UPDATE: I was able to contact Helen Angel on Reddit. She said that she’s not the person who makes these decisions, she just announces them. While this may seem all fine and dandy, just think about it. That means that the decision to not add sharks wasn’t the fault of one person, but probably a group of people, in a conference room, who all agreed to not add sharks because they’re “endangered”, without one person standing up saying anything about this being a bad idea.
so your telling me they wont add sharks tp the game because they are an endanger species but yet they are perfectly fine with adding dragons. What is the logic here can they not distinguish between reality and fantasy. Do they even play minecraft or have they deiced its the perfect time to start inserting politics into the game design. this kind of illogical fallacies is the destroyer of games. Its like saying Lets not put a swords into our game because it might correlate to a growth in crime resulting from sword violence and lets remove strong and empowered Male figures due to toxic male behavior. What this game needs is more strong men and women who are determined to do something others are determined not to be done.
lol.. please explain what they are supposed to be apologizing for.
For bad employee ethic. If I go into a restaurant wearing sweatpants and crocs, I don't want to be lectured on fashion by the employees. Now, if it so happened that I brought an illegal weapon into the building or violated the clothing codes of the restaurant, I would expect to be pushed out for violating rules meant to keep people safe and/or healthy. But I don't want employees to lecture me on fashion, much less political correctness.
If I came into a restaurant with a fur coat and you, the waiter, lectured me on how many animals were killed to make that coat, you would be fired for such an attack on my personal decisions. It is beyond your jurisdiction as an employee to attack my personal choices unless they violate health, safety or moral protocol set in place by the restaurant.
For the record, I would have rolled my eyes and moved on if this was a response she gave when talking about something other than Minecraft. But when she responds to a customer asking about a product with "Animal Cruelty" as an excuse, then goes on to call someone's career "stupid", I believe this at least deserves an apology and restraint in the future to avoid any worse employee behavior.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
so your telling me they wont add sharks tp the game because they are an endanger species but yet they are perfectly fine with adding dragons. What is the logic here can they not distinguish between reality and fantasy. Do they even play minecraft or have they deiced its the perfect time to start inserting politics into the game design. this kind of illogical fallacies is the destroyer of games. Its like saying Lets not put a swords into our game because it might correlate to a growth in crime resulting from sword violence and lets remove strong and empowered Male figures due to toxic male behavior. What this game needs is more strong men and women who are determined to do something others are determined not to be done.
You're talking about illogical fallacies and yet you compare dragons to sharks. If they were being serious about not adding sharks because they are endangered, it's because they don't want to encourage violence against sharks and make a statement. Dragons don't exist. You can't discourage violence against dragons because they don't exist. They are completely and utterly different things.
You're talking about illogical fallacies and yet you compare dragons to sharks. If they were being serious about not adding sharks because they are endangered, it's because they don't want to encourage violence against sharks and make a statement. Dragons don't exist. You can't discourage violence against dragons because they don't exist. They are completely and utterly different things.
Ok I'm going to give it to you straight, its not a logical fallacy if you have the right attitudes on the matter. Dragons exist in minecraft so your point is mostly invalid as towards what can be encouragable here upon us gamers, maybe I want to be one of the first person to explore the vast known world and search for a Dragon to prove to the entire world that dragons do in fact exist after all dragons come from eggs. Now this is the heart of the matter here, what is worse putting something in a game that is based on myth or putting something in a game that is based on some animal life. Its all about perception here and with that I could perceive that Dragons are real and be determine enough to try and find one like if it was a shark out in the vast deep open ocean, so with that being said can you convince me that Dragons don't exist to try and stop me, who knows maybe you want to be the first on that wants to find one and you go around telling other people that dragons don't exist to better your odds on finding one. Now I want you to think about this for a moment because to you dragons and sharks might seem like completely and utterly different things but someone out there with the certain inclination can believe otherwise.
Ok I'm going to give it to you straight, its not a logical fallacy if you have the right attitudes on the matter.
I'm sorry but... no? I agree that this whole animal cruelty thing is stupid, but you always, always, argue your point with logical conclusions, not with illogical statements. Otherwise, you aren't proving your point to the other side. You would appear wrong to them.
We are not going to encourage you to use logical fallacies to prove our point either, because that makes our entire side seem wrong rather than just you.
Dragons exist in minecraft so your point is mostly invalid as towards what can be encouragable here upon us gamers, maybe I want to be one of the first person to explore the vast known world and search for a Dragon to prove to the entire world that dragons do in fact exist after all dragons come from eggs.
Now this is the heart of the matter here, what is worse putting something in a game that is based on myth or putting something in a game that is based on some animal life.
You're trying to tell us that Mojang is being hypocritical because we have a moral obligation to be realistic one-hundred percent of the time. This simply isn't true. Kids have a basic understanding of what's fictional and what is real. Putting Dragons into the game isn't encouraging kids to think Dragons are real, and Mojang doesn't think that it will.
Mojang thinks that putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to hunt for sharks, not because it might encourage kids to think sharks are real... which would be a good reason for Mojang to add sharks...
Its all about perception here and with that I could perceive that Dragons are real and be determine enough to try and find one like if it was a shark out in the vast deep open ocean, so with that being said can you convince me that Dragons don't exist to try and stop me, who knows maybe you want to be the first on that wants to find one and you go around telling other people that dragons don't exist to better your odds on finding one.
I'm not sure what this has to do with encouraging kids not to grow up to think sharks are harmful and should be killed... (Which again, I think is a stupid thing for Mojang to think, but this is their argument.)
Now I want you to think about this for a moment because to you dragons and sharks might seem like completely and utterly different things but someone out there with the certain inclination can believe otherwise.
You seem to have a very strange idea of how arguments work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
I'm sorry but... no? I agree that this whole animal cruelty thing is stupid, but you always, always, argue your point with logical conclusions, not with illogical statements. Otherwise, you aren't proving your point to the other side. You would appear wrong to them.
We are not going to encourage you to use logical fallacies to prove our point either, because that makes our entire side seem wrong rather than just you.
