pigeonburger
3hr ago
Car-based terrorism seems to accrue more charges and sentences than other forms.
The intent might be disuassive, since it's terrorism that's within easy reach of almost everyone.
My main issue with DA2 is how it dropped the pretence, story-wise, of being anything else than a game with a strictly structured narrative.
Of course, games usually benefit from some kind of narrative structure, while real life typically doesn't have one, but good writing smoothes over the seams and makes the story still flow in a realistic way. Now Bioware, since their beginnings, have seen people enjoy when the writing in their games forces them to engage with difficult philosophical, ethical and moral questions with no obviously good answer. But up until ME2 and DA2, it still felt like those choices happened fairly organically. Sure, most storylines had them, but sometimes they were subtle, or the deeply held morality of the player made it so that the player would not even notice they were there. Up to that point, Bioware seemingly understood these moral questions were in the service of worldbuilding; it adds a layer of realism when the two sides of an issue are not saints vs comic book villains, when at least the comic book villains make a good point once in a while, or when perfect is the enemy of good.
ME2 and especially DA2 laid bare the narrative structure; the whole game world felt like a contrivance to push those toy moral puzzles rather than something that would have happened in a consistent, well-written world. It felt, to me at least, like the narrative equivalents of being told "You can defeat this asshole who is oppressing people, but it requires you to personally skin every puppy in Kirkwall with a potato peeler and roll them in salt, how do you feel about that, player? Huh?" or "You have a choice, do the right thing or not, but if you do all your family and friends will be raped, tortured and murdered". It feels like they created the story backwards from the dillema they wanted to push on the player, rather than build a coherent universe that has dillemas.
pigeonburger
1d ago
The French have been operating nuclear submarines with LEU for decades, so it's not exactly a hard requirement
Yeah, but trucks don't represent an advanced vehicle for us, back when it did they were probably rare in the hands of yahoos in the Sahel.
Now though this has me wondering about a tangeant. I think humanity has been pretty good at not giving giving idiots access to advanced vehicles. I wonder how many people with sub-100 IQs have ever piloted an airplane (on their own, not like "pilot let me hold the yoke of personal airplane"). Can't be too many, I imagine.
*EDIT: AI guesses seem to be in the million range, though likely strongly concentrated into general aviation (recreational aviation)
pigeonburger
4d ago
Anyone who looks at Diana and sees that is the one that should be kept under strict scrutiny, not Capcom's artists.
pigeonburger
4d ago
Fun gimmick with the combat hacking thing but I feel like it'd get tiresome over 20 hours so I didn't buy it, but the demo was perfectly entertaining.
I'm between 5 and 10 hours in the full game, I think, and so far it's still holding up for me. They still regularly add additional game mechanics to both sides of the combat to keep it fresh. Either side of the combat on their own would make for a ridiculously easy game but but that you're forced the juggle them still works for me, and when I think I've got it all down they add something else to juggle (danger squares in the hacking, enemies you have to clear another layer of defense before attacking, etc...)
pigeonburger
5d ago
The important difference is that it makes you responsible for who you allow to drive your car, and if someone steals it and commits traffic violations that cost you money, you would in theory (presuming that the guilty part got caught, which is a big if) be able to sue that person for damages to at least compensate those. So you have avenues to avoid or (in theory) get reimbursed the fine. In his scenarios, you're held responsible for existing in the vicinity of the infraction, that's much more unfair than being punished for lending your keys to someone you should know better than to lend your keys to.
this sleazy game feeds into the typical male fantasy of being the protector and patriarch of a nuclear family where he is supposedly owed sex, affection, food, services etc. His subjugated wife is the idealized woman who is virtuous and yet hot, basically a personal slut. And it’s not like these dudebros are making any effort to be the supportive, emotionally intelligent, suave etc. male ally that is worthy of a relationship, instead they want to realize their fantasies by curbing women’s freedoms. It’s just terribly gross.
If that is indeed the thinking, then that's Anita Sarkeesian levels of not having played the game and missed the point entirely. There's no nuclear family, it's "single dad" coded. There's no wife. Hugh is the most supportive idealized single dad. It's not even "disgusting instinct of spreading his genes"; Hugh is more like an adoptive father. He himself has been adopted, and talks multiple times of how much he loved and was loved by his adoptive family, and how they're his real family. The game is adoption propaganda. If anything the right should be complaining that it's encouraging men to raise kids that aren't their own.
If we're going to mindread the people who screech at the game, I don't think we need to go any further than: anything that reminds men and women that there are genuinely fulfilling experiences in building a family is unpleasant because they are not currently feeling fulfilled by the life they chose for themselves of eschewing traditional family roles.
pigeonburger
6d ago
Both are good casting choices in my opinion though. As you mention, Martin Freeman does "everyman reluctantly thrust into adventure" very well, he pretty much built his career around that, and Ian Holm does very well the "nice and affable guy with edgy undertones hinting at a dark secret".
pigeonburger
7d ago
Don't worry, it happens to all of us
pigeonburger
7d ago
Holm brings the role that hapless charm that he also brought to roles like Arthur Dent.
Sorry, was there an other adaptation of the HHGTTG I missed, or did you get Ian Holm confused with Martin Freeman who played Bilbo in the Hobbit movies and Arthur Dent in the recentish hitchhiker movie?
The other role I mainly remember Ian Holm for has him a lot less hapless charm; Ash in Alien.
