SuperBiasedMan

The problem with any joke conspiracy site is that invariably there are people who can entirely take it seriously if they stumble upon it.

I still don't even know what bubble hearth means and I've played that game.

I'm with Danielle that I like weird stuff. Almost all media feels fake to me anyway so I'm not looking for a natural immersing experience. So what alienates most people just feels interesting and new to me. Also the childhood reminiscing reminded me of my old books I wrote such as Mutant Zombies and the Zombie Slayer. The former had an ancient Irish monk cursed with immortality because he wrote the zombie book, the latter featured a fight with death (who had future weapons), both were inspired by Resident Evil 2 to the point that they both feature Rookie cops.

I'm also inclined to think the potential for abuse exists among an entitled audience with a warped view of the price of their media.

To clarify, people offering the games sometimes ask for that criteria. Anyone can give games if they want.

To clarify, people offering the games sometimes ask for that criteria. Anyone can give games if they want.

There's a degree of caveat emptor here in Ireland. It's not 100% a company must provide you with a totally fitting product for your needs. The way it works for the most part is companies shouldn't mislead you and must make an effort to compensate when a product flat out doesn't function as advertised through no fault of the consumer. How that's determined is a whole big thing, but it's important to have the mentality that you expect companies to provide a certain amount of after sale service as standard. Also for the record, it's not a legal obligation to offer returns if the product does work. but a lot of places do offer it because it's offering better service.

Whenever I have attempted writing stuff about my experiences playing games I always have a big problem not feeling like I'm writing trite garbage. I don't think the experiences I have are trite in themselves but I have trouble actually verbalising them in a way that reads to me like it's both genuine and interesting. Last year I spent a good half an hour trying to write a first line of a Desert Golf post before abandoning it because all of my instincts were dead ends.

My country wouldn't even fit in that room.

Digital and physical stuff see definitely different, but for a long time that excuse has been used to not bother offering any consumer protection so it's good to see it back on the table for some reason. Consumer Protection is bigger over this side of the ocean, but it really ought to be there too because at the end of the day the biggest companies don't give a crap about you so it's nice to have protection in place to enforce a degree of care.

Also accidental or not, this stuff is worth critiquing. And for me too it is less about the director/writer and more just criticism of this particular work.

Only seen this thread now, but why isn't it titled VVVVVV V2

The game's currency is male tears.

It's also not about every game hitting a percentage, it's about games as a whole consistently being too far one way, and how often games continue that trend rather than undermine it. The problem is less that Brothers doesn't do good female representation so much as yet again a video game does bad female representation. Brothers is not especially bad, it's another entry on a long list of bad, but that doesn't mean we need to accept the consistency instead of highlighting it when it stands out to us as offputting. Brothers doesn't need to hit a quota but it could've done with paying any amount of attention to the significant focus on gender representation in current media because it made some basic level poor choices.

If it helps Twig I had problems with both Ico as well as Brothers, but for different reasons. Ico was mostly the usability, and frustration. I fought smoke stuff too often and Yorda was just that burden I had to carry all the way. They actually do both have problems with female tropey representation too. I guess Ico gets slack for... Having less characters? I would say Ico was better though.

A friend of mine has one that works reasonably well for her. It's worth having multiple tiers of both funding goal things and patron levels. She had $50 and $100 level ones that people actually paid up for because they were commission rewards. Good low level rewards are things like livestreams, password protected galleries that have more art than non patrons see (like WIPs and practicey stuff). Maybe tutorials too, if you're so inclined. Low level ones should be easy work to supply to a group of people, so you're not doing a bunch of work for the people on the low end. Also make up ideas of stuff you'd do if you don't have anything in mind for the funding goals, and keep people updated on the progress when they're close, it can tip some people over the edge of putting in money.

I feel like there is a difference with making a personal choice to not support a product because of attached people having especially distasteful opinions and maybe educating others on the harmful ideas. As far as I'm aware, boycotts are specifically about organising a mass of people to act as one. I'm not going to try and stop everyone from giving sales to Stardom. At most, I'll inform them of why I've decided to avoid it and leave it there.

I specifically opted for Windows 7 on my computer out of lack of confidence for 8, and I have no XBONE but I guess I should pay attention to Direct X if I'm going to be making games. My general concern is that Microsoft has no real regard for what consumers want, instead opting to develop what they consider important. Like touch interfaces, a windows store etc.

What is supposed to be better about 10? Have they espoused any worthwhile features? I bought a new computer that's gonna have a free upgrade to 10 but I'll likely want to just tell it not to bother.

I think you're viewing this wrong, you're viewing it as someone 200 hours deep into the game rather than from the view of someone who thought <10 hours was enough and dropped out then. I don't want a final exam, I just want a fun game and it felt overly disruptive to me to change how the game worked for that ending so I bounced off the game.

Well in FTL if you lose then your entire run is over. I played for maybe ten hours and only reached the final boss a few times(I might suck but it's still a lot of play time relative to boss encounters). That doesn't offer a lot of time to figure out how to beat it, and it's pretty hollow to just find out strategies online.

I generally enjoyed Brothers, disliked the female representation and was pretty unengaged with the emotion of it. But I thought the basic and plain level design was fine as just a nice space to walk through and the whole climax was a solid demonstration of mechanics as story even if it didn't hook me.

The ending encounter seemed to break with the rest of the game because it's no longer about holding your ship together over random encounters scraping together what equipment you can. Instead you're brought up against a tough wall of an enemy that seemed like it particularly favoured certain strategies, and could even be impossible if you have unsuitable weapons to attack them with. When I reached the boss for the first time it took some wind out of my sails because my ship was totally unable to damage it with my limited firepower. Then when I eventually beat the first form I just gave up the game, seeing there was was a whole 'nother one I'd have to beat.

I'm pretty sure that the coffee thing was intentionally done and to demonstrate that Chet is different to Cooper, because it's so antithetical to what Cooper would do in that situation.