Its all about perception in the end. The only logical conclusion we can all agree on here is that this is minecraft and whether ideas implemented in the game to be based on mythical fantasy, borderline reality and creative originality it all can equally represented in the game no if and or butts, This is our game and there is no denying that the Loyal fans made this game for what it is. The only logical fallacies I see here and I hear it all the time is blaming video games for real world problems and I see this topic brought up way to much in the political correct thinking crowd to scapegoat the real issues by not only suggesting the actions in said video game are some how correlated with actions in said real world but are a direct cause for me is shear ignorance. Violent video games do not create violent kids and with that being said putting Sharks in minecraft is not going to cause an crisis with any shark population because its already happening. Over fishing is to blame and several other factors I'm not going to go into great detail have are already created a crisis years ago and as industry keeps on fulfilling an ever increasing demand for such wants, Sharks and many other forms of ocean life will go extinct.
You're trying to tell us that Mojang is being hypocritical because we have a moral obligation to be realistic one-hundred percent of the time. This simply isn't true. Kids have a basic understanding of what's fictional and what is real. Putting Dragons into the game isn't encouraging kids to think Dragons are real, and Mojang doesn't think that it will.
Mojang thinks that putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to hunt for sharks, not because it might encourage kids to think sharks are real... which would be a good reason for Mojang to add sharks...
I'm not trying to tell anybody anything or accuse Mojang of being hypocritical and nor do I have aspirations to make minecraft 100% realistic what so ever. Now I will tell you when I'm going to tell you something, I don't hide behind shallow wording steep in unequivocal semantics. Now I will tell you what I mean, I just want a fun and exciting game not to be ruined by trite trivial Ideas, I've seen it happen one too many times and destroy many of good games. I hate the thought when the devs think they need to virtue signal with something in the game. There are plenty of pretty faces representing out there about stopping animal cruelty and there is plenty of commercials out there to boot. I personally think its bad publicity all the while if not the opposite it does nothing to improve game play for the players at all. According to my observations there is nothing wrong with adding Sharks to minecraft, I believe it would be awesome addition to minecraft and in no way shape of form do I think that it will encourage kids to swim 50 meters out in the ocean searching for a pack of sharks.
I'm not sure what this has to do with encouraging kids not to grow up to think sharks are harmful and should be killed... (Which again, I think is a stupid thing for Mojang to think, but this is their argument.)
I'm just questioning everything, they can put dragons in the game but not sharks. C'mon it will be fun to have sharks in the game especially Big Great White Sharks.
You seem to have a very strange idea of how arguments work.
I'm not here to argue or to create a flame war because that how they usually start.
Its all about perception in the end. The only logical conclusion we can all agree on here is that this is minecraft and whether ideas implemented in the game to be based on mythical fantasy, borderline reality and creative originality it all can equally represented in the game no if and or butts, This is our game and there is no denying that the Loyal fans made this game for what it is.
This sentence has nothing to do with the subject matter. We're not debating whether or not something based on mythical fantasy or creative originality belongs in the game, we're arguing on whether Mojang's stance on animal abuse is correct in this situation or not.
The only logical fallacies I see here and I hear it all the time is blaming video games for real world problems
Which is what we've been arguing against. And this statement isn't a fallacy, it's just a bad assumption. Of course, we in this forum topic have our reasons why we disagree with this assumption. A fallacy is when an argument is used that does not logically prove a point. Such as Ad Hominem, attacking someone with insults and personal attacks rather than actually focusing on the subject matter, or False Analogy, where an analogy is used to prove an argument that does not fit the situation well.
and I see this topic brought up way to much in the political correct thinking crowd to scapegoat the real issues by not only suggesting the actions in said video game are some how correlated with actions in said real world but are a direct cause for me is shear ignorance.
Which is what we've been talking and agreeing about for 9 pages of posts. (Besides bad customer service and work ethic.) Thank you for restating this.
Violent video games do not create violent kids and with that being said putting Sharks in minecraft is not going to cause an crisis with any shark population because its already happening. Over fishing is to blame and several other factors I'm not going to go into great detail have are already created a crisis years ago and as industry keeps on fulfilling an ever increasing demand for such wants, Sharks and many other forms of ocean life will go extinct.
And everyone would agree with you, but none of us want you to make a logical error that makes our arguments seem more confusing than convincing.
I'm not trying to tell anybody anything or accuse Mojang of being hypocritical and nor do I have aspirations to make minecraft 100% realistic what so ever.
And we know you don't want Minecraft to be 100% realistic. But from your argument it seems that you are making some connection between Mojang's choice of adding an unrealistic dragon into the game inspiring kids to think dragons are real and Mojang thinking putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to kill deadly dangerous sharks.
I'm starting to understand your point more and more, but your analogy is still off by a large margin. Kids are smart, Mojang knows they are smart enough to tell Real Life apart from Fake Life. But Mojang thinks that they might take a certain lesson repeated often in Fake Life to be true in Real Life, that sharks are dangerous and evil. To be fair, cartoons and movies repeat this mantra a lot, and it does make the idea of saving sharks seem odd.
Now I will tell you when I'm going to tell you something, I don't hide behind shallow wording steep in unequivocal semantics.
Shallow Wording: Wording that is not wise.
You say as you make a wall of text that seems to be made more to confuse than to explain... That's not to say that you are doing this on purpose, but every time you tell me that you are going to "spell out" your arguments, you get more verbose.
Now I will tell you what I mean, I just want a fun and exciting game not to be ruined by trite trivial Ideas, I've seen it happen one too many times and destroy many of good games.
And then you act like I'm criticizing your love of the game rather than trying to criticize your argument structure, which I would like to see improved as a general courtesy, not as someone trying to disprove your arguments and force you to agree with what Mojang is saying.
I'm not here to argue or to create a flame war because that how they usually start.
Actually, you came here stating an argument against Mojang's choice not to implement Sharks, so this statement is false.
