Gaizokubanou

What if NPC raiders vigilantly pursued after you? Kinda like say, having minimum of 2 stars in a GTA game. Sparse resource on top of that with most of your tool being mobility focused... maybe that might get too tedious but maybe something like that perhaps?

I'll just second osmosisch here, you have some seriously rose tinted glass about the past that you rely on to make some sweeping statements that are just so abrasive at best (the rant about trying to justify piracy) and at worst straight up ignorant (gamer dev vs non gamer dev? the fuck man). Yep. There is also development of internet and mobile devices that makes it much easier to come across bad games (before we had to physically search for games, not anymore). Not that current industry landscape is all peachy and perfect but the whole "good old days" rants are just as ridiculous imo.

You say it as if this is something new. When was this ever not the case?

As you already pointed out, I think both "anime" and "moe" is way too broad to get any meaningful discussion than say, "violent video games". So I think something more specific (which I think there are plenty of worth criticizing) is needed to get anything out of it. Say like, do you have a series, character or merchandise in mind to analyze through your hypothesis?

I have none.

I agree that hypothetical is ridiculous and this is one of many reasons but just to clarify, it isn't that 1% build the super robots on their own... I assume super robots would come to be like any other inventions, but then would be placed under the rich's control, just like how most modern goods are somehow assumed to be the top 1% elite's possession even if most of the labor process is handled by the 99%. Still highly unlikely that rest of the world will sit back and watch it happen but it is somewhat more plausible.

Not exactly... the hypothetical is that 1% (shorthand for rich assholes) not only get the robots, but that the robots they own outperforms the 99% in every single way, including designing better robots. So that given time, 99% only lags behind further and further. Still, I agree that the hypothetical is ridiculous as both you and Ninety-Three have pointed out. But for that specific discussion, the premise is that hypothetical does happen because some of us wanted to point out that not only is 'singularity' implausible to happen but even if it does happen, it most likely spells doom for great majority of the people.

AFAIK all popular engines are capable of making turn based strategy games. Go with one that suits you best. For 'future proofing' (like, ensuring that skills you learn will have future use) more advanced engines like Unity or Unreal would probably be best, but I'm personally using Gamemaker cause I find it the easiest to use.

It is hugely different. It's looking bleak now but they can't run the world without 99% and 99% actually has means of fighting back because of it. Just take military (most important) for example, where all weapons are still operated (even the drones) by people, majority of which falls well inside (edit: major typo lol) of that 99%.

And pets can be killed off whenever owner feels like it, bred for specific purpose, and basically lack any means of effective protection from poor ownership. Income is a very misleading term to describe what pets receive from their owners. Income implies agency. Pets don't have one beyond what owners grant for the time being.

:x

Umm... no... if top 1% have everything (including labor), they won't need a market to pay them or deal with anyone for anything outside of that 1%. If you have full control over entire supply chain of every goods and commodity, all you need to do is just keep the machines rolling. The 99% would literally be killed, quarantined, or become some sort of pet population.

Hahaha~ Everyone loves orange juice.

@Cordeos, IIRC, even with stuff like modern CPUs we are actually hitting some bottlenecks that Ninety-Three mentioned that is greatly impeding technological advance in that area. I kinda just echo what Ninety-Three, Merus and Twig are saying so... :x The current inequality must be solved BEFORE human labor is out of the equation (I mean completely, like robots being designed, built and fixed by robots) or else everyone beneath certain threshold would be massacred

They literally do, don't they? :x MEGA SPOILER

@N1njaSquirrel, Have you watched the third rebuild film?

I want to second what Mangala Lansbury said, except that I still think it's worth watching but then again, I don't watch too much anime overall so perhaps I'm missing out on how much of its elements are being re-used these days.

I loved it, lived it, hated it, and now annoyed by it (too much of it now seems pretentious or nonsensical but that might have a lot to do with lash back from how much I adored it)... it's definitely a memorable experience, highly recommend it. I actually prefer the manga cause of it's oddly happier ending and overall faster pacing seem to help tighten up the storytelling.

I liked FMA but liked Brotherhood even more so I would recommend it.

We don't know if that person was PR It was an "seasoned industry professional". Damn you Markson for giving this person a specific job title! XD Wear what you want that doesn't offend people for right reasons (I mean they would be right to be offended). If people started to get worried about how they dressed because of this article I think the author would be very sad cause she wants the opposite to be true, where one can freely express themselves with their clothes without worrying about negative repercussion.

This is the closest story to where you said "bit about PR guy not liking women dressing up because they don't want to look like they're selling sex". It wasn't stated as a PR guy (that's assumed by Markson) nor did he say he didn't want her to dress up. I'm not sure how you even got your version from this. Which is messed up but it's messed up because he didn't want two women to stream, not because he the author was dissuaded from dressing up (which is what rest of the article focuses on).

Where is the bit about the guys dressing up? Nobody dresses up, that's what I thought the article is getting at.

Geez Twig, sorry but can you point out where she said that other dudes went unnoticed with dressing differently in ways she didn't?

I thought article wasn't about double standard, but about uniformity of the group makeup. The problem isn't that guys get away with 'dressing up' while she didn't. Problem is that nobody seem to dress up or down and creates this sort of flat uniformity.

In that sense of call of empathy then I can see what it is about. So not a call for action but for empathy. Nothing wrong with wearing similar stuff, just asking to understand that non-conformers might feel like odd one out. I used to wear suit and carried briefcase to my middle school, loved every bit of attention I got~