Lurker > nemu

Does this qualify as offensive content?

The death of Blockbuster was pretty much the signal of the end of it being super mainstream, but theres still stuff like Redbox.

It depends on the person, but I believe the majority of media personalities know they're peddling bullshit to evangelicals and conspiracy nuts.

VeggetaX posted...

You guys are having major severe lack of mindness for others in this thought process. A lot of "The game should be designed for me!" energy here. Have you guys ever thought maybe the design will work well with people who are colorblind? What about the people who don't have a 4K HD TV/Monitor so they aren't capable of seeing everything as clearly?

Those are called accessibility options.

The main thing is there's a difference between having options to cater to the non-game player and having the experience inherently cater to the non-game player. God of War's constant, insentient talking during puzzles and games using yellow paint are over-corrections to a problem that can be solved in other ways, and it seems like some people are inherently defending bad design for no particular reason.

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

wonder if its a copout for game design or a philosophical statement

Most early 3D platformer combat was pretty bad, so not a horrible idea just to skip it. Even in Mario 64, how often did the enemies actually matter?

I couldn't get into Baldur's Gate 3 at all. The gameplay simply was not for me, but beyond that the characters didn't capture me either.

It looks like most at least align with the age of consent. Not ideal, but much better than the 5(?) that seem to allow any age with parental consent.

The major consoles have been transitioning to specialty cheap PCs the last couple generations. With how lackluster they've been this generation and the heavy focus on PC/multi-platform, I think the landscape is going to massively change either next generation or the generation after if the PS6 and Xwhatever are already too far into development. Nintendo will just continue being Nintendo unless they pull another Wii U with the Switch 2.

It's definitely something that will catch on more as they manage to reduce the bulk.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

He has no legal obligation, but dropping something that people have spent millions of dollars and hours on is quite dick move. Though that ignores the fact that he's been leaching off people's goodwill for a decade instead of just officially canceling the series because that would remove a large amount of his cultural relevance.

I think it would definitely mean a lot of horrible trends affecting groups targeted by bigoted evangelicals, but the position doesn't really carry enough power to turn the country into an instant hellscape.

I dont like the idea of encouraging unhealthy parasocial relationships, so I wouldnt be ok with anything where theres direct private interaction with fans for money. If its more something akin to idol worship, I wouldnt care as much.

If I can scan and bag it faster than waiting, yes. If it would take me longer, then I'm fine waiting.

It depends on the definition of fine and the level of abuse, but I'd believe the majority of people come out without any major trauma or anything. If they're trying to use it to justify abusing more children, then they're just fucked in the head.

Not at all. It always seems extremely confusing. Like I can understand if someone has active grandparents or great grandparents, who still live in their country of origin, and they actually have visited that country, but the people who sort of pick and choose some arbitrary heritage point and act like it means anything seem to be compensating for something.

I can understand not thinking the paint is a big deal, but I dont get simping for the paint. Its just so ugly.

CrimsonGear80 posted...

any solution you can come up with will just be another way to guide the player that is no different from yellow paint.

It's weird that you don't consider any possible midpoint. Plenty of games have guidance and accessibility options that are much less in your face. You don't need to inherently cater to the wandering child or game journalist. You just need to make sure you have options that can cater to them, if needed.

CrimsonGear80 posted...

people who complain about these kinds of visual aids don't seem to realize they were put there because they had actual people play the games and realized they needed them...

And you can have a midpoint so those visual aids can help people without making the rest of the players feel talked down to. Like with God of War, there were clips where the player wasn't even given a full minute before being told the answer, despite there being several different difficulty levels presented to the player. That was a case of them being too handholdy instead of catering to the needs of each kind of player.

The main thing is to have environments that naturally guide players, but from there you can have non-ugly markings if needed, or just have an accessibility option that activates if the player lingers for X minutes that can then be turned off.

It was definitely quite overhyped, but I imagine it's gained enough traction that it'll be around for a while. The dev seems to have an issue with not actually finishing games, but seems like modding is pretty easy.

CrimsonGear80 posted...

people who complain about these kinds of visual aids don't seem to realize they were put there because they had actual people play the games and realized they needed them...

There are ways to make visual aids that fit into the environment. Yellow paint is like God of War's excessive verbal "hints," lazy and way too handholdy to the point of patronization. You can have a midpoint between that, or you can have accessibility options for those who really are completely lost without them.

