And why exactly does Hamas exist in the first place? Surely not because Isreal has been killing Palestinians before Isreal was even an official state.
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 506
- Joined
- 9 mo. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 506
- Joined
- 9 mo. ago
I didn't have a lot of time for the next fest but I did give three games a try that were on my radar before the next fest.
The first was Allumeria. It was recently in the news because it got DMCA'd for looking like Minecraft. Having played it I would say that while the artstyle is somewhat Minecraft inspired the game felt more like 3D Terraria than Minecraft. But I still consider it to be too raw to really get into it. The forest boss was kind of just running around to avoid getting hit by projectile spam while spamming projectiles back at the boss. I don't know if I was supposed to have better gear for the boss but it was like 10 minutes of just running around taking potshots at the boss because the boss was too tanky. I followed up the boss fight with the forest dungeon and after literally spending an hour inside the dungeon I gave up because I had no idea where I was supposed to go what I was supposed to do. That said, I'll still keep it on my radar because the concept was appealing.
The second game I played was Let's build a dungeon. This was probably the best game I played and the whole concept of the game is so novel I'd definitely recommend keeping an eye on it. Basically the core gameplay of let's build a dungeon is to build an MMO world. You throw in a spawn point, build roads, scenery, and then add quests and dungeons (which you also build manually) and then get NPC players come in to play your MMO world. Except that is not all that the game is. The game is also a game dev studio management game where you deal with hiring talent, managing the popularity of your MMO, budgeting etc. Except that's not all that the game is. You also get to play the very MMO world you create. You can make a character and play through all the quests and dungeons you've made and if I remember correctly you can also play the MMO worlds other players have created. I would also recommend their previous game, let's build a zoo, which is a game where you build a zoo (with a twist that I'm not going to spoil).
The last game I tried was Cargo hunters. It's essentially a single-player extraction shooter where you play as humanoid robot. The novel idea in cargo shooters is that any other bot you destroy you can saw into pieces and then you can take those pieces back into your base and rebuilt your own bot using the pieces from the other bots. And that's pretty much all I can say about the game because the demo was so barebones I couldn't really tell anything more about the game beyond that it worked and didn't play like ass. In fact I'd say the demo was an excellent example how not to do a demo. The game is supposed to have crafting, but most of the crafting stations are not available in the demo. It's supposed to have trading, but trading station is not available in the demo. You can find gun parts to modify your guns, except the modification station is not available in the demo so you can't do that. There's a leveling system in the game but beyond being a requirement for some crafting stations I didn't see any reason for there to be a leveling system. The demo felt like a mash of all sorts of things that an extraction shooter should have, except more than half of those things weren't even in the game yet. So the game boils down to running the same level over and over again killing the same bots over and over again while you become weaker and weaker because you can't really replace the gear your started the game with. I'm keeping it wishlisted because their trailer showed far more content than what the demo had so maybe there's a quick jump into something with more substance when the early access launch happens, but overall this was the demo I was the most disappointed by.
If we want to give Musk some benefit of doubt the only visionary thing he did was SpaceX. Pretty much every other venture he's invested in has been either someone else's vision or something very stupid (like what the Boring Company is doing). I don't think he deserves to be called a visionary when his contribution isn't the vision but a fat wallet.
The two parts that manage the video game side are Nintendo (whose interest it is to keep Pokemon exclusive) and Game Freak (whose main publisher is Nintendo and who very much needs Nintendo's cooperation to stay alive) have little to no interest in expanding the games to other platforms. And considering Nintendo was the publisher of the Pokemon games before the Pokemon company even existed they might've snuck into some joint venture agreement or IP agreement or whatever that Nintendo gets the final word on what platform the games are released on.
So them having only partial ownership of the Pokemon company doesn't mean they can't have full control over where the games get released.
The latest earnings call implies the opposite. They don't have a large supply of PS5 laying around because they're also struggling to buy memory and hardware unit sales have declined so they're focusing on monetizing the existing user base instead of selling more units.
I'll bring up a few shows that haven't been mentioned yet.
Band of Brothers. It's probably one of the greatest TV shows ever made. It's about the Easy company of the 101 airborne division in WW2. The show follows the company from bootcamp (where you get to see David Schwimmer give a performance that could shock you out of seeing him as Ross from Friends) all the way to the end of the war. It's a must watch and that's all I'm going to say because if I say anything more I'm just going to start praising it to high heavens. I'll only add this that if you've finished Band of Brothers and feel like you want more there's also a sort of a follow-up miniseries called "The Pacific" which focuses on the Pacific front of WW2. It is good definitely worth watching if you enjoyed Band of Brothers but it doesn't reach the high that was Band of Brothers.
