Bartimaeus

I wrote out the following post, but am now prefacing it with this: it would probably be useful to define what you think "caring" about something actually means, because the particular way you conceptualize what that functionally means in your day-to-day life has to play a pretty big role in determining the things you feel you do or don't care about. It's impossible to even remotely conceptualize that many people. I'm pretty sure there's a reason reading a headline like "young girl tragically killed in car accident" while attaching a face to the headline is much more likely to get our attention and an actual empathetic reaction compared to "294 children among thousands of dead because of extreme flooding" with a generic picture of the flood in question. One person suffering is tangible and digestible, getting into even the hundreds or thousands just becomes an incomprehensible statistic...at least not without some direct visual aid (e.g. 9/11...but that is obviously extremely traumatic and almost certainly unhealthy to experience the brunt of, particularly repeatedly*). If by "care" you meant able to offer up a very basic feeling of "that sucks" when something terrible happens to [whomever], okay, but that feels hard to really qualify as proper caring - those people didn't exist to me before I learned whatever it was that happened to them, and they're not going to exist for any longer than probably an hour after in the vast majority of cases either, even given a normal sympathetic reaction. Chilloutman already said they don't want bad things to happen to anybody anywhere, so if that's the level of "caring" that you're talking about, it seems like they pretty much already expressed it (...even if it was less than diplomatically said). *I wonder what psychologists have to say about the health of caring about things that are beyond your control. Is there any value whatsoever to anybody, least of all yourself, in trying to care about stuff happening on the other side of that planet that you can do practically nothing about?

Yeah, the English dub was unbearable from the ~10 seconds or so I tried of it in the first episode. Not that I particularly liked the direction of the Japanese* either, but I don't know why so many modern English dubs go with the over-the-top false/artificial style for their direction when you could just...like, not? There's something there that I clearly just don't get.

Yeah, doesn't really sound like a show I'd appreciate unless the characters magically grab me without actually making the effort to do so (which...is not impossible, but is definitely pretty rare). I'm also not known for caring about mystery stuff for the mystery in of itself (now as a vehicle to propel characters forward a la Steven Universe, heck yes...but otherwise, not really), . I'll try an episode, but if I don't take a liking to it within that, I'm not gonna sweat it. Doesn't sound nearly as horrific as the U.S. Sailor Moon pilot - how unfortunate. American TV animation was almost as skilled and detailed as Japan in the 90s.

We just got out of Irenicus' dungeon, and...hey, there's an illusory wall in the main room of this inn, wonder what's inside! Oh, instantly blown to smithereens by an epic-levelled lich, what great design. And by "great design", I mean "terrible design", but it was funny and memorable, and it can be easily avoided until later...so maybe not terrible design.

@Humanoid I guess it depends on whether it's singleplayer or multiplayer. My experiences with multiplayer CRPGs have suggested that probably exactly one is the optimal amount each player controls, with a maximum of two if it's only a two-player game. In singleplayer, I would probably personally prefer 3 if they're characters I control all of the time. But you're right, the game has to be designed as if those limitations are law, because otherwise you can get something like the Baldur's Gate AD&D experience where playing solo means you level up approximately every five minutes and you become a god that destroys practically everything without effort for most of the game...until you come up against the hard level cap and the game starts to catch up with you with nowhere for you to go. See above: I would say playing solo makes all balance and progression moot much more than a quest XP reduction mod intended to make a 5 member party more balanced, but people apparently do that and think it's fine, . There really is a lot of worthless trash in BG1, between near empty wilderness areas and low quality quests being everywhere from beginning to end of the game. You'd think by the time you get to the city of Baldur's Gate, the game would ease up on a lot of that, but it doesn't. I honestly don't remember much about IWD, except that it was atrociously boring with no reason to care about anything even like ten hours into the game, so I just stopped playing and ejected it from my brain.

