Jump to content

alanschu

Members
  • Posts

    15,297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by alanschu

  1. 15-20 years ago I was super conservative and even advocated that Canada consider privatizing health care. Although most of my research at the time didn't do a good job of supporting me (to the point that I reconsidered my position). Basically I realized that a lot of my applications of free market economics still relied on a lot of the idealized application covered in course work. Assumptions such as perfect markets, no transition time/costs, perfectly rational actors, and perfect competition. As a result, even at some of my most ardent big-C Conservative days, I still felt that health care and primary K-12 education were good things to support similar to roads/infrastructure, emergency services, and so forth. Essentially I felt an educated and healthy populace was a good investment and would be good for the economy. Evidently Obsidian just needs to release games more frequently to keep me coming back <.<
  2. Watching my MIL in Texas stay in a job with an abusive boss because she depended on the health care that the job provided in order to get necessary medication was one of those eye opening moment for me. She was eventually fired which was disruptive in ways I'm pretty unfamiliar with as a Canadian, because in effect it also forced my FIL to quit his job so that he could find one that provided adequate medical insurance. For a state that very loudly proclaims their support for liberty/freedom, it seemed like quite the juxtaposition for me. My wife is much more left than her conservative parents (as am I), but even as a son of a business owner in Canada there's a significant "freeing" aspect of having socialized health care. It's one less mechanism compelling people to remain in jobs that may actually be harmful to someone, and one less cost and headache for a business owner (particularly a smaller one) to not have to worry about providing that level of care for your employees.
  3. Also liked it as we had player options in response that allowed us to share that we too were ace!
  4. It's near the office where you can go to Chairman Rockwell's office. Facing the door to that, it's to the right. IIRC, on the map it is just north.
  5. Definitely on the radar. Basically flipped a coin between it and Outer Worlds. Just finished up OW though!
  6. I ran into the Parvati bug as well, though I was still able to continue with her quest. I found hers super adorable and in general she was a delightful character. I agree about Ellie's. Nyoka and Max's were quality.
  7. Yeah I actually really enjoyed the skill level ups. The low level, baseline stuff would all go up but the specialization and harder checks required you to then focus those skills.
  8. I recall having a "Parvati falls to hear death shortly after leaving the ship" moment too, though I'm pretty sure mine happened on Phineas' asteroid. Just finished the game and got "Parvati did not survive." I have similar issue with her personal quest being listed as failed. Similar to @lv100shuckle I was still able to complete the date. I actually had completely missed the quest being botched.
  9. This is my take on it. Make it convenient and at a cost that people are okay with, and the transition will happen. Not too dissimilar to things like digital distribution platforms. Could probably argue it's just the next step? Heck steam was effective for combating some of the casual piracy among some of my friends because it was a bit more hassle free to just download and run a game on Steam than to go ISO hunting. I couldn't say how close we are. There's likely a need for pretty intense bandwidth infrastructure (or improvements in compression and delivery) that need to be done though. That said, if it's *just* about sending an image on your screen... it might be mitigated somewhat. But for that to be the case we'd need spectacular latency to mitigate input lag and so forth. I'm not sure it'll happen "soon" (in whatever ambiguity "soon" means though).
