" ( http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emotion/#8 ).
That would be the definition of a fanboy; hope that clears things up a bit, and I apologize for overestimating my original "clearness", so to speak.
Now then, as a second sidenote (hmm, perhaps it would be more accurate of me to describe them as "secondary points" as opposed to "sidenotes"?), allow me to say that the whole "it's peoples own fault for not researching enough" also falls into a fallacy; for then, you have to specify what "enough" research is. If you don't, and it is taken to it's logical conclusion, then that would mean that if I were to e.g. buy a GW-kit, I would first have to find a reseller. Secondly, I'd have to read up on that particular reseller/company, to see what sort of reputation it has. Thirdly, I would have to see who originally owned and operated the reseller, and who is currently doing it, as it might have otherwise been taken over by a shady person. As such, I would fourthly have to find out some personal details regarding the person who currently owns and operates it, to know if that person is trustworthy. Fifthly, I would have to make sure that that person was not part of a larger conspiracy of some sort, directed specifically towards making me buy a false GW-kit, and so on and so forth; already by the fifth step, it has turned ridiculous, and there are many, many other ways of formulating this fallacy without getting so ridiculous (here, I do it to be very clear regarding the point at hand), and also with adding many, many more steps; as such, there has to be a limit to what is reasonable, and a defined one, e.g. "I the company in question seems reputable, and when I contacted them, they gave me answer X which seems satisfactory" or some other example. Further, saying that (as some user previously did) it is always the user buying a clones own fault leads to a fallacy (which will shortly be explained) and also a second rather absurd conclusion. For the fallacy; since most people who did buy a clone were most likely new to it all and didn't even know there was such a thing as "clones" that they had to watch out for, that logic leads to an absurd logical end as that is logically and principally identical to me saying
"Anyone who slips on a banana peel will be shot on sight", and then - waiting around a corner - intently watching a banana peel on the side-walk, and shooting the first person who slips on it, and then explaining myself by saying "Well, it doesn't matter if the person didn't hear me saying that I'd shoot anyone who slipped, he/she/it could've just been watching his/her/its feet even though he/she/it had no particular reason to be doing so; they still could
have been watching their feet, hence, it's their fault for not doing so".
For the second absurd conclusion, it would as such also mean that everyone would have to watch out for everything at all times, i.e. a variant of the earlier fallacy regarding "having to do research".
Yet another sidenote is that the newspost that said "just around the corner" also used the word "soon", not to mention the earlier made point regarding how early they released a teaser video, and I find it is currently most rational to assume that at least a few of the mails - perhaps particularly the ones from our own users - are real. Further, also the fact that they are keeping us completely in the dark as to what's actually going on. Hence, it would still seem - unless I've missed something - that they have actually acted in a rather sleazy/questionable manner.
Regarding what's actually going on, that leads to the third and final (unless I later remember something that I as I'm writing this have forgotten) sidenote, the matter of their supposed "stability-testing".
It is proven not by me, but by GWs actual communications to us, that we have no idea what they're doing, simply because they haven't told us. I made this point in my previous post, and even came up with two other blind guesses as to what might be keeping them and furthermore added an argument as to why those two blind guesses might actually be better guesses than that they're stability-testing, and yet it seems that some people keep talking about being patient because "don't you want a stable release?" as if it was a fact that stability-testing is what they're doing. This baffles me, and could be added to the definition of a fanboy; assuming that the best possible/most probable explanation for any action that the thing they're a fan of is always also the explanation that puts the thing in question in the best possible light. One cannot say that the extra amounts of time it is taking is because they're stability-testing, because we provably have no proof pointing to that or to literally anything at all. Me guessing that they're members of a small and secret cult that forbids releasing software-related updates of a particular byte-size at any other day then the 21st of march is literally just as good a guess as that they're bug-hunting, simply because they are keeping us in the dark and not telling us anything at all. Saying "don't you want a stable release" or "if you got your way people would brick their 3DS's" is simply not fact, it's wild speculation.
Now, that should be it. If I've missed something, made some error or other, or have said something without properly defining it, I would like to be called out on it, that I may improve and better myself.
Stay civil, unemotional and rational.
*Ad Hominem=Attacking the person making a point, as opposed to the point itself; when one cannot actually counter the points being made, and instead opts to attack the person making the points and as such trying to "win" by metaphorically saying "that man is covered in poo! Do you really want to agree with a man covered in poo?" and making people disagree based on that, even though the actual creature making the points - and the make-up of said creature - is entirely irrelevant to the validity of the points, and if the points made by the poo-covered man are actually correct. Put as simply as possible; one tries to avoid the issue(s) at hand and instead try to attack the people, not the arguments, of the opposing side.
** That sort of "argument" is inherently flawed, as the principle and logic it is based upon leads to a fallacy, in the sense that if the people using that sort of argument truly believed in it, they would never try and complain about e.g. being randomly beaten up and put in a wheelchair, because people sometimes get wantonly/senselessly murdered, and getting murdered is certainly worse than "merely" being put in a wheelchair. Put simply, it's flawed because it is a false argument that no-one truly upholds, and also/secondly because the logic upon which it is based leads to that there can literally be only one living person at a time who has a right to complain about anything, and that would be the one single person currently alive that has the worst possible conditions at any given time.
10. Kidding just one and the sd card of the 3ds.
Only 1 really, if you want .cia wich will be installed in your emunand get 2
Samsung having bad SD cards? I bet you went on ebay and read those reviews on a fake reseller.I bought 2 of those microSDHC. Is it any good? I SAW TONS OF BAD REVIEWS.
Seeing this thread running like is awesome! I hope you'll get what you want soon, guys! SOON. ah ah ah ah!
I bought 2 of those microSDHC. Is it any good? I SAW TONS OF BAD REVIEWS.
Samsung having bad SD cards? I bet you went on ebay and read those reviews on a fake reseller.
I'll find out soon, mine was brought directly from Amazon so it should be legit.
everyone is out of stock of the N3DS's so they will be waiting on Nintendo to make more and send out, firmware will be 9.2 on this up coming batch
The price is just so outrageous... :/ i mean i got my n3ds ll for under $200 and thats just a normal n3ds i mean i get its in english which is a decent benefit and if u wanted to buy legit games youd have that option. but with region free through gateway its just hard for me to justify such a price difference.