POLL: a little question on the use of language:

Remove all ads!

This part of a sentence was used in a review. I would like to ask you to take a few seconds to discern its meaning:

(edit) I forgot to mention: post the response that best describes your interpretation, not what your second guess on what the person meant to say.

...but the abundance of water in this game depressed even me, especially since the graphics made it look more like milk...

What do you suppose the comparison to milk was meant to suggest?
a. that there is too much foam covering the water
b. that the water is completely opaque
c. that the water appears too white


The above choices are meant to be reminders, should you want to post a reply to elaborate on your choice. They are also in the poll question itself.

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 25 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: a little question on the use of language: (25 votes.)

What do you suppose the comparison to milk was meant to suggest? (Choose 1)
* that there is too much foam covering the water - 8% (2)
* that the water is completely opaque - 32% (8)
* that the water appears too white - 60% (15)

 

Wow, and I thought my first topic was strange.

It sounds like c) to me, since an "abundance of (white) water" would make everthing look washed out. And I can't imagine why milk would be the best description for a or b.

Where the heck is this from anyway?

 

[oracle]Actually none of the options provided fits perfectly. I would have to see the game to tell what they really meant in that review, but the sentence clearly refers to dense whitish water. This would make it both too white and too opaque.[/oracle]

 

Its really hard to make any kind of interpretation without knowing the context of the sentence. How can one even guess when they have't seen the graphics or read what else the author has to say about it?

 

Hmm, just by looking at it, I would say a, that there was too much foam, but I could always be wrong.

 

C, as it sounds as though the people who did the water were crap at it, while foam suggests that they weren't.

 

I'm not good with English terms when it comes to explain something scientifical , but I will try. I also don't know a lot about science, so I could be wrong here.

Milk has a different density than water. Milk is less 'thick' than water. That is why some bugs can walk on water, but not on milk. When a fluid is less 'thick' the waves are different from a thicker fluid. Waves in milk, look a lot different from waves in water.

I don't really know the specific meaning of the word 'opaque', but I think it is the opposite of transparent. This water in the game could still be transparent, but because of the way it moves, it looks like milk.


I'll just wait until Nobleman comes and contradicts my moment of smartness.

 

C, it have to be. There arten't foam that completely covers a pond, it's only covering the edges....

 

This has to be the most insane topic I've seen. I thought I was mad! Anyway, I picked the water looked white option since I have no idea what opaque means and I couldn't get my brain to work out what the first option meant