Amentep

Its not really about Quinn or Grayson, per se. They're just real world examples of the questions that arise when developers and journalist intersect at at personal level. What he's saying is that if you're a journalist in a relationship with a developer, that you should recuse yourself/be recused by editorial from any journalistic endeavors related to the covering of that developer. To not use real people, lets say Developer A (DA) and Journalist B (JB) are in a relationship. JB writes positive things about DA's career in games, and mentions their current work, the Awesome Game of Awesomeness (AGA) How do you know the positive press isn't influenced by the relationship? Would this developer be noted by this press outlet if not for the relationship with the journalist? DA runs into financial trouble because they sunk too much money in their project. JB allows DA to move in and pays for some of the bills so DA can continue working on AGA. JB writes a positive preview of AGA. How do you know the positive preview isn't influenced by the relationship? Isn't JB technically a financial investor in AGA? Does this mean JB can't be objective? Would AGA be a game covered by this press outlet if not for the relationship with the journalist? DA and JB break up. DA completes AGA. JB gives a negative/positive review of AGA If Positive: Is the review accurate, or is JB inclined to write positively about it because they'd hyped it during the relationship? If Negative: Is the review accurate, or is JB inclined to write negatively about it because the relationship soured? Would AGA be a game covered by this press outlet if not for the relationship with the journalist? DA works on the sequel, AGA2. When it comes out, JB pans/promotes it. If Promote: Is the review accurate, or is JB inclined to write positively about it because they'd hyped it during the relationship? If Pan: Is the review accurate, or is JB inclined to write negatively about it because the relationship soured? Would AGA be a game covered by this press outlet if not for the relationship with the journalist? You see the problem begins to arise about whether you can trust the news outlet to be unbiased as much as it can, and point out what biases it has when it can't be neutral.

No problem with the thighs, but what's up with adventuring in heels?

I was halfway through my first run when POE came out so I shelved it. Probably restart with GOTY comes out (assuming I ever finish POE...)

Is this RPG only? Do action and roguelikes count? Does it not count kickstarters that only partially funded the game (like Divine Divinity)?

Correct, California is not a right to work state, so you can be compelled to join a union and pay dues for their benefits even if you don't agree with the union/union heads/direction of the union or else lose your job.

Yeah, as True Neutral mentions, the original comic origin was that Thor was Donald Blake, a surgeon who found a staff that was actually Thor's hammer enchanted. Later this was retconned into Odin creating the Donald Blake human to house Thor's spirit to teach him humility. The current Thor is actually post Ragnarok (which is cyclical in the Marvel U) where he re-incarnated or some jazz. Sorry, but past history shows - quite clearly - the superhero comic buyers aren't going to buy a new character. BTW they relaunched Thor when the new Thor happened, so old Thor wasn't shoved out of an existing comic - the old comic was cancelled. Neither were the above examples which were all new series with new leads based on older characters.

DC Comics has moved to California just to avoid being found at their old address during this crisis. They would have never allowed Marvel to create a female Thor if they were still at their 666 Fifth Avenue address. From a story and Marvel myth persepctive, the hammer says "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor", which in practice has granted the power of Thor to whoever holds it (Beta Ray Bill, Natasha Romonov, etc). Its perfectly in keeping with the title to make a changeover. Heck they did it for several years with Thunderstrike. Unfortunately a reality of comic books is that new characters don't sell for Marvel and DC. The best selling "new" comic book characters are iterations of existing characters. Whether its the new Ms. Marvel, Thor, the new Blue Beetle, the new Dr. Fate, or whatever, comic companies are going to try to tie a character to the familiar - not try to build something never seen before. As I recall the author has said that this was part of his plan with the title and the relaunch wasn't his idea; its a continuation of what he'd been doing and was originally intended to be held in the existing Thor title. Marvel decided to make a big deal of it, but the story didn't change so...yeah Thor Odinson is in the book. Its a bit of a moot point since Odinson is dead (as of the last couple of Avengers titles - where he was using the hammer of THORR, and then his axe again when he proved worthy and couldn't weild the hammer of THORR) and even further moot now that the Marvel Universe is destroyed and we're due to having a a plethera of Thors around in Battleworld.

