Angry Video Game Nerd Reviews Mao's On Contradictions
Intro theme song plays
AVGN: Hey there, gamers! Today, we're gonna take a look at one of the most frustrating, mind-boggling, and downright infuriating "games" out there. I'm talking about Mao's "On Contradictions." (Sighs) Yeah, I know it's not a video game, but this philosophical work is so full of contradictions, it's like playing a game that's impossible to beat. So, let's dive right in!
Cut to AVGN sitting on the couch with the book in hand
AVGN: So, "On Contradictions" is written by Mao Zedong, the infamous Chinese communist leader. And, oh boy, does this book make me wanna throw my controller at the screen!
The basic premise of the book is that contradictions are the driving force of societal development. Mao argues that contradictions exist in everything, and it's the struggle between these contradictions that leads to progress. Sounds simple enough, right? But just wait until you get to the gameplay.
AVGN flips through the book, frustrated
AVGN: The first thing you'll notice is that there's no clear structure to this book. It's like trying to navigate through a maze without a map! Mao jumps from one topic to another, making it nearly impossible to follow his train of thought. And don't even get me started on the translation. It's like reading a game manual that's been translated from Japanese to English by a five-year-old!
Now, as you progress through the book, you'll encounter various "contradictions" that Mao tries to explain. But instead of clarifying things, it just adds to the confusion.
AVGN gives an example
AVGN: For example, Mao talks about the contradiction between the productive forces and the relations of production. He says that these contradictions will eventually lead to a revolutionary change in society. But then he goes on to talk about the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the contradiction between the oppressed nations and imperialism, and so on.
It's like trying to play a game with a million different objectives, and you have no idea which one to focus on! And the more you read, the more contradictions you'll find. It's like a never-ending cycle of frustration!
AVGN throws the book on the ground
AVGN: And just when you think you've reached the end of the book and things might start to make sense, Mao pulls the rug out from under you. He says that contradictions are not only the driving force of societal development but also the driving force of thought itself! So, basically, the whole point of the book is to confuse the reader and make them question everything they thought they knew.
AVGN looks at the camera, irritated
AVGN: So, there you have it. Mao's "On Contradictions" is like a game that's impossible to beat. It's confusing, frustrating, and leaves you questioning your sanity. If you're looking for a good read, I'd recommend sticking to the classics like "The Communist Manifesto" or "Das Kapital." At least with those, you know what you're getting into.
Outro theme song plays
AVGN: Well, that's it for today's review, gamers. Until next time, remember: if you want to avoid a world of confusion and frustration, stay away from Mao's "On Contradictions."
I asked it literally to swear, here's areview of a previous text it generated when I asked if Hegel would win a battle against Diavolo if he was in Jojo and was granted a stand based on his philosophy
spoiler
Warning: The following text contains strong language.
What's up, you shitload of fuck? It's the Angry Video Game Nerd here, and today, we're going to take a steaming dump on this godawful comment about some hypothetical Stand battle between that pompous ass, Hegel, and Diavolo from JoJo's Bizarre Adventure. What a bunch of diarrhea dogshit!
First off, who the fuck thought it'd be a good idea to throw a dead philosopher into a Stand battle? I'd rather have a buffalo take a diarrhea dump in my ear than try to make sense of this asswipe idea. So, they came up with this Stand called Dialectical Unity, which is supposed to represent Hegel's philosophy or some shit. It's like they took the most pretentious, convoluted concept and slapped it onto a Stand. Great fucking idea, guys!
And then there's Diavolo's Stand, King Crimson. Yeah, we all know that fucker can erase time and has a face on his forehead. Real spooky, I shit my pants just thinking about it. So these two are supposed to duke it out, but the comment is just a load of donkey turds because it doesn't even give us a clear winner. It's like trying to beat a game without a fucking controller!
So, let's recap: we've got a philosopher with a Stand based on his mind-numbingly boring ideas going up against an Italian mob boss with time-erasing powers, and the comment doesn't even have the balls to pick a winner. What a diarrhea dookie of a response!
In conclusion, this comment is a pile of puke, a mountain of monkey spunk, and a shitstorm of snot. It's like taking a shit on your keyboard and expecting it to turn into a coherent fucking argument. Don't waste your time on this crapfest, and always remember to keep it Angry!
In conclusion, this comment is a pile of puke, a mountain of monkey spunk, and a shitstorm of snot. It’s like taking a shit on your keyboard and expecting it to turn into a coherent fucking argument.
Holy fucking shit :michael-laugh:
You clearly need to be clever at writing prompts to get gold out of it
You also need to keep it very pop culture, otherwise it will channel a very generic voice. I'm getting a sense of its limitations tbh, it will always generate the most obvious stuff possible and if it can't incorporate your prompt, it will include it literally and abruptly.
No clue, I was surprised to see ass and goddamned there too. Looking at what you got and some of my other attempts that very first result almost seems like a fluke. Yours sounds less like AVGN and more like a generic video game reviewer, though I'm guessing changing the topic to political philosophy made it more difficult to apply the AVGN style to it.
The AI is very weird when you try to make it speak in the voice of real people. I tried to make it write a Zero Punctuation episode but I just got a generic, mildly snarky review not in the style of ZP at all. My first Chapo prompt didn't sound like Chapo at all either, but it feature all 5 hosts. Later I tried to make it do a riff on the Challenger disaster but got told that was too insensitive. Then I tried to make the Chapos talk about Tulip Mania, but got told it can't impersonate real people and got a generic podcast excerpt of Hosts 1-3 relating Tulip Mania to crypto
How did you get it to curse?