But with the context of what you were replying to, it seems to me you are assuming every argument leads to a flame war. This isn't true. Friendly and polite arguments are necessary to come to a conclusion that all parties can agree with. The Suggestions forum is full of friendly and polite arguing, where we debate game design and code implementation. I think I can safely say that you can learn a handful of knowledge about how balance and game design work by reading the replies on many of the topics in that forum.
Heck, right now I'm having an argument with you because I'd like to improve upon and constructively critique your arguments and critisism. (Yes, it's inception.) I'm obviously not arguing against your points because I support Mojang, but because I'd like to see you critique correctly. After all, no sports player got good by not playing against an opposing team.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
This sentence has nothing to do with the subject matter. We're not debating whether or not something based on mythical fantasy or creative originality belongs in the game, we're arguing on whether Mojang's stance on animal abuse is correct in this situation or not.
I might be all by myself here but that's what I'm debating about the soon to be mythical shark that bites at anything that moves which sometimes eats floating garbage because the mythical shark never stops eating. Now I think it's safe to say Sharks are not pets so you cant abuse sharks, animal abuse usually occurs when animals are consider pets so unless Mojang has a shark for a pet then it's safe to say you cant be abusive against sharks.
Which is what we've been arguing against. And this statement isn't a fallacy, it's just a bad assumption. Of course, we in this forum topic have our reasons why we disagree with this assumption. A fallacy is when an argument is used that does not logically prove a point. Such as Ad Hominem, attacking someone with insults and personal attacks rather than actually focusing on the subject matter, or False Analogy, where an analogy is used to prove an argument that does not fit the situation well.
The idea that Violent video games is a direct cause for violent behavior is certainly a fallacy by most standards. Think about it, how can you be violent if you sitting at your computer playing video games 8 hours a day unless your that bad at playing video games that you got to smash your keyboard. Other then that according to my personal observations obsessive behavior is the prime factor in creating violent tendencies.
Which is what we've been talking and agreeing about for 9 pages of posts. (Besides bad customer service and work ethic.) Thank you for restating this.
Your welcome.
And everyone would agree with you, but none of us want you to make a logical error that makes our arguments seem more confusing than convincing.
Everyone does agrees with me, I should know the voices in my head said everyone agrees with me but anyways the argument that is being used to keep sharks out of the game is confusing at best because when faced with such an irrational argument you will see there is nothing to gain in winning an irrational argument against people that don't want you to win that how some games are played out. Try as you might but sometimes certain people with certain one sided beliefs are incapable of being persuaded towards complex realities they don't want to understand.
And we know you don't want Minecraft to be 100% realistic. But from your argument it seems that you are making some connection between Mojang's choice of adding an unrealistic dragon into the game inspiring kids to think dragons are real and Mojang thinking putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to kill deadly dangerous sharks.
Thats what we call rare circumstances, it's a possibility a very slim possibility that Dragons did existed in the past and if the genetics sequences lined up just right with reptiles today its possible a new form of dragon could be born. We might not at first perceive the new reptilian as a dragon because we are forced to treat dragons as a missing link in the reptilian family tree so anything that is Dragon in nature will ultimately go unidentified until the missing dragon link found.
I'm starting to understand your point more and more, but your analogy is still off by a large margin. Kids are smart, Mojang knows they are smart enough to tell Real Life apart from Fake Life. But Mojang thinks that they might take a certain lesson repeated often in Fake Life to be true in Real Life, that sharks are dangerous and evil. To be fair, cartoons and movies repeat this mantra a lot, and it does make the idea of saving sharks seem odd.
You will understand in due time the eureka moment is always just around the corner. Your right kids are smart but yet there is still much to learn. I think a fairly intelligent child can figure out that Shark have small complicated brains and like to bite at anything that moves not because sharks are evil but because sharks have a bite reflex similar to how we have our own reflex when it comes to our own senses.
Shallow Wording: Wording that is not wise.
You say as you make a wall of text that seems to be made more to confuse than to explain... That's not to say that you are doing this on purpose, but every time you tell me that you are going to "spell out" your arguments, you get more verbose.
You can blame my mentor for that. He is very eccentric, spells everything out, and is very elaborate with both his wording and writings. He does it and so must I.
And then you act like I'm criticizing your love of the game rather than trying to criticize your argument structure, which I would like to see improved as a general courtesy, not as someone trying to disprove your arguments and force you to agree with what Mojang is saying.
I do not perceive in anyway that you are criticizing me unless you tell me that you are criticizing me and in all honesty a little criticisms wont hut anybody. Your most likely here for the same reason why I'm here, sure we might have different view points about this question why Mojang says sharks can never be implement in minecraft but when it comes down to we both think it is absurd. You have your reason why you think its absurd and I as well have my own. But no matter how complex or simple the reasoning is, the heart of the matter will be always be the same if we are of the same beliefs.
Actually, you came here stating an argument against Mojang's choice not to implement Sharks, so this statement is false.
But with the context of what you were replying to, it seems to me you are assuming every argument leads to a flame war. This isn't true. Friendly and polite arguments are necessary to come to a conclusion that all parties can agree with. The Suggestions forum is full of friendly and polite arguing, where we debate game design and code implementation. I think I can safely say that you can learn a handful of knowledge about how balance and game design work by reading the replies on many of the topics in that forum.
Heck, right now I'm having an argument with you because I'd like to improve upon and constructively critique your arguments and critisism. (Yes, it's inception.) I'm obviously not arguing against your points because I support Mojang, but because I'd like to see you critique correctly. After all, no sports player got good by not playing against an opposing team.
Well Its not an argument when its true. You might think your having and argument with me but I'm just conversing what I know is to be true.
Recently, a leak of a shark mob for version 1.14: The Update Aquatic was released. Afterwards, Mojang announced that the leak was fake. While this was fine on its own, they then went on to say that sharks would NEVER be added to Minecraft! When I learned about this I was really mad. Sharks are probably one of the most wanted mobs to be added into Minecraft. You'd think they'd add this in since the entire 1.14 update is about the ocean. How could you have an ocean without sharks? Sharks would be a really good addition to the game. It would make traveling the ocean a lot more scary and exciting.
