When they stop feeling clean. Why are you all counting days?

I keep my head down. No legal consequences isn’t the same thing as no consequences.

Trump’s pretty crazy but I don’t think he’s “plan to intentionally get grazed by a bullet” crazy.

I can’t think of another game that I like so much and enjoy playing so little. I will spend countless hours creating families and houses and then five minutes playing the actual game before I’m like “oh, right, I hate this” and then I start making another family.

I think this disparity in votes and comments is also hugely affected by how the UI has been changing over the years as well as the destruction of third party apps. The site is now designed in a way where active participation is less encouraged than ever before unless you’re running old reddit on a traditional computer with an ad blocker.

For anybody playing this for the first time, an important piece of advice:

Don’t be a completionist. Leave areas before you’ve done everything in them and don’t do any side quests you’re not interested in.

It’s my least favorite Dragon Age but it got a lot more hate than it deserved because other open world games trained people to play it the boringest way possible.

So, underneath all the dramatic and flowery language, the argument being made seems to be “if the purpose of our biology is to make its own DNA persist, it wouldn’t make sense for biological chimeras to exist; based on the ability of cells to coordinate even with different DNA, the main goal seems to be human cells cooperating to make a general human form.”

This anthropomorphizing of biological building blocks is ridiculous. Cells and DNA are not in competition over who runs the show because they aren’t sapient. And I fully understand that the scientist making this claim understands that on an intellectual level but I mention it because the backbone of this argument is to conflate the literal and the figurative. The only inconsistency in cells being compatible despite having different “bosses” would be an ideological one and, because there isn’t any actual ideology at play, it doesn’t matter whether it’s consistent when attempting to describe it. You’ve proven a metaphor wasn’t literally true, congratulations.

But setting all that aside, this still doesn’t actually function as a counter argument. If we are to accept the premise of DNA’s authority as literal truth, is this function of unrelated cells to be compatible with each other not a logical extension of the DNA’s will? It more benefits the DNA for the organism to be viable even if that means other DNA also persists. It has a greater chance of reproducing itself if it’s not in a corpse.

Not only does the argument hinge on anthropomorphism, it also hinges on this metaphorical entity being self-destructively spiteful.

Lastly, it is downright comical to mention things like “cells know on their own that the heart goes on the left” when making an argument that a different characterization of biology is wrong based on the existence of rare biological edge cases. Some people’s hearts aren’t where hearts normally go. I’d let this kind of thing slide as a simplification of the truth were this not part of calling out exactly the same degree of simplification from someone else as being invalid.

“It’s okay to fail” seems like it would have been a more valuable life lesson than “it feels good to beat a really hard video game” and it concerns me that you’re so okay with the amount of trauma this entertainment product caused him.

The fact that you’re sharing this story of years of repeated meltdowns caused by a video game and calling it an example of games being beneficial is pretty surreal.

There's a warning sign with a silhouette of a deer on it to warn drivers to be on the lookout, and somebody graffitied a little guy riding on its back. It's been that way undisturbed for at least the couple of years since I first noticed it.

I've absolutely died as a result of bad dialogue choices but that's just role playing; sometimes something you might choose to do can only logically result in your death and I, for one, am happy to be given that choice. I've straight up deleted a character profile with lots of progress because there was no in-character way not to do the thing that would kill me in dialogue. That game over is just that character's canonical ending as far as I'm concerned. He couldn't not shit-talk that god, that god couldn't not erase him from existence out of spite. If the game had not provided me with an option to shit-talk the god, I would have been annoyed that none of the dialogue options were true to my character.

I'm ready for a new era in Mario voice acting of an Italian voice actor putting on a cartoonish American accent.

It's a part of my most hated trend in the video game industry: video games that are ashamed to be video games so they try to fool you into thinking they're a more "respectable" art form like TV shows or movies. The mainstream hype we're seeing is probably that it's popular with Naughty Dog fans rather than Final Fantasy fans.

I wish these types of games would at least consistently ape more interesting TV shows and movies. Alan Wake seems like the only one that didn't aspire to be something forgettable. I don't even like Twin Peaks but at least it's an identity.

This game is okay enough that I'm probably going to eventually finish it but I don't think I'd ever feel tempted to start it again even if somehow every other option available to me were objectively worse because at least some of what's left would be memorable enough to care about.

In general, the graphics are roughly the same as FFXIV.

The graphics are apparently deceptively good. Not immediately jaw-dropping for us lay people like the series is known for but more of a technical quality. I thought it was underwhelming on first glance but I admit I enjoy the things that video brings up now that I've started paying attention to them.