-
Posts
2397 -
Joined
-
Quote:I feel terrible for the state of microwaveable food in Germany.Moreover, the only food you can actually prepare in it is pre-cooked. 90% of which is store-bought and usually indistinguishable in taste from its packaging. The other 10% having been made on a real stove and given to you by kind strangers. Or your mom.
I agree with you about boiling water, but there's a lot of reasons why someone might end up using a microwave to prepare food over the more traditional oven. -
I don't know, that third movie stepped up its game.
Doesn't have to step far, either. -
-
Quote:Haha.I was pre-warned about those. My old housemate ate a whole bag of them one night and spent the evening gripping the bed trying to sleep. Never tried them after she told me that.
Moderation!
Actually, now I really want some. Since caffeine sets my mind in motion, I should take steps. -
Quote:I think we always knew what was going to happen.I agree with you on this. My wife watched the trailer and she said, "Well, I don't have to see the movie now. I know whats basicly going to happen."
I think so also, which is where my worrie comes in. They showed A LOT of the plot in this trailer, but Mythic? God like? Something really impressive? No. Again, I hope its in the movie somewhere squeezed between the scenes with the jeans t-shirt Thor and the CG Set.
IDK, it looked mythic and godlike to me, what with Asgard and all of the Norse gods. It didn't show any crowning moments of badass, but I really prefer trailers to not turn out like Day Watch. -
It's funny - when a movie shoots its wad with a trailer, they give away too much. When a movie does not do so, it's giving away too little.
-
I thought the story was pretty coherent.
And I found Chris pretty likable. -
I agree with the people who liked it and don't care about the people who didn't.
I would just quote CaptainFoamerang's response to LJ and say "this." -
I have no idea what you're complaining about. The Thor trailer is pretty amazing, but focused a lot more on the world they created for the film (Asgard) and perhaps less on spoiling the best effects shots in the movies.
-
Quote:Iron Man wasn't even about Iron Man! After all, he was turned to steel in the great magnetic field when he traveled time for the future of mankind.I dunno; that sounds like something out of "A Knight's Tale" to me. Besides, I thought AC/DC was Iron Man's signature band in the Marvel movie universe (never mind that "Iron Man" is a Black Sabbath song...). Maybe for Thor they should bust out with "God of Thunder" by KISS.
-
Good Bollywood-style music video, but needed more melodrama.
-
This looks promising.
Love the Blue Beetle test footage. -
Quote:I see this assumption a lot, but I'm not seeing it empirically play out.There is money to be made with such a system and it is highly doubtful that such a large corporation like Blizzard would just shelve any and all proposed plans when at first they were of the attitude, "Do what we say or don't play." They've successfully managed to fool the player base that believes this is the end of Real I.D.
Also, other applications of RealID may be okay with the playerbase as long as no one is forced to link their real name to their WoW activities. -
Quote:Have you been paying attention to how Activision-Blizzard is set up?Blizzard can certainly have a social network, but Real ID is wrongheaded in its implementation. Some people here have looked to blame the Activision side -they more than likely want to start earning ad revenue like Facebook - but it is Blizzard who implemented it. Someone there was responsible for delivering it and who should have spent more than 5 minutes picking a social network to copy.
Everything I've heard from multiple sources now indicates that Blizzard employees were virtually all against this. That doesn't mean any of them wanted to lose their jobs by engaging in passive resistance, rather than actively objecting up the chain. -
Quote:Actually, what he said makes sense and I didn't read that into it at all.Not to take this off topic too much, but if there's a 'but' coming after a statement like that, then you are ashamed to a certain degree. If you think it's a negative to bring up the fact that you are an online gamer, then at some point you're hiding that fact. Not saying you should or shouldn't, because I don't know your current situation, but I'd think the art/music field would not only not care about you being a gamer, they are both fields that flow very much into the gaming world. You might be shooting yourself in the foot as much as trying to maintain a certain image. Just something to consider.
I'm not ashamed of playing, but I don't want to deal with employers who don't want to hire WoW players making up their minds about me because they saw my name on the WoW forum. -
Quote:This is promising.Yeah, agreed. That said, every source I've seen suggests strongly that Blizzard knows full well what we want, and why, and that Activision was trying to push this. There is some hope that the degree of pushback now experienced may be enough to erode Kotick's influence a bit.
I've had my own sources, and same.
Too bad I haven't talked to Chris Metzen is ages. <-- not one of my sources -
Quote:I trust them a bit less, but yeah, I think it's up to everyone to decide how far to trust them. A lot of people mainly wanted Blizzard to move away from this invasive policy (and future policies like it). I did, but I'm still at a point where I'm less likely to buy their games than I would have been last week, even if more likely to do so than a couple of days ago.I trust them... up to a point. Mostly to behave like a large corporation.
