@pigeonburger's banner p

pigeonburger


				

				

				
2 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2023 March 03 15:09:03 UTC

				

User ID: 2233

pigeonburger


				
				
				

				
2 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2023 March 03 15:09:03 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2233

Anyone who looks at Diana and sees that is the one that should be kept under strict scrutiny, not Capcom's artists.

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...)

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.

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".

Don't worry, it happens to all of us

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.

That they had the guts to use the name "Center Investigative Agency" for one of their alleged shell cracks me up.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Oh! Oh! Phantasy Star Online!!!!

There's something in the aesthetic of that game that always look "new" and shiny.

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.

Ohhhh, can it be retroactively applied so we can say that Pretti and Good were shot by NICE?

I liked the aesthetics of Guild Wars 1, but the heavy bloom style is very of its time.

That's a deep cut, but yeah, I can see it

And honestly, there's probably one of the easiest cases to argue for it being good for a kid's development to make them face their fears in the form of gentle tension building in family movies while surrounded by their family for support. It's hardly "losing" their kids in the forest with a compass and a knife.

Pretty much anyone else is going to be at their hardest to assassinate when they are in proximity to the POTUS. Unless the assassin just wanted a challenge, he could have waited until any of these people were not being indirectly protected by the President's Secret Service detail and have an easier job of it.

I'm pretty sure #1 is the model you should assume. If it so happened that the Democrats were in a position to stop the war, and that they were to still take these votes then they'd have some dastardly blue dog democrats in purple states "betray" them. That's their main duty to their party. The party can maintain the virtue signaling while achieving the result the politicians want, the blue dog Democrats find their position in their purple state strengthened by their appearing "bipartisan".

Huh. Why do they always pick such long words for the “new” versions of these things? Master/servant still too hierarchical? Dom/sub too sexual?

I prefer pimp/ho