  10. GoA, here's a screencap from the challenges as an example of crafting recipe progression.
  11. Re: Story A lot of the early going is just about "surviving as a freelancer after the events of the prologue" Have you reunited yet with Haluk or anything like that (it sounds like you have - but that's where I just got and it feels to me like the main crit path is starting to come into focus - it's possible you just don't like it which is fair too!). The story aspect is different compared to our other games by design as it is a different type of game (we tried to be reasonably open about this, and it's a big reason why we wanted to have a prerelease demo for people to play - I don't want someone to pick up the game if they're looking for a DA or ME type of experience). I'm not sure I grok what you mean by loot is terrible, beyond feeling that the weapon models are too similar. Are you feeling you're not getting decent loot upgrades? Or that they're not interesting? Or that you're not able to do sufficient damage? Loot progression has seemed reasonable enough by my take, but I'm still pretty early in the game (level 11 IIRC). I tend to get a handful of greens every mission though and I don't feel like I'm struggling to get through missions either, so it doesn't feel like loot "sucks" in the sense that I'm not able to be effective in combat, but you're mileage may vary. There's issues with the inscriptions being sometimes oddly matched (all energy gun gets bonus to physical damage) though that was addressed in a patch today. But I'm also early enough that I'm not really worrying yet that much as my gear still tends to be pretty temporary. I have found 2 legendary yellows and 1 blue in my past few missions. Stuff you can craft seems to be based on your own level. You can unlock higher tier recipies by using the weapons and getting kills. I can craft green Sledgehammers (a light machine gun that I dig). Getting the next level recipe looks a fair bit trickier as I'll need to kill Elite level baddies with my sledgehammer. Just checking out the Challenges tab in the journal right now. The load screens for Forge (and just in general) are no arguments here. I've read some have had success putting the game on their SSD, though not everyone is able to do that and we should work on improving it for everyone (I still use a HDD for most of my games)
  12. I haven't played through the narrative itself yet so I'm not sure how long it is. How long did it take you to get through it all? What other stuff did you find missing from the game (lack of content or otherwise)? (I know end game content has been a complaint as seems to be the case for a lot of these games but curious if there was something else)
  13. ROFLMAO! Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers." Compared to fresh young pups that are just getting into gaming the last 5 years the context is probably accurate. Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers"? That's like saying "Most green bananas are sweeter than yellow ones" - "Wrong" - "Only wrong if sweetness is concerned". I mean that what they consider "older gamers" had a gap that overlooked an even older group of gamers. Perspective of one's audience can be off due to inaccurate assumptions and all (e.g. I often prescribe a pronoun based on one's avatar) and it's not really nefarious; it's just gaps in their assumptions. Someone that is 28 is an "older gamer" compared to Fortnite players of today. And I pick Fortnite specifically because it's one of the first games I've felt an obvious "generational gap" in that This Thing Is Definitely Not For Me But Is Definitely Very For A Demographic I'm Not A Part Of. My wife and I went to a restaurant and when the server asked us what we were up to, we said we were going to go home and play some games and his eyes lit up "Oh you play Fortnite!?" hahaha. The idea, though, that it was "all down hill" from the EA purchase is going to be something some people will definitely not agree with. And if we were able to take a particularly randomized poll of the entire gaming community for BioWare's peak, I wouldn't at all be surprised if it came after EA's purchase of BioWare. With it comes the PC version of the first game, DAO finally being released, and BioWare's best selling games all coming after that period. Of course it's also a bit of an obvious thought, given that gaming itself has grown. EDIT: Even I did it since I bucketed "Fortnite players of today" as being younger players which certainly isn't an entirely accurate generalization hahaha The way I've always looked at it is that a game dev making games that don't interest me anymore is functionally no different than if they had just gone out of business.
  14. ROFLMAO! Only wrong in the sense that it is "older gamers." Compared to fresh young pups that are just getting into gaming the last 5 years the context is probably accurate. This forum (at least when I was active here) leaned towards even OLDER gamers so for many long time here it was BG2 (and for some, KOTOR) that they felt was our peak. Unsurprisingly those that loved ME Trilogy (or even the first 3 DA games) don't care much for a game like BG2. You probably get KOTOR overlapping the most which would probably make sense given when it was released relative to the others. It's also reflective of what people liked about our games. For example, for a lot of people it was BG1/2's tactical combat aspect was what they loved. Unsurprisingly not much since then has made those people happy. I still had people on the old BSN that said they stuck around being a voice for a return ala "BG3" (or whatever spiritual successor as licensing was probably an issue). For myself it was the narrative and specifically companions which I loved, which I think were more ubiquitous across the breadth of BioWare games (subjective preferences aside). It meant BG1 was cool but not really my cup of tea (especially as someone that hated low level AD&D), though BG2 pulled me in heavily. We also have people that literally didn't play one second of single player of ME3, but hundreds of hours of the multiplayer.
