The One Thousand Most Annoying Things Ever!!

[OB1]

'Synonym' generally means 'same meaning'... maybe with a slightly different undertone, but the same essential meaning.

Such as video vs computer games. They mean the same thing. 'video game' is just a term invented for games played on 'consoles' -- specially designed computers just for games. They are all computer games. Are all computer games video games? I'd say yes... given that videogame is just another way of saying the same thing...

Oh yeah, and I do think that the text counts as video output. Is it a picture? No. But it is video output to a screen... which fits any definition of 'video' I can think of... and it is modified by user input for the purpose of playing a game. That fits 'game'.

'manipulating images'.

Oh man, I am so stupid. Here I am all this time trying to say your defintion isn't always the only definition of the term, when its just fine.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=image

Look at definitions 6 and 7...

Yes you are stupid, but not about that. All words have several different definitions, and the ones down the list are the ones that only apply to certain contexts. When people say "mental image" that applies to definitions #6 & 7, but not images on a video screen.

Computer games and video games are said to be the same thing because most computer games are video games, just not all of them. And people use the two terms interchangeably, even though it isn't always accurate.

You do see text on the screen in text-based games, and that is an image, but not the kind that make up video games. If the text was say, flying around and you had to shoot it or something (as an example), then it would be a video game. But if the text is used only to describe images that aren't really there, it is not a video game.

Political debates are serious -- big difference there.

Oh please, a couple of armchair politicians calling each other names is not what I'd call a "serious debate". It's just a petty mud-slinging contest with you and Weltall. "You're a stupid liberal!" "You're a stupid conservative!", etc. You just repeat the same crap over and over.

I just don't think WW has fights against huge numbers all the time like you say... and anyway whenever you do fight more than two or three guys the enemies are EXTREMELY weak and are just a annoyance, not an actual challenge... not that most anything in that game is. I haven't actually been in danger of dying ever in playing WW... which is so pathetic... give me the challenge of OoT any day (and NOT just the enemies. That's not it. OoT also has more challenge in the environments... for instance, in WW, in many places you can fall... but when you fall you don't die, you just reappear in the doorway of the room having lost a little health. In OoT you'd be hurting, bad... WW just makes it too easy. Easy enemies, forgiving level design, few deadly obstacles in the levels... and, of course, the pushover enemies.

OoT just does it better. Sure, it has fewer enemies... but that isn't a bad thing, not when the alternative is having them be so easy!

Oh yeah, and its not that great to have to duel all the time. Its annoying, actually... especially when the fights aren't hard at all, they're just a bit slower because you have to get around them. Now if the enemies were even remotely challenging, like the sword-fights in OoT, it'd be much better... but they aren't, so its just tedious.

All of the enemy fights in OoT were very easy, and the sword duels were a complete joke. Block. Hit. Block. Hit. Block. Hit. Block. Hit. You get the point. And holes in the ground? What on earth are you talking about? I rarely fell into any holes in OoT. There is a lot of fighting in WW, and I'm really starting to doubt that you even played the game. That or your case of "Darunia-itis" is getting stronger.