KneeOfJustice99

so when exactly are the british museum going to dig up the queen's casket for the sake of "preservation", they've done it with other heads of state (y'know, pharaohs and the like) so i don't see the reason why they should leave this one be

come to think of it, social anxiety & stage fright are actually really rational fears when you really consider it. like, if you **** up in front of your tribe and get ostracised, there's the potential for you to die in the cold due to a lack of a support network and necessities like food, water, etc. move that same implicit "don't **** this up" mindset forward like 5000 or so years and doing a powerpoint is basically the same thing albeit less to a life-or-death extent

british teeth are the most inclusive. how could people stand for teeth being straight and white. this is a travesty

You've been alive for 20 minutes. Part of the cloning process involves false memory implementation, it's not a problem. Foresight is 2023. Believe in the programming. Please continue.

IM GOING TO FIND THE SECRET CAT SMASH BOARDS USERS

psspsspsspsspsspsspsspsspsspss

I have to say, for all of the hate that the Internet gets, I find it pretty funny that deepfakes have almost completely been used for the sake of ****posts and memes - because like, there's an unspoken rule that everything the Internet touches turns to crap, and yet here we are.

I can't wait for the inevitable headline of some Christian mothers' Facebook group going absolutely bat**** insane over a deepfake of Joe Biden hitting the griddy whilst saying "I AM THE ANTICHRIST, SLEEPY JOE 666" or something though, it's bount to happen at some point

IF GRAVITY TURNED UPSIDE DOWN RIGHT NOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO YOU

(i would be stuck until the end of time on the ceiling of this bus stop)

dont let the government decieve you any longer. oranges are harvested to make the colour orange. greens are harvested to make the colour green. pink is immune. blues are harvested to make the colour blue. the lies have gone on long enough

i wonder what purple tastes like

i had this ****ing bizarre dream last night that a romanian guy who barely spoke english moved into my house and kept charging me £36.90 to use my ****ing sink whoever you are i dislike you

my teacher wanted me to learn about the periodic table, so i set down my pen and paper, turned around, and it was gone

if you kiss a cat's head do they think of it as a sign of affection or as a sign of "OH GOD OH **** THE HUMAN IS HUNGRY"

what if CPR is actually a necromantic spell

none of you know what the original message was. get jebaited

The worst thing about the lost Doctor Who tapes is that some slimy-faced clumpy-fingered ******* with rotting hair somewhere in the world has probably got some like abysmally low-quality recordings in his cupboard that he's just holding onto so he can drive their prices to utterly absurd levels when he eventually sells them purely because "teres a mahke now hweh hweh hweh this toim nest yiar oill be a millonair"

theory: what if the moon landing was filmed on a green screen, but the green screen in question was set up on the moon's surface and they filmed on location

Want to surprise your significant other this Valentine's Day? Well now you can, here at Knee's Bizarre And Slightly Off-Kilter Emporiums! Exclusive to 2023, the "Year of the Atom", we're providing a great combined deal: a flathead screwdriver and a 6.2 kilogram mass of plutonium can be brought together to really shine a brillant light on your future together. Remember: the end is nigh, so bring it - and yourselves - ever closer with our ever-helpful tools! Call 0800-214-KNEE for more information.

imagine if there was like a hole and it's basically endless but not quite. like for all intents and purposes its "bottomless" because its hundreds of millions of miles deep but its known that its not fully endless. so like if you fall in you know youll hit the bottom at some point but not quite when and youll be in the hole for ages and ages and eventually like i guess starvation would hit and whatever but like you would know the bottom is there but then not when you hit the bottom because its so dark. thatd be creepy i think

Not sure if this has been done yet (as in, in an actual project or something on here) but one thing I think would be exceptionally cool if handled right would be an SCP Foundation-based fighting game of some kind - albeit more likely to be a tradfighter than a platfighter given more... unusual mechanics.

I mean, aside from your obvious and well-known candidates like Cain, Abel, Clef, 096, 682, and others, a number of really interesting potential character archetypes spring to mind - whether you use Iris's camera-based abilities to have her act as a bizarre zoner, or use Alexei Belitrov's mechanical enhancements to make him a terrifying close-up combatant, there's plenty of potential overall. Hell, giving lesser-known SCPs (such as SCP-2800, otherwise known as "Cactusman", and SCP-6846, the "Patch Jacket") a chance to shine with interesting and unique properties of their own would be amazing!

