FA+
Shop
10966
Views
Views
195
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Digital) / Macro / Micro
Species Rabbit / Hare
Size 960 x 540
File Size 130.7 kB
Report this content
More from Charon2
Nariko is done with the country and wants to visit the big (lol) city
Nariko © me
Nariko © me
Category Artwork (Digital) / Macro / Micro
Species Rabbit / Hare
Size 960 x 540px
File Size 130.7 kB
So, what's the goal when a macro walks through a city like this? To destroy and kill as much as possible with total disregard for everyone else until their sadism meter is full and they can rub one out?
Seriously, I'm trying to find a single redeeming goal/factor to the typical "macro rampage" that kills dozens, hundreds, etc... and decimates cities, homes, etc...
Seriously, I'm trying to find a single redeeming goal/factor to the typical "macro rampage" that kills dozens, hundreds, etc... and decimates cities, homes, etc...
Interesting counter, however I'd wager that few if any are injured or killed. Insects are generally quite tough and get out of the way when they sense vibration and/or movement, or are actually attracted to it when it comes to ticks, fleas and other parasites. So, I'm not exactly sure that analogy really works the way you want it to.
Insects also aren't intelligent (as far as a singular 'insect' goes) nor sentient. I feel there's a very distinct line between killing an insect though and killing a sentient being (as I'm sure we all do). Unless the macro itself is no more intelligent or sentient than a bug, doing only what instinct drives them to do... That then changes the conversation some. Could make some joke about in Soviet Russia, bug step on you...
I'm not trying to nitpick, but in thinking over the analogy you offered I think there are just too many differences between the two situations for them to be compared.
Insects also aren't intelligent (as far as a singular 'insect' goes) nor sentient. I feel there's a very distinct line between killing an insect though and killing a sentient being (as I'm sure we all do). Unless the macro itself is no more intelligent or sentient than a bug, doing only what instinct drives them to do... That then changes the conversation some. Could make some joke about in Soviet Russia, bug step on you...
I'm not trying to nitpick, but in thinking over the analogy you offered I think there are just too many differences between the two situations for them to be compared.
We, as humans, regard insects as "lower forms of life and not sentient"
A being that is so thoroughly breaking the laws of physics as we know them might as well be a god to us, thus, we'd be lower beings.
Do some macros destroy for the sake of it? Sure
Do some not? Also yes.
Are there sadistic macros? Yep
Are there non sadistic ones? Also yes.
Do not infer malicious intent when none has been shown.
A being that is so thoroughly breaking the laws of physics as we know them might as well be a god to us, thus, we'd be lower beings.
Do some macros destroy for the sake of it? Sure
Do some not? Also yes.
Are there sadistic macros? Yep
Are there non sadistic ones? Also yes.
Do not infer malicious intent when none has been shown.
It's a silly question.
It's like asking "Why does the majority of BDSM art/photography/stories involve bondage?"
People who like it, like it because it's their fetish.
There's no "deeper analysis" than that.
We don't get it being macros just as much as you don't get it not being a macro.
Everyone enjoys what they enjoy.
It's like asking "Why does the majority of BDSM art/photography/stories involve bondage?"
People who like it, like it because it's their fetish.
There's no "deeper analysis" than that.
We don't get it being macros just as much as you don't get it not being a macro.
Everyone enjoys what they enjoy.
No... it's like asking "What is it about bondage/BSDM art/photos/stories do you like/enjoy?" Vastly different questions.
It doesn't seem like we're quite on the same wavelength here in the conversation, so I'll respectfully borrow your closing line.
Everyone enjoys what they enjoy.
It doesn't seem like we're quite on the same wavelength here in the conversation, so I'll respectfully borrow your closing line.
Everyone enjoys what they enjoy.
I'm generalizing a lot and using myself as a specific example. No way I'm going to speak for Charon2.
We have a Fetish here. Generally, there is on definitive answer to "why?". There can be so many answers and so many can't be articulated. I haven't gone into any deep thought about what makes macro/giant scenarios and the violent aspects appealing. I chalk it up to finding the causal displays of Power appealing. To be able to causally cause so much damage is a tweak. Why is it a tweak? I don't know. I find no reason to dig into finding out why, too. In the overall scheme of life and socializing, it is harmless because it's fantasy. It's not real.
If such a thing were to happen in reality, I'd be horrified. I imagine most people into it would be horrified too. But, because it's fantasy, it's safe.
Looking for "redeeming goal/factor" into any fetish, whether it's macro rampages, love for chubby puppies, French Maid costumes is pretty pointless. If the asking is to figure out why you don't like the fetish in discussion, then, you're doubly wasting your time. Have you asked why you *don't* like macro rampaging? Is there any need to?
If I like it and it's harmless, I revel in it. If I don't like it and it's harmless, I ignore it. It's someone's "thing". So long as their Thing isn't being shoved at me, they can have it.
We have a Fetish here. Generally, there is on definitive answer to "why?". There can be so many answers and so many can't be articulated. I haven't gone into any deep thought about what makes macro/giant scenarios and the violent aspects appealing. I chalk it up to finding the causal displays of Power appealing. To be able to causally cause so much damage is a tweak. Why is it a tweak? I don't know. I find no reason to dig into finding out why, too. In the overall scheme of life and socializing, it is harmless because it's fantasy. It's not real.
If such a thing were to happen in reality, I'd be horrified. I imagine most people into it would be horrified too. But, because it's fantasy, it's safe.
