Badfinger

Don't be a racist and don't say or do racist things and maybe you won't be face consequences for being a slimeball.

Buy one graphically intensive game and play it forever. Keep adding texture packs to GTA V.

New pants feel so good! A new pair of slacks is all cool and smooth and you get those nice creases and breaks. Mmm, pants. I am Team Socks, and Team Wearing Shoes Is Fine And Ok To Do In Your Own Home. They keep my feet from getting cold! They are goodness and light. The real reason I came to post in the thread: Griffin McElroy sounds like Conan O'Brien, right? I just recently started watching Monster Factory so I don't pretend this is a new revelation. I just need confirmation.

You can get quite a bit of xp from tinkering and building. Less combat might make it harder to acquire things, but if you have acquired them you're still going to be ok I think.

I started listening to 99% invisible again, and man there really is just so much advertising. Up to a third of a 15 minute podcast is Roman Mars being smug about a thing you can get if you like how smug he is. It's frustrating in a way that it's not in other places.

I think it's the same attitude that sees me with 450 health potions at the end of a game. Don't do it until you have to... whoops you never have to. Anyone that does so is wrong, I didn't!

Glue uber alles.

I am optimistic about JC3, but I never got the hang of the controls of JC2. They were just too esoteric and specified compared to other 3rd person action, I wasn't able to remap, and it never clicked after a couple of hours. I'm hoping they've improved the control scheme so I can get crazy with the rest of the Just Cause world.

I'd wager that's started to happen because of the merging of "low or "high" fantasy with "lowbrow" and "highbrow", and possibly because of co-opting "lowest common denominator". I'd be curious to hear your thoughts about that. There are more than a few locations that would dispute your definition of High Concept, as sourced from a couple minutes of internet browsing, but I don't know their reliability.

As soon as I realized how useful supply lines were, I dumped a ton of food, water, beds, a recruitment beacon, and 3-4 machine gun turrets into the connected settlements. I already had at least a dozen people at the drive-in so they were my supply chain hub. My population of Fallout Peons has exploded. I kept wondering why Sanctuary Hills never got bigger, and then remembered I'd never put a beacon there (partially because Marcy was all "DON'T TELL ANYONE DAMMIT").

What if they took the time and put in the effort, but didn't get it right? Same outcome, different method. Nope. Definitely not true. They're pretentious, though!

I don't have the foresight to be pretentious. I'm just tentious, mostly.

I think your assertions are both unqualified, and extremely ungenerous. There are dozens and dozens of strategy games. Not all of them are real time, not all of them are fast paced, but they certainly exist. Browse Steam releases sometime- there are so many that I'm completely overwhelmed by them. Why is Civ 5 awful? Why aren't Paradox products "games"? What does Civ have to do with making an RTS? How popular does something have to be to do multiplayer? I played CoH:Online for months (until it was canceled, in fact) with a tiny community. People still play Warcraft 3 online. I checked Twitch just now, and there are 1200 people watching War3. It's a 13 year old game. Why are the devs awful at making single player AI? Have they always been? Is this recent? Do you see a path to a solution?

No, I was asking what language I should use for someone who was going through the process of changing genders. No mention of surgery whatsoever. You have twice now added assumptions and inflection to a question I asked so I could try and learn something and improve the way I talk. Following up, is that what transitioning is assumed to mean? That wasn't my understanding. Am I stumbling around that blindly?

I don't want to be contentious about this, but there appears to be quite a lot that's complicated about this. It has nuance. I am trying to figure out the right things to say or not say, and apparently "transitioning" means something to you that it doesn't to me. It does not mean "a process in which surgery is necessary" to my ears, but you are implying that's what I'm implying.

I have 3 suits after 30ish hours. The starter suit, one that I just found wandering around the wilderness (fast travel is now less necessary with supply lines!), and one in a military place where it makes sense there would be a suit of power armor. I also did a cool quest that gave me an amazing piece of gear for power armor. The game just won't stop happening.