  15. I feel compelled to post: I like Fight On from FF7 (I think mostly due to nostalgia now, but it just fit so well with the boss fights). This track is probably a key cog for the scene that converted me back to a PC gamer back in 1999. I think Bloodlines had some catchy ones that seemed to fit the scene so well. There's something about that has some tracks that I for no particular reason! And while many may feel it reminds them too much of something they didn't enjoy, is a great piece IMO. Came across this and it's interesting how much of this is still true to me today :D Also Arkham Bridge B-)
  16. Nooo... I has an identity crisis! Good to see you again Allan and good to hear you not running around with a bullseye painted on you I don't generally share what people on my friends lists do I still remember the time I accidentally called Deraldin Deladrin! And I screwed up Gfted1 by calling him G1fted! D: And I totally took Kaiserslautern from German Div 3 to Champions League Champions! Suck it Bayern!
  17. I can try to check. Edit: for what it's worth, social media tells me he is still there. I still have him on my steam friend list, so I know he's online, alive and kicking every now and then. and for the record, Baldurs Gate 1+2 were Biowares best ever games! I'm still around. Time flies and I'm about to complete my 10th year at BioWare - the past few I've been more of a QA programmer than a QA analyst which I enjoy and I get to flex my programming education a bit more. Gorth can probably corroborate that I play an awful lot of strategy games (oh Paradox Studios...) lately. And Football Manager. Because evidently I like spreadsheets! Also recently got married and in general life has been pretty good I think! As for our imminent doom, I mean it's part of the ebb and flow I find of a lot of game development studios? People that are still waiting for Baldur's Gate 3 will think it's been all downhill since then. For some KOTOR was the peak. Others the ME Trilogy. And for still others it's the DA games. Even DA2! Just depends on what it is specifically you're looking for in a game I think? I see similar arguments for studios like Bethesda, Blizzard, or even Obsidian! Daggerfall was the best... or Morrowind... or Skyrim. I loved Doom, but Quake never grabbed me. Commander Keen games were meh while Duke 3D was amazing. Oh the time I spent into Warcraft and Starcraft games, but I suspect far more enjoy Overwatch. And I'm pretty sure Diablo 3 is most popular Diablo, even if a hefty amount wholly prefer Diablo 2 over anything else. Obsidian's highlight for me is Fallout: New Vegas, but I also really enjoyed Alpha Protocol (flawed diamond it was) and wasn't really pulled into Pillars of Eternity but Tyranny had me binge two playthroughs of it pretty much back to back. I'm certainly not impartial but definitely not hoping that we get shuttered. I'm not overly concerned in any case and Anthem's launch not causing me any sort of dread or worry for whatever it's worth. But hey, 15 year veterans of Blizzard felt the same. It could happen... I suppose we shall see. Though I'm enjoying it because my current work has been really interesting and doing loads of Python/C#/C++ work in and around the game code which feels pretty cool. Anyhoo, thanks Pidesco for the link. They had mentioned that a few old timers like G1fted (whom I foolishly mistook for Gorth for a moment... too many floating skull/head avatars!!!) and just wanted to chime in for any that were curious. Cheers. Allan
  18. If you feel your life is increasingly difficult because of your status as a man, then that is your prerogative and I'm not here to convince you otherwise. Yes, I do think that men face less institutionalized issues and that most of them manifest from men. You asked why it was transmisogyny and I attempted to explain as best I could based on the limited knowledge I have now. If you feel you're better versed on the topic and that the entirety of my post is invalid because of those 8 words then so be it. Cheers.
