SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
No bio...
User ID: 225
Firstly, the great majority of “classic” games before professional writers were also terribly, awfully written...
I don't agree with your thesis that games have always been poorly written. Obviously individual works vary, but on the whole story driven games like RPGs used to be written pretty well.
I can never find it when this discussion comes up, but years ago there was a great video by someone about the importance of corporate culture and how it destroyed Bioware after the EA acquisition. Bioware had a culture of "we want to make video games, and to do that we need to make money". EA has a culture of "we want to make money, and to do that we need to make games". Those two approaches to the video game business are very different, and are going to produce very different results. And, even if you assume the best intentions of all involved, the corporate culture of the parent can't help but influence the subsidiary over time.
And that's what happened to Bioware. Ever since the EA acquisition they have steadily lost that drive to make great games first and foremost. And it shows in their output. Opinions vary, but for me the last game they made which was good was Dragon Age Original in 2008. Ever since then it's been mediocre or bad games coming from a studio that no longer knows how to prioritize quality.
My baseline assumption is "they don't do that, it's a scam".
If you can pull it off, having no facial hair just looks better.
Taste is subjective and all, but wow I disagree with this. If you can pull it off, facial hair looks way better than being clean shaven.
My understanding is that the genealogical passages are about establishing Jesus as the descendant of David. But I'm not an expert and I could well be mistaken.
From everything they said about the expansion in the dev diaries, it should mix things up enough to make things interesting for you. They added multiple new mechanics that straight up didn't exist before, and each of the planets has a design where they try to put a twist on the way you are used to building a factory.
I hear you about blowing your wad though. I have Factorio: Space Age, MW5: Clans, Metaphor: ReFantazio and the new Zelda all clamoring for my ducats. Only so much money to go around though.
There are two problems with your argument here:
-
Trying to do something different with your life at an older age (such as having a kid, to use your earlier example) doesn't have catastrophic consequences if you don't succeed. It is entirely unlike gambling that you can survive a fall without a parachute. So there's not really a compelling reason to shoot down ideas and go "no, it's too late for me".
-
You are, by your own account, unhappy with certain aspects of your life. Your judgement might be good in some areas (presumably you're happy with how some things have gone), but not these areas. Therefore, if people are telling you "x will help your problems", and your judgement says otherwise, you are more likely to be wrong about this than they are.
And you're right, I didn't offer you advice. But why on earth should I, when all you have been doing is arguing with anyone who does? I'm simply trying to encourage you to stop biting people's heads off when they are trying to help you, and to actually try the things they suggest even if they strike you as unlikely to work. Frankly, the only legitimate objection you've had to any of the advice given to you was that you are medically advised not to do meditation. Fair enough. But otherwise, it's just been you dismissing good ideas out of hand without even trying them. If you want to change where you are in life, it's going to take things that you wouldn't have done up until now. So unless there are catastrophic consequences (like the meditation thing), your best bet is to just start trying things and see if they work for you or not.
I'll do that when they start giving advice that isn't totally useless to me and my situation.
You need to consider that maybe your judgement of what is useful is flawed, and that people are actually giving you useful, actionable advice which you are rejecting because it doesn't fit with your preconceptions of what works and doesn't work.
Again: "rare" and "difficult" are not the same as "impossible". Nobody said that everything is equally as easy as you get older, simply that it can be done.
I'mma be real with you dude: you're approaching this whole thread (and your other thread about clubs, for that matter) in a supremely unhelpful way. When people give you advice about how to solve (insert problem here), you need to actually try to take the advice. Don't argue against every single thing everyone says to you, and don't continually shift the goalposts the way you have been. It's unhealthy for you, and it's just going to cause people to stop trying to help you. The vast majority of self improvement has to come from you believing that it's possible and trying to make it happen, and that's not feasible if you just shoot everyone down when they try to help.
Parenthood? Dating for the first time? A career in physics (physicists all do their best work in their 20s, and are generally considered "over the hill" once they pass 30)?
No to all three. You're way too fatalistic, dude (and I say that as someone with too big of a fatalism streak myself). You can do any, indeed all, of those things at older ages. Most people don't, but "rare" and "difficult" are not the same as "impossible".
That's exactly how we do funerals where I'm from. You have the funeral Mass where we all are sad and say goodbye to our loved one, then afterwards you go to the church fellowship hall and the church ladies have cooked lunch for everyone. Then you enjoy each other's company and celebrate the life of the person you said goodbye to.
He said hot takes. That's lukewarm at best.
I will narrow my reading focus down, trying to just read and having 20 books open is not very fun for a green new reader like me.
