Lurker > Gobstoppers12

Murphiroth posted...

Like, they're specifically angry at the idea that minorities or LGBTQ folks might appear in videogames

That's surely an opinion that some people have, but that's not really the majority of people who oppose corporate mandated diversity quotas.

Torgo posted...

demanding that they will go after games that don't meet their fascist content code.

I feel like you're just making this up, for the most part. What are some examples of a game that has been harassed to this degree just for existing?

I obviously agree that targeted harassment and threats are bad things, but is it really that widespread? Or does it only pertain to specific public figures who say controversial things about men or gamers in general?

Anybody who hates a game "because it has black people" is obviously a pretty hateful person, but in my experience it's usually more than just "black people bad"

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

Yes, using a legitimate constitutional argument that Trump should not be allowed on ballets was just awful.

Nah. If you dont want to be removed for insurrection dont fucking try to overthrow the government.

I mean, the result speaks for itself. Maybe if they had a better case, it would have been a better choice, but as it stands they were kind of humiliated.

Murphiroth posted...

Yeah they're not "just" doing this but count on you to ignore all the horrifically racist shit that comes out of that camp.

What else are they doing, functionally?

Torgo posted...

Can you point to one of these reviews from a published source that isn't just a random twitter or youtuber with six followers?

Here's the specific one I had in mind, since it's somewhat recent. Articles like this have been coming out about lots of games for a really long time now, though.

https://www.theverge.com/23771491/final-fantasy-xvi-diversity-inclusion

Torgo posted...

Only they insist they are entitled to have all games be made to suit their desires and insecurities

Not really. They're just buying the games that suit them, rather than buying the games that don't. Additionally, they're compiling a list of games that have similar DNA (aka, using the same diversity and sensitivity consultant) so that other people of like mind can avoid those games, too.

It's pretty basic stuff. There's nothing ethically, morally, or legally wrong with the existence of such a list, nor with the desire to play games that the consultant didn't work on.

ArsGoetia posted...

because it's just thinly veiled pushback against gaming embracing modern social sensibilities

It's not that thinly veiled, really. The pushback is largely against diversity spreadsheets and quota checklists that don't actually make the game any better. It's push back against a culture that constantly puts out articles about how "this game is awesome but I have to give it a bad review because it has too many white people in it"

Once again the democrats are fumbling their counter strategy and handing him victories he never should have gotten. They literally took him off the ballot as a symbolic gesture, and now the Supreme Court slapped them down 9-0.

Trump now has that ammunition to run on. That 9-0 court decision in his favor is going to run very well in campaign ads, even if the truth is that he's still under legal trouble in dozens of other cases and situations.

If Trump loses 30 cases, but that one case still stands as a 9-0 victory, all he has to do is go up there in front of his followers and brag about that 9-0. His followers will eat it up, spread it around, use it as proof that they're "still not tired of winning."

It was a massive, massive blunder to do that.

ArsGoetia posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/a3760aa7.png

I would like to ask you to explain how the page owner's not-actually-hateful conduct during the interview has anything to do with the company trying to brigade and mass report the list itself

Edit: Also, are you saying it's okay in general to harass and brigade a person who says something in their personal life that you personally dislike?

Torgo posted...

Isn't that Asmongolb guy some kind of right wing lunatic?

No, not at all.

ArsGoetia posted...

dude was holding his tongue the entire time not to say just absolute dipshit nonsense

Okay, but how is that actually relevant to this situation?

Meanwhile, the actual controversy around them pertains to a Steam page that contains a list of every game the company was hired to work on. People who want to avoid that company's work can visit that page and make sure that a game doesn't appear on the list.

The company is very, very upset by the prospect of accountability for their own output, and a few employees are trying to mass report, smear, and otherwise attempt to damage and punish the person who made the Steam page.

That's where the actual controversy starts. The rest of it is just "consulting firm gives awful advice, game companies follow the advice, the game sucks, people don't want to play more games with similar problems, people follow a steam page to keep track of games associated with the consulting company, consulting company becomes very upset"

It's a consulting firm that makes games worse and advises people to threaten their employers with "media outrage" if said employer doesn't hire a consulting firm to increase diversity in the game's writing.