  19. Transmisogyny is simply the intersectional focus that transgender women tend to, in general, face increased hardship by virtue of being a transgender woman compared to transgender men. Some examples of this can be seen with whom trans exclusive radical feminists target (overwhelmingly male to female trans people compared to female to male). I believe transgender women are also more likely to be murdered and encounter sexual violence, but admittedly I'm still very new to this. I'm still getting over my own transphobia, which typically manifested from a discomfort from the reality that I probably would also freak out if I slept with a woman and she was transgender. Though I think I'm getting better in this regard and it's something for myself to work on. (I want to make the clarification that I do not think that someone must be an -ist or -phobe to do -ist or -phobic things. On this board I once casually used the term "Jap" to describe Japanese people which is a racist slur, and once I accepted that that mistake didn't make me a racist but just a human it was a lot easier for me to accept that type of critique and to respond more appropriately). It relates back to the idea/concept of systemic/institutionalized discrimination. I don't feel misandry is really a thing because while any individual can be a jerk towards a man for being a man, I don't really face wide spread challenges based on being a man. That's not to say there aren't issues that apply to men, but just that those that I do find tend to come from other men (and the supposed accepted ways that a man should behave and the shame for having particular events happen to you, for example). My two cents. In any case I don't see the censorship issue here, especially since trans awareness and sensitivity is still in its infancy meaning even if it wasn't noticed prerelease, doesn't mean Obsidian cannot take the feedback and say "Oh we didn't fully appreciate this." It's complicated because some transgender individuals won't care, while some do. Not really my place to say they should or should not be offended. Undoubtedly there's other contributions that were refused because Obsidian didn't feel they were appropriate.
  20. Was curious to see what the reaction to this would be here. If you believe the contributors should have had carte blanche to write whatever they want with no oversight from Obsidian, then that's fine. It's a position we disagree on. I suspect they didn't let people write anything they wanted and that the submissions were vetted, so I'd need to know what Obsidian did in those cases, because I suspect it was probably a mistake. I'm not seeing the censorship issue since it's not relevant to the content of the game. If it's unfair because of the kickstarter contribution, then they could let the person submit something else in its place. This isn't like depictions of rape in FONV (which I feel Obsidian did well and disagree with the critique levied against FONV for those reasons) which is part of the narrative that Obsidian wishes to create, created specifically by Obsidian. It's also possible they didn't realize it was a mistake until pointed out, and of their own free will agree that it's not something they want. Similar to when I used "gay" as slang for "stupid" until I had a few people point out to me that they really didn't like that. Rather than continue be an ****, I opted to stop using the term. (The same thing happened on this forum when I ignorantly used the term "Jap" actually). And yes, the game is successful so it's going to get a wider range of perspectives on something like this. I also think Obsidian's track record is pretty decent for this sort of stuff, even if not every feminist perspective would agree. (The game is aces and I'm off to return to playing it now)
  21. It's seen all the time. Often on this board too. Often the words being used are just slightly different. It's almost a daily occurrence on the BioWare Forums for there to be a heated discussion over the term "RPG" because to some, referring to anything that doesn't fit their strictly defined view of what an "RPG" is threatens that vision. If RPGs are popular, but popular in the wake of something like Fallout 3 or Skyrim, then those that want more Fallout 1/2 or Baldur's Gate 2 have now become marginalized. Devs will make RPGs not "for them" but "for those other people" instead. I agree that those labels are fluid, but then I also respond to the disagreements I have with people that use the term in ways I find confusing in entirely different ways (it typically involves less hate than some people).
