Kal-El814

It's time.

This motherfucker buttoned his bottom button, you think he's gonna take a beanie off? Please.

Again this is all true, but in a world where the Steam Deck exists and the messaging on game store pages about compatibility is sometimes completely incorrect, it's hard to fault the consumer for thinking that some of the listed requirements might not be accurate. It's not reasonable to expect that someone do a bunch of online forensics to this extent before purchasing a game that shouldn't have even been for sale in their region to begin with.

Calling out anti consumer nonsense is always good even if it doesn't affect an individual directly. I never used Other OS, Sony patching it out of PS3s was bad. Besides, for a game like this where playing it solo is essentially pointless, the potential player pool for matchmaking getting smaller because Sony spent too much time seeing how good glue smelled over the last couple months is bad for everyone still able to purchase and play the game; this affects the whole community and everyone interested in the immediate health of the game IS right to "whine."

Not that you don't know this of course, just saying it aloud... but that shit is weak. The stuff on those pages is occasionally-to-often outdated or incorrect and a consumer would have every reason to assume it's wrong upon being able to purchase the game / run it even once without that requirement being mandated. There are so many ways this could have been communicated and managed other than this, the possibly worst one. I'm sure nobody anticipated this game being the hit that this is but here we are.

Winging about this is totally fine at worst and probably for the good overall. Strapping on new requirements after launch launch is almost always bad unless there's a compelling reason to do so. None exists here and the notion that this is for security on PSN of all things is not believable. Anti consumer bullshit should always be loudly called out for what it is If there's an actual reason for this beyond Sony wanting the number of PSN accounts to go up on a PowerPoint somewhere I'll be goddamned.

I mean one of those makes complete sense and is very likely given the particulars of this season of the show.

Bethesda doesn't seem to be terribly precious about the lore in their franchises, but that said...

Steam discussions are a compelling argument that the first amendment was a mistake.

DPRK being on there his hilarious.

Personal gun ownership for self / home defense is as a huge mistake.

Abolish crypto.

Biden will lose if he deprives us of this content.

MDMA - Wikipedia EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

This is actually part of the issue as well. Despite there definitely being improvements in many areas and the aesthetic being distinct from both ES and FO games, this still very much FEELS like one of those games most of the time in a mechanical sense. You move like you do in other BGS games, inventory / weight management is largely the same, dialog is, companion management is, sneaking is, etc. But BGS also seem to want the player to interact with the world in a meaningfully different way than they're used to. Again, it just FEELS like a hedge almost constantly. Maybe if this is someone's first BGS game they wouldn't pick up on this, but as someone that's played all of them other than FO76... it feels like one of those games but it's out of sync with the experience of playing. Not to make a direct game comparison but one of the reasons Breath of the Wild or Tears of the Kingdom work to the extent they do is that while they have a lot of the aesthetics and trappings of Zelda games, they're obviously very different mechanically; they are very obviously and meaningfully designed around those differences. And while people still chafe because of their expectations sometimes (the "where are the dungeons" observations, for example) the way those games are built mandate that the broader expectations are different and so the player's expectations are modified as a result. Again, Starfield just doesn't go hard enough in any one of its directions

Aside from the gameplay being just sorta fine and the writing being pretty bad, I think the main issue with Starfeild's approach to a universe is that it's just so segmented that it pulls you out of itself too often. It makes absolutely no sense that there are a bunch of towns in Skyrim that have more cops than civilians, that you can walk across the continent in something like 3 calendar days, that Nazeem busts your balls for never getting to the Cloud District of a "city" that is 300 paces wide, etc. because the game gives you enough shit to do at almost all times that you either don't notice or you're too distracted to care. Starfield segments off so much shit while also making the planets themselves generally pretty boring. Yes that "makes sense" but nobody is coming to BGS games for that shit, nobody cares that setting off a mini nuke doesn't affect corrugated aluminum fencing, they just want to see shit go boom or BOOSH a dragon priest off a fucking cliff and then reload once you realize you can't find his corpse to loot. Make a real space sim or make Skyrim in spaaaaaaaace but hedging like they did is the actual issue because we just ended up with the worst of both worlds.