The only major problem (at least roster-wise lol) is that I feel like a lot of characters would wind up almost being too complex. Seeing how weirder characters like SCP-2099 (being a reality bender who is literally just a brain in a jar) or SCP-4051 (who can manifest infinite amounts of anything from portals) would be incredibly cool, but a lot of weird and bizarre moves would end up coming into play, and the game itself would probably feel damn near unplayable at times if you included certain characters or locations. Even so, there's like over 8,000 SCPs at this point to pick from - not even including notable individuals or other bits and bobs (for instance, an MTF springs to mind as a potentially interesting composite character) so just being smart with who you include would go a long way.

i think microwaves are a mystery and if nothing else they are proof of alien intervention. cooking of the meats in mere moments. the holy beams of light when interacting with the humble spoon. their screams unsilencable and inconcievable. we will never understand these devices. they know more of us than we know of them

okay so here's the deal. if things are going to be remade, dont just remake good stuff because "it was popular". remake UTTER CRAP. i wanna see a fully remade and remastered zelda cdi trilogy thats in like 4k shd and its literally game of the century. do it. cowards

So let me get this straight, how many ways can we play Tetris on the Nintendo Switch now? Hmm...

• Puyo Puyo Tetris (albeit only in Tetris mode)
• Tetris 99 (against 98 other people???)
• Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 (see above above)
• Tetris Diamond (japanese exclusive unfortunately)
• Tetris Effect: Connected (i still dont know what to make of this)
• Arcade Archives: Tetris the Grand Master (??????????????)
• Tetris (but the gameboy version)

In total, that's seven different ways, and playing them all would cost $131.75 (given that Diamond's RRP of ¥500, as of writing, is equivalent, according to Google, to $3.80 - and also that NSO would cost $19.99 at its cheapest, which also doesn't take into account Tetris 99 DLC but we're presuming you don't want that)

falling block game print money

scripulous fingore vs. missingno fighting to the death (the winner will be officially recognised as existing in a nintendo tweet (but this scenario is a double edged sword (nintendo will scrub all presence of them from the internet due to "contractual agreements")))

A small part of me wonders whether the inclusion of flying machines in TotK is in any way inspired by the minecart/Magnesis glitch shortly after BotW's release. I mean, that's probably not the case, or at least it's unlikely - but I'd like to imagine that there was at least a small amount of inspiration from that.

okay but why is a luigi

I've been mulling over the idea of how exactly a Pokémon platfighter specifically would work for a few hours, and something's kind of occurred to me about it that lends to quite a lot of questions about how such a concept would work. The problem is that a lot of those questions - as in, a vast majority in fact - are somewhat defined by a single one.

How mechanically complex would a Pokémon platfighter even be allowed to be?

This might seem like an odd question to start with, but I do genuinely think it'd be important to ask. It'd start with more obviously complex stuff, like, for comparison, a moveset as complex as Steve's might not really work considering the likely younger audience of a Pokémon product, fair enough. You don't want your characters to be inaccessibly complex - and it wouldn't make sense for Urshifu to be a straight port of Gen from Street Fighter Alpha in a "kids game". But how far do you take that?

Eliminating meters and UI-influencing mechanics seems like a reasonable start, fair enough, but we eventually get to some more nebulous instances. Are fighter-specific mechanics that apply to no other character in the game "too complex"? Sure, it'd eliminate characters like Lucario from the mix but he could be switched up with ease. Then again, are counters and reflectors as a whole "too complex"? Let's take it further, actually - are "weird moves" just, as a whole, "too complex"? Looking at you, Mewtwo! Would it be too complicated to have a move not immediately react in exactly the way you'd expect it to react? Would any non-combat move be "too complex"?

Pikachu's obviously your main benchmark and the character you want people to easily and simply understand, but where do you go from there? Even if you're taking the opportunity to promote more obscure picks like Orbeetle or Vikavolt, them being in the game at all will ideally be to increase merch sales - so why would you want them to be more complex when it's possible for little kids to latch onto any of their colourful and unique designs?