The other miniseries I'll mention is Bodyguard. It's about a British Police officer who ends up becoming a bodyguard for the Home Secretary (Minister of the Interior or Homeland security of however it's named it your country). I won't spoil anything else about the plot, I'll just add that the show does an excellent job as framing conflicts and building up suspense. It's an all around great thriller.
And now something from the left field, Attack on Titan. This is the only show that I recommend that isn't a miniseries and it's not even live-action. It's an anime based on the comic (manga) of the same name. It's set in a world where humans are forced to live behind walls to keep out giant man-eating humanoids called the Titans and the anime (and the comic) follow Eren Jaeger, who wants to rid the world of the Titans. This one needs a PSA. Anyone who has watched anime knows the trope of the hero putting together a band of companions and they go on their merry adventures. That is definitely what you will feel on the first half of the first season so if you start watching and think "what is this boring bullshit" it gets way better. It's a really well written story with a lot of hints that will make sense in hindsight and some borderline Dark (if you've seen the show you know what I'm talking about) moments that make you go "what the fuck is even going on?" It's one the few stories where I hope we get a proper "Edge of tomorrow" level adaption of the whole story (as a show not a movie because you're not fitting that into a movie) to make it more digestible for western audiences because that's how great Attack on Titan is. It's the only anime that I recommend on the basis that if it had a a good live-action adaptation I would be recommending that. But because there's no live action version we have to make due with anime and if you're not going to watch it because it's anime then it really is just your loss.
Because only one wealthy guy got killed not all of them. The meme also doesn't work when it's only Elon Musk going into the bunker.
Do you want to expand on that statement?
In this AI bubble Playstation is also a marginalized platform. Sony is also struggling under the memory shortage and rumors are the PS6 has been pushed forward another year because you can't launch a new platform in this economy. They will fare better because they can make special deals to get the hardware they want, but at what price? If PS6 starts costing something like $700 they're not going to be all that successful.
The only ones I was remotely interested we're Demons souls remake (which never came to PC) and Bloodborne remake (which never happened in the first place). For the rest of Sony games I gave most of them a fair shot but none of them made me think "wow, this was a must play".
fauxbait means fake (jail)bait and jailbait is considered childporn, so fauxbait is about fake child porn. The content itself is not illegal if the participants are all adults but according to Australian laws the framing of the content can make it illegal as explained in the original post. Fauxbait frames the content as "child porn, but not really" and I think if someone made that framing explicit you'd also consider it wrong.
If someone posted an image of small flatchested adult woman with the title "that woman has nice tits" you probably wouldn't think anything of it (unless you're into it) but when that same image is shown and the title is "that fake child has nice tits" it should raise some questions for you, like why even mention child? And that's the issue with fauxbait. There's nothing wrong with liking small women with small tits as long as they're adults, but why is it necessary to take the extra step to frame the adult as a fake child? If you like those kinds of women you don't need fauxbait, you can subscribe to small titties or tiny titties or flatchested of whatever the community would be called. You can get the same content without the "that's a fake child" implication.
If you want to argue that they're not actually implying the fake child porn then why call it fauxbait and continue using it? There are other communities with the same content, just ban the fauxbait community and use a different community. Even if they're not implying it they're still using a name that literally means fake child porn.
To put it plainly I was asking if the context matters more than the content, because I think it does. I agree the faux bait community shouldn't exist but if you're going argue that content shouldn't be posted in the first place I'm going to disagree. Not because it's my kind of content, at to be clear it very much is not, but because I think that's the slippery slope. That would be saying small flatchested women porn is CP which means men who like those kinds of women are pedos and those women are essentially jailbait. I think that's stupid.
I think if we to improve the state of NSFW content we also need to be very specific in our wording of the criticism because how criticism is worded can change the context and as we agree, context matters. And that's what I want from this discussion, clarity on what people are criticizing. Because the other person is right that the content there is not the problem, but he's wrong because the reason to defed wasn't because of the content itself but rather how it was framed. And I think you also blurred that line with the fiction story example.
You're just taking offense to the community being called fauxbait? So if the community is called tiny titties it's all good?
The point is that this is not the first time that Valve has been singled out for things widely done across the industry and they’ve also been falsely accused of doing things that the rest of the industry is doing.
I don't see how that's relevant. If someone is innocent the 99 times they've been accused of a crime we shouldn't give them a pass on the 100th accusation.
If they wanted to go after Valve specifically for gambling they should not have linked it to kids. It’s invoking “think of the children” BS while diluting what they claim is the core argument.
But it is an argument to be made when a) kids are playing a game with gambling (which they are), b) there's clear evidence that kids experiencing gambling has a negative impact on their life (which the lawsuit also clearly cites) and c) children gambling is illegal.