Nobody should try to read 20 books at once, lol. That's way too much. Gotta focus them down one at a time, imo
That's not what he said. And it's also not accurate. I liked Hlynka quite a bit, but he was prone to getting pissy and going off on people. That's against the rules, plain and simple.
Yes, that is tangibly worse. And that will affect people's decision making for sure. As you indicated in your reply a bit further down, it's better to spend time together digitally than not at all. But it's still sufficiently worse than in-person interactions that it'll be a deterrent against people moving for the foreseeable future.
I think there was an element of 'too many chefs will end up fighting' but cultural deference to leadership stopped egos getting in the way.
I feel like that also had to do with everyone seeing what a disaster it was in the class team challenge, when the one white spoon team wasted a ton of time because egos got in the way.
It is a good show. Also I can't believe my man Napoli Matifa (sp) deadass made tiramisu from convenience store items. That was true genius. Haven't been able to watch the final episode yet, but I'm really looking forward to it.
My one major complaint was the restaurant challenge. That was complete bullshit. It was ostensibly supposed to test their business acumen, but they didn't give the contestants any sort of market research info (like an actual business would have), and they judged them purely on gross revenue, not profit. On top of that it was totally unfair that they made the fourth team like they did. They should've had some advantage to compensate for the fact that they started several hours late, and had fewer people, but they didn't get anything! Give them a couple sous chefs or something for goodness' sake, to even out the playing field. I really hated that challenge.
A bunch of people get together in a parking lot and have candy in the trunks of their cars, and the kids go from car to car to get candy. I think it's kinda lame personally, but I can imagine kids enjoying the sheer efficiency of getting candy in that way.
I don't find that a very compelling argument, I must say. Murdering people to take their stuff is equally bad no matter who is murdering whom.
If with a snap of my fingers, I got all the technical know how and a steday source of money, some progress on my startup stuff, I would instantly be happy so just ssris wont fix this.
Seconding @TheDag on this. It's very common for people to say "if only I had X I would be happy", get the thing, and then find out that they still aren't happy. Happiness really is a function of mindset more than external circumstances.
One thing you can try to work on to increase happiness is to try practicing gratitude. Focus as much as you can on the good side of things rather than the bad, and consciously make an effort to be grateful for those good things. At first it will be hard and require a conscious effort, but with practice it will get easier as your mind forms the habit. And eventually, it will help with your overall happiness as you are able to appreciate your current life situation more, no matter what it is.
I am not that young though, 24-25 is not young
This is a matter of perspective. I said the exact same thing about myself when I was 25, but looking back now (I'm 39) that age seems very young to me. I realize why you say this (I said it myself, lol), but try to reframe your perspective if you can.
Because people are very good at trying to get others to follow norms, but terrible at following the norms themselves. It's kind of like how it's easy to plan a healthy diet for someone else, but hard to eat that way yourself. It's also worth pointing out that there are plenty of adults who do act the way we teach kids how to act. It's a subset (however large) of bad actors who are ruining things for everyone.
From a Christian perspective, what matters is repentance and not when it comes. If you truly repent of your sins, even on your deathbed, that's good enough because Jesus paid the price and he forgives you. Notice that wiggle room with the word "truly", though. Christians aren't idiots either, and we know that someone's repentance might not actually be sincere. But that also isn't something we are capable of (nor have the standing for) judging. God has to sort that one out.
From there, it gets more complicated depending on your tradition. From a Catholic perspective (and even some Protestants, e.g. CS Lewis), most people will go through purgatory. This isn't something we know much about, more something that we deduce from two points in the Bible. First, "nothing unclean will enter [heaven]" (Revelation 21:27), and second, "There is no righteous person, not even one" (Romans 3:10 but the sentiment appears many places). So, if nobody is pure, nothing impure can enter heaven, and if we are somehow to be in heaven anyway, that implies some kind of purification that happens. We also have reason to believe that this process is painful, as some people "will be saved, but only as through fire" (1 Corinthians 3:15). There are more verses but that's the gist of it.
So, from this perspective the answer to your dilemma about satiated sinners is that those people will not suffer damnation, but there will be consequences for them. They will have to go through the (likely painful) process of being purified from those things before they can enter heaven. Thus it's better to avoid sin (as much as you can), so that you won't need as much purification before you can enter heaven. To use a medical analogy (always a good source of metaphors for sin), the satiated sinner is like someone who has abused the hell out of his body, and then decides to get back into shape. It's totally possible, but it'll be harder and more painful than if he had taken care of his health in the first place.
The husband couch is one of those things that most malls/stores have for a reason. They know, lol.
No, I don't agree that was the case.
More options
Context Copy link