The only difference between bigotry and compassion is attribution of cause.
Women are usually worse at math and science than men. Absolutely true fact. But why?
See also: Racial minorities being poorer, worse educated, and more inclined to steal. It’s true! Now tell me why it’s true. Trans people have higher rates of mental illness, self-harm, and suicide. No argument that this is true, it’s rampant. But why is it true?
social pressure
women and girls are actively discouraged from engaging in math & science by:
teachers (dont sweat it honey, you’ll make a smart man very happy with those looks)
men (i dont want to be with a smarter woman because it makes me feel inferior)
women (ew who wants a dorky nerd girl, borinnnng)
you get all that in math class as a 12-year old girl and yeah you start to associate math with unhappiness
Yeah it’s a “read the room” kind of thing.
There’s a group that would be annoyed by immersion-breaking 4th wall jokes, and there’s another group that would be relieved by the tension and pressure to perform being broken. Everyone’s going to have slightly different comfort levels so there’s always some compromise on the tone of a campaign.
On the flipside of this, I’ve been kicked from games because I know how to prefire, and a lot of players see that and just assume you’re wallhacking. Nobody pays attention to the 70% of the time that you prefire at air, but when you guess right and instakill someone holding an angle, it’s easier to say “cheater” than “i’ve been holding this same angle for the past 5 rounds, perhaps I’ve become predictable”
I have small hands and still fingertip basically all the time, and I have all my life. I don’t use a small mouse either (G502)
I hate how smudgy and uncomfortable it feels to have reduced fine control when my palm comes into contact with the mouse. It feels icky and frustrating. I know plenty of people palm grip with low DPI and big mousepads to achieve fine control, but that seems far more exhausting than just developing stamina in the forearm.
You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense.
because you of in the cold food which isn’t what you want and you of out the hot food you eat so we should call it of out which is the goal state not of in which is the problem state very simple explanation hope this helped you
This comment will include a lot of spoilers for the yokoverse. Continue at your own peril.
Anyway, just to give you an idea of how little any of this matters to Yoko Taro, here’s how his stories have developed:
Drakengard: Ends with absolute apocalypse, total destruction of the world, no coming back.
Nier: Let’s go ahead and change the name and say that all the Drakengard stuff has now entered a new dimension. Our dimension! The story technically goes on, and THIS time we’ll have the absolute apocalypse of OUR world.
Drakengard 3: Where do we go to continue the Darkengard name? Make it a prequel! Ezpz. Also we already did interdimensional stuff so let’s add time travel why not.
Nier Automata: Okay the world basically ended for humans, but who cares? Just make it all about legacy of humans.
You know what, we can do even more already. Why not pepper in some mobile games, like Nier Reincarnation and SINoALICE (yes, this is still Nier universe). Why keep it to games? Let’s write light novels (YoRHa, Drakengard 1.3) and a stage play (YoRHa Boys). I am not even the biggest Yokostan so this list is probably incomplete.
My personal take is that this methodology is all very intentionally tied to the main theme of the Yokoverse, which is that no matter how dark and hopeless the situation may become, there is always a future; a new opportunity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
I got this bug on desktop, running chrome, with no VPN.
This was, as most things like this are, just a pure dumb fuck-up by some guy putting things on prod without properly testing and staging. No need to put on any more tin foil hats than we already have, the incompetence is plenty reason enough to point and laugh.
It’s comedy, but it’s not comedy heaven.
In order to be comedy heaven it has to be a victim of comedy homicide. There is no homicide here, just a naturally funny situation.
It’s a funny post but in the wrong place.
Oops, you’re right. I went kingblind
I think the definitive solution was already found further down the thread, but I think this could still work
Qd3 Bg3 Nf4 Kh4 … at that point it becomes a sloppy chase but White takes an indomitable lead, taking B and a pawn easily
Qd3 Pg3 Qf5
While I agree that Hunt is a great game, I think it’s a bit dishonest to compare it to Tarkov. I guess it’s my own fault for saying “extraction shooter” since Hunt IS a Shooter where the goal is to Extract something, but the economic component is paper-thin, to the point that it barely matters.