But you might be asking, "Did they give any reasons for this decision?" Well, Helen Angel (The Community Manager[I think that's what it's called], since people were wondering who she is) actually gave an explanation as to why sharks won't be added. Take a look.
...
WHAT?
Okay, let's break this down.
Okay, so what? Just because an animal is endangered doesn't mean you can't add it to a game. Plus, Minecraft has added in some endangered animals before. Take a look at the wolves, who look similar to the gray wolves, an endangered species. And about the misunderstood part, wolves and polar bears are also misunderstood. May I also note that wolves were hunted to extinction in the UK?
Shouldn't taming wolves also make people want to approach wolves in real life? This could also apply to polar bears too. There is an obvious flaw in your logic.
I'm pretty sure that at a young age, most people are taught that sharks are dangerous creatures that could possibly kill you. Because of that, why would any sane person want to approach a shark? Also, there are in fact ways to safely approach sharks. Take a look at shark cages.
Playing a video game where you can kill an animal doesn't make you want to kill that animal. What about pigs, sheep, cows, chickens, and rabbits? I've never heard about anyone wanting to kill any of those animals after playing Minecraft of all games. Hell, there is literally a game centered around killing sharks(Can't remember the name).
What happened? I never heard anything about a child feeding their parrot a cookie and killing it. The game even tells you that cookies kill parrots by having them die when you feed it to them.
So, overall, this decision is completely nonsensical. All of the points Helen brings up are easily debunked. Sharks should definitely be added into the game, as they would make an awesome addition to the ocean update. I'm not sure whether backlash from the community will cause them to change their minds, because from what I can tell, people are pretty steamed about this. Where do you stand on this? Do you support this decision or not? Do you think that Helen brought up some good points? Let me know in the comments below.
I might be all by myself here but that's what I'm debating about the soon to be mythical shark that bites at anything that moves which sometimes eats floating garbage because the mythical shark never stops eating. Now I think it's safe to say Sharks are not pets so you cant abuse sharks, animal abuse usually occurs when animals are consider pets so unless Mojang has a shark for a pet then it's safe to say you cant be abusive against sharks.
Okay, first off, animal abuse can happen to animals in the wild, and so can species endangerment. Mojang is worried about the Shark population which gets a bad rep as shown in Jaws and similar movies. Sharks are also killed to make Shark Fin Soup, which kills a large number of sharks. Is it right for Mojang to go out of it's way to stop people from killing sharks by not implementing a feature? We here on this forum do not think so.
Secondly, if you're debating a completely different topic, maybe you should make your own topic? This topic itself is mainly centered around Mojang's stance on animal abuse, but if you'd like to argue why Mojang won't add a mythical shark to a game that already has a mythical dragon, okay...
The idea that Violent video games is a direct cause for violent behavior is certainly a fallacy by most standards. Think about it, how can you be violent if you sitting at your computer playing video games 8 hours a day unless your that bad at playing video games that you got to smash your keyboard. Other then that according to my personal observations obsessive behavior is the prime factor in creating violent tendencies.
A wrong argument is not necessarily a fallacy. In this case, the argument is based on an assumption, or hypothesis. Is the hypothesis wrong? Probably. But that doesn't make the argument a fallacy. The hypothesis itself is based on the well known fact that what you see, hear and feel will inspire what you think, say and do.
A fallacy would be if they tried to argue that video games cause violence because in their personal opinion video games are bad. In this case, the argument is based on someone's personal opinion of video games, and not based on a well-known fact.
Everyone does agrees with me, I should know the voices in my head said everyone agrees with me
Except Mojang doesn't seem to agree with you because they aren't adding sharks, so why did you even say this?
but anyways the argument that is being used to keep sharks out of the game is confusing at best because when faced with such an irrational argument you will see there is nothing to gain in winning an irrational argument against people that don't want you to win that how some games are played out. Try as you might but sometimes certain people with certain one sided beliefs are incapable of being persuaded towards complex realities they don't want to understand.
And if Mojang is being one-sided about these things, they are not agreeing with you... So why did you make that other statement?
Thats what we call rare circumstances, it's a possibility a very slim possibility that Dragons did existed in the past and if the genetics sequences lined up just right with reptiles today its possible a new form of dragon could be born. We might not at first perceive the new reptilian as a dragon because we are forced to treat dragons as a missing link in the reptilian family tree so anything that is Dragon in nature will ultimately go unidentified until the missing dragon link found.
This has... literally nothing to do with the argument that Sharks being in the game would cause animal cruelty.
Okay, so I put Dragons in the game. If I have a kid that doesn't catch the hint that they aren't real, I can explain to them this. HUGE SHOCKER: Fictional Animals are Fictional, who knew? (I could actually get into a very interesting argument for Creationism about how the word dinosaur only got added to our language in the late 1800s, and how it's likely humans and dinosaurs may have existed at the same time, inspiring the notion of dragons, but this would be mind-bogglingly offtopic to the main post.)
You will understand in due time the eureka moment is always just around the corner.
Just because I understand what exactly you were trying to prove doesn't mean that your argument is based on firm grounds.
Your right kids are smart but yet there is still much to learn. I think a fairly intelligent child can figure out that Shark have small complicated brains and like to bite at anything that moves not because sharks are evil but because sharks have a bite reflex similar to how we have our own reflex when it comes to our own senses.
Okay, but what does this have to do with preventing killing sharks in the wild for shark fin soup?
You can blame my mentor for that. He is very eccentric, spells everything out, and is very elaborate with both his wording and writings. He does it and so must I.
Okay? Moving on...
I do not perceive in anyway that you are criticizing me unless you tell me that you are criticizing me and in all honesty a little criticisms wont hut anybody. Your most likely here for the same reason why I'm here, sure we might have different view points about this question why Mojang says sharks can never be implement in minecraft but when it comes down to we both think it is absurd. You have your reason why you think its absurd and I as well have my own. But no matter how complex or simple the reasoning is, the heart of the matter will be always be the same if we are of the same beliefs.
That doesn't mean that I won't try and question your reason if it sounds absurd... I may have my own reasons but I don't want you to base your ideas off of flimsy logic that doesn't make sense...