The list itself is not as important as the SPLC's stamp of approval on it. The SPLC had a positive reputation on the political spectrum from all but the most extreme leftists down to the center right, covering most people who are within the Overton window, and certainly a majority of decision makers in the tech and financial sectors. To these people, they were credible as a non-partisan subject matter expert on what is a hate group or related. Of course, to people deeply aware of the culture war they were obviously a player in it, but there's still a shocking amount of people unaware of the culture war. Or who don't recognize it as a war between two sides with legit grievances, but only as a one-sided "my side who is obviously right" vs "uninformed, stupid and/or evil people". Using their data product for automated checks made sense. Anyone else, or the SPLC itself going forward if it survives this, is going to have a harder time laundering political interference as a non-partisan service. Certainly they'll face more scrutiny.
pigeonburger
7d ago
That they had the guts to use the name "Center Investigative Agency" for one of their alleged shell cracks me up.
pigeonburger
8d ago
You can engage in the NPC fights whenever you want, gear up in consequence with cheap/free gear and go tussle with them. It's fun, and sometimes your goals will align with that. You probably don't want to be doing it with fancy gear because no fancy gear can compensate for the disadvantage of being caught in between the NPCs and the players the noise you've been making fighting the NPCs might have attracted. But anyway, some people, me included, enjoy the sneaking aspect as much as the fights. Sometimes I'm not in the mood to fight at all but I'm in the mood for the survival horror esque aspect of trying to sneak around.
pigeonburger
8d ago
The waiting part is a different game; a sneaking game with regards to avoiding unecessary fights with NPCs (or players if you're not looking for a fight that day). There's also the hunting game mechanics; if you're looking to kill some players, stopping, listening for distant firefights, doors, exfils, running... so that you can create as accurate a picture of what is happening before you engage is another kind of gameplay that is enjoyable in its own right, for some people at least.
pigeonburger
10d ago
I'm sure it helps that that the venn diagram circles for smart men with a lucrative profession looking for a committed relationship and the one for men with such strong anti-gay opinion that they'd force or otherwise cause their girlfriend to break off their friendship with her gay friends likely have so little overlap they might as well be completely separate circles.
Yeah, but I imagine they spent a significant amount of time in ports or around beaches. When the ship is anchored for a foreseeable amount of time, they would have had a chance to learn it.
I know that since most didn't learn it that it probably somehow made sense to them not to learn it anyway, but it's hard to explain from my perspective too. I learned as a kid and it felt pretty much effortless, but maybe it's harder for an adult to learn it. And it's not like it's very likely to save your life; from their point of view, it's likely if you fell in the drink it was in a situation where swimming wouldn't help much (ship just got sank, big storm). Maybe it'd mean additional dangerous tasks might be asked of you if your superiors find out you can swim.
pigeonburger
10d ago
most people who answer red assume children wouldnt' be asked.
I think a lot of people who would answer red assume children old enough to understand the question and to press a button would be asked, but that enough children could be convinced by their parents to seriously, not joke around, just press red. Now if you assume babies who don't understand the question and are unable to push the button as a deliberate act are included, then blue is a more reasonable answer.
pigeonburger
11d ago
Is not that they're blind, it's just that some things are not realistically in question; a blind tribalist would be 100% on board to dump these assumptions if their tribe also dumped them.
pigeonburger
11d ago
For a lot of people, and not necessarily fully blind tribalists, their side is better because of prior assumptions that are not in question. For instance, if you consider all immigration to be inherently enriching, or the kind of environmental positions that the Democrats have been pushing to be a non-negociable minimum, then there is no need to analyze the "soul of the DNC"; you are not going to alter these positions, you might at best appear to compromise on them publically but still intend on cynically carrying them on when in power. Basically, you just need to manage the situation with regards to the public, including avoiding giving the other side ammo.
pigeonburger
14d ago
Oh! Oh! Phantasy Star Online!!!!
There's something in the aesthetic of that game that always look "new" and shiny.
pigeonburger
14d ago
Interestingly both ways make sense. In the US, antisocial is against or uninterested in socialization, whereas in the UK it's meant as the opposite of prosocial.
pigeonburger
15d ago
Ohhhh, can it be retroactively applied so we can say that Pretti and Good were shot by NICE?
pigeonburger
15d ago
I liked the aesthetics of Guild Wars 1, but the heavy bloom style is very of its time.
The whole concept of the series is exploring this aspect of the Star Wars universe; how can normal, realistic human beings can become what appeared to be comic book villains, so it felt like the morality system and its difficult questions was in service of the world building. Yes, the Sith are comic book villains, but the comic book villains occasionally make a good point. And I'm reminded of that planet in KOTOR where a Republic officer is decidedly guilty of murder; this is the kind of realistic dillema that helps the world building. KOTOR2 also works a lot to knock the Jedi down a peg, not intervening against the mandalorians was a problematic decision that with the benefit of hindsight the Jedi love to act all superior about, nothing says that it needed to have happened that way, especially if the Jedi had been led into the war by wiser masters rather than hothead Revan. I don't remember much of Jade Empire, I remember the thesis of closed fist being not exactly evil made sense when it came up in the game, but as applied in the game it felt disconnected (it would have made sense if CF was about letting or empowering people to deal with their own problems, but in the game it felt more like inflicting additional cruelty for the lulz)
Yeah, Bioware of that era was high on their own supply in that regard (and in the LGBT romances department) due to the praise they were getting. It's not the morality system I resent, but the contrivances made to force you to engage with the moral dilemmas. In the KOTOR murder case I mentioned, the murderer doesn't also randomly kidnaps your dog and forces you to chose between losing your dog or helping him off the hook; the reason why you would hesitate are utilitarian calculus (his condemnation could affect the balance of power on that planet), or perhaps an extremist belief that all Siths deserve death because the ideology they willingly embrace would spread it, etc... The story doesn't feel the need to twist itself to try and make the choice harder.
More options
Context Copy link