Yeah, there should be a maximum age for government officials across the board. Even setting it high at 80 to prevent another wheelchair-bound, barely cognizant puppet from being wheeled around would be better than nothing.

It's definitely a very ugly trend that could be done in a number of more aesthetically pleasing ways, and for some reason, traveling painters are more immersion breaking than ancient dungeons having lit lanterns. Ideally, you'd want to naturally guide the player through better design, but I'd otherwise rather just see something more gameplay-related, like having intractable objects flash. Making it a weird in-universe thing doesn't make it more immersive if it just looks silly.

I really don't get what started that trend. Many games previously had been able to lead the player without stupidly obvious markings. While we're dealing with more realistic settings now, you can still prep the player for what to look for and make sure you don't double up on things that look climbable.

Mentally, Trump seems fucking insane. Biden seems to slip between alert and witty and doddering old man way too frequently.

Physically, Biden seems to be normal for his age, which is still too fucking old to be in office. Trump seems one brisk jog away from keeling over. Neither should be in office, but Biden is still the better one by far.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

People within individual countries cannot even cooperate to the point of fixing all their issues, so an altruistic global community is pretty much an imaginary utopia from where we currently stand.

In the sense that we could hypothetically support the entire population of the planet in an imaginary utopia, no. In the sense that we dont have a system to properly support the entire population of the planet, yes.

It's really annoying for following anything with a lot of people. If it's just a small group of less than 20 users, it's not much different from a normal forum experience.

ellis123 posted...

There are hundreds of districts, only one of which is feudal Japan.

We only know of the main one and Reverse London, which is the "West Branch," and it doesn't seem to fulfill the same purpose. The main Soul Society has the main city and various districts, all of which are based on feudal Japan. It's really just that Kubo sucks at worldbuilding, so none of it really makes much sense.

Seems like everyone goes to Soul Society? It doesn't seem like Reverse London houses an afterlife. It's more of just an alternate realm where strong people live amongst the Dragons.

The biggest thing is that he easily could have written it in such a way that it made sense, relative to the situation. The idea that "no depiction of anything that could considered child abuse, no matter how small or innocuous, should ever be trivialized as a joke" is a perfectly justifiable stance, but he just put it out into the world in the most moronic way possible. For a more reasonable take, he could have said his stance, compared it to something like Bart and Homer in the Simpsons, explained his trauma and how it might have affected him as a kid, and that would have been that.

No. I cannot stand service people who constantly try to talk. I'm here to get my haircut, not have a chat. I won't hold it against them to try, seeing as a lot of people like to chat the entire time, but it gets really annoying if they keep trying even after it's clear I have no interest.

Bubbagump posted...

Actually, I completely agree. It doesn't give him free-reign to lash out, to name call or anything like that. I also agree, he would benefit from better coping strategies or counseling. These are extremely valid points! What I take issue with is people lashing out in response with their own hateful responses. I think there's a difference between recognizing that someone has a trauma-based reaction and disagreeing with it, saying he went too far, versus straight up belittling him, name-calling, and otherwise being hateful. There is plenty of space to disagree with someone and not resort to hateful attacks. Wil Wheaton chose not to do this. But that doesn't mean he deserves all the hateful comments right back at him. One reaction is coming from a place of trauma and need for therapy. Another reaction is coming from being an anonymous online persona and hating on a person (Wil) who's popular to hate on. I'm gonna go back to my first comment. Let Wil have his moment, recognizing it's based in trauma, and be the bigger person and not resort to hateful comebacks.

I think the main thing is that it's so insanely overblown in proportion to the "incident" that it's comical in its own right, irrespective of the reasoning behind it. You can give some leeway when someone has an emotional episode, but that only goes so far.

If that was portrayed on the actual show, I could understand that meltdown, but it was literally 3 seconds of bad acting on an adult focused news show.

I'd imagine the biggest factor is that it attracted a lot of Chris-chan-like people who lack a filter and make their sexual fetishes into a personality trait. I assume most fandoms have a similar level of deviancy, but the majority keep it to their particular niche circles.

Its definitely something that should remain a very strict process to avoid situations like in Canada where they offered to end some disabled persons life instead of giving them the assistance they needed, but otherwise being able to end your suffering on your own terms is definitely good.

I remember that being peak disappointment as a kid. I don't know what they were thinking with that, coming off the 10/10 that was the first game. They did better in the DS game, but it still failed to live up to the original. Then they failed again with the 3DS game.