The amount of combat in the IE games would make turn-based gameplay untenable (unless you want BG1 to last approximately 200 hours in a utterly miserable slow slough where each battle with every random wolf takes a couple of minutes instead of 10 seconds like it does via RTwP), so you can throw out 90% of that as well. I don't really see how the IE games would benefit from being turn-based, particularly because they kind of already are - enemies generally operated in a (albeit somewhat chaotic) turn-based manner, it's the player that can bend and break the rules by operating outside of that structure with micro-managed movement, reactive targeting, intelligent ability sequencing, concerted character tactics, etc., .

Not playing with a full party completely breaks the game balance of Baldur's Gate entirely due to AD&D's terrible level progression wherein all else being equal, a level 7 fighter will defeat a level 5 fighter probably 99% of the time. I usually play with 5 characters, but I use a mod that reduces all quest XP to half in order to compensate. Level 10 is...what, about the time you're ready to start the Bodhi/Shadow Thieves stuff before going to Spellhold? I'll power game a little, but I ain't power gaming THAT much and for that long, . I'd probably place PST and BG2 equally, though for very different reasons. I don't know where I'd place BG1/IWD2; my first inclination was to place BG1 above it since I have much more fond feelings for the BG series than the IWD series, but every time I actually play BG1, I get like halfway through before I quit, so I guess I'm not too sure.

What did the EEs do? The only thing I can think of is restricting level 1 proficencies (i.e. so you can't put all 4 of a fighter's level 1 proficencies into one weapon type, which is a BG2 bug and wasn't allowed in BG1 in the first place AFAIK). Generally, I think 7 makes the most sense, since it's when you get the +1/2 APR from being a fighter. It's also not too high level and so it doesn't take too long to reactivate your class (which gets exponentially more annoying and burdensome the farther you go past level 7), you still get most of your fighter 1D10 HP dice and enough THAC0 progression, you can have two weapon types with 3 stars (or dual wielding with 3 stars + one weapon type with 3 stars). Going up to level 9 for grand mastery with one weapon type doesn't even give you anything but +2 damage in BG2, since grand mastery was completely broken in that game. EEs fixed it so you get the other 1/2 APR and extra THAC0 that you're supposed to get, but it means you're going to be gimped for almost all of BG2... Icewind Dale 1 is literally the only Infinity Engine game I haven't beat, . Haven't ever been able to suffer through it...would rather play PST probably ten more times rather than IWD once, I think.

In Everything Everywhere All at Once's case, the justification is really twofold: I will forgive a lot of ridiculous silliness that might really bother me elsewhere if I love the character stuff...in fact, there's even a chance that my tastes might literally change as I watch it so that I am more accepting of whatever precise type of silliness it's engaging with. Characters trump everything else - they are the foundational backbone of almost all types of fiction/entertainment for me. I will also forgive what should be unforgivable if the film manages to resonate with me on a personal level, and Everything Everywhere All at Once very strongly resonated with me on a personal level from multiple angles, which is very rare indeed. I've always said that I don't really care for themes and other kinds of big ideas in entertainment, but that's because they generally stand extremely little chance of affecting me on a personal level: without characters that I like, it's virtually impossible for me to pay enough attention to even fully understand the plot of something, and never mind looking deeper for the themes. So when you have characters that I like while being able to interweave ideas and themes that I like, you've really got potential for something special. And then I watch Aliens where the characters are completely one-note meme-worthy non-characters that can't even deliver their lines properly, and people wonder why I'm not impressed with it. I'd like to turn to my friend George Lucas here... ...who, although he would completely and utterly forget what he said fifteen years or so later while making the prequel trilogy, pretty much hits a home run on my feelings here with regards to not spending your time on the proper elements. Haven't seen Event Horizon, but obviously I love Satoshi Kon's Magnetic Rose as previously discussed. Slow, personal, atmospheric horror that builds itself through what our characters are experiencing...what they see, or what they don't see, their personal weaknesses and fears, and the terror they experience. At the most base level, I want to feel something for my characters as a result of what they're going through, and you have to make it personal to them to accomplish that. I want to become afraid and get hurt just as they do.

