Ninety-Three

From the same developers who gave us fetish nun assassins wearing heels and latex in the desert, following up on that promise would not surprise me in the least.

All three were arrested as part of a group of nearly 60 who refused to disperse after climbing over a barricade onto federal property. Not only was this a reasonable reaction from the police, it was apparently expected. From the article: I don't know how you can possibly call that specifically targeting leaders.

Wikipedia tells me it's on the Wii/Wii U virtual console. Meeting a sketchier definition of "good", if you don't have a Wii, you can always download an N64 emulator for PC and the Paper Mario ROM.

So after beating the game, I pressed the New Game button and, uh... It's impossible to tell with this game, is this some kind of New Game+ graphics pack, or did I actually break it?

I would continue, but apparently this is concluded. So uh, cool discussion bro?

You seem to be responding to comments that are occurring somewhere else, because here's what's being said in this thread: The other comments are in no way condemning (EDIT: how did this get auto-corrected to condensing?), they're simply using the fact that her earrings are elaborate, with absolutely no indication that that's bad. It's also not 'Anita Sarkeesian: Popcorn gifs', or 'English: How to pronounce robot' or 'International politics: Greece edition' but all those things show up here. That's a terrible argument.

I seem to be missing something, what are these volatile circumstances? That seems like an argument which both doesn't apply (the comment is being made on the Idle Forums, not sent to Anita, so "she's heard it" is irrelevant because she won't hear this) and could be used to shut down all discussion of pretty much everything everywhere for all time. "They've probably heard it before so why are you saying anything?" I guess from now on we should only express novel opinions that have never been heard before. Cool beans buddy that was a really worthwhile statement that made for some truly productive conversation.

How does someone get into this game? I tried, and I found myself crippled by the compulsion to play optimally, trying to use all the systems, which resulted in time passing at a rate of about one in-game day per real-life day. The eugenics simulator alone has enough depth (and time wasted due to sub-optimal UI) that I could imagine playing it as a full game, not just one of many systems to manage. How do you decide where to engage and where to ignore systems to your detriment?

As someone who would and has criticized a male critic's ear fashion (specifically a bar piercing), I feel compelled to jump in and defend this, even though I don't share the specific criticism. It's perfectly possible to say something like that without gender being a factor.

I found this on Soundcloud, titled "THIS SHOULDN'T WORK, WHY DOES IT WORK". It's kind of amazing, and I mean that in the literal sense of the word: it surprised me to the point of amazement.

The joke is designed to be taken with a degree of seriousness that might cause offense to white men. No one seems to see that as a problem. It's internally inconsistent to disregard their offense, but immediately give nonwhite people the benefit of the doubt and stop the joke. If offense was a reason to stop the joke, it would never have been started in the first place.

Today I learned an interesting thing about serial killers. The stereotype of them being mostly white is completely incorrect, and has been for decades. As of 2010, 56.2% of US serial killers were black. That means that in the US, there are 8.6 times more black serial killers per capita than white ones. While they do skew towards being twenty-something years old, that trend isn't as strong as the stereotype taught me to expect either. They really are overwhelmingly male though.

Do we have any kind of Random Interesting Facts thread? Like the "I had a random thought" thread, but for things we learned about the world and wish to share? I have no idea how to search for such a thread, but it seems like surely it would have been done by now.

Does it count as quitting a game if you beat the final boss, then the game crashes and you don't bother reloading to see the final cutscene? If so, I quit The Witcher (1). I had fun with the game, it just went on too long and I got burned out before I finished. The combat wasn't complex enough to remain exciting after however many dozen hours, and partway through chapter 5 I had gotten so disengaged that I had stopped bothering to loot bodies (and partly because the economy did a bad job of continuing to incentivize it). The game also got pretty unbalanced by the end: I got enough accuracy that I could hit Fast enemies with the Strong attack (dealing way more damage than intended), and a max-rank stun spell allowed me to one-shot the final miniboss.

No, I got the "kill all men is a joke" thing. It's just that the subsequent "kill all men is racist" thing also struck me as absurd to the point of a joke. And looking at the responses above, Jesus, people take it seriously. I don't know how to deal with that because it is crazy. It is exactly as crazy to me as saying that "I hate everyone" is problematic because some of the people you're hating are black. I realize this may sound disparaging, but I swear I'm only attempting to communicate the magnitude of my befuddlement. This is like I've walked into a thread where a bunch of people earnestly talk about the Earth being flat. I can imagine no way to productively engage with this, so I guess I'll just back out of the discussion.