They're attached to a lot of recent games that are incredibly mediocre at best.

Prestoff posted...

For why the refund is happening because the game has been having server issues since day 1. It's basically the hydra effect when it comes to server issues

Jesus, imagine launching a game that has server issues even when only a few thousand people are playing. I understand issues for huge successes like WoW or Helldivers 2, but it's not like Suicide Squad ever had a massive influx of players.

Those kinds of issues should be tested for and solved before launch.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

shrug. the worms listen to and react to rhythmic patterns on the surface. if the people walked normally, it wouldn't make sense that their movement didn't agro the worms.

I know that. I just think the in-universe solution and resulting visuals are very silly. Especially when they're doing it in the middle of sweeping landscape shots while "desert music" plays triumphantly.

bsp77 posted...

$190 million. It will need about $500 million to break even. I predict a 3.25 multiplier on its worldwide opening, so it will make close to $600 million.

3.25 is pretty strong for March, but I suppose we'll have a better idea of where it's headed after the drops in its second weekend.

When does it come out in China, for that matter? They usually prop it up a bit.

Quarter pounder

Smashingpmkns posted...

Glad to see sci-fi back in a big way. There's been spurts here and there but nothing as demanding to the audience as the Dune films, at least for a major blockbuster, since maybe the original Matrix. We're back bby

How expensive was Dune 2 to make? If it's a huge budget, there's a reasonably high chance the studio barely breaks even on it.

Giant_Aspirin posted...

did you understand why they were doing it? are you generally bored by lore / creativity in fiction?

Of course I understood why they were doing it. The movie beat me over the head with the reason for it. The main character watched the equivalent of an intergalactic YouTube tutorial explaining it. How could I possibly not have understood?

I understand why it exists in-universe, but I also think it is incredibly silly.

And no, generally I'm not bored by lore and world building. I just think Dune in particular is kinda lame and boring.

DiScOrDtHeLuNaTiC posted...

It's a two and a half hour film with maybe half an hour of dialogue, none of which is hard to grasp if you pay attention.

First off, there's way more dialog than that.

Second off, I never said I couldn't grasp it. The issue wasn't understanding what was being said-- The issue was that I didn't really care. It failed to make me care about all the different factions and religious prophecy stuff.

At a certain point, it got to the part with the sandwalking shit, and I couldn't help but burst out laughing. I'm sure some people think that's cool and creative, but it didn't really do it for me. I just found it incredibly silly.

specialkid8 posted...

I don't know it's trash. Gameplay looked fun and the internet seems to be doing its typical act of wailing and rending its clothes over nothing. Y'all act like everything you don't like killed your dog.

You seriously don't need to defend the soulless cash grab game, my guy.

Smashingpmkns posted...

This game was dead the minute the battlepass screen leaked like a year and a half before release lol

Honestly I'm here for that. Eventually enough of these uninspired battle pass money-farming vehicles will fail spectacularly, and companies will finally realize that they're just as risky as full sized games.

Nah, I only go see movies when I'm wide awake first thing in the morning. My dad fell asleep during parts of Infinity War in the theater, though. Which is weird, because he loves that movie now.

The first Dune was absolutely painful to sit through for like 60% of its runtime. So much political and religious jargon, and lots of dry exposition.

The visuals were awesome, though. That's what got me through it. I have literally no investment in the story after finishing the first movie.

There's nothing wrong with a live service game. Everything wrong with lazy live service games. Unfortunately, most of them are incredibly lazy.

Resisting arrest is one thing, but there's no way he's culpable for that death. It's insane that there was ever a question.

Jurassic World is super fun, though. The second one is much worse.

I seriously, seriously want to know why anybody thought this game would succeed. Everybody knew from the first announcement that it would basically be trash.

ViewtifulJoe posted...

Don't they just make supercuts and clickbait now?

No. They do the same thing they've always done.

Irony posted...

