Hurlshort

I've played a fair amount of TF2 and I can't tell you anything about the characters or the world. I don't think comparing the writing of TF2 and Overwatch is a worthwhile endeavor.

I'm not sure I've ever seen Blizzard lauded for their great writing. They tend to nail the gameplay down, polish the heck out of it, and appeal to a wide audience. That's their formula, it may be simple, but it has made them arguably the most successful studio around. They also seem unwilling to release anything that doesn't meet a certain criteria of fun, even after years of development, and that is a good way to endear themselves to their fans. I wish we had more studios that follow the Blizzard model. (despite me not really enjoying Starcraft or Diablo.)

Ugh, don't summon that guy here.

I am really hoping this becomes widespread within the next decade. I do not think I can handle 20 more years of my commute.

Heh, the Angry Birds anti-immigration breakdown was pretty well done. This one is more far-fetched.

Roofles

I'd say Cosby had a much better reputation than Clinton before the accusations. Bill Cosby was America's Dad. Any President is going to be a somewhat divisive figure, particularly in the current climate. Also I'm not sure how you argue Hillary is in the shadows.

Also, I've always viewed the Clintons as a political marriage. They stay together because it is best for their careers. That isn't a new concept. The Cosby's don't have that going for them. You can argue that Cosby's wife stayed through this because of his reputation, but it is still a very different scenario.

Let's be fair, if the only person accusing Cosby was Janice Dickinson, this would be tabloid fodder and everyone would ignore it. The reason Cosby has fallen so quickly is because there is a long list of women coming forward and accusing him, and they all tell the same disturbing MO. The case still needs to be tried with evidence weighed, but it looks very bad. Clinton has a long list of affairs, but only one has accused him of rape. If you want to compare him to Cosby, I think you need more than that. He may be a scumbag, but there does not seem to be a history of assault on women. My first instinct to to believe Juanita Broadrick and throw the book at Clinton, but I do find it troubling that such a serial philanderer does not have more accusations. As Ganrich pointed out, it is a different case with the wives. Both seem to be willing to endure some pretty tough circumstances. However there seems to be evidence that Cosby's wife was not only aware of assault, but may have helped cover it up (and enabled it to continue.) That's a huge distinction as well.

There is a pretty big line between adultery and assault.

There are 5 reviews so far, so I wouldn't exactly call it a slaughter...yet. But honestly I don't think you need (or expect) a bunch of rave reviews to make this worth watching. If it is an entertaining adventure that pays tribute to a pretty geeky property, it will make audiences happy. Angry Birds is the bigger surprise. Might be the most successful video game movie ever. Edit: I read the Variety review. The writer makes a big deal about the fact that WoW has declined from 10 million subs to 5 million subs, as if that is a knock on the property. It's a 10 year old game with 5 million subs, that is basically the most successful game lifespan ever. It was hard to take them seriously after that. I can see the movie sucking, or being too niche, but lets not lead with a dumb argument about the game's success.

I wonder how this affects the legacy of the Warriors? They established a new win record in the regular season, but now they may not even make the finals. I think it is mitigated a bit by the fact they won last year and Curry is clearly not healthy, but it still is going to add an asterisk to that regular season.

I used to post as God on occasion, but I am too lazy nowadays.

You heard it here first!

You really need to czech your facts, Bruce. edit: did you all see what I did there?

It's confirmed, Hoonding is an alt of Volourn.

Been playing Expeditions: Conquistadors again, hopefully I'll see it through. Some of these battles are tough. I feel like the unluckiest person alive on certain rounds.

Bah, won't beat the original.

I am disappointed Cleveland didn't just smoke them and be done with it. Want to see these 'We The North' scumbags weep. Aw, gotta have a little bit of satisfaction in seeing a new team mixing it up against the Eastern king. It looked like the Cavs were going to coast in, now we've got potential upsets in both conferences.

Oh, like the Atlanteans? This is in line with how I teach about civilizations in the classroom. It references my state standards as well. http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/6.3/brown.html

I'd probably classify that as a more tribal society than a civilization.

We have loads of data that support religion and spirituality in early societies. Earlier I wrote that a civilization: So I suppose size does matter, although I think progress is the more important measure.

So if there is no evidence to support a lack of religion or spirituality in early societies, are we just supposed to take it on faith that they existed?

So what are the alternatives? I do like the idea that religion is more of a cultural glue than a foundation. That might be a more fitting analogy. But I have a hard time separating religion from the human condition before a certain time period. Actually I have a hard time saying "the human condition".