A strength of Tarkov is the frequent wipes. This isn’t me saying Hunt should do the same - it’s a different game. Rather that I want a game with an emphasis on economic risk, like Tarkov, but made by a developer with the competence of Crytek.
The whole genre is hilariously incompetent. It SHOULD be easy for somebody to come along, make an actually good extraction shooter, and cash out, but every time they do something dumb to screw it up.
Marauders was a blast for a short period of time before they made the mistake of listening to their community and made it Tarkov But Worse
Pokemon is how a lot of people got into games to begin with. It was a new and innovative experience from their perspective. Pokemon Red/Blue was a competent game with some fresh ideas, but through luck/marketing it became the launch point for a massive population of people into the gaming industry.
So now you’ve got a few factors playing into Pokemon hype:
Nostalgia (you never forget your first)
Production value (this made money, pump more money in)
Incidentally a formula that favors expansion (just add more Pokemon)
These factors are enough on their own to carry a franchise for a while, especially for an otherwise ignorant audience that doesn’t play anything else (just like the people who just play FIFA games and nothing else). But at some point, it becomes too obvious even to the most zealous supporters that the formula is, well, a formula, and it’s not changing or improving, and even they finally begin to criticize the product. It’s easy to have a favorite pokemon out of 150, maybe even 450, but now there are over 1000 and it becomes exhausting even for die-hard fans. Even the number of types has exploded to 18 without actually having any interesting interactions to justify them, it’s just more for the sake of more.
Plus, the most recent releases have been impressively lazy, again so much so that even megafans can’t nostalgia their way out of it.
All this together makes for a history of a franchise that was one vehemently defended but is now seen as an embarrassing phase one went through as a child.
Could still be a real European perspective. I’ve found a lot of people who are only casually familiar with North America will be able to tell you the broad cultural strokes and then one or two bizarrely specific facts. Like, “Oh yeah, America is all New York, Texas, California, Florida, and who could forget the iconic Egyptian Theatre of Boise, Idaho.”
The crux of this is whether Us vs Them is instinctual or learned. I don’t think we yet have a definitive answer, but certainly Us vs Them is so ingrained in our ways of life that removing it would be extraordinarily difficult.
Again, I may be excessively cynical, but my belief is that some people, maybe even most people, WILL take these mental pathways you describe no matter what, and the best we can do is provide distractions. Bread and circuses. At their best, these distractions channel our self-destructive tendencies into harmless oceans of impunity. At their worst, they are hijacked by ne’er-do-wells to transform the apathetic into frothing zealots of a cause they don’t even care to understand. It becomes the responsibility of those who are paying attention to design a system that is resistant to abuse.
Presuming I am wrong, that means that there is a path for society to eliminate competitiveness from its apparent nature. I agree that would lead us toward utopia, but I am very skeptical such a path exists, and that those who attempt to follow it will simply be eaten by the wolves they believe they can train.
I basically agree, but I think we should also think about this in a solution-oriented way at a large scale, beyond just personally opening one’s own eyes.
Tribalism is part of our nature. It’s not necessarily a bad thing, and it’s fun. It makes us feel good to belong. The sports analogy is frequently brought up and is the example of tribalism being leveraged for entertainment and social bonding. It’s a clever way to us to short-circuit our instinct for tribal warfare and use it for something constructive and fun instead of destructive and tragic.
Politicians and media outlets have started using this insidiously for their own powergames. Maybe this is too cynical, but it seems to me that the circus has been poisoned. You hear about all these people who “aren’t into politics” but will repeat their CNN and Fox soundbytes. There’s nothing terribly wrong with being personally apathetic about politics, in fact that’s the norm for those people currently benefitting the most from existing policy, but it’s terribly dishonest and destructive to lure such people into the political arena when they have no sincere interest in the impact of their political decisions, but a few powerful people benefit and countless powerless people suffer.
How do we reclaim our circus? Do we really just need more ESPN and less CNN? Can we punish politicians and news sources for the pervasion and perversion of information as infotainment? Can we educate people to source their identity from their family and culture instead of from their senator?
You’ve had villain protagonist, and you’ve had relatable villain, but only in deathnote do you get relatable villain protagonist. Usually gotta read a century-old russian novel for that kind of stuff.