Well Its not an argument when its true. You might think your having and argument with me but I'm just conversing what I know is to be true.
Kid, there are three sides to an argument: Mine, Yours, and the truth. Nobody is going to flawlessly point out the truth, at least not any human being. Claiming you have the truth without giving evidence that your side is the trustworthy one is both prideful and illogical. So illogical, that it's a fallacy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
The discussion in this thread appears to be getting further and further away from the actual topic of the thread, and seems to just be turning into a big back-and-forth argument. Please keep the posts in this thread directly about the topic of Mojang not adding sharks. If you wish to argue about how correct your opinions are, violence in video games, dragons, etc., please move to a private discussion.
Okay, first off, animal abuse can happen to animals in the wild, and so can species endangerment. Mojang is worried about the Shark population which gets a bad rep as shown in Jaws and similar movies. Sharks are also killed to make Shark Fin Soup, which kills a large number of sharks. Is it right for Mojang to go out of it's way to stop people from killing sharks by not implementing a feature? We here on this forum do not think so.
Secondly, if you're debating a completely different topic, maybe you should make your own topic? This topic itself is mainly centered around Mojang's stance on animal abuse, but if you'd like to argue why Mojang won't add a mythical shark to a game that already has a mythical dragon, okay...
I think the devs are hiding behind said animal abuse stuff as a means not to implement the fan favorite/promoted sharks and cover up the real reasone why they don't want sharks in the game. Its not animal abuse that we should be debating about, were just beating a dead horse here like the devs want, but rather we should be debating about "why would the devs say never to adding sharks to the game", I think the devs have watched one to many cheesy shark films like sharknado, jaws and that other movie about those mutated sharks that escape from there ocean lab containment I forgot the name of that movie, but anyways back on topic the devs have become sharkophobic and truly afraid that by adding sharks will cause the player base to become afraid like them and stop playing because the devs cant face seeing a very terrifying shark. Simply put Sharks are to scary and because of the devs fear of sharks is stopping them from being added to the game. I think that is what going on here and now the devs are just trying to psychologically guilt us so that we would agree with their baseless fears. tell you the truth I'm more afraid of Lighting then I am of sharks, I almost been hit by lighting but does that mean I'm not going to play a game that has lighting in them not at all.
A wrong argument is not necessarily a fallacy. In this case, the argument is based on an assumption, or hypothesis. Is the hypothesis wrong? Probably. But that doesn't make the argument a fallacy. The hypothesis itself is based on the well known fact that what you see, hear and feel will inspire what you think, say and do.
A fallacy would be if they tried to argue that video games cause violence because in their personal opinion video games are bad. In this case, the argument is based on someone's personal opinion of video games, and not based on a well-known fact.
Fair enough.
Except Mojang doesn't seem to agree with you because they aren't adding sharks, so why did you even say this?
And if Mojang is being one-sided about these things, they are not agreeing with you... So why did you make that other statement?
Now, I am going to tell you what I mean when I say " the voices in my head say everyone agrees with me ;)" i don't mean the voices in my head but I am actually talking about the voices your hear that said "And everyone would agree with you." so with that said the devs dont agree with any of us. The devs are indeed one sided they are so one sided that anyone with some common since logic would be able to tell you how they are thinking, I can tell you how they think and this is how they think they are more concern about the game and its perceived influences then creating a enjoyable experience within said game, they have drank the koolaid and taken unprofessional advice from political correctness thinking that if they can just guilt trip us players into their PC beliefs then they don't haft to do all those cool things the dedicated players base is looking forward for them to do.
This has... literally nothing to do with the argument that Sharks being in the game would cause animal cruelty.
And there it is, it's because adding sharks into the game has nothing to do with animal cruelty. Its only the devs choice of words that implies this notion which I personally disagree with, so I don't want to echo their baseless beliefs on fragmented Ideas. The devs are the ones not telling us the truth and until the devs admit this which will be never because the devs are one sided with their beliefs about why sharks can never be adding to the game. All the devs need to do is say they don't like sharks so were not adding them to the game and then the real debate can begin.
Okay, so I put Dragons in the game. If I have a kid that doesn't catch the hint that they aren't real, I can explain to them this. HUGE SHOCKER: Fictional Animals are Fictional, who knew? (I could actually get into a very interesting argument for Creationism about how the word dinosaur only got added to our language in the late 1800s, and how it's likely humans and dinosaurs may have existed at the same time, inspiring the notion of dragons, but this would be mind-bogglingly offtopic to the main post.)
Just because I understand what exactly you were trying to prove doesn't mean that your argument is based on firm grounds.
There is no firm ground here bro the idea of animal cruelty is nothing more then quicksand for your arguments, the devs are the ones bent on the idea that we must agree with them no matter what. The whole point to this argument is to corner dedicated player base into a framework of thought that If you dont agree with the devs then the devs can simply say "why you support animal cruelty you animal abuser, you shouldn't want shark in the game you should stand with us devs for that it is us devs that are protecting sharks from people like you who want to see dead shark carcass inside videos game."
Okay, but what does this have to do with preventing killing sharks in the wild for shark fin soup?
But first tell me how not adding sharks to minecraft is going to prevent the slaughtering of sharks in the wild for witch doctor soup recipe delicacies. What is shark fin soup for, is it for chilly powder voodoo magic.
That doesn't mean that I won't try and question your reason if it sounds absurd... I may have my own reasons but I don't want you to base your ideas off of flimsy logic that doesn't make sense...
Go ahead Question me I don't care I'm not afraid to speak my mind I have nothing to fear but fear itself. My ideas are like cement at first its like liquid only to fill the form but over time My thought harden and take shape, It might not make sense at first but the end product will its called a foundation of ideas.
Kid, there are three sides to an argument: Mine, Yours, and the truth. Nobody is going to flawlessly point out the truth, at least not any human being. Claiming you have the truth without giving evidence that your side is the trustworthy one is both prideful and illogical. So illogical, that it's a fallacy.