  22. The term's neutrality was already negated when people claimed ownership of it and spoke out with hostility to anyone that tried to use the term in any other way than their narrowly defined application of the term. Although... You literally excuse their usage here. (bonus irony points: gaming journalists stating this were also online!) I take offense to people who fail to recognize which group was being specifically focused on here, complete with the fallback of "people are just **** on the internet." There's cause and effect here. Gaming journalists don't call out "gamers" (quoted specifically, since I'm getting tired of writing "the subset of gamers that these articles refer to") unless "gamers" are being total asshats with respect to their hobby. And those online asshats (who'd never be in real life...) do an excellent job of pushing new gamers (no quotes) away because they attack and bully those that they feel co-opt the term and ruin the purity of gaming. Those same people who are ridiculously outspoken and go through great lengths to harass people and to try to bully/discredit them. Anita isn't a gamer. Game X isn't a "real" game. Toxicity that does a good job of pushing out moderates with, I feel, the hopes that people will simply "leave gaming alone!" so that it remains what these people believe it is. And this is exactly what the articles calling out "gamers" are doing. They're stating "you don't have ownership of the term anymore. And the identity your group ascribes from being a gamer is being eroded." The term gamer is being redefined, and a lot of the recent bull**** going on is providing an impetus for that. Those that want to distance themselves from the asshats are either going to try to take more ownership of the term and increasing the voice of those gamers that aren't "gamers" (which is what I've started doing), or we'll find a new term because honestly... I don't care what specific label is applied to me for my hobby. I am, however, sick vitriolic and hateful component of a hobby I love that gets trivially excused because "there's plenty of people [that] are asshats online. Which is a privileged perspective because simply that YOU don't get harassed in person doesn't mean that people (often women) do. "Fake geek gamer girl" and that nonsense actually does happen in person, and one of my best friends (who avidly wears game themed clothing) has to deal with it pretty much every time she wears said clothing. Yesterday it was getting a coffee and being challenged "do you even know what that is?" (referring to the Tri Force from Zelda). Me inquiring about it: "Yeah it pretty much always happens." Which often comes with the typical victim blaming "well if you don't like those questions why wear stuff like that?" This is a lot like #NotAllMen, where people are failing to realize that the silence towards **** that smear the name of gaming is the tacit acceptance of said perspectives. It's more about "Hey I'm not a bad guy" with the failure to realize that the backlash one's receiving has a very specific cause. Remove that cause and the outrage about "gamers" goes away. If things fall the way I would like, it means people realize that "gamers" mean people that play games, not "**** that attack anyone and anything that threatens the purity of their gaming hobby."
  23. Hate speech is probably the worst possible term you could have used. Especially since we're all being so keen on using proper definitions of words now. Hate speech is, outside the law, speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of e.g. race, religion, gender, disability, or sexual orientation. (Source. Note that this doesn't touch on the legal application of the term which the link also discusses). That is sounds the same as "muslims are to blame for 9/11" is a huge problem because the level of significance and relevance of people seeing "attacks on gamers" as being in any way equivalent to real world and institutional discrimination towards (typically) visible groups gives gaming a level of gravitas that isn't there. As people are so common to say when it's convenient: "it's just video games." Which is true, and that doesn't mean one can't be passionate about it and love it. But any level of equivalence towards the two things is false. People aren't going to be scrutinized by the law for being gamers. People aren't going to face systemic levels of discrimination because they play video games. It's co-opting a specific term that means something different and I see it all the time too. LGBT people, for example, have "gotten what they wanted" on the claims of representation. Unsurprisingly, groups and fans of particular ideas (that don't suffer constant erasure from pop culture nor systemic oppression for simply having those ideas) now utilize the term and feel justified in doing so because "well we've given them what they want, so now it's time to give us what we want." Would it have been more palatable if they had colluded to spread out the articles? What you're seeing is a reaction to what some of them, and yes some of them are indeed friends, had to endure in the wake of both Zoe and Anita backlash. When you're facing a plethora of people (and their sockpuppets) harassing the **** out of you and your colleagues/friends