LightningThief posted...

Demanding everyone to pay you a voluntary tip you feel entitled to regardless of the person's salary being less than yours very much has everything to do with this discussion.

You just find it uncomfortable to talk about or recognize.

You're basically just arguing against tips existing at this point, which is like near universal in this thread. Nothing about that justifies being a non-tipping asshole. So, while I abhor the whole "they'll spit in your food" nonsense some people spout, I hope you get horrible service befitting your refusal, if you practice what you preach.

DeadlyNinjaBees posted...

Anytime someone uses the term strawman people know you can be taken less seriously. Its a buzzword for people with limited arguments. We all know it at this point.

He's literally trying to reframe the argument from some sappy "think about these irrelevant people" angle that has nothing to do with anything and claim some nonsense that my lack of engagement with it means XYZ. If that's not strawmanning, then it's some "appeal to X" nonsense.

LightningThief posted...

Thanks for proving my point again in the irony of you calling anyone an asshole. Your entire argument boils down to ignoring tipped workers demanding the less unfortunate to tip them or take a vow of suffering.

Keep up with the strawman. It's a really strong argument without any flaws.

LightningThief posted...

It's not a strawman just because it makes you uncomfortable to recognize the waitress making more than a lot of essential non tipped hard workers, yet demand those who make less than they do, to tip the waiter or take of vow of suffering.

But again, fuck those non tipped workers making less than the waitress right? You don't want to talk about them because it's inconvenient to acknowledge many of these tipped workers demand people less unfortunate than them to still tip them.

Your irrelevant soapboxing means nothing. You're just rambling for the sake of rambling at this point.

It's weird when people downplay how out of sorts Biden gets at times. He's miles better than Trump, who seems to be literally insane at this point, but he's still in confused old man mode way too often for a world leader.

LightningThief posted...

Says the guy justifying his own asshole behavior and logic.

Yes, continue with your strawman about unrelated jobs or whatever point you think you have.

LightningThief posted...

Thanks for proving my point.

You have no point. You're just trying to justify the behavior of assholes who don't tip. It would be one thing if this was a discussion of people who want tipping culture vs people who don't, but I'm pretty sure nearly everyone here is against it. They're also against assholes who don't tip for arbitrary reasons.

LightningThief posted...

The only assholes are the ones that hold waitress/server/waiter on a mile high pedestal, and not giving a damn those same waiters likely.... do not tip the many essential workers they get service from who make less than they do.

The waitress isn't any more special than the person who does janitorial work, pushes carts all day, bags your groceries, stock the shelves you get your essentials for, and so much more..... and yet take home less pay than tipped workers.

Apples and oranges. One service literally gets by on tips. The rest don't. Whataboutism has no place in this discussion. If you eat out, abide by the social contract. If you don't want to, don't eat out. If you want change, then work towards it in small or big ways. It's extraordinarily simple. Stiffing the staff just makes you an asshole.

LightningThief posted...

Earing out is a luxury that if a poor person wants to spend they can legally spend their their money however they legally want to.

Your argument is hypocrisy and elitism at best.

Not to mention not even grasping the irony of talking about a luxury. Tips are a luxury as well, that no one is entitled to.

There's no legal mandate for it, but it makes you look like an absolute asshole. I'd imagine a restaurant could probably ban you for it as well, right to withhold service and all that.

LightningThief posted...

People keep saying this, and don't realize it's a terrible argument. It's hypocrisy and elitism at best.

Eating out is an expensive luxury, even without tipping. If someone cannot afford an extra 10-20%, they should be conserving their funds by eating economically. Tipping should be abolished, but please don't act like people are trying to conserve money by paying 5 times as much for something they could cook at home, get as a TV dinner, or get from a cheaper fast food place.

Neutral to big nope depending on if it's porn or some kind of random shock image. While not disgusting (generally), it's nothing I want literally or metaphorically shoved in my face.

DeadlyNinjaBees posted...

*To have control over their own money that they worked for.

If you can't afford to tip, you shouldn't be eating out in the first place.

JVillJags posted...

The server is wrong. The customer tips the same way I do. They use the tip to round out the bill. Sometimes the tip ends up being huge and sometimes it's small. But as long as it rounds out to a good looking number it's fine. I have friends that calculate the tip with their phone. I think that's worse.

That's a horrible way to tip if it ends up way below. You can use common sense to at least get into the proper ballpark.