Game Grumps suck

I like them a lot still. I mostly watch the power hour right away, then peruse the games on the main channel when the mood strikes.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

That... doesn't actually address the logic, though. You're not disproving the reasoning, you're just telling me that you don't like the term.

Explain to me, please, how one can be pro-choice without also being pro-abortion. They go hand in hand.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Reiterate for me, please? Or point me to the relevant post numbers and quotes?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Explain how it's invalid, please. I've given my reasoning for why they mean the same thing. You cannot support a woman's right to choose without also supporting the availability of abortion.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Nah. Unfortunately, you don't get to decide how others view a particular position. You can't pretend it's an invalid way of describing the situation.

I'm in favor of abortion, though I also think it's a sad and regrettable thing that should be a last resort.

I support the right to choose, but that also means I am pro abortion. It's just the way words work.

DrizztLink posted...

You can try all you want, it's not the term.

It's not "the term," but it is an equally valid term for the position. When referring to pro-choice, the "choice" in this case is the choice of whether or not to have an abortion. In order for that choice to be possible, the abortion services must be accessible to those who choose to undergo the procedure.

To be pro-choice, you must also be pro-abortion. I get why those who identify as pro-choice would rather not be identified as pro-abortion, but in essence, to be pro-chocie means that you are also pro-abortion.

Pro-choice individuals definitely aren't anti-abortion, and they're not neutral regarding abortion, either. That means they are pro-abortion.

DrizztLink posted...

It is not.

It is. Just because you don't like that term does not mean that it isn't a valid term.

Are you uncomfortable with the term? Because in essence, if you are pro-choice you are arguing in support of abortion practices. That means you are pro-abortion.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

It is absolutely a thing. Pro-choice is another term for pro-abortion, meaning that you argue in favor of abortion procedures being legal and accessible. Being "pro abortion" doesn't mean you want abortion to be mandatory, it just means that you are in favor of abortion as a practice.

Deutschenlied posted...

There are people who think abortions should be mandatory?

That's not really what that means, but you already knew that.

Karovorak posted...

It's rarely frustrating, even if you get your ass kicked.

Yeah, the tone and second-to-second excitement keep it fun no matter what, in my experience.

The air strike functions are also amazingly cool to use.

I feel the same way about repetitive multiplayer-only games.

One of the best movies I've ever seen. It nails pretty much every aspect.

Because they're super obvious and easy to identify?

The gun physics and the way the damage hits the enemies immediately sold me on it. It feels exactly like playing the Starship Troopers movie. Blowing off legs, nuking whole fields, posting up in a stronghold and fighting off huge waves...

Every shot feels good.

MrAntisocial posted...

The self checkout being faster is an illusion. There are usually more self checkouts open

Yes, this makes them faster because you wait less time overall.

At least at my Walmart, there are maybe 3-5 cashiers working at a time. Each one probably has 4+ people waiting at a time during normal traffic hours.

Meanwhile, the single line leading to the 6 self check outs moves faster than each of those cashier lines. Because while the cashiers generally work faster than the self checkouts on a 1:1 comparison...

The self checkout lane is serving 6 people at a time. It's like playing an RTS like starcraft.

If you have one barracks, it would take 6 minutes to make 6 marines. (Not accurate game time, just simplified)

But if you build six barracks, you can make six marines in one minute.

Even if you double the speed of the single barracks, keeping the other 6 at the same speed as before, having 6 of them will still be twice as efficient.

That's how it works with self checkout. Each person is individually slower than the cashier, but they're served at 6 times the rate.

viewmaster_pi posted...

i understand that, but it doesn't mean furry = lgbt, and i think it's disingenuous to try and quash and smear any anti-furry sentiment as anti-lgbt when your gender identity has nothing to do with being Silverpaw Windrunner at conventions

Currently, it's not considered hate or bigotry to single out furries for ridicule. I think over time that sentiment will change. Give it a bit.

Seems fair.

ThePieReborn posted...

Weebs will always be acceptable targets, even for other weebs.

Signed,

A weeb

That one's going to be true until the point it finally becomes unfashionable to shame men for being lonely or introverted.