Getting the first seven levels of a fighter-type class (or even a thief) and then dual-classing to either a mage or cleric so that you can get the single-class XP progression of the spellcasting class (as opposed to the much slower multi-class XP progression) while retaining the HP, THAC0, APR, proficiency, and item usabilities of the fighter-type class kind of beats everything else, IMO. Of course, it can be kind of painful for BG1 because you're starting to take on actually hard stuff right as you get to level 7...

I said everything, not everybody. I am anti-nationalist, generally accepting of ideas and identities wherein they do not infringe upon others (wherever their basis may lie, whether it's ethnic, religion, personal, ideological...), and am only just somewhat misanthropic, so I certainly don't qualify for that, . My intolerance for certain types of people is, I believe, much more reasoned and limited than my intolerance for most other things. I don't have a good enough memory of Prometheus to talk about its plot, especially given that I obviously lacked the context of the rest of the Alien films when I saw it. Perhaps that's a reason to re-visit it after all...

"Christianity didn't become a world religion because of the quality of its teachings, but by the quantity of its violence." What a gorgeous line - mind you, it's applicable to other religions besides just Christianity, but it's especially relevant today given today's ever-growing Christofascist movement.

In all fairness, I am probably the biggest hater of...everything, out of everybody here on the Obsidian forum? Like, I play maybe two to three new (usually short/indie) video games a year, I dislike or at least don't care for the vast majority of movies and shows that I try, most music induces strong misophonic reactions from me, I'm very selective about what I'm willing to put in the effort to read... I mean hell, I almost definitely even have the largest ignore list on here! Intolerance and indifference is pretty much what everyone should expect from me as a default at this point, . In spite of that, I'm still somehow able to find stuff that I enjoy (and because of my dislike for everything, I also have a tendency to keep what I do like extremely close to heart for a very long time)...but in the context of specifically Alien, I have a pretty noted extreme aversion to pointless action and corny acting/dialogue, so really, the only surprise here is that I enjoyed Alien 3. Now, as for everybody else being "haters"...they can make up their own explanations for themselves.

Prometheus is the first Alien film that I ever saw. My main impression of it (now, ~10 years after having seen it) was that Noomi Rapace was good in the starring role. There were, I understand, just a couple of writing and creative decisions that people took issue to, . No chance on Alien vs. Predator, I'm afraid: it's so far outside my wheelhouse that it would serve no purpose for anyone.

Yes, the worst movie ever made (that I have watched, particularly that I have ever watched the entirety of) is still Star Wars: The Holiday Special. I think I'd put it right around on Aliens' level (i.e. significantly below Alien 3, unfathomably below Alien), but how it got there is different. Where Aliens is just generally bad and dumb throughout the entire thing pretty consistently due to deliberately stupid writing and direction courtesy of one Mr. James Cameron, there were some moments and ideas in Resurrection that I thought were pretty decent...but it was pretty much always quickly followed up with stuff even worse than what I saw in Aliens. A steady flat-line (Aliens) vs. peaks and valleys (Resurrection), I guess. Well, I'm officially done with the Alien property. Yeah, I'll get right on that, Fox.

Alien: Resurrection (1997). Well, this is going to suck. Seems like I always hate his characters and dialogue style...that combined with the fact that, as @Amentep so helpfully informed me, Ron Perlman is also in this movie, means I'm a hundred percent going to absolutely loathe at least one terrible actor and associated character in this film. Soon to find out if it's more than that... Well, what can one say about Alien: Resurrection? It was about the time we had the Catwoman basketball scene (but sans all the embarrassing quick cuts and nauseating zoom-ins, so I guess not quite as bad) between Sigourney Weaver and Ron Perlman that I knew this movie had gone past the point of no return, and that was only like maybe 25 minutes in. Brad Dourif was awesome, as always, so at least there was that...but on the other hand, there wasn't nearly enough of him. Ron Perlman was awful, as always, and there was naturally way too much of him (although I would say anything more than exactly 0 milliseconds is probably too much Ron Perlman, so you know...with the exception of when he's just voice-acting, I suppose). Um, wow, well, this was not a good movie for reasons beyond Ron Perlman, so I don't even know why I'm talking about him. Let's not make any more Alien movies, mmkay?

