Blarghagh

Actually, they had to add a raid mode that you can queue for with the push of a button to justify their continuing to make them, because not enough people actually raided to justify the cost of making raids. Back in 2013 there was a Blizzard post explaining why that mode exists, and it include this quote (emphasis mine): "We don’t want to restrict raiding again to People underestimate the amount of casual players who will buy a game simply for the single player experience. I'm sure 90% of the people who buy Battlefield do so for the crappy single player experience.

This reminds me of how World of WarCraft players say people only play that game for raiding.

Two lost in the woods buddy movies: - Hunt For The Wilderpeople: Pretty funny, great performances by the leads, especially Sam Neill, but has trouble moving back and forth between its serious character-driven scenes and the more over the top comedic scenes. Overall still great and I'm looking forward to what this director does with Thor 3, the Thor & Hulk buddy movie. 7/10 - Swiss Army Man: Also pretty funny, but it got a little too out there and nonsensical for me when it tried turn a story about a corpse with magic fart, vomit and boner powers into a character driven drama. I'd say someone needs to make a highlight reel short-film and leave it there. The scenes that work are fantastic, but there are too many that don't. 5/10

Building a portfolio of writer's samples and published work (articles, short stories, perhaps writing a game and getting a mod team together to make it) is essential. A good portfolio trumps a diploma every time and experience most of the time. Either way, writing for games isn't exactly a career you can work towards in a traditional way at the moment. Writers are underappreciated and rather often the game designers are also the writers ("why should we pay for a writer when I can write just as well?" they exclaim, thinking they know anything about writing at all) unless you're working for medium-to-large studios. It's possible, but it's going to be hard.

Quite liked Star Trek Beyond, it seemed hopeful and positive and even had a literal bit of Utopia in it. The villain and character development were a bit meh but it was fun at least. Was this explicitly stated because I interpreted this as less a battle between the mirror and the protagonists and more just the mirror screwing with them. I believe so, but I don't remember if there was exact dialogue, sorry. I do remember that they had electronic surveillance they could look at for that purpose (the other person would see the truth and alert the one in the illusion) and that certain stimuli knocked them right out of the illusion (such as the part where one of the leads believes to be eating an apple and realizes she just bit into a lightbulb because of the pain). I might watch it again to check. Of course, the twist was in fact that they stood no chance, but I don't believe that was implied before the end.

Okay. But when you watch it again, try to pay attention to how much of a difference he actually makes to the plot. To be fair, neither does Indiana Jones.

Naw man, what movie did you watch? This ain't "How Sparrow got his boat back". He was the Inigo Montoya of this movie, just with more screen time. You could write him out and be left with pretty much the same story. The shenanigans are because pirates want Bill Turner's blood and gold but kidnap the wrong girl. Will Turner breaks Jack out to get him there and that's as far as his impact on the plot really goes. Jack Sparrow is the best thing in that movie, but he's not even important in it. He's even just a cog in Will Turner's character development, the mentor who shows up and teaches the poor boy who spent his entire life living by other people's rules that to do the right thing, sometimes you have to live by your own rules. Having more screentime or higher billing doesn't prove anything - hell, Mark Hamill got second billing on The Force Awakens and he's in it for twenty seconds. It's all a moot point anyway, my definition of lead character is probably just different from yours (since billing matters to you apparently). Either way, Jack may not be the lead character but he's the one we as the audience cares about. But that's because he's pulling all these weird shenanigans to distract us from how boring the actual plot and story and the other characters are - which is what I was trying to say in the first place. These movies don't work if the story is about Jack, because what was fun about Jack in the first place was that he royally ****s the story up for everyone. Nobody wants him there - Will and Elizabeth don't want him there, the Pirates don't want him there, the Navy doesn't want him there, even his cohort pirates leave him behind. He's a spanner in the works and that's what makes him work, and that's why the fourth Pirates film was a monstrosity. We don't care about Jack's quest for immortality, we only care about how badly he ****s up everyone else's quest. The more these movies focused on Jack's story, the worse they got.

Nope. Doesn't even show up until like 20 minutes into the first film. Elizabeth Swann and Will Turner were the leads of the first film and Jack Sparrow was the wacky sidekick, just he totally upstaged those losers because Depp was great and kept grabbing more and more screentime. In the shooting script, he had less than half the dialogue and only speaks as much as he did because they wisely let Depp do his thing (this was before he was annoying). Was more of a co-lead in the second and third, but didn't become the full-fledged sole main character until the fourth, which was completely boring and annoying because Jack Sparrow is only as funny as the people who are reacting to his antics. He needs a straight man to function in any story.

Not really, it establishes pretty soon after that it's possible to break out of that perception if you realize it's happening. The resulting mind games are what create the tension, so it's the exact opposite.

Yes, that's why I'm saying it needs to be an expanded library of older titles, not JUST Skyrim. A backlog of titles that you can play while waiting for a new game is invaluable. Don't forget that's how Steam became huge, and is the entire business model of GOG. With the recent resurgence in Pokémon sales and their gimmicky NES thing, there's no way Nintendo doesn't realize by now how many people are looking to play older titles, and by using Skyrim they show that not only will they have older titles, it won't even be just Nintendo titles. I also assume this is the Skyrim Enhanced Edition, which after a big hullaballoo can now be modded on both larger consoles. It'd be silly that Bethesda pushed for that with Sony but not Nintendo. But yeah, ideal world and all that. Nintendo has been known to **** up on things like this.