If Blizz ever spins off from Activision again, I might trust them a little more. Or if Activision fired Kotick.
Was annoying, that apparently I'm not allowed nuance and "They backpedaled" means I automatically trust them as much as I did before, per some posters here. To be fair, I doubt Nethergoat's one of those. -
-
Quote:Although, any reasonable, empathic human being would in fact see this as persuasive because to do otherwise is to advocate harm (whether it's social or potentially physical) against another human being. But maybe I have impossibly high standards!I pretty much agree, although I have gotten the impression from a couple of comments (including an email I got back from privacy@) that they may actually add an "alias" feature to Real ID. At which point it would, *poof*, instantly turn into a feature I could almost use -- and could use, if they let you use the alias for invites.
FWIW, I had two key arguments against Real ID forums. One, though much more emotionally persuasive to me, was irrelevant to most people; I have a transgendered friend who would, for a number of fairly obvious reasons, be unable to use any game feature that involves displaying your current legal name.
Quote:The one that I have found really effective, though, for arguing with people who think all you have to do is not troll and there's no risk to you for posting on forums, is this: -
Quote:I didn't say I thought you were mean-spirited, I told you I didn't take offense. I suggested that saying "no offense" is generally a bad move because if you feel the need to say it, you're probably saying something that could be said better.I'll put this line first... because it wouldn't make sense to respond to it at the end. (Obviously, I have not dropped it. However, I still stand by what I said before that NONE of that post was intended to be mean-spirited.)
As I said, I'm not continuing this. I didn't read your response, I don't intend to read your response. I've made my points.
I will actually suggest one last thing: You seem to assume that my examples were meant to cover the entirety of what was wrong with this policy. I suggest you consider what I wrote to be examples of what could go wrong. -
Quote:There's no such thing as reverse sexism. I would think "reverse sexism" would mean not being sexist.If you are going to try to plead your case, let it stand on it's own merit. Obliquely referencing the "victimizability" of women (whether intentional or not) is a bit obsurd. Men get stalked, men get harassed and men can certainly get murdered. Reverse sexism should be made obvious where it occurs, and I try to do so... likewise with heterosexism (though that is not an issue here). And don't give me the statistics shpeal... because you just went out of your way to decry Venture's use of same.
Also, the stuff I talked about? Stalkers harassing women? Happens far more often to women than men. Just being a woman playing a video game can often be enough to attract attention.
You misunderstood my criticism of Venture's use of statistics if you think I said any use of statistics was bad. What I said was that he's trying to use statistics to cloak the fact that this stuff happens, by pretending that it's okay to enable an increased amount of potential harassment and violence if it's a small amount, and implying that rather than one person being killed, maybe 1,000 people are each .1% murdered.
The murder was more a matter of abusive exes stalking their ex-wives and ex-girlfriends and trying or succeeding at killing them, something that happens more frequently than it should, and is a context that Ventrue tried to erase by just making the blanket statement that men are more likely to be murdered than women, and not looking at how women are often murdered.
Also, my argument was not about the victimizability of women. It was about how some (NOT ALL <-- NEON ******* LETTERS) men often try to victimize women. Of course all men don't try to victimize women, and it's true that some women victimizes men, but in the context of video games? I've heard lots of stories about women being stalked and harassed. I've been stalked and harassed. I honestly have never heard about men being stalked and harassed by women in video games.
Quote:(Please note that I mean no offense by the above. It is stated bluntly so there is no misunderstanding about the content, not as an attempt to be a total d*****bag. Of course, you are free to label me as such if you wish. )
Anyway, I'm dropping this now, and I hope you're willing to do the same. -
Did you see where they said this was just the first step to a glorious RealID revolution?
-
Quote:This outcome was what people wanted when they protested Blizzard. I still think a lot of people don't trust them because they were willing to impose this change, and won't trust them for a long time*.why?
they only changed course due to massive public backlash, and their mea culpa is full of enough half-***** lawyer speak to stop Clarence Darrow's corpse from spinning in its grave.
Not sure why we should congratulate them for stopping at the edge of the abyss- it was simple self preservation. And they're explicitly reserving the right to jump off the edge at some point in the future (presumably when the heat dies down), so, uh, yeah. Gratz?
* Right now this includes me. -
Did you notice how what I wanted was them to not put real names on forum posts, and how I said several times that this was why I wasn't going to buy any future games from them? They've suggested that they're moving away from that, so I'm suggesting that maybe I'll end up buying Cataclysm.
I've been consistent in my stance. You, on the other hand, seem to think that it's pretty awesome to attack me if I say anything more positive than "Blizzard is made of Satan's disgusting bodily fluids."