There are no sides to an argument for the fact its an argument with an endless stream of opinions and Ideas that seek to fight it out to see which side can attract the most people too, that is all an argument is. To be right ones thoughts needs to be based on natural facts and that All our idea should produce good lasting results so any idea that is good in its entirety will be good under any circumstances and those thoughts right there usually don't attract but repel. Evidence is the fact that nature can only tell what is right and what is wrong and the way thing should be. So with that said why would I provide evidence when people seek to destroy evidence. I don't need to show evidence to people that don't have the refined senses to respect my evidence.
I'm going to continue this into our private discussions so that everyone else can enjoy a discussion without a meta-argument.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
Could it be that adding a shark may change the whole ocean biome? And since sharks are complicated more phases will be added and more work would be done behind the scene
lol.. please explain what they are supposed to be apologizing for.
...
so your telling me they wont add sharks tp the game because they are an endanger species but yet they are perfectly fine with adding dragons. What is the logic here can they not distinguish between reality and fantasy. Do they even play minecraft or have they deiced its the perfect time to start inserting politics into the game design. this kind of illogical fallacies is the destroyer of games. Its like saying Lets not put a swords into our game because it might correlate to a growth in crime resulting from sword violence and lets remove strong and empowered Male figures due to toxic male behavior. What this game needs is more strong men and women who are determined to do something others are determined not to be done.
For bad employee ethic. If I go into a restaurant wearing sweatpants and crocs, I don't want to be lectured on fashion by the employees. Now, if it so happened that I brought an illegal weapon into the building or violated the clothing codes of the restaurant, I would expect to be pushed out for violating rules meant to keep people safe and/or healthy. But I don't want employees to lecture me on fashion, much less political correctness.
If I came into a restaurant with a fur coat and you, the waiter, lectured me on how many animals were killed to make that coat, you would be fired for such an attack on my personal decisions. It is beyond your jurisdiction as an employee to attack my personal choices unless they violate health, safety or moral protocol set in place by the restaurant.
For the record, I would have rolled my eyes and moved on if this was a response she gave when talking about something other than Minecraft. But when she responds to a customer asking about a product with "Animal Cruelty" as an excuse, then goes on to call someone's career "stupid", I believe this at least deserves an apology and restraint in the future to avoid any worse employee behavior.
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
You're talking about illogical fallacies and yet you compare dragons to sharks. If they were being serious about not adding sharks because they are endangered, it's because they don't want to encourage violence against sharks and make a statement. Dragons don't exist. You can't discourage violence against dragons because they don't exist. They are completely and utterly different things.
Ok I'm going to give it to you straight, its not a logical fallacy if you have the right attitudes on the matter. Dragons exist in minecraft so your point is mostly invalid as towards what can be encouragable here upon us gamers, maybe I want to be one of the first person to explore the vast known world and search for a Dragon to prove to the entire world that dragons do in fact exist after all dragons come from eggs. Now this is the heart of the matter here, what is worse putting something in a game that is based on myth or putting something in a game that is based on some animal life. Its all about perception here and with that I could perceive that Dragons are real and be determine enough to try and find one like if it was a shark out in the vast deep open ocean, so with that being said can you convince me that Dragons don't exist to try and stop me, who knows maybe you want to be the first on that wants to find one and you go around telling other people that dragons don't exist to better your odds on finding one. Now I want you to think about this for a moment because to you dragons and sharks might seem like completely and utterly different things but someone out there with the certain inclination can believe otherwise.
I'm sorry but... no? I agree that this whole animal cruelty thing is stupid, but you always, always, argue your point with logical conclusions, not with illogical statements. Otherwise, you aren't proving your point to the other side. You would appear wrong to them.
We are not going to encourage you to use logical fallacies to prove our point either, because that makes our entire side seem wrong rather than just you.
You're trying to tell us that Mojang is being hypocritical because we have a moral obligation to be realistic one-hundred percent of the time. This simply isn't true. Kids have a basic understanding of what's fictional and what is real. Putting Dragons into the game isn't encouraging kids to think Dragons are real, and Mojang doesn't think that it will.
Mojang thinks that putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to hunt for sharks, not because it might encourage kids to think sharks are real... which would be a good reason for Mojang to add sharks...
I'm not sure what this has to do with encouraging kids not to grow up to think sharks are harmful and should be killed... (Which again, I think is a stupid thing for Mojang to think, but this is their argument.)
You seem to have a very strange idea of how arguments work.
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
Its all about perception in the end. The only logical conclusion we can all agree on here is that this is minecraft and whether ideas implemented in the game to be based on mythical fantasy, borderline reality and creative originality it all can equally represented in the game no if and or butts, This is our game and there is no denying that the Loyal fans made this game for what it is. The only logical fallacies I see here and I hear it all the time is blaming video games for real world problems and I see this topic brought up way to much in the political correct thinking crowd to scapegoat the real issues by not only suggesting the actions in said video game are some how correlated with actions in said real world but are a direct cause for me is shear ignorance. Violent video games do not create violent kids and with that being said putting Sharks in minecraft is not going to cause an crisis with any shark population because its already happening. Over fishing is to blame and several other factors I'm not going to go into great detail have are already created a crisis years ago and as industry keeps on fulfilling an ever increasing demand for such wants, Sharks and many other forms of ocean life will go extinct.
I'm not trying to tell anybody anything or accuse Mojang of being hypocritical and nor do I have aspirations to make minecraft 100% realistic what so ever. Now I will tell you when I'm going to tell you something, I don't hide behind shallow wording steep in unequivocal semantics. Now I will tell you what I mean, I just want a fun and exciting game not to be ruined by trite trivial Ideas, I've seen it happen one too many times and destroy many of good games. I hate the thought when the devs think they need to virtue signal with something in the game. There are plenty of pretty faces representing out there about stopping animal cruelty and there is plenty of commercials out there to boot. I personally think its bad publicity all the while if not the opposite it does nothing to improve game play for the players at all. According to my observations there is nothing wrong with adding Sharks to minecraft, I believe it would be awesome addition to minecraft and in no way shape of form do I think that it will encourage kids to swim 50 meters out in the ocean searching for a pack of sharks.
