Griddlelol

Yup! The fact he's not perfect is exactly why I love Indy.

Yeah, I can agree with that. Well put.

I don't really understand the term "overrated" other than meaning: "I didn't like something that a lot of people like." So yeah, it's probably the latter - classics that I don't like.

I couldn't disagree more. Whenever I used a gun I was unsure if it was actually firing. It barely affects guards, and the animation is just...bland. Then on top of that, even if you do kill all the guards, an infinite stream of them come to do battle with you. Gah, I hate the combat in MGS1. It's boring and ends up being pointless most of the time. Bosses that turn invincible after you hit them really soured me on the so called "best boss fights in the series." MGS1 did a lot of good stuff, but the combat was more in the tedious/frustrating pile than exciting.

Can this be about games too? I'm not really enjoying Super Mario Bros.

Why is this not out on PS4?!! I want to give them my money, but they just won't take it!

I really loathe ads that are clearly never going to interest me. Spotify which I use sparingly must have data on the music I listen to. Why are they hitting me with ads for the "Moby Awards"? I have never once shown an interest in hip hop, RnB or any of music genres represented at that show. It's a waste of my time and a waste of theirs too. Undirected ads happen everywhere, but when the company actually has data relating to what would be a good ad, I don't understand why they waste their time.

I'm still not sure why it matters if I'm listening to something for entertainment, as long as I know what the biases are. It doesn't damage other's work, and if I find something interesting, I'm far more likely to go read an actual source. I liked Wolf Hall and Bring up the Bodies, I knew it was fiction, but I ended up searching for stuff on the dissolution of the monasteries. I'm also not sure if I'd want to listen to a lecturer or a scientific publication when it comes to history. I listen to the Nature podcast for my science news, but that's the odd one out. Science (AAAS podcast) is awful and so incredibly dry. The PNAS podcast is also really dry (although better than Science which has the host repeat their name every 2 minutes and drives me crazy). I also don't listen to pop-science podcasts (and history of britain is essentially pop-history) because 1) I'm not interested in physics which they all seem to go on and on about, and 2) they over simplify stuff that I am interested in to the point that it's not worth hearing their interpretation, or I already know the more in-depth version because I read the paper. I guess what I'm saying is, I'm not going to stop listening to it because it's fun and that's what I want from a history podcast. It's well made, and I'm learning stuff!

What I loved about V, is that it didn't have the self absorbed, pretentious, wankery found in the story of 1. Nuclear weapons are bad. Yup, thanks. You don't need a 60 minute long cut scene to say something I summed up in 4 words. It also has less of the pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo. VChPs (can't be bothered to spoiler 3 words) are mumboy-jumboy, but no where near as bad as the DNA and genetics jibber jabber throughout 1. It stripped out what I disliked about MGS, put in a bunch of new awesome stuff, and made it play like foie gras.

Stop reading youtube comments.

I skipped the ending cut scene in MGS1. The only reason it's higher than 4 is because I literally remember nothing from 4 other than the eggs.

He uses the term "Romano-British almost exclusively for the past 4 episodes, although that's past where you commented on before. I absolutely disagree with the idea that ignoring facts for entertainment is only present in social sciences. It's everywhere. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v488/n7410/fig_tab/488151a_T1.html I just think that I'd rather be exposed to a biased romanticisation than give up trying to read a dry factual documentation. Are you telling me you go read the source material for subjects in which you have a lay understanding at best? Edit: Also, I hate reading, so even if there's a non-biased, well written account, I'd never get through it.

I'm still in Roman Britain, around Caracalla. His view is very pro-native, but I've just assumed it's because the story so far is very Rome-focussed, and thus he's trying to give at least some reason for the podcast to be called "The History of Britain" rather than "The History of Roman Occupation of Britain." I like history in two ways - the great man narrative has always been interesting to me because it gives insight into the intrigue and machinations of the time, but I also like how his telling is more of a...romanisation. Or more a dramatisation. It's entertaining - which is why I'm listening. I feel as long as I know he's taking a particular stance, and his own biases which are clearly on display, I can look past it if it's entertaining enough.

You know what's cool and weird about games? You don't have to be the first to make something, you just have to be the best. Contrary to what I do, where if you're the first, you're the one who's always cited, even if what you did wasn't all that great.

Oh yeah, I know mincraft build up in popularity over time, but my point was that non-traditional game play has been proven before (and by a small indie team) to be incredibly popular. We'll have to wait and see. I'm sure it'll be a great game, I just don't think it's going to be the game to end all others like many people are making it out to be. Although Hello Games are certainly not saying that, they seem pretty humble about it. That's actually something I'm curious about. For an indie team, they sure are getting a lot of exposure. Weren't they on some late-night US shows with huge viewership or something? Is that their own publicity acumen driving it, or is it Sony pushing for the exposure?

Are you sure it's the non-traditional gameplay? I didn't read the previous articles linked, but from what I've seen/read, it's more about how it's a small indie studio that is attempting something incredibly ambitious. They've made what? Joe Danger...and that's it. Now they're jumping in to making one of the most anticipated games of the decade. I'm really excited for NMS, but I think it's right to keep my expectations as low as possible because I don't want to be one of those people that is disappointed by everything they buy since it's not the game they imagined. It's something I've seen when people criticise a new game - "It's not X" "It doesn't have Y" are far too common. Responses like that wouldn't occur if people judged something on what it is rather than the image of what it is based off marketing and their imagination. And are people really that down on non-traditional gameplay things? Minecraft is probably the most popular video game of all time.

Wrong again idiots: 5, 3, 2, 1, 4 is the correct order.

I kinda like it that people are tempering their expectations for once.

Hey, the History of Britain is actually pretty good. The guy is a great story teller, although he is obviously taking a few liberties with the facts. I think I'm liking it so much because it's basically the history of rome told from a different angle.

Holy shit! I didn't realise that was a thing!

In the past 3 years I've taken 3 weeks holiday. I guess it depends on what you do, I love my job and while the holiday has been enjoyable, I always was desperate to get back into the lab. I've also been working for 27 days straight, but that's because it's crunch time and will be until 8th of Jan when my contract ends. One paper down (almost) one to go!

I hope you realise I was joking. It's a neat feature.

I'm one of those people who has a foreign name in an English speaking country. Years of huge disappointment as a kid when everyone had key chains with their name on, and I could never find mine. I don't think I ever recovered from that. Fallout 4 would just be rubbing salt in the wound.

I'm not arguing she's not sexualised. I'm arguing her sexualisation has nothing to do with BSB. Oh, I see where you're coming from. Never mind.

So by that logic, Twig's example counts. I'm not saying either way is right, but I feel like if one is an example of BSB, then the other should too, or not. If I understood his example correctly, she wears it because it's her fighting gear, which is awfully similar to Quiet wearing next to nothing because it's her...breathing gear.