Oh no, I was getting sealed rooms on day 2 (maybe day 1?), mandatory triple jumps on day 3 or 4. And I was using several to mean three, which is three more consecutive waste-of-time heists than I wanted or imagined in the game. What it teaches me is that sometimes I will randomly lose a bunch of heists to factors outside of my control, and that if I'm not far in, I can reset to play through the early few days and get those heists back. The fact that it's intentional doesn't make it good. Imagine an RPG where in the starting zone you will randomly encounter an ice elemental, and if you haven't bought the fire sword yet, you can't kill it. And it's so early in the game you can't afford the fire sword. And you only get a limited number of random encounters to earn XP before the final boss. And you have to spend minutes fighting the elemental that ultimately won't give you any XP. That shouldn't happen. It feels bad, it costs the player time and in-game resources, and the only thing it accomplishes is to teach the player that ice elementals exist, which can be done in easier ways. At the very least, the game should hold off on spawning ice elementals until it is humanly possible to have bought the fire sword.

From the article: Is this a joke? I would assume it's a joke, but the article goes on about it at length. It's like saying "The statement 'I hate everyone' is troubling because there's a history of hating black people." I don't know how to engage with an article that spends so long taking such an absurd notion completely seriously. I would comment on other parts of the article, but I genuinely can't tell if there`s some big elaborate joke I'm missing.

I'm certain it wasn't an issue of practice, I explored all the levels from left to right, top to bottom, and I'd either explore every square without finding much (presumably the good stuff locked in sealed rooms, occasionally sealed rooms were visible), or I'd run into a series of things that required many jump upgrades to progress further in the level. It's a game design philosophy thing, yes. It bothers the hell out of me when Binding of Isaac spawns a locked door and there are no keys anywhere in that or any of the preceding levels, and this bothers me for exactly the same reason. If it was consistent (the first district always has exactly one computer that needs triple jump to reach it) it would probably bother me less, but it's infuriating that the game gives you a limited number of heists, and then sometimes a heist will be worthless because the game spawned a bunch of stuff you can't get. It also pushes the player into this horrible reset-focused playstyle "Well I didn't get enough cash for hacking on Day 1, then on Day 3 when I had hacking it didn't give me any computers. That's two days wasted, better reset."

It occurred to me that when we talk about dis-empowerment in videogаmes, we're almost never talking about a game taking away your power. Batman: Arkham Asylum meets the literal definition of dis-empowerment: it likes to force you into stealth sections, forces you to not take down enemies, and locks you into those Scarecrow sequences which take away most of your gameplay verbs. In Batman, you have power which is then taken away, while something like Amnesia: The Dark Descent simply never gives you much power, and yet Amnesia is often called dis-empowering while Batman never is. STALKER: Shadow of Cherynobyl is challenging, hostile and far less hand-holdy than most FPSs, the word dis-empowerment sometimes comes up when discussing it, but it never takes things away from you, it simply gives you more challenges and less shinies than you average FPS. If you play a bunch of average FPSs and then play STALKER, you'll feel dis-empowered, but not as the character. Instead, STALKER reaches across the fourth wall and takes power away from you the player. You're used to having a certain degree of power in games, but you just booted up STALKER.exe and suddenly some of that power is gone. What do you think Thumbs, am I on to something about people describing personal dis-empowerment, or am I just overanalyzing the fact that words sometime lose meaning and everyone who talks about dis-empowerment really means to say "low power-level"?

I could only stand to swim through Reddit drama for so long, but it looks like his channel got auto-banned because it met a threshold of people reporting it (presumably due to his cringe-inducing SGDQ performance), and the only word from SGDQ staff was on July 27th: I couldn't find anything about him being banned from future stuff, did I miss something?

I just found out that Mass Effect 1's game over music is titled Saren. I'm not sure I can explain why, but there's something I love about having the game over music be the villain's theme. Also, it works very well in its role as game-over music, which I realize sounds weird, but just listen to it.

Actually it is. This lets cars move sideways which can allow them to be packed more efficiently or in spaces they otherwise couldn't reach, a problem not found in most boxy objects.

So Rachel Amber. Why does anyone think she's still alive? There is a bunch of dialogue in which characters speculate or wonder about her, but it seems to me that as a long-term-missing girl, she is 99% likely to be dead (at least based on the evidence and reasonable odds, this being a fictional story her chances are much better). I can't tell if the characters are unreasonably optimistic, or I'm unreasonably pessimistic, so Idle Forums: does it seem that way to you?

I have a strong philosophical objection to the level requiring upgrades that you couldn't have afforded yet (even if you'd played all levels perfectly and put all money earned towards the upgrade), which is part of my problem. My bigger objection though is that there's a huge difference between "Not being able to 100%" and "Only being able to 4%." I quit after getting several consecutive 4%ers because the game was just willfully wasting my time while doing its "fuck you" dance, decrementing the "days remaining" counter.

Just bought this, and wow is the level generation awful. Low points include: A 24£ heist on day 4 which would have required triple jump to advance any further (3-high window to jump past, or a chimney 3 off the ground to jump into) An area that was so filled with badguys there was no way to advance into it (not an inch of ground not under constant surveillance) A 32£ heist where most of the cash and all the computers were in sealed, inaccessible rooms The impossible levels would be tolerable if you weren't working with a limited number of heists, then it would just be sigh-inducing rather than feeling like the game dancing around going "Haha, fuck you!"