Sorry, I didn't hear what you said, I had to go clean up my dog's turds using my Princess Mononoke™ Giant Wolf Pooper Scooper, now what was it that we were talking about again?

...I'm definitely not thinking of Princess Mononoke and the intro sequence where Ashitaka sacrifices* himself in order to save his little sister before leaving his village being the best part of the film and it all going downhill from there on. Nope, not at all, .

By the way, you really ought to have to me complete a fifteen second investigation as to whether a show is going to be...well, that, before you start it. I mean honestly, a few seconds of looking at user screenshots and it's pretty obvious what kind of content it will have, . @kirottu recommended Angel's Egg and I liked that, I can only assume that his not-exactly-a-recommendation of Made in Abyss has to be okay. Someone besides only @majestic has to be capable of recommending things I like, right? I still remember that one part where the one girl brutally and bloodily bashes a locker room of girls' brains in. No, I don't think I'll watch that.

I haven't even seen what ol' crap-for-brains has said, but I try not to ever read the dystopic farce that is the Ukraine thread, and I certainly don't unblock the people I have on my ignore list on the rare occasion I do... O.K., I'm now back from taking a quick look at the Ukraine thread where I see you posted the same message that you just posted here, so I guess that must've been it - what you said now makes a lot more sense with that context, . Thanks, let me know how it goes - the original TV show is only 13 episodes long, but there's a bit of stuff after that that I figured would discourage you from trying it.

This is an improvement, since it got rid of the one where I confessed...er, jokingly mentioned ritually sacrificing my family to Satan.

Provided that it's grounded, for a reason (i.e. not simply for shock value, which is usually lame), and not just utter misery all the time, the torment of children is (or at least can be) great. ...I originally wrote that as just "child torture is great", but that didn't seem to capture my sentiment quite right and I would prefer to deny KP the opportunity to put another of my posts in his signature. But really, probably my third favorite live action film of all time is The Florida Project, and Grave of the Fireflies is pretty close to the top of my favorite Ghibli films...and I'm probably forgetting some other things, but yeah, not really usually an issue for me. Now whether or not I would like it due to vastly different reasons more related to it coming out in 2017 is an entirely different question...

Pretty much this exact thought occurred to me when I watched Alien 3: if I had actually enjoyed Aliens, I would've been greatly perturbed by them essentially invalidating the entire emotional core of the movie by killing off Newt within the first minute of Alien 3...but since Aliens was a big pile of garbage, I was more or less cheering for doing exactly that. Then the movie told me there weren't going to be any guns (which apparently was a Sigourney Weaver-mandated decision) and it felt as if they were deliberately crapping all over the legacy of Aliens - difficult not to be greatly pleased by that. But yeah, significantly worse than Alien and not at all like it's predecessor Aliens means that most everyone else will hate it. From what I recall reading, if the alien gestated from a dog (The Thing...), that's the theatrical version, while in the special/Assembly Cut, it instead gestates from an oxen.

One moment, let me do a Google image search...uh, what the hell am I looking at? Looks like a cross between the Rabbit of Caerbannog and Cthulhu. Yeah, I'm quite sure that I've enjoyed your descriptions of episodes many times more than I would've ever enjoyed the show itself, . I have to tell you though, Cobra just doesn't really seem like the "savant programmer" type to me...or really even an idiot programmer. Immersion ruined, . Although the sudden appearance of a certain mustached villain as the ultimate evil in the show, uh, probably would've done it as well, .