Hurlshort

Obama is rumored to be a decent basketball player, actually. He still isn't going to drain 50 playing against former NBA players.

Santiago Casilla closed out a 1 run game last night on 9 strikes. 3 strikeouts on 9 pitches in the 9th inning, wow.

Kind of creepy how much this sounds like the Kim Jong stories.

Ugh, I can't do 3D for more than about 10 minutes.

I'm not sure I'd really call Destiny an MMO. I enjoyed it as well, but it is fairly limited in terms of how many people you are playing with in an area.

Wow, that was a thrill ride. I wanted more of the guitar guy shredding away. I need to watch it again, for sure.

Eh, most other trade mag's can be different because the diversity of what's being sold within the mag itself. A movie magazine might be selling everything from laser tag to games to movies, but it's not enough of a money invested from one point that the editors pressure the reviewers to give Transformers a good score. The entire games industry itself is built around selling to itself. You open Game Informer (which is only successful because of gamestop's pushing it), and you're seeing reviews for games, advertisements for games, and discussion only about games. I don't ever remember seeing anything from a "related" industry that thinks the market share would be good to crack (no comic book ads, no movie ads, no car ads). So the Magazine Editors want to keep the publishers happy so they can keep the ad revenue rolling in and the review copies too. Publishers want to keep the magazine/website editors happy because that means their ad's and games get better press, and nobody cares about the consumer. Oddly enough, I was just flipping through Game Informer on the commode, and Pillars of Eternity was their game of the month, while Broken Age part 2 also got an extremely high mark. They also gave a rather low mark to some Assassin's Creed side-scroller.

My argument has always been more about this is simply how trade magazines work. They rely on the people who create the product to stay in business. Subscriptions (or in this day and age, hits) only cover part of costs, they need advertising dollars and they need behind the scenes access to content in order to operate. This is coupled by the fact that a review is a fairly subjective thing, and any game that can afford good advertising is also probably going to look good and be technically solid. In essence I think that reviews are one of the least important parts of game journalism, and hope that someday the general public moves away from relying on them so heavily.

I prefer Elric, although I've not read the Witcher books, only Moor****'s work.

I am entirely certain that 99% of the people playing Dragon Age games are paying way less attention to the lore that Qistana. It really is just a game for the majority of people.

Sometimes I enjoy the actual discussion about journalism. But yeah, most of the time I scratch my head over the stuff that gets discussed here. Something about nazism and misogyny, I think.

My wife and I celebrated out 12 year anniversary. We started out with a bit of wine tasting, then had a very good dinner. It was a very good evening.

I've heard that this is standard practise with the historical consultants hired for movies, simply there to lend a veneer of authenticity and then largely ignored, unless the director likes one of their ideas. That actually sounds like a great gig, sign me up.

I was just pointing out a fun moment in the game I watched last night. Thanks Mr. Buzz-kill.

You didn't ask a question. I'm not sure what you feel I was dodging.

Gee, I'm sorry if you feel I was dodging your incredibly convoluted question. You are clearly digging for something. Let's just assume you found it and we can all move on with our lives.

Did the no name Bull get 32 points, going 8 for 13 beyond the arc?

Depends on the recyclable content.

You're dodging the question. Would you accept an Alien movie with Ripley assigned to a lesser role and played by a much weaker actress than the main male lead? Hardy is nowhere near the same weight class as Theron. How am I dodging the question? I said yes, I would have no issue with a strong male lead in an Alien film. I will judge it by its individual merit. You can already argue that the guy that played the android was a much stronger lead than the female in the newest Alien movie. Although, once again, Charlize Theron was there dominating. (if only she knew how to run sideways!) The crazy thing is Sigourney Weaver can still play a kick butt character, while Mel Gibson is pretty much past that. It's all about the strength of the actor, I don't care what their gender is. Why do you guys make such a big deal of it?

Whoa, just watched Curry drop a huge shot at the end of the 3rd from the other side of the court. Hah!

I would have no problem with a new Alien movie with a male lead. But part of the formula of that movie is the strong female scientist who ends up kicking some butt. Oddly enough they have the Predator movies set in the same universe, which tend to revolve around a strong male character. I think people spend too much time worrying about this stuff, while the majority of the world goes about their business just hoping the movie is entertaining.

They could have just called it Fury Road, but Mad Max is much more marketable. Would you rather have "Mad Max and his more Distinguished Female Co-star" for a title?

Or they will sell even if garbage because taste is subjective, and most people buying them enjoy them and don't think they are garbage.

Are you dissing Paddington? He'll maul you, be careful what you say. That raincoat is not about the weather, it's to keep clean when the blood of his enemies is raining down.

To be fair, the NFLPA is made up of people that have undergone a lot of brain injuries.