Lurker > Philip027

I like using them and dryer sheets because they smell good.
/shrug

me defending anyone else's position or saying anything in defense of what anyone else said

Post #58 was attacking post #10, you immediately attacked post #58. It's a clear cut defense of post #10. You trying to argue against this is pointless.

i'm not saying that i was hiding anything or that i'm tricky to read, either?

You certainly seem very eager to say you never said things that you very clearly did say, so either you (mistakenly) think you're a lot cleverer than the rest of us, or even you don't know what it is you're posting. Which is it?

dude just admit that you read something into it that wasn't there and move on

What did I read that wasn't there? You didn't even try to hide anything.

If you think you're a tricky one to read, I'm here to tell you that you're not.

Nothing was "pulled" out of anything.

#58 made a completely valid point stating we can't make assumptions like #10 did about what the guy may or may not have said (there's certainly nothing concrete that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that what he said caused her to commit suicide). You came in immediately afterward accusing #58 of having a "problem" of some kind.

Playing innocent is not going to work for you.

Is that what you think is happening?

If you're so tired of it, why do you keep responding?

Punished_Blinx posted...

Yeah Game Pass has streaming already. They're planning to give the ability to stream your owned games as well

Also lol;
https://twitter.com/PLAION/status/1575766741644627971?t=Vs9c0T2hEVYvMbL_KsTvWw&s=19

At least the guy in charge of their twitter is being a good sport about it.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Doesn't change the fact that post #58 had a perfectly valid point, and #59 (yours) does absolutely nothing to refute that.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Yes, you did.

Post #58: "Hey, post #10, you're making an accusation about the guy that you have no definitive proof over; don't assume"
Post #59 (you, immediately afterward): "Hey, post #58, what the fuck is your problem? How dare you point out that there's no proof? There's no anti-proof!"

I've seen better backpedaling attempts than this before.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


You came to the defense of someone who explicitly said "she might still be alive if he had chosen better words", thereby implying it's the guy's fault she died (and this person, like you, has no actual idea what was said or not said, yet was all too eager to pin it on the guy anyway)

So yeah, by supporting a position like that, that is indeed exactly what you're saying.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Even if he did say everything that she claims he did (which you do not know, and therefore cannot claim as the truth), that still does not necessarily mean her death was his fault, as was originally implied.

To me this is the good news. I don't want to stumble across that stuff on the eshop

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


There's also no need to blame a guy for a woman's death (a suicide, for that matter) without actual evidence, but hey

CassandraCroft posted...

Goodness gracious sounds like Christine Chubbuck all over again.

For those that don't know Christine Chubbuck was a 27 year old woman who in 1974 shot herself in the head on live television. She was suffering from depression and when she found out that the man she had a crush on was seeing someone else she committed suicide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Chubbuck

Sad to hear about that reporter.

This sort of thing probably happens more than you think; I wouldn't think news anchors are generally less suicidal than anyone else (if anything, getting more exposure to the crappy events of the world is something that I think would take an emotional toll on some people, that might leave them more prone to acts such as this)

Christine only became particularly notable because she offed herself on live TV. Something like that was unprecedented.

Have you never had an emotional fight with a loved one and said shit you didnt exactly mean

Yep, but it never went as far as to say I hated someone I definitely did not hate (or that I care about the welfare of someone I definitely did hate)

this is tragic, its also not something you can assign blame for because relationships are complicated

Wasn't trying to blame anything. I just do think the story doesn't quite add up and has missing details (but as I said, we probably won't get them now)

It was announced back in June.

https://www.siliconera.com/final-fantasy-record-keeper-shutting-down-outside-japan/

I dunno about anyone else but I certainly wouldn't bother calling in a welfare check to someone that I supposedly "hated"

Definitely feel like there are some missing details here, but we probably won't ever get them now.

I could try it, but I don't suspect I would like it.

I've never had Peeps, dunno what they are. Am ok with the other two

My existence wasn't my decision, so why should I be the one apologetic for it?

It honestly lasted a lot longer than I expected it would.

It was the one time of my life that had me actively contemplating suicide, so... you tell me

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I still do.

Oh that's okay, I just won't eat breakfast, I usually don't anyway --

it must be your first meal of the day

... Nope.

Yes. I lived the majority of my life in Hawaii which practically doesn't have seasons (about the only thing that changes is the overall temperature adjusting a few degrees), and living now in an area with actual seasons has made me realize how much I miss them.

samsungsugar posted...

They tried that during the prohibition, remind me, howd that turn out again?

Prohibition didn't work anyway because alcohol was still around. In this hypothetical situation, it would presumably simply cease to exist. People could get as butthurt as they wanted about it and it wouldn't change anything.

I already don't consume alcohol and feel like it causes far more harm to society than help, so that's an easy decision.