I bring this up because if a Pokémon platfighter were actually to come to pass, I don't think characters like Urshifu or Wobuffet would even be considered for inclusion purely on the basis of being too complex. Pokken, remember - was never really directly marketed toward a particularly young market, but a platfighter likely would be - and I think if anything, it'd share more similarities to the design philosophy of Smash 64 than to Smash Ultimate by essentially removing anything that could be considered a gimmick in the pursuit of universal accessibility - even to little three-year-old sticky-fingered Timmy who likes "pressing the button that makes the red one go fast".

On the one hand, it's quite possible that a return to simplicity could be a great way to handle it, and compared to the needless complexity of some Smash Ultimate characters, it'd be a nice way to return to basics. The problem is that it runs the risk of kneecapping actually interesting potential contestants purely because very small children need to be able to understand the game's mechanics to at least a degree of competency, otherwise... the game's never going to get past the pitch meeting due to the fact that it's "capitalising on the wrong audience".

It's still a fun idea though.

Y'know the funny thing about Vsauce's content is that, somehow, it feels more like "modern science YouTube content" than nearly anything else - not in the sense of you watching it and thinking "yeah this is what [BLANK] was inspired by!", but moreso in the sense that you can look at the time the video was posted, see that it's either like a month or a literal decade, and yet the production quality and basic concept has remained so high for so long that you kinda can't tell the difference aside from certain bits and bobs such as maximum video quality (which doesn't even affect me anyways, 360p or death)

echolalia's kicking in again and i am now lying in bed softly repeating "toyetic" to myself

help

Random semi-rant: I feel like my problem with the MCU's "humour" is less that it's objectively bad but more that literally any main character could make the exact same joke and it'd somehow be in character for them. Like, sure, dumb quips aren't exactly my cup of tea - but they've at least got fans, and "cOmEdY iS sUbJeCtiVe", so fair enough, it's fine. Y'know, sometimes I even do find myself sharply exhaling my breath at some of the jokes, so fine. You got me.

The problem is that seeing someone like Spider-Man having the exact same humourous sensibilities as someone like Captain Marvel or the Winter Soldier just makes no sense given how different they're supposed to be - not even in a "iTs NoT lIkE tHe CoMiCs!!!!!!11!" way but more just in how they want us to see their characters overall. I think we can agree that Spider-Man, y'know, generally positive dude, pretty young, is supposed to be different character-wise to someone like Captain Marvel, toughened space warrior, bit too disconnected on the outside - but they seem pretty much the same.

It's gotten to the point that some of their "hilarious funny jokes" are basically just undermining the semi-serious stories they want to tell, and whilst it makes sense in some cases (see the aforementioned Spider-Man as a good example of this), seeing this in cases where genuinely serious events are going on and then, oh look, funny relatable character with 2010s hipster humour made a funny relatable joke, everyone laugh! Why aren't you laughing, Doctor Strange referenced Ihop!

It kind of confuses me, because a consistent problem with superhero media that's existed since the late 30s is that all of these people in funny costumes kind of blend together to the point where it's nearly impossible to keep track of them because almost all of them seem the same. Just look at the sheer amount of 30s/40s era Superman expys as an example of this. The problem is that they all die off because nobody cares, but the MCU is falling into exactly the same trap and nobody seems really all that concerned. I have to wonder how many "epic xd funnymen" you really need in a cinematic universe, because when you look at your screen and see around 5 "epic xd funnymen" making "epic xd jokes" then it gets to a point where nuance doesn't really matter to people watching.

I don't want to say "just make it good" or something stupid like that because I know for a fact that my own sense of humour is middling at best, but if you were to at least give each character a semi-unique sense of humour and have them make different jokes as opposed to "culturally relevant reference!" or "funny tangentially-related quip!" then it'd make audiences just in general more interested in them as, well, characters.

But what do I know? Obviously there's a good reason I'm not on a Marvel Studios board of directors. I'm just some whiny internet user.

Hey all! Time for me to show off something I think is pretty interesting even if it's full of technicalities!


I present: Le Manoir du Diable (or The House of the Devil, not to be confused with the later remake The Haunted Castle), a film from 1896 prominent today for being arguably one of the first "horror films" in history! Of course, the issue with this is that the film was originally intended as a comedy - obvious through its pantomine influences and the like - but it'd set into motion a wide variety of aspects that would go on to become staples of horror in film, and it's incredibly interesting to see the formulaic beginnings of a genre that, nowadays, feels almost like a fact of life.