Gambling is also harmful for adults. They are M rated games. If a child is playing the game that is a parental issue, not a state issue. It’s not illegal for kids to play M rated games, nor do I really think it should be as that is something parents should decide. The issue is that a lot, if not most, parents have no idea what their kids are doing online.
Gambling is also harmful for adults, but that has been legalized. Children playing an M rated game is a parental issue but that's not the argument that's being made. But it turns into a legal issue when the game children are playing is gambling.
The argument that “mostly kids play these games” is unsubstantiated at best. Might have been true in the 90s and early 2000s, but there are people in their 50’s that have played games for the majority of their lives.
I didn't see them making that argument. I saw them make an argument that teenagers are a core audience for CS.
Teenage boys are a core audience of first-person shooter games like Counter-Strike. It is also well known that many of the most famous esports players of CS 2, Dota 2, and Team Fortress 2 began playing well before they turned 13. Over half of the 22 players on the top five Counter-Strike esports academy teams are 18 years old or younger, and the youngest member is just 14 years old.
That seems to be pretty well argumented especially when you know the competitive scene of CS where those same academy teams have slotted straight into T1 CS. The fact that there are so many talented players in the competitive scene who either are or were minors a few years ago means that there is a big enough teenage audience to have such talent rise to the top.
Also, PC gaming tends to skew older. They might have more of an argument if they were talking about Call of Duty on a console, but an M rated game is still not targeted to that age group.
You don't see the irony of defending Valve with their games being M rated and then saying it would be different if it was Call of Duty, which is also an M rated game? By your own logic you should be just as opposed to them talking about Call of Duty as they are talking about Counter Strike.
Again, if they want to go after Vavle for gambling, then do that. But they are jumping around with what exactly the accusation is which makes it seem like they are grasping at straws at best or trying to hide the real reason at worst.
They are and they're making arguments where Valve would be breaking the law if Valve is gambling. That includes letting children gamble.
That we have all the age verification crap happening at the same time is too much of a coincidence to ignore. Like, How about going after anyone implicated from the files if you really want to protect children? They can come back to this after they develop a coherent argument and include any other gaming companies doing the same thing.
They can’t legally force Valve to implement age verification unless Valve decides to double down on the gambling. Valve could just as easily prevent age verification by removing gambling from their platform. I don’t think Valve should get a free pass on gambling just because there’s a risk of someone malicious trying to push age verification through this door. Valve opened that door when they decided to implement gambling.
They have a coherent argument, it's just an argument you don't like and they can't include other gaming companies in this lawsuit because other gaming companies are not doing it the exact same way Valve is doing it. What you're saying is that we should give Valve a pass on allegedly breaking the law because we can't accuse all companies who may or may not be breaking the law. If there's a gangrape and only 1 of the 5 rapists could be proven guilty should they get a free pass because we can't prove all 5 did the raping? Because that's the argument you're making.
If this is a plan to distract from the Epstein files I would consider that a successful plan because what is happening is fucking insane. This distraction would literally be hiding child rapists by killing children.
Absolutely. My point was more that even though it doesn't seem much for NY it's still way better than doing minimum wage. Anyone doing minimum wage would love to make that much because the minimum wage is so low.
And yet it's almost double the minimum wage.
Which means what exactly….it was there. You asked. I provided.
Which was something that was. Car used to run on gasoline mixed with lead, do you think if someone asked what are the problems with ICE engines they care about an issue that has been fixed for over a decade? Nobody cares about that because it's fixed and the same way nobody cares that D3 had an auction have 12 years ago. It's not relevant today so your example is worthless. The least you could do is own up your mistake but it's pretty clear admitting fault is beyond your capacity.
Uhh ok? It kinda does…
Uhh ok? It kinda doesn't...
Because this is a platform that allows people to post their comments. You whining about how you care that whales exist, doesn’t magically make your opinion more important than mine. Plenty of games out there aren’t pay 2 win…so vote with your wallet and don’t play them. If you are addicted get help. Don’t punish those who enjoy a vice. It’s how we get shit legislation that doesn’t do anything but create blackmarkets.
You're free to make a comment, but don't get pissy when you get called out for being an ass. Because you are. That very line of thought means you're okay with legalizing hard drugs. After all if you're addicted to meth that's your fault. We shouldn't be punishing the people who somehow luck out of not getting addicted to meth. You don't care about this issue so stfu, your opinion is irrelevant.
You do know that almost all Windows games can run on Linux? The biggest reason you can't play some Windows games on Linux is anticheat and even there in most cases it's the developer deciding to not ship the version of anticheat that works with Linux.
If there was pressure on the developers to make sure their anticheat wouldn't stop games running on Linux you could just as easily game on Linux as you do on windows.