Yeah! What were they thinking with female Thor! There's never been a lady Thor. Well except if you count Thor who was forced by Odin to be a woman as punishment in Earth X. Well then lets object because the role of Thor has never been passed on. Except Beta Ray Bill. And Natasha Romonoff. And Rogue. And the What If? story where Jane Foster got the hammer and became Thor. And Thunderstrike. I haven't even mentioned Thor-GIrl and Thor's alternate universe daughter Thena have I...? Seriously, the book - other than the fight with Crusher Creel - has actually been pretty good, IMO.

Most of the Star Trek games I've played (mostly in the 1980s) were terrible (IMO). Are the ones on GOG any good?

Its not like you can't have space midgets and space elves. In fact, I think that was a requirement for sci-fi in the 20s, 30s and 40s.

Really depends on the local levels. Right-to-work states generally speaking have very weak unions (or none at all).

While I'm not sure I'd agree with "This is public shaming for actions you incorrectly think are wrong", I do think some of the "flags" on the website are highly subjective and seem to ascribe motives that aren't necessarily supported by the text. If you look at the Arthur Giles link, they claim "Famously gave a much-lower than average score to Bayonetta 2, due to its “blantant over-sexualization”, with the apparent intent of generating hits through outrage." Without knowing what the average score is, we have to accept on face value (I went and looked, the metacritic is 91, but the lowest score from the game sites is actually not the Polygon one (those come from LEVEL and Game Revolution). If you calculate the mean of the scores, you get 91 and a standard deviation of 8. This means that 75 (the score on the Polygon review) does seem to be an outlier to the data set at first glance. But then is it because it is an outlier are are there too many 100 scores skewing the data? And even still 75 is, I believe, within 2 standard deviations from the mean - so not impossible as this is where 95% of a normal curves data would exist.1 Second how can you justify "apparent intent of generating hits through outrage? First off it assumes a motive that can't, ultimately, be known (unless Giles admits to it). Second the title of the story is BAYONETTA 2 REVIEW: HEVEN AND HELL. You'd think a review designed to generate outrage would have a more incendiary title - BAYONETTA 2: THIS IS WHY WE HAVE EATING DISORDERS or BAYONETTA 2: WHY DO DEVELOPERS WANT ME TO GET CLOSE-UP AND PERSONAL WITH VIRTUAL CROTCH or something. And while, yes, there is a bit more editorializing in the review than I think necessary personally, I don't see their summary statement as "Bayonetta 2's blatant over-sexualization puts a big dent in an otherwise great game" as being unrepresentative of the issues the reviewer clearly addresses in the text of the review. Unless you're arguing that there can't be differing opinions on a game, then I - and again this is me - feel like it is a bit of a stretch to argue an intent in the review And frankly I don't see any provocative statements in the review. While I think that section that is most relevant to the discussion - "The camera doesn't look at Bayonetta — it leers at her. This is frequently provided as an implicit reward for doing well...It's sexist, gross pandering, and it's totally unnecessary. Bayonetta 2 needs prurient rewards even less than the original Bayonetta did, because the on-screen chaos you can wreak through skilled play is infinitely more satisfying." is clumsily written (I think what he means to say is "The camera doesn't look at Bayonetta — it leers at her. That it ties into learning and executing successfully harder to accomplish, stronger attacks makes it seem an implicit reward for improving your skills as a player. But Bayonetta 2 doesn't need such prurient rewards as the on-screen chaos you can wreak through skilled play is infinitely more satisfying than any titillation the game could provide") I'm not sure it exists so that outraged mobs will rush to the article (clickbait) or even incite much of a stir on Twitter. 1It may be worth pointing out that the fact that reviews are capped at 100 does skew the normal curve, so this is kind of "general example" stuff.