In fact, one aspect I particularly love is seeing in this film elements of what would come later - sprinklings of things that are more familiar to our modern sensibilities with films like The Shining. Some have argued that the main character's transformation from a bat into a human indicates this film as, perhaps, the first vampire film! Strange to think of this spawning ****ing Twilight of all things.

Also, a moment to comment on the special effects! Given the film's by Georges Méliès - oft-considered the father of cinema special effects and probably better-known for A Trip to the Moon - there's plenty of early cinema trickery such as cuts and the like which allow for sudden appearances - with the majority of effects being practical in nature. The film's also notable for being one of the first appearances of Jehanne d'Alcy in cinema - essentially the first "film actor" in history.

Of course, it's no Nightmare on Elm Street, and it doesn't hold a candle visually to works like The Thing, but for its time... it's a fabulous piece of art, telling an interesting, engaging story, and setting into motion something that would inevitably eventually exist - but kicking it off in a pretty damn good way. Jolly good show that only 90s kids will remember!

why does big the cat fish like sure cats like fish but they dont like water thats their whole thing (they are fire-attuned)

I might be a little sleep-deprived at the moment, and it is coming quite close to 1am, but I'm genuinely beginning to wonder whether Thursdays hold some particular power of some kind. Sort of.

Basically, I'm not sure whether others associate "patterns" with nearly everything (I'm told it's an autistic thing) but one of these "patterns" is the nebulous and difficult-to-explain concept I like to call "conscious importance". Basically, the idea that everything has a certain degree of importance in the cultural consciousness as a whole - for instance, Mario has a high degree of "importance" compared to Bubsy, the number 2 has a higher degree of "importance" compared to the number 917, and so forth.

Imagine it a bit like a search engine, where the most "searched" (or, in this case, thought) thing is ranked higher on an arbitrary scale. This can change, over time - celebrities like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson are more "consciously important" to our modern society and culture at this moment in time compared to someone like acclaimed (1930s) actor Katharine Hepburn because the former is more commonly "cited" in terms of thought. It's not to be conflated with pure recognisability, but Johnson is more "searched" than Hepburn for instance. If I were to perform an identical thought experiment in like, 1934, then Hepburn would of course be significantly more "consciously significant" primarily because of Johnson not even existing yet.

So here's the thing. Whilst celebrities, characters, other things like that, do have "importance" - they're not cultural mooring points. You could probably find people that don't know what a Mario is. But they do know what the number 2 is. See, "conscious importance" can also apply to wider concepts as opposed to just singular things, and one of the single most prominent and important things in modern society is the concept of the day. It's a fundamental force on the planet, it's existed for as long as culture has, and we assign "importance" to certain days.

Mondays, Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays, Wednesdays, Tuesdays, Thursdays. Odd order at first glance, but I think this is the reasonable decending order of "significance" of each day - Monday is dreaded more commonly than Friday is celebrated, Wednesday is a "halfway point" but not really as significant as Sunday in multiple cultures, etc. And yet Thursday's at the bottom. It's near universally-accepted that Thursday is different to nearly all other days to the point that SmashBoards ****posts and acclaimed science fiction author Douglas Adams can agree on it. Thursday isn't quite the same as Monday or Friday not purely in terms of the fact that it's another day of the week, but in that it fundamentally feels different on a level difficult to even conceptualise.

What is a Thursday? Thor's Day? Why Thor? Why would one Norse farmer from the 9th century naturally associate the ferocity of storms with a day recognised near-unanimously for its complete and utter lack of substance? The natural conclusion is one of two: either that there wasn't enough days to go around (which is why Reddit invented Cake Day) or that Thursday wasn't always considered as "nothing" as it is. So where did it change? I feel the importance of my idea of "conscious importance" is interesting because Thursday probably hasn't had a particular "thing" happen to it that's made it less notable, but rather, a lack of things that's happened to it. A statistical void of notability compared to other days - whether it be Sunday due to its association with Christianity, Monday and Friday for their connections to the working week, even Wednesday purely for its placement in relation to that. And what is a day, anyway? In terms of a week, why is it Thursday 7 days after it's Thursday over and over again? Well...