Angry Video Game Nerd Reviews Mao's On Contradictions
Intro theme song plays
AVGN: Hey there, gamers! Today, we're gonna take a look at one of the most frustrating, mind-boggling, and downright infuriating "games" out there. I'm talking about Mao's "On Contradictions." (Sighs) Yeah, I know it's not a video game, but this philosophical work is so full of contradictions, it's like playing a game that's impossible to beat. So, let's dive right in!
Cut to AVGN sitting on the couch with the book in hand
AVGN: So, "On Contradictions" is written by Mao Zedong, the infamous Chinese communist leader. And, oh boy, does this book make me wanna throw my controller at the screen!
The basic premise of the book is that contradictions are the driving force of societal development. Mao argues that contradictions exist in everything, and it's the struggle between these contradictions that leads to progress. Sounds simple enough, right? But just wait until you get to the gameplay.
AVGN flips through the book, frustrated
AVGN: The first thing you'll notice is that there's no clear structure to this book. It's like trying to navigate through a maze without a map! Mao jumps from one topic to another, making it nearly impossible to follow his train of thought. And don't even get me started on the translation. It's like reading a game manual that's been translated from Japanese to English by a five-year-old!
Now, as you progress through the book, you'll encounter various "contradictions" that Mao tries to explain. But instead of clarifying things, it just adds to the confusion.
AVGN gives an example
AVGN: For example, Mao talks about the contradiction between the productive forces and the relations of production. He says that these contradictions will eventually lead to a revolutionary change in society. But then he goes on to talk about the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the contradiction between the oppressed nations and imperialism, and so on.
It's like trying to play a game with a million different objectives, and you have no idea which one to focus on! And the more you read, the more contradictions you'll find. It's like a never-ending cycle of frustration!
AVGN throws the book on the ground
AVGN: And just when you think you've reached the end of the book and things might start to make sense, Mao pulls the rug out from under you. He says that contradictions are not only the driving force of societal development but also the driving force of thought itself! So, basically, the whole point of the book is to confuse the reader and make them question everything they thought they knew.
AVGN looks at the camera, irritated
AVGN: So, there you have it. Mao's "On Contradictions" is like a game that's impossible to beat. It's confusing, frustrating, and leaves you questioning your sanity. If you're looking for a good read, I'd recommend sticking to the classics like "The Communist Manifesto" or "Das Kapital." At least with those, you know what you're getting into.
Outro theme song plays
AVGN: Well, that's it for today's review, gamers. Until next time, remember: if you want to avoid a world of confusion and frustration, stay away from Mao's "On Contradictions."
I asked it literally to swear, here's areview of a previous text it generated when I asked if Hegel would win a battle against Diavolo if he was in Jojo and was granted a stand based on his philosophy
spoiler
Warning: The following text contains strong language.
What's up, you shitload of fuck? It's the Angry Video Game Nerd here, and today, we're going to take a steaming dump on this godawful comment about some hypothetical Stand battle between that pompous ass, Hegel, and Diavolo from JoJo's Bizarre Adventure. What a bunch of diarrhea dogshit!
First off, who the fuck thought it'd be a good idea to throw a dead philosopher into a Stand battle? I'd rather have a buffalo take a diarrhea dump in my ear than try to make sense of this asswipe idea. So, they came up with this Stand called Dialectical Unity, which is supposed to represent Hegel's philosophy or some shit. It's like they took the most pretentious, convoluted concept and slapped it onto a Stand. Great fucking idea, guys!
And then there's Diavolo's Stand, King Crimson. Yeah, we all know that fucker can erase time and has a face on his forehead. Real spooky, I shit my pants just thinking about it. So these two are supposed to duke it out, but the comment is just a load of donkey turds because it doesn't even give us a clear winner. It's like trying to beat a game without a fucking controller!
So, let's recap: we've got a philosopher with a Stand based on his mind-numbingly boring ideas going up against an Italian mob boss with time-erasing powers, and the comment doesn't even have the balls to pick a winner. What a diarrhea dookie of a response!
In conclusion, this comment is a pile of puke, a mountain of monkey spunk, and a shitstorm of snot. It's like taking a shit on your keyboard and expecting it to turn into a coherent fucking argument. Don't waste your time on this crapfest, and always remember to keep it Angry!
The last phrase got me good.
Holy shit lol. I can hear this episode
Holy fucking shit :michael-laugh:
You clearly need to be clever at writing prompts to get gold out of it
You also need to keep it very pop culture, otherwise it will channel a very generic voice. I'm getting a sense of its limitations tbh, it will always generate the most obvious stuff possible and if it can't incorporate your prompt, it will include it literally and abruptly.
No clue, I was surprised to see ass and goddamned there too. Looking at what you got and some of my other attempts that very first result almost seems like a fluke. Yours sounds less like AVGN and more like a generic video game reviewer, though I'm guessing changing the topic to political philosophy made it more difficult to apply the AVGN style to it.
The AI is very weird when you try to make it speak in the voice of real people. I tried to make it write a Zero Punctuation episode but I just got a generic, mildly snarky review not in the style of ZP at all. My first Chapo prompt didn't sound like Chapo at all either, but it feature all 5 hosts. Later I tried to make it do a riff on the Challenger disaster but got told that was too insensitive. Then I tried to make the Chapos talk about Tulip Mania, but got told it can't impersonate real people and got a generic podcast excerpt of Hosts 1-3 relating Tulip Mania to crypto