I'm just questioning everything, they can put dragons in the game but not sharks. C'mon it will be fun to have sharks in the game especially Big Great White Sharks.
I'm not here to argue or to create a flame war because that how they usually start.
This sentence has nothing to do with the subject matter. We're not debating whether or not something based on mythical fantasy or creative originality belongs in the game, we're arguing on whether Mojang's stance on animal abuse is correct in this situation or not.
Which is what we've been arguing against. And this statement isn't a fallacy, it's just a bad assumption. Of course, we in this forum topic have our reasons why we disagree with this assumption. A fallacy is when an argument is used that does not logically prove a point. Such as Ad Hominem, attacking someone with insults and personal attacks rather than actually focusing on the subject matter, or False Analogy, where an analogy is used to prove an argument that does not fit the situation well.
Which is what we've been talking and agreeing about for 9 pages of posts. (Besides bad customer service and work ethic.) Thank you for restating this.
And everyone would agree with you, but none of us want you to make a logical error that makes our arguments seem more confusing than convincing.
And we know you don't want Minecraft to be 100% realistic. But from your argument it seems that you are making some connection between Mojang's choice of adding an unrealistic dragon into the game inspiring kids to think dragons are real and Mojang thinking putting sharks in the game will encourage kids to kill deadly dangerous sharks.
I'm starting to understand your point more and more, but your analogy is still off by a large margin. Kids are smart, Mojang knows they are smart enough to tell Real Life apart from Fake Life. But Mojang thinks that they might take a certain lesson repeated often in Fake Life to be true in Real Life, that sharks are dangerous and evil. To be fair, cartoons and movies repeat this mantra a lot, and it does make the idea of saving sharks seem odd.
Shallow Wording: Wording that is not wise.
You say as you make a wall of text that seems to be made more to confuse than to explain... That's not to say that you are doing this on purpose, but every time you tell me that you are going to "spell out" your arguments, you get more verbose.
And then you act like I'm criticizing your love of the game rather than trying to criticize your argument structure, which I would like to see improved as a general courtesy, not as someone trying to disprove your arguments and force you to agree with what Mojang is saying.
Actually, you came here stating an argument against Mojang's choice not to implement Sharks, so this statement is false.
But with the context of what you were replying to, it seems to me you are assuming every argument leads to a flame war. This isn't true. Friendly and polite arguments are necessary to come to a conclusion that all parties can agree with. The Suggestions forum is full of friendly and polite arguing, where we debate game design and code implementation. I think I can safely say that you can learn a handful of knowledge about how balance and game design work by reading the replies on many of the topics in that forum.
Heck, right now I'm having an argument with you because I'd like to improve upon and constructively critique your arguments and critisism. (Yes, it's inception.) I'm obviously not arguing against your points because I support Mojang, but because I'd like to see you critique correctly. After all, no sports player got good by not playing against an opposing team.
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
I might be all by myself here but that's what I'm debating about the soon to be mythical shark that bites at anything that moves which sometimes eats floating garbage because the mythical shark never stops eating. Now I think it's safe to say Sharks are not pets so you cant abuse sharks, animal abuse usually occurs when animals are consider pets so unless Mojang has a shark for a pet then it's safe to say you cant be abusive against sharks.
The idea that Violent video games is a direct cause for violent behavior is certainly a fallacy by most standards. Think about it, how can you be violent if you sitting at your computer playing video games 8 hours a day unless your that bad at playing video games that you got to smash your keyboard. Other then that according to my personal observations obsessive behavior is the prime factor in creating violent tendencies.
Your welcome.
Everyone does agrees with me, I should know the voices in my head said everyone agrees with me but anyways the argument that is being used to keep sharks out of the game is confusing at best because when faced with such an irrational argument you will see there is nothing to gain in winning an irrational argument against people that don't want you to win that how some games are played out. Try as you might but sometimes certain people with certain one sided beliefs are incapable of being persuaded towards complex realities they don't want to understand.
Thats what we call rare circumstances, it's a possibility a very slim possibility that Dragons did existed in the past and if the genetics sequences lined up just right with reptiles today its possible a new form of dragon could be born. We might not at first perceive the new reptilian as a dragon because we are forced to treat dragons as a missing link in the reptilian family tree so anything that is Dragon in nature will ultimately go unidentified until the missing dragon link found.
You will understand in due time the eureka moment is always just around the corner. Your right kids are smart but yet there is still much to learn. I think a fairly intelligent child can figure out that Shark have small complicated brains and like to bite at anything that moves not because sharks are evil but because sharks have a bite reflex similar to how we have our own reflex when it comes to our own senses.
You can blame my mentor for that. He is very eccentric, spells everything out, and is very elaborate with both his wording and writings. He does it and so must I.
I do not perceive in anyway that you are criticizing me unless you tell me that you are criticizing me and in all honesty a little criticisms wont hut anybody. Your most likely here for the same reason why I'm here, sure we might have different view points about this question why Mojang says sharks can never be implement in minecraft but when it comes down to we both think it is absurd. You have your reason why you think its absurd and I as well have my own. But no matter how complex or simple the reasoning is, the heart of the matter will be always be the same if we are of the same beliefs.
Well Its not an argument when its true. You might think your having and argument with me but I'm just conversing what I know is to be true.
Make a rant BBCode banner.
E? E. e? e. EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
Okay, first off, animal abuse can happen to animals in the wild, and so can species endangerment. Mojang is worried about the Shark population which gets a bad rep as shown in Jaws and similar movies. Sharks are also killed to make Shark Fin Soup, which kills a large number of sharks. Is it right for Mojang to go out of it's way to stop people from killing sharks by not implementing a feature? We here on this forum do not think so.
Secondly, if you're debating a completely different topic, maybe you should make your own topic? This topic itself is mainly centered around Mojang's stance on animal abuse, but if you'd like to argue why Mojang won't add a mythical shark to a game that already has a mythical dragon, okay...