You will find enough fusion cells. Anyone else who's progressing through the game... does it feel like certain enemies are scaling to your level by the weaponry they are carrying? It feels like a bunch of enemies should have cruddy pipe pistols but have combat rifles. It could just be the geography dictates the armament. To anyone who does not know about the Local Leader perk- With 6 charisma you can take local leader. Rank 1 lets you set up supply caravans between your bases. What that means is that ALL your materials are available at all the locations you have connected with a supply chain. Instead of having 12 cloth I scrounged to make beds with, I have 700. It allows you to build up settlements quickly rather than piecemeal, and is a godsend. If you care about building up your settlements, this is a really important perk to consider. I cannot BELIEVE how dense Boston is. If you have the map zoomed out, a lot of the time the location markers get all smushed together because there's one every block. It is not a desolate wasteland like I expected after wandering around outside the city limits. It's a huge, living jungle. Fallout you're actually creeping up on Witcher 3 for games I love the most this year.

It took me about half an episode to warm back up to them. I loved Mr. Show. Part of what appeals to me about their comedy is the way they make 5-6 complete non-sequitur sketches fold together so amazingly. I don't know what makes you laugh, but comedy is hard and doesn't click for everyone.

Your implication is that your purpose in drinking is to become drunk. Am I correct in reading that?

Thank you for mentioning that. I used that terminology because I believe that's what the write of the email used and I was following suit to try to keep the original point as clear as possible. Like Ben, if it's germane, I don't know what to say. Transitioning? I 100% agree that there's no need to talk about someone's junk under most circumstances, but at the same time it feels (possibly incorrectly) as if something like this comes up more frequently with transgender issues because it's so new to the common audience and so it's a focal point. I'd at least like to put my foot in my mouth as little as possible.

Even if we pretended momentarily that everyone paid for all their media consumption, the best streaming site sure as hell isn't Hulu.

I saw/heard a couple of reviews that basically said skip the weapon and armor crafting because it's not worth it... Those people are crazy, weapon upgrades are the best fucking part of this game. Give me every adhesive.

I hope everyone is safe. My thoughts to the victims and residents of Paris.

If you strip all of the extremely complicated, important details out of it, it read like this (to me): Q) We are two people who care about each other. When we try to be intimate, I pull away because I am uncomfortable with a major component of that intimacy. How do I talk to my partner about this, because I am concerned how they will take the discussion? A) Well maybe you should actually just try the thing because they're a person, too? I think there is an additional layer of complexity here that pushes me (besides the fact that no one answered the writer's actual question). I have a partner, and we are sexually compatible. If my partner brought up adding new sexual interests to our intimacy, I think that is a different question and worth exploring the possibility space because that is not a barrier to intimacy. That is a different question from having a partner and not already being sexually compatible, and suggesting that because you love someone part of that love is crossing your personal sexual preference boundaries.

So I THINK this is one of the more right threads to post this? On Giant Bomb's Danswers, Samantha Kaldan gave an answer to a question that bothered me, and I want to unpack it and see where everyone else stands. For those that don't know of her, she is a post-op transgender woman. The question being answered was from a lesbian woman, asking for advice in a relationship with a pre-op transgender woman. The framing of the question was basically, the two of them get along fabulously, share interests, love spending time. However, whenever things start to get physically intimate the writer gets uncomfortable and disengages, because even though they both know and see each other as women, her girlfriend's physical form still has body parts she is uncomfortable and not interested in engaging with. The writer's question seemed to be how to talk to her about it, because her girlfriend has a history with bi-polar disorder. However, the question that got answered felt like one that wasn't really being asked? SHe basically said the writer should maybe step out of her comfort zone and see if she could please her partner. Which stuck in my mind as, hey please just give your girlfriend a blow job ok. It can be hard to find a partner when you're part of the overwhelming majority of how sexual relationships play out in current society, forget the difficulty of anything outside the "norm", let alone gender reassignment. I could hear the frustration in her voice, being rejected for being seen only through the lens of what she used to look like and now doesn't. However, I don't think it's ok to tell someone they should try something sexually they're not ok with, regardless of other feelings they have for someone? Some people have no interest in penises, and some have no interest in vaginas, and that's ok regardless of gender presentation. I felt like my answer would have been you need to talk to your girlfriend about why you haven't been intimate, and maybe it either needs to wait until post op, or exploring other avenues of physical intimacy that don't make you do something physically you're uncomfortable with? I realize I'm biasing the description by running it through my head and back out in my words, but am I crazy off base in this? It felt like her answering a cisgender heterosexual question with "if you love your boyfriend, you should do anal" about how to talk about sexual tension.