online the impetus is going to draft a response. Yes, several articles came up to call out the antiquated notion of "gamer" and the narrow field of view a group of gamers have about what is mandated to be a gamer. But an organized hate speech campaign or several people sharing their experiences with each other and deciding to write about it? Note that there IS a gaming journalism critique here, in that games journalism has a huge tendency to imitate and repost same ideas from other OpEds and the like. But that's not what you've expressed concern about. First off, the bolded. This statement is untrue. Both Mandarin and Spanish are spoken by more people than English. Your perspective is, however, consistent with eurocentricism and ideology that the subset of gamers that these articles refers to. Why do we need more black people in our games? Ugh who cares about LGBT in games? I just want to play games! God damn SJW are ruining gaming!!! As though gaming is some pure thing that should be sheltered from outside influences and untainted by those that just don't understand what it means to be a true gamer! God forbid some article points out that older women now outnumber teenage boys. In fact, lets make sure we point grill them on "what types of games" because if they don't fit a particular idea (which is a moving set of goalposts depending on who you ask) then we can dismiss this and speak out against articles that state this as being bogus for... reasons. I question the intentions of anybody who lectures people on the proper use of words while in the immediately not following their own standards. The same things you bitch about gaming journalism about you exempt yourself from. Gaming Journalism is RIFE (click baiting, link chaining, industry sponsored award shows, etc.) with bad things and I don't, in general, care too much for it. You're absolutely correct in your other paragraph that there's dozens upon dozens of huge issues with gaming journalism. But when someone like Dan Golding states the following: ------------- When, over the last decade, the playing of videogames moved beyond the niche, the gamer identity remained fairly uniformly stagnant and immobile. Gamer identity was simply not fluid enough to apply to a broad spectrum of people. It could not meaningfully contain, for example, Candy Crush players, Proteus players, and Call of Duty players simultaneously. When videogames changed, the gamer identity did not stretch, and so it has been broken. ------------- then you're just being obstinate about the usage of the term gamers. Don't claim to be moderate in this issue. You dislike gaming journalism and you're insistent on this because in your views you want as much as possible against them so much so that you're splitting hairs over the usage of the term because failing to do so would mean conceding a talking point against gaming journalism. For all the ills of gaming journalism, them pointing out that the term "gamer" applies to so much more people than those that are so adamantly defensive about it is hardly an indictment against it compared to other things. But hey, like you, I have my own biases and since I've already been pretty indifferent towards the term being applied more liberally it's hardly a shock that I have less issues with them calling out the old, rigid gamer clique and illustrating that times are indeed changing. If someone were to, however, have a particular agenda against gaming journalism it doesn't surprise me that they'd opt on being wilfully obstinate towards the nuanced use of the term in this case because hey, you have a pile of stuff you want to build up against gaming journalism and the thought of taking something off that pile isn't something you're keen on doing. But that's not a moderate view. If you're going to rag on gaming journalism, I'd consider your argument to have more weight if it wasn't insisting that media telling people that the ownership of the term has evolved beyond what the old school insist it is. The subset of gamers that these articles refer to view the label as so sacred that they actively go on "hate speech" (since you used the term) campaigns to push out and discredit anyone that threatens to change the status quo. Depression Quest isn't a game. Anita isn't even a gamer. Allan you don't understand the gamer identity and the co-opting of our culture capital (yes, this has been said to me, as though I haven't been a gamer for 30 years that even competed in online leagues). The same group that shat all over Tim Schafer for "betraying" them because he simply said "I think everyone who makes games should watch this video from start to finish." I mean, he wasn't even talking to gamers (of any kind) when he said this - he was talking to the developers. But that's the issue the subset of gamers that these articles refer to. Anita is poisoning gaming through lies and all sorts of other scandalous terms. If Tim has now bought in... we have to mobilize and be even louder because otherwise true games won't be made anymore. Especially given that Anita's video basically comes across as "Stop being lazy and use different tropes." As though the subset of gamers that these articles refer to are actually encouraging game developers to be stagnant.
×
×
  • Create New...