Who would be an inappropriate woman president? Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann for starters? I get what you're saying. You're using inappropriate to mean "not suitable" whereas I was trying to read it as "not proper".

Who would be an inappropriate woman president?

Still want to know more about the gameplay.

There's really no need to complete the set unless you want to. The only thing that would ever be an issue is you can't create/play toy boxes based on themes/game elements that only exist in what you don't have (which I think isn't too often the case excepting specific skins) with respect to gameplay. But there is always more stuff coming to get - plus Disney stuff is collectible on its own, so I've heard of Disney collectors buying the Disney classic stuff (say the Mickey, Donald or Princess characters) without buying the game / non-Disney stuff. That can be a headache itself (which I think is par for the course - heard of the same thing with Skylanders). I've heard Skylanders is pretty fun too (I think unlike DI, you have one game and each figure unlocks specific locations in the game there). Not clear on where Lego Dimensions is going with their TtL game.

Its a "Toys to Life" game system (similar in thought to Skylanders). You buy a toy, put it on a platform and the character the toy represents appears in the game. In infinity you can build simple games (typically action, platform and racing) and each toy and each set can unlock things in the toy box to facilitate building. Toy sets and character are usually reserved for those characters (so a Star Wars character can be used in a Toy Box or in the Star Wars Set. A Marvel character can be used in a Toy Box or a Marvel Set. But the Marvel character can't be used in a Star Wars set or vice versa. They can meet in the Toy Box - and besides creating your own you can download a bunch from Disney that fans make and upload).

I honestly can't fathom achievements. I don't see why anyone even likes them, much less tries to collect them. They range from "can't miss" (DOOR TO ADVENTURE: You opened your first door! Congratulations) to nigh impossible (MIDNIGHTER: kill 100000000000000000 opponents between 11:59 pm and 12:01 pm to unlock). That said, since people seem to care a lot about it for whatever reason that seems alien and foreign to me, it probably would have been better to not lock the retail customer away from 100%.

Were they straight up born without reproductive organs? I guess that's true. Romantic love and familial bonds should really use different words rather than share the word "love". Moving the goalposts... you asked if people had heard of eunuchs being in love and now add in "But they must be born it!" when people responded in the positive. Many eunuchs were made eunuchs before puberty, effectively preventing them from developing into men and yet they still could have sexual desires for others (which seems to be what you really mean when you say love, not love itself), close enough? People can also have romantic love without engaging in sex as well, some people just mistake sexual desire for love. Sexual desire seems to be the different word for the kind of love you are thinking off, so there's the different word for ya, desire. I can totally see a Godlike travelling the world for another like themselves who can love the way they do. Maybe they even feel emotions differently from the others? I know I missed most of the boat on this, but if memory serves me, castrato Giovanni Velluti was well known for his sexual misadventures (often with wives whose husbands didn't realize that him having been castrated before puberty didn't mean he couldn't have sex).

Can we eat doughnuts if we do like it, or do we have to not like it to eat doughnuts now...?

I liked Ep 3 on Bates Motel (I'm not a binge watcher - I have no time - so I get only one episode a week unless something special happens). Seeing some of Norman's problems surfacing was interesting. Agents of SHIELD - man this isn't going to end well for anybody, I don't think.

To no ones surprise, Disney Infinity 3.0's launch is centered around Star Wars: https://infinity.disney.com/news/3204/disney-infinity-3-revealed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWnA-yXUmJI

Whedon Recalls "Unpleasant" "Age Of Ultron" Memories, Quits Twitter: http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/whedon-recalls-unpleasant-age-of-ultron-memories-quits-twitter

If Eora speaks language "A" and language "A" has a relationship with language "B" and the relationship between language "A" and "B" is equivalent to say, the relationship between English and Cornish/Irish, what's the issue with representing Eora langauge "A" and "B" with English and Cornish/Irish?

I don't find that funny. :/