Shocking that something with the acronym AI ended up sucking shit and being a scam @legend

If by "too different" he means "worse than" then well spotted, Todd. I feel understood.

Well that was really quite good. EDIT - I didn't see I basically cribbed @CayceG comment word for word, @Commissar SFLUFAN I commit myself to the posting gulag

I personally don't have a problem with "slow parts" in movies; they're often my favorite parts in the moves I like that have them. To wit, I think the scenes with Pitt just driving around or the movie/show within a movie in Once Upon are probably my favorite parts. I don't know that the time spent with Robbie pays off in the same way. That's not a knock on her at all, I just don't think it serves the overall interest of the movie as well as that other stuff. Yeah, I know. To be honest I haven't watched Django in such a long time that I don't really recall how I feel about its editing. I thiiiiiink I thought the ending dragged? I can't remember. Hateful 8 I've only seen once somehow, I should check that out again. Regardless it's a fine line for me personally and I don't think that "I'm right" or whatever when it comes to movie length and editing broadly. D2ne is long but never felt like it (aside from maybe one scene or two that feel less unnecessary now that we know there's a sequel coming for sure), I for the most part enjoy the extended LotR movies more than the original cuts, etc. And I don't think that Once Upon is long for the sake of being long, like Justice League or something. I get what QT is going for here, I just don't think it lands. Anyway I've been thinking about the end of this, and I don't know exactly how to feel. It's... weird to see women have the everliving shit beaten our of them and then burned to death. I dunno if this makes me a cuck or a snowflake or whatever, but it lands differently. Yeah it's the Manson family, fuck them and all that. I don't think QT shouldn't have gone there or anything, it's just a lot. I need to think about it more.

In my case specifically, I bought the house we're in now in 2019 and refi'd twice so my rate is <3%. I did a "traditional" 20% down, 30 year fixed. My house has appreciated in value by $250K+ since we bought it. I could afford it comfortably then, I couldn't really do that now between both increases. But I could still afford *a* home, for sure. But broadly, yes, I agree that the middle class is in trouble.

Is that a gun that shoots one steak knife? Why is he dressed like a biker Dracula? Why is he grinning? I have so many questions.

One of my favorite Nintendo rumors was the GameCube controller secret that people couldn't stop speculating about before launch. People went absolutely apeshit and it turned out to be the click at the end of the shoulder button press IIRC. Good stuff. Anyway why anyone would get genuinely excited about a Nintendo controller feature after HD rumble is beyond me.

Necro time! Finally saw this today. I think I really liked it? But I'm also worried that if / when I watch it again, I'll like the whole thing a lot less? The take that this is QT's go at directing stuff from various times that no longer are is obvious and he really succeeds in that regard. The performances are almost all great and the movie is never visually uninteresting. It's beautiful and for that alone it's worth watching and probably rewatching. But it's also indulgent to the point of pornographic in some respects as well. I know I'm the old man shaking his fist at clouds when it comes to movie length. Ironically I do enjoy long epics like Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, etc. But I feel like those luxuriate in their own spectacle. And while Once Upon does that in some respects there's still an awful lot of fluff here, too. Having a fictional Tate live and showing slice of life stuff with her is all well and good but there's just so much fucking padding. And as a director who's done his fair share of casting strong female leads, particularly in comparison to other male auteur contemporaries, it's a bit disappointing to see QT reduce Robbie to a generally quiet foot model while every other dude in the film gets to chew the shit out of every scene. Also not for nothing but it's fucking weird to have a movie come out in 2019 where one of the protagonists ascends into what is an obvious heavenly metaphor at the end... and it's Roman fucking Polanski's house. Just bananas. Anyway yeah, my thoughts are still half baked. But in general it's absolutely worth watching, parts of it are incredibly captivating. I just wish QT had a better editor.

I go back and forth on this. There are a lot of places where interest rates going as well as the cost of a home and it's very conceivable to me that people could be priced out of regions today that they weren't a few years ago. I'd agree that it's not super likely that someone went from being able to afford any house to not being able to afford any house. But if entire neighborhoods are out of bounds that weren't before it's more than just a distinction without a difference.