I can't say I'm not worried about the third part support. I'm guessing that's why they released their list of partnered devs and tech companies: I think a smart move is the focus on Skyrim in that trailer. They don't seem to be afraid to bring older titles to this. An expanded library of old titles complimenting the new ones, especially ones with high playtime value, is a smart idea. Playing Skyrim requires a lot of time, time that will be easier to find if you can just grab your console and take it with you.

I went to see Ouija 2 with a friend that I saw Ouija 1 with because we were alone in the theater and ripped that movie to shreds hilariously, expecting it to be just as bad and unintentionally hilarious. Boy were we wrong, that was actually a good horror movie. Creepy as hell, unrelenting tension and good performances. Turns out it was directed by the same guy who did Oculus, which was also fantastic. Why is that guy wasting his time on sequels to awful films?

I did say it was unlikely. It's using updated nVidia Shield technology though, and that was always surprisingly powerful. In either case, even if it's not as powerful as the XBone and PS4, it looks powerful enough for me. I think that whether or not it's underpowered compared to those consoles doesn't matter, I don't think power is a selling point these days. Core gamers don't use consoles anymore.

Racist and offensive against asians, specifically? I dunno, with the Cannibals from the second flick, the Asians from the third and the Spaniards from the fourth I think they were pretty racist all around - offensive, however, is in the eye of the beholder. It's supposed to be like old school pirate stuff, if they painted a realistic view of the world and cultures around that time it'd be wildly different. Anyway, I enjoyed the first one which was a fun adventure whose only flaw was that it was slightly too long. The first two sequels were pretty bad but I respect them because they were bad in a spectacular, ambitious way (which also holds true for Gore Verbinski's Lone Ranger). The fourth movie where they decided Jack Sparrow was the lead character was absolutely terrible, though. Jack was only as interesting at all because of how everyone else had to deal with his shenanigans - the shenanigans themselves aren't nearly as fun if he's the point of view character.

Honestly the convenience of being able to pick up my console game and continue when my girlfriend needs the TV or I need to catch a train or something is priceless to me - that's a huge difference between it and any other "I guess I'll bring Pokémon with me to play or something because I can't bring the game I really want to play" mobile device. This is the first time in years that I'm considering buying a console. Which makes sense, because I'd been looking into the nVidia Shield before and this is pretty much that with Nintendo support. But I need much more info before I actually do, such as knowing the specs, if there's sufficient release-titles, a post-release slate worth sticking around for and most importantly power management and battery life. No use being able to take Skyrim with me on the train if it lasts twenty minutes, am I right? And I don't want another Wii situation where I buy a console and get maybe 50 hours out of it over its entire lifespan. How do you know if it's underpowered? Are there any real specs? Boogie2988's source has thus far been confirmed legit and also said it was on better or on par with the XBox 1 (which sounds unlikely, but he was right about everything else). EDIT: Haha, I was checking Boogie's twitter to check if I read that correctly and he started calling it the Nintablet.

Looks like an Arrow time-travel episode.

Don't Breathe - First time ever I actually wished there was a trigger warning because nothing I remember from promos suggested it was this rapey. I'll never look at a turkey baster the same way again. Terrifying horror movie though, even though there's not a ghosty or goblin in sight. Stephen Lang, or as I like to call him, Old S. Lang, was horrifying as... the blind hermit who gets robbed by some young punks? That doesn't sound like he'd be horrifying, but he is.

That may be true, but Blizzard isn't exactly known for doing that quickly. Both Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2 took 12 years and I've been waiting for WarCraft 4 for 14 now. As for an MMO, I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed. Blizzard knows there will never be another succesful MMO, it's why they cancelled Titan.

The lead designer who ruined Diablo 3 moved on to WoW and someone else fixed his mess by making an expansion that changed most of the systems, so I don't think so. (I don't hate the guy, but clearly he wasn't the right designer for Diablo 3, most of his systems felt like MMO systems so WoW is a better fit).

Date night with my lady included sappy romance movie and horror movie. Me Before You - Surprised me, thought it would be run of the mill romance drama where a depressed white guy gets taught how to live by a manic pixie dream girl. Turns out it was a deconstruction of the manic pixie dream girl trope in which the characters are counting on that and the depressed white guy teaches the manic pixie dream girl how to live instead. It also won me over by never taking itself too seriously despite heavy subject matter. Lights Out - Horror movie based on the short film of the same name. Fantastic first half in which characters are smart, then they all grab the idiot ball because there was nowhere else to go with the plot in the second half - it also explains literally everything about our supernatural creature halfway through taking away most of the fear. Characters were done pretty well and the dumb horror movie boyfriend turned out to be by far the best part. Very strange ending with horrible implications though. Spoilers below!

Enolicia, never heard that one before. I've met a Bronwyn myself, and also a Blodwyn which is the most metal girl name ever.

While that is true, that video is much more in depth discussion than your simple answer implies. Just wanted to point that out in case anyone would skip the video thinking it's some kind of clickbait. Big fan of Super Bunnyhop - always makes me look at games in a way I haven't before.

So what are we getting at BlizzCon? New expansion? Diablo 4? I think they might not go for another expansion, because even though Diablo 3 became super fun after an expansion and some content patches, by that point most people had already stopped caring because it was horrible when it launched. It's gonna have to be something special to get me away from my WoW addiction, but pretty much the only thing that does so these days is other Blizzard games anyway. Overwatch Halloween brawl .

Did he really just ask her to keep the dream alive? Star Wars is cheesy, but yeesh!

I saw one of those break recently. Was a miracle the people came out with nothing but a few bruises.