1) I don't drive
2) I'm not rich
3) Too inconvenient to refuel, might be outright not an option depending on where you live

BotW is a game I could have liked if not for its more tedious elements, which almost feels more frustrating in a way than it would have if the game were just flat out bad. (Even if I did like it though, I still wouldn't think it's a good Zelda game -- it deviates too much from the core Zelda experience for me to really regard it like one. Same feeling I had about A Link Between Worlds.)

My "bitterness" mainly comes from the fact that this was pretty much the title I got a Switch for, which made it feel like a big wasted investment at the time once I realized how I really felt about the game. It took some time afterward, but the Switch library eventually expanded enough to the point I at least don't feel like getting it was a waste anymore.

Not interested in "cyberpunk" to begin with.

Flockaveli posted...

Nope. Like I said I'm not a "Sit Down and Watch" type of person. Only ever watched like 8 movies my whole life. Every critically acclaimed series that people will clamor about until the end of time, haven't seen 99% of them. Pop Culture and Movie references go over my head. I probably have some kind of learning disability because I can not sit down and focus on watching a screen. I'll sit down and play video games for 18 hours in a day or listen to albums or podcasts but I can not sit down and watch Hulu or Netflix or HBO or whatever else. Just nothing enjoyable about it.

Aside from the albums or podcasts thing (music/audio also doesn't hold my attention), that's a lot like me.

Nope

Umbreon posted...

"It's your fault if you can't predict when you might trip!"

"Tripping adds realism!"

Don't forget "respecting the creators' vision"

Being a loser isn't solely based on one's own level of self-confidence.

Sure, I love me some Frosty.

ZangsBeard posted...

Wut?

Bane of the Trapped, starts at 15% damage boost, gains .3% per rank. Every rank is worth the exact same amount, a linear upgrade path.

You can double the damage of this gem (to 30%) by getting 50 ranks.

But getting another 50 ranks does not double the damage again. It becomes 45%, half the improvement from 30%. The higher the rank gets, the less impact each additional rank has. That's diminishing returns.

thx1138 posted...

Online games dont usually have a pause button

Playing Diablo 3 right now and if you're solo, the game is perfectly fine with letting you pause.

I personally have no interest in playing rifts beyond 120 or so (unless I came across a build that could easily do so in 2-3 minutes); there's no real benefit for it beyond getting slightly better gems (which all suffer from diminishing returns because the upgrades are all linear anyway).

The game does a poor job of incentivizing high tier content. Amount of equipment drops caps at around 90-100, going higher than that doesn't affect the likelihood of getting better drops, and it's far better XP to speedrun the highest tier you're capable of doing rather than doing the hardest rift you can just barely clear.

The basically free tier 125 augments from echoing nightmares is far more than enough for me.

Sounds a lot like the justification for no pause feature in Desert Bus.

Except Desert Bus was, you know, an intentional joke game.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/2/2/AAAgybAADs62.jpg

Somehow I get the impression that if a student showed up looking like that they wouldn't look the other way.

You know, metaphorically speaking.

Disclaimer: I may be talking completely out of my ass.

132 to 0.05 is a x2640 increase in production using the same amount of original material (0.05 * 2640 = 132), meaning a 263,900% increase in production (as with the original 100 to 1 example, you don't count the original product in the percentage, since we're talking about simply what's been increased)

To get the 2640 value, I multiplied .05 by 20 to get 1, then that by 132 to get 132. 20 * 132 = 2640.

trappedunderice posted...

Make sure you have the bounties for Adria and Urzael so you can find their locations quicker.

You won't ever have more than one boss bounty in each act, from what I can tell. So you'll only get a map pointer to one or the other.

If you are relying on having one, I'd pick Urzael. Ruins of Corvus is more of a consistent path to Adria, whereas the entrance to Urzael can be more in the middle of Westmarch Heights rather than at an end, which IMO makes it easier to overlook. Westmarch Heights is also more prone to dead end paths, in my experience.

But yeah, you do want to focus on the bosses with scruffier maps like these two first. That way if one of them wastes too much of your time, you can just restart without much effort wasted.

I don't get it; what's different?

For me, the actual procedure itself was fine, I got numbed up good.

It was going home afterward (and the following day) that was painful. Gradually dissipated over the rest of the week or so.

The weapon durability was never a big deal to me, I don't see how people had trouble with it other than just the premise itself

You don't see how having to stop the action over and over on nearly every fight to take out a new stick or farming implement because your previous one shattered into a million pieces yet again (in a series where you previously almost never had to worry about that happening to your sword) might be tedious to some, especially at the start of the game where the weapons are at by far their weakest?

It's not like the Giant's Knife or Razor Sword in the N64 games either, where not only do the games emphasize that these are both meant to be temporary weapons to be replaced by a permanent version, even if you do decide to actually try to use them, they still last for way more hits than just about anything in BotW does.

Mia_K97 posted...

what's the con? I'm already an Asian girl.

You become a guy instead. (As stipulated in the OP.)

Of course, YMMV on whether that's a con to you.