I’d also say we’re well past that point. Generally from my experience, the only difference between a rogue-like and -lite is that the latter has some form of permanent progression between runs. Though, often times even that distinction is ignored.

I mean, its not about the art style, its about the gameplay loop.

Worth playing even today?

I don’t even care enough to decorate my real life space so why waste the money on some pretty .png files?

Right, that was my entire point though. Different stokes for different folks. Also, I realize you’re being hyperbolic there, but things like that tend to be a lot more than just a png.

$20, 3D audio in Black Ops 6

Also also, no fucking way that’s real. That’s insane lol.

What makes something a “real” experience to you? When people buy cosmetics in the game, they’re not (generally) doing it just to own those “bits on a PC”; they’re doing it for the experience that comes with the cosmetics. Maybe their character looks pretty now and it makes them happy, maybe they can build a cool castle now and it makes them happy.

that money could be spent on having real experiences instead of some bits on a PC that you’ll lose access to within a decade

Paying for DLC and extra content is one thing, but

These two comments are contradictory. The first comment has the same issue with DLC as it does cosmetics. It sounds like you don’t really have any issue with the first comment, rather, your issue is that you don’t consider cosmetic things an experience worth spending money on. Which is fine. But you should realize that many people do find fun and enjoyment (enough that they don’t mind spending money) from things like character customization and building (among other things), which cosmetics let them do. There’s a reason the Sims is so popular.

I don’t think the issue is the word “buy”, but rather clarity on what you’re buying. Amusement parks use the word buy, but I don’t think anybody is confused that what you’re buying isn’t the whole Ferris Wheel, it’s a ticket that gives you permission to ride the Ferris Wheel. Meanwhile games tell you you’re buying a mount, when what you’re actually buying is a license that gives you access to a mount.

Does paying for a ticket to go to an amusement park or the movies or whatever mean that you wasted money on nothing? Just because you don’t permanently own something doesn’t mean you paid for literally nothing. You paid for the experience. The good times you have over the years playing a game you loved.

I mean yeah, I’m sure losing everything when the servers shut down would fucking suck, but that doesn’t invalidate the time you’ve experienced up to that point.

I don’t have the money to throw at games like that, but I do understand it.

If anything, this would be an appeal to authority. It’s not like the post is saying half of the American people believe it’s genocide and therefore it is. No, the claim is that several relevant organizations like the ICC, ICJ, and Human Rights Watch, etc., are saying that it is genocide. That’d be like claiming that the vast majority of climate scientists believing in global warming is supporting evidence that global warming is likely true. It is. It’s not enough evidence on its own, but it is evidence nonetheless.

That’s the thing. Not all appeals to authority are fallacious. Supporting a claim with an expert’s opinion is a logically sound way to support an argument.

In this exact scenario, I feel like the bottom track would slow the trolley down quicker, no? There is no room to stabilize, just pure flesh on wheel, 24/7. Not to mention the constant sharp turns, I think it would topple over long before the top one reaches its final kill count.

Calling him a narcissist isn’t really an insult either way. It’s just a fact about him. The dude only cares about himself.

The superhero or the animal? Because I’m fine with either.

Hint: America’s ‘literally’ and its dog-food spelling isn’t the leader.

Okay? I’m talking about American English. Everybody’s languages evolve differently based on their culture. I’m American, so American English is what I know best.

It doesn’t change magically. It changes through continuous usage and acceptance from society. That’s how language works.

Some examples. When was the last time you heard somebody say something was “awful”, as in awe inspiring? When a kid says literally, do you take them 100% seriously or do you accept that the word’s changed to be a synonym for “figuratively” among younger people? And as far as spelling is concerned, colour and color are both correct spellings, depending on where you live. Gray vs grey, acknowledgment vs acknowledgement, same thing. Or look at barbecue vs barbeque; the latter was incorrect for a very long time until the popularization of the abbreviation BBQ, after which it became a commonly accepted variant.

These things were not always correct, and yet, now they are. Society adopts and uses different meanings and spellings for words all the time. Sorry friend, you’re not the arbiter of English. It changes with or without you onboard.

Whatever you say, Sithik!

Both are correct. Language changes.

Do you say *newb when correcting people that spell it noob because the origin of the word is newbie?

For the vast, vast majority of Doom (2016) players who have never played Doom (1993), they would probably completely disagree.

I think it makes more sense to refer to the more relevant, popular, and well-known game as Doom and just refer to the other as “the original Doom” or Doom (1993). Especially since that’s what the store page does, as the other person made clear on the 2016 end, and this store page should make clear on the 1993 end.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2280/DOOM_1993/

Ooh. I might have to try this out. My pup Sophie has major social anxiety, never expected catnip to possibly help.

I still don’t see any reason to believe in things I don’t see any evidence for. If you want to believe in ghosts or spirituality or Bigfoot or whatever, have at it. I don’t agree with you, but I don’t really care either. I only take issue with people that have, and act according to, beliefs that cause direct harm to others. Religions, crystal healing, antivaxxers, etc.

Sure, a community based around not believing in flying pigs might not make sense to you. Why build a community around not believing something? But you’re missing the same point a lot of religious folk do when they say, “why do you hate god if you don’t believe in him?” See, what if you lived in a world where 90% of people believed in either flying pigs, flying sheep, or flying cows, and all around the world, people in power are making laws based around these things that directly hurt, suppress, and ostracize the lives of others? Suddenly, making a community around it makes more sense.

What do we get out of it? Well, we get a sense of community and belonging for one thing. We all have something in common, and many of us have even been directly hurt or oppressed by the beliefs we stand against. And besides, we’re not perfect human beings—sometimes it’s just fun to poke fun at things we find ridiculous with a group of like-minded individuals.

If the amount of people that just put up with ads currently instead of switching to Firefox is anything to go by, I think the number of people who truly care is less that you might think. Especially when YouTube is such a monopoly.

I mean, I agree completely. I’m an agnostic atheist myself. I believe it is highly unlikely a god exists, but outright claiming absolutely no gods exist is a positive claim that also requires evidence if you wish to convince others. It’s not a stance I’m willing to take.

That said, I’m very willing to make the positive claim that certain gods do not exist. The christian god, for example, at least as described in the bible, is so logically inconsistent that I am willing to take a hard atheist stance on its existence and say outright I believe it does not exist.