SuperBiasedMan

I've started this, I'm about halfway through now and really enjoying it. It has nice writing touches and I like that the exploration of AIs as individuals doesn't seem to be boiling down to just "AIs can be people TOO!" At least not so far. I look forward to finishing this out soon, especially because it's one of those games that gives me the impression that I can't be sure how it will end (ie. compared to obvious happy ending plots where you know the hero will win and everything will be fine). I think I'm gonna go try finish this now, as long as I don't get caught on any more weird puzzles that throw me off (the baby test one was a nightmare).

For me it was a little that I didn't see how it was supposed to be half as funny. And in general, the show started to take itself more seriously even though the plot was just as poorly written as in Series 1 (where they just didn't care and mostly joked about). The worst example for me was Also I just read this on the character page on wikipedia (cause I forgot everyone's names) Damn, I just reminded myself how much I love season 1/hate season 2.

I've been listening to classic Thumbs, from episode 1, for a while now and I think I finally I looped back around to the earliest episode I had originally heard. Episode 67 - Dot Gobbler. I unfortunately didn't remember the Dot Gobbler discussion but I did remember the talk about an arcade expo sharing a convention hall with a gathering of Jehovahs witnesses, with a theme park across the road. Some memorable banter was had. They also got in a seg about Farcry (not 2, the arcade one with Paradise Lost and several other words in the title).

Aw man, ok. I HAVE to do the Ship. I already have the game and I was too late to the party to get a good game of it.

It's not terrible, but it didn't read as very different to the old cartoon style things. Someone crossdresses for a disguise, it's played for laughs and then when the other character/s realise it's funny how they're disgusted. But when representation of any social group is limited, having them appear just for laughs is pretty unfair. Especially when it's especially aimed at children.

...those are body parts?

Here's an interview with Jim Sterling about realising he was behaving sexist while being oblivious to it.

I say this as someone that thought Coraline lagged in the middle with pacing and the ending didn't really win me back, so I didn't like it that much. Which is a shame cause it started strong and was a really good premise.

I'm going to assume not one of them has ever read the Daily Mail. EDIT: I almost missed that SmZA's post was satire, almost.

Yeah, Boxtrolls basically has the old style cartoon crossdressing and it's just played for laughs, including a character reacting with mild disgust that they were previously attracted to the crossdresser. It's quite disappointing as a choice in this and because it strengthens my concern that the ending bit to Paranorman was more about the joke than an actual social motivation. Aside from that, Boxtrolls is pretty fun and nicely written with good laughs. Better than Coraline but not reaching the heights of Paranorman. Also I hope you saw the after credits sequence. In other viewing news, I started watching a bit of Downton Abbey and every time the music swells they do a scene transition in a really jarring part of the song. It pains me so muchhh.

I don't think there's a proper general trailer thread, so here! It's a teaser trailer for a game, and you should definitely take a look

:tup:

I sent out a tweet to the hashtag (can we start calling hashtags horsebags? I think the word is kinda dumb) asking what the movement has actually achieved if they don't see the harassment as part of their movement. They mostly seem to say they got ads pulled, they have sites changing ethics policies and they started a conversation. This mostly just made me more annoyed with the sites that have supported gamergate in any capacity and also worries me that this is going to be a ridiculously long drawn out death of GGers, because the entire event has basically just turned them into a societal group. They feel like a marginalised community, so to them it's not that they've seen a lot of progress, they just think they need to keep working on it to overturn their hugely unfair characterisation. I've gone back and forth from thinking I should and shouldn't engage, because obviously the discussion has not changed anyone's mind. But maybe it's better to distract them from worse targets and also show that I'm actively not supporting it.

if (likeProgramming){ Console.log("Yes!"); } else { while(1){ Console.log("no"); } }

Oh I meant in Javascript, so it might be language specific. Basically making a JS array has special syntax in Unity (if you use the normal syntax it produces an error) and when I call an element from an array in Unity it's declared all the elements as objects, even if the array is just full of numbers.

*cough*Yeah, got it for Firefox, just wish I didn't have to.*cough*

Then you are just like me.

Indeed I would, likewise Mass Effect and most scifi that features aliens, really. Because even though they're not humans, they are so humanoid and feature so much humanity that it is more like a race than another species. In Mass Effect, there are several species of alien that are all human shaped (even if ones like the Krogans are a distinct body type) and can communicate quite well with humans. They're really just other flavours of races, with some extra cosmetic flair on top. (I can't specify with Star Trek, I've never watched it) Oh I wasn't trying to villify Tolkien for the racism in the books. It's been too long since I've read them to know the nature and I don't know enough about his life to say. That detail probably does go a long way to speak to the creation of Orcs and Uruk-hai. Plus, it would make sense to then regret this choice later on (as someone earlier mentioned he did).

I think unintended racism is absolutely a part of Tolkien's actual work. I don't think he wanted to make a race that were the bad guys as an allegory for real life. But he does put forward a story in which different races are strongly typified as having integral traits to their vary person. Elves are attractive, intelligent people. Dwarves are short, greedy and rash. The Hobbits are cheeky little farmer people that mess about and enjoy their insular life. The very concept of strongly defined races is problematic in that it asserts that most people within a group share a personality even if a couple of them defy classification (like Frodo and Bilbo). Which is the basic concept of racism after all. Even aside from that, creating an Us versus Them type of conflict is also overly simplistic and again can only come from a prejudiced viewpoint. Whoever 'Them' is, must be a class of people that differs from how you identify your own group. You'd be hard pressed to say these are choices unique to Tolkien but I don't think it's unfair to say he did make racist choices in his world building.

Twin Peaks is on Netflix everywhere except here and the UK too I think. *grumble grumble*

I don't know about the Thumbs or GiantBomb but I'm listening to You Are Not So Smart right now and he has a code for SquareSpace: 'Lessdumb' Not sure if you specifically wanted to support GB or IT though.

Don't underestimate the value of increasing the number of people talking about your game while intending to make them all say good things. Even if people would like the game regardless, that doesn't always translate to free positive press. By ensuring it, they made SoM a widespread Internet topic that they otherwise couldn't have counted on. (or at least they presumably didn't think they could count on it).

How far in are you Blambo? If you're anything like me, you won't like it for that long.

In nine years I'll start a kickstarter for my documentary, "Opening Up the GamerGate".