Looking for "redeeming goal/factor" into any fetish, whether it's macro rampages, love for chubby puppies, French Maid costumes is pretty pointless. If the asking is to figure out why you don't like the fetish in discussion, then, you're doubly wasting your time. Have you asked why you *don't* like macro rampaging? Is there any need to?
If I like it and it's harmless, I revel in it. If I don't like it and it's harmless, I ignore it. It's someone's "thing". So long as their Thing isn't being shoved at me, they can have it.
I'm not asking or arguing why people can't enjoy it, or the details of why it is or isn't realistic, etc... What I asked is what the goal of stepping on people and destroying buildings was. The motivating drive behind it and why one would be drawn to it as a fantasy fetish. It's brought up some interesting discussion which I find thought provoking. It seems that the common answer is sadism and/or megalomania. Those are scary words when written out and applied, but there's nothing wrong with being a sadomasochist or megalomaniac.
I actually have asked myself why this type of thing doesn't appeal to me. I can't get my head around crushing, killing, destroying for fun or sexual gratification. That's why, and that's why I posed my question in the way I did. It was open-ended with a generic "view" of what the macro crushing/rampage appears to be to an outside viewer who doesn't understand it.
It's not that I want to like it or am trying to convince others how evil or gross some may consider it, I was curious what other people- those actually 'in the fold'- got from it. That's all.
I actually have asked myself why this type of thing doesn't appeal to me. I can't get my head around crushing, killing, destroying for fun or sexual gratification. That's why, and that's why I posed my question in the way I did. It was open-ended with a generic "view" of what the macro crushing/rampage appears to be to an outside viewer who doesn't understand it.
It's not that I want to like it or am trying to convince others how evil or gross some may consider it, I was curious what other people- those actually 'in the fold'- got from it. That's all.
"Seriously, I'm trying to find a single redeeming goal/factor to the typical "macro rampage" that kills dozens, hundreds, etc... and decimates cities, homes, etc... "
You do understand that this phraseology seems rather judgemental in typing. The usual no inflection problem, perhaps. To me, it seems like an attack on poor Charon2 for doing art of something he enjoys. Particularly if, as you said, your investigations have already given you the most likely answer to the question. I felt a need to defend the man and perhaps provide a suitable answer.
If the questions were phrased in a manner that wonders why *she* is trodding on cities, the reaction would have been different and would yield a more definitive answer.
I've fielding answers to the "why violent macros?" questions for a long time. The answers are vast and varied and I try to keep the answer to why I run with it. A lot of times it comes down to just plain mood. But, I usually stay away from the discussions when I can, because the discussion often falls into the "Toddler asking his parents 'why?' scenario" where the final answer is always "Because."
Best to go reading psychology journals. It'll be easier on everyone's nerves.
You do understand that this phraseology seems rather judgemental in typing. The usual no inflection problem, perhaps. To me, it seems like an attack on poor Charon2 for doing art of something he enjoys. Particularly if, as you said, your investigations have already given you the most likely answer to the question. I felt a need to defend the man and perhaps provide a suitable answer.
If the questions were phrased in a manner that wonders why *she* is trodding on cities, the reaction would have been different and would yield a more definitive answer.
I've fielding answers to the "why violent macros?" questions for a long time. The answers are vast and varied and I try to keep the answer to why I run with it. A lot of times it comes down to just plain mood. But, I usually stay away from the discussions when I can, because the discussion often falls into the "Toddler asking his parents 'why?' scenario" where the final answer is always "Because."
Best to go reading psychology journals. It'll be easier on everyone's nerves.
To make it very clear, I was not attacking Charon2 or his artwork/renders. Nor anyone who enjoys macro stuff. I'm not sure how that message could come across from anything I wrote, but you were able to find that in there so I have to presume others may as well. It is very likely that the lack of inflection in written text is the cause, I agree. Frankness (or lack of subtlety) and argumentative 'tone' or attack don't have a whole lot of differentiation in text.
It may also have not been my phrasing, but as you glossed over, those who enjoy this sort of thing having gone through X years of fielding the same questions about violence related to macros that set those people on edge when anything about it is brought up. I can understand being tired of answering the same question over and over again, especially when asked frankly about it. I'm sorry if this was just nails on a chalkboard for you.
As my mother always scolded me for, "Because is not an answer." That's why we ask questions. The very basis of knowledge is "I do not know". Prior to asking the question, I did not know. Now that I have, I have some glimmer of insight into it and am appreciative of that.
With that said, I'm getting the distinct vibe that you want the conversation to end and for me to be on my way. I can and will oblige, with Thanks for those who did chime in on the subject.
It may also have not been my phrasing, but as you glossed over, those who enjoy this sort of thing having gone through X years of fielding the same questions about violence related to macros that set those people on edge when anything about it is brought up. I can understand being tired of answering the same question over and over again, especially when asked frankly about it. I'm sorry if this was just nails on a chalkboard for you.
As my mother always scolded me for, "Because is not an answer." That's why we ask questions. The very basis of knowledge is "I do not know". Prior to asking the question, I did not know. Now that I have, I have some glimmer of insight into it and am appreciative of that.
With that said, I'm getting the distinct vibe that you want the conversation to end and for me to be on my way. I can and will oblige, with Thanks for those who did chime in on the subject.
Test model(s) aren't bad. Ground texture is quite blurry though and the roadway is oddly angular... Toss some texture filtering and anti-aliasing in, turn on lighting and shadowing and the 3d stuff will pop more. If the macro is really supposed to be as big as shown here, you may think about throwing in some haze and maybe a cloud or two to give the sky and distance detail some depth.
Comments