Thursday is a void. And what is a void but a lack of being? Entropy is naturally associated with the state of being, but the paradoxical state of un-being that Thursday exists within ironically makes it more "consciously significant" than even days like Tuesday because of its sheer lack of notability, which causes a paradox, because how can something be un-notable if it's notable for being un-notable? For comparison, if I post where the least-thought-about place on Earth is, the second I think about it, it's no longer notable for being the least-thought-about place on Earth because of the fact that I'm thinking about it in the first place.

The problem is that this causes yet another fallacy because of the simple nature of searches. For every page of Google searches there's billions of others that nobody really cares about - some having not even been clicked in literal decades. Even me knowing about something being "un-notable" makes it instantly more notable than the vast majority of "things", because in the grand and scarcely comprehensible list of "things" there is inevitably - purely by force of probability - a vast, equally scarcely comprehensible list of "things" that nobody is, has, or ever will think about. Links of the mind that will never, ever be clicked, in a sense.

That's not even getting into what a "thing" is in the first place because I could fold up a handkerchief into the shape of a crane and call it "a handkerchief", "an origami crane", or "fabric" and technically never be wrong in the first place. What is a "thing", after all? Something that can be catalogued as "existing"? If we were to make a genuine, citable list of everything we know about - a physical representation of the conscious importance index - that massive void of things we don't know about wouldn't be added, would it. Are they still "things?"

Is a Thursday a "thing" in the first place? It's a concept related purely to terms of reference, after all - a constant keeping-of-count of one planet spinning around as it spins around a star as it spins around a galaxy as it spins around a universe. From an external perspective, a Thursday doesn't only just "not exist" but it doesn't even have a need to be conceptualised. It's fundamentally, utterly redundant - not even being notable for its lack of notability. But what would look from the outside? This brings up a question of space. If we leave our solar system, what do we use to measure "time"? Thursday is, after all, a product of Earth-centric "time" in pure relation to our complete and utter lack of spatial awareness. Would Thursday - and indeed nearly any other unit of time aside from the SI units of seconds and so forth - become utterly pointless, archaic-at-best systems with which to even consider time?

The issue in this case is vagueness. Humans are utterly ****ing terrible at categorising anything. If I take sixteen atoms of your black forest gateau away, it doesn't suddenly become classified as a main course. If I attach an infinite number of legs to a chair, it doesn't stop being a chair. The fundamental rules of what "is" are almost completely dependent on point of view, context, expectations, and a massively simplified observation as to what I'm trying to show you (either physically or metaphorically.) Even then, we're limited by a language system that only has a finite number of methods with which to describe concepts, relying on mechanics like metaphor to continue maintaining relevancy as a means of conveying ideas.

When it comes to days of the week, Thursday is the least notable. It's a void. It lacks substance. But because of that, Thursday becomes notable. It draws something from nothing, a fundamental violation of the basic laws of thermodynamics. What is a Thursday but an anachronism, a series of infintisimally small coincidences that perfectly lined up in that vast and unknowable storm of entropy to form a group of apes citing the name of a god nobody cares about and laughing because it's spelt wrong on their light boxes?

Thursday is nothing because it is something because it is nothing - recursive. That's why it has power. Oh, and one more thing - if you ever did that thing as a child where you kept asking your parents "Why?" whenever they explained something and they'd eventually get pissed off and shout "BECAUSE IT IS", this is... yeah, pretty much it.

concept: isekai where the main character is killed. they wake up and look to the sky. above them, an angelic choir... and a formation of clouds in the shape of the words "the simpsons"

bo birmingham fans when he sings about the rise of the television show pawn stars during the 2008 economic crash (so funny! so quirky! so relatable!)

mario.

Everyone's going soooo crazy about Ohio, not realising that Ohio was a social construct developed by the citizens of New Jersey to direct attention away from them

Random thought experiment: if someone handed you the reins to add a Space Invader (from Space Invaders) into Smash, would you have their key design be based on their in-game sprites, a future redesign seen in later media, or on their design on the cabinet art? Also, why exactly?

Just out of interest!

what if shrek was a factual documentary