A wrong argument is not necessarily a fallacy. In this case, the argument is based on an assumption, or hypothesis. Is the hypothesis wrong? Probably. But that doesn't make the argument a fallacy. The hypothesis itself is based on the well known fact that what you see, hear and feel will inspire what you think, say and do.
A fallacy would be if they tried to argue that video games cause violence because in their personal opinion video games are bad. In this case, the argument is based on someone's personal opinion of video games, and not based on a well-known fact.
Except Mojang doesn't seem to agree with you because they aren't adding sharks, so why did you even say this?
And if Mojang is being one-sided about these things, they are not agreeing with you... So why did you make that other statement?
This has... literally nothing to do with the argument that Sharks being in the game would cause animal cruelty.
Okay, so I put Dragons in the game. If I have a kid that doesn't catch the hint that they aren't real, I can explain to them this. HUGE SHOCKER: Fictional Animals are Fictional, who knew? (I could actually get into a very interesting argument for Creationism about how the word dinosaur only got added to our language in the late 1800s, and how it's likely humans and dinosaurs may have existed at the same time, inspiring the notion of dragons, but this would be mind-bogglingly offtopic to the main post.)
Just because I understand what exactly you were trying to prove doesn't mean that your argument is based on firm grounds.
Okay, but what does this have to do with preventing killing sharks in the wild for shark fin soup?
Okay? Moving on...
That doesn't mean that I won't try and question your reason if it sounds absurd... I may have my own reasons but I don't want you to base your ideas off of flimsy logic that doesn't make sense...
Kid, there are three sides to an argument: Mine, Yours, and the truth. Nobody is going to flawlessly point out the truth, at least not any human being. Claiming you have the truth without giving evidence that your side is the trustworthy one is both prideful and illogical. So illogical, that it's a fallacy.
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
The discussion in this thread appears to be getting further and further away from the actual topic of the thread, and seems to just be turning into a big back-and-forth argument. Please keep the posts in this thread directly about the topic of Mojang not adding sharks. If you wish to argue about how correct your opinions are, violence in video games, dragons, etc., please move to a private discussion.
- sunperp
I think the devs are hiding behind said animal abuse stuff as a means not to implement the fan favorite/promoted sharks and cover up the real reasone why they don't want sharks in the game. Its not animal abuse that we should be debating about, were just beating a dead horse here like the devs want, but rather we should be debating about "why would the devs say never to adding sharks to the game", I think the devs have watched one to many cheesy shark films like sharknado, jaws and that other movie about those mutated sharks that escape from there ocean lab containment I forgot the name of that movie, but anyways back on topic the devs have become sharkophobic and truly afraid that by adding sharks will cause the player base to become afraid like them and stop playing because the devs cant face seeing a very terrifying shark. Simply put Sharks are to scary and because of the devs fear of sharks is stopping them from being added to the game. I think that is what going on here and now the devs are just trying to psychologically guilt us so that we would agree with their baseless fears. tell you the truth I'm more afraid of Lighting then I am of sharks, I almost been hit by lighting but does that mean I'm not going to play a game that has lighting in them not at all.
Fair enough.
Now, I am going to tell you what I mean when I say " the voices in my head say everyone agrees with me ;)" i don't mean the voices in my head but I am actually talking about the voices your hear that said "And everyone would agree with you." so with that said the devs dont agree with any of us. The devs are indeed one sided they are so one sided that anyone with some common since logic would be able to tell you how they are thinking, I can tell you how they think and this is how they think they are more concern about the game and its perceived influences then creating a enjoyable experience within said game, they have drank the koolaid and taken unprofessional advice from political correctness thinking that if they can just guilt trip us players into their PC beliefs then they don't haft to do all those cool things the dedicated players base is looking forward for them to do.
And there it is, it's because adding sharks into the game has nothing to do with animal cruelty. Its only the devs choice of words that implies this notion which I personally disagree with, so I don't want to echo their baseless beliefs on fragmented Ideas. The devs are the ones not telling us the truth and until the devs admit this which will be never because the devs are one sided with their beliefs about why sharks can never be adding to the game. All the devs need to do is say they don't like sharks so were not adding them to the game and then the real debate can begin.
There is no firm ground here bro the idea of animal cruelty is nothing more then quicksand for your arguments, the devs are the ones bent on the idea that we must agree with them no matter what. The whole point to this argument is to corner dedicated player base into a framework of thought that If you dont agree with the devs then the devs can simply say "why you support animal cruelty you animal abuser, you shouldn't want shark in the game you should stand with us devs for that it is us devs that are protecting sharks from people like you who want to see dead shark carcass inside videos game."
But first tell me how not adding sharks to minecraft is going to prevent the slaughtering of sharks in the wild for witch doctor soup recipe delicacies. What is shark fin soup for, is it for chilly powder voodoo magic.
Go ahead Question me I don't care I'm not afraid to speak my mind I have nothing to fear but fear itself. My ideas are like cement at first its like liquid only to fill the form but over time My thought harden and take shape, It might not make sense at first but the end product will its called a foundation of ideas.
There are no sides to an argument for the fact its an argument with an endless stream of opinions and Ideas that seek to fight it out to see which side can attract the most people too, that is all an argument is. To be right ones thoughts needs to be based on natural facts and that All our idea should produce good lasting results so any idea that is good in its entirety will be good under any circumstances and those thoughts right there usually don't attract but repel. Evidence is the fact that nature can only tell what is right and what is wrong and the way thing should be. So with that said why would I provide evidence when people seek to destroy evidence. I don't need to show evidence to people that don't have the refined senses to respect my evidence.
I'm going to continue this into our private discussions so that everyone else can enjoy a discussion without a meta-argument.
My avatar is a texture from a small block game I made in Python. It's not very good and it probably won't work if you install it.
I'm very alone in my Minecraft worlds as I don't have a very good internet connection to run a server. If you're like me, you might be interested in my Posse mod suggestion.
Thread cleaned up. People, please don't post unless you are willing to contribute to the threads topic.
- sunperp
Could it be that adding a shark may change the whole ocean biome? And since sharks are complicated more phases will be added and more work would be done behind the scene