6,297 karma · joined May 25, 2021
The catacombs are just a smudgy mess with a couple of uninteresting ennemies and a mid-boss without any worthwhile patterns. The depth is just reskinned old ennemies you have to plod through one after the other before what’s probably the worst boss in the soul games. Even the better areas like Duke’s Archive, Crystal Cave or New Londo are inferiorly designed retread of previous ideas. The true genius of the game - the looping-on-itself level design - is over and you spend your time in this very bland linear areas wishing it was over already.
Honestly if the game stopped after fighting Orstein and Smough, it would be a better game overall.
The DLC is good again however. You can tell FromSoft got additional budget for it.
PS:T was a cut above the other cRPGs of its time mainly because it had adequate writing and an engaging story when most other cRPGs were trite. Still everything after Raven’s maze is just average until the ending where it gets good again and the gameplay outside of dialogue is frankly uninteresting. It’s in a lot of way like the original Dark Soul whose last half is so aweful I’m not sure the awesome first one is enough to redeem the game.
PS:T has now been bested by plenty of modern cRPGs. I’m not sure it’s worth revisiting considering how long it is.
I don’t understand why they felt the need to engage so much with app providers and be so childish about the whole thing. They just had to assume they were yielding the power they have over the platform and that’s how things were going to be from on now, no long explanation needed. They could still be communicating this way actually and it would sound much more honest and serious that what they are doing currently.
As of now the whole thing is a master class in how not to communicate.
The US Justice Department sued Google in 2020 and is asking for pretty much the same disinvestment for pretty much the same reasons. The EU is trailing the US by two years here.
I'm eagerly awaiting the trove of patriotic comments which will undoubtedly follow the posting of such an article and will most likely entirely miss the point as usual.
Misogyny is not prejudice. It also simply is dislike or contempt for women as a gender. Something which is clearly on display throughout this whole page.
It’s kind of untrue nowadays. Married people get divorced. People split. Plenty are not interested in marriage.
As a data point, I am a currently single average looking and averagely successful guy with no intention of ever getting married (I will probably settle into a long term relationship at some point but I’m not planning to in the near term) and who has dates (as much as such a thing exists here) semi-regularly when I feel like it. I have nothing particularly bad to say about the experience. At its heart, it’s just meeting someone new. It’s not particularly complicated or difficult hence my puzzlement.
A casual reading lends me to think that this is because this place skews rather young.
We probably should readjust what we consider normal to something veering further from the past years average and prepare for more extreme scenarios.
Also we probably should keep working on managing our emission of greenhouse gas to avoid things getting even worse.
As an aside, I don’t get all the people loudly expressing being depressed about the graphs and whatever. This is in line with predictions. People knew that was going to happen. It’s pretty useless to bemoan things which are unavoidable.
Did you consider that maybe the reason this proposal was written was because this mutation was the most likely way this kind of virus could mutate to infect humans?
I don’t understand why people keep throwing around all kind of unsubstantiated facts like if they suddenly made things clearer.
The facts are not that complicated. Could the pandemic be linked to an accidental leak from a gain-of-function study at the Wuhan lab? Most certainly. Do we have evidence that it did? No, we don’t. Could it come from somewhere else? Sure, it can. Was there a properly done inquiry with full collaboration from the lab and the host country? Absolutely not, China was extremely uncooperative and did all it could to control the narrative surrounding the pandemic.
From that, I conclude that it’s highly unlikely we will ever learn anything definitive. Therefor, discussing this is pretty much pointless.
For the official response, it was to be expected. The UN does plenty of compromises with authoritarian countries for the sake of being able to operate. It would have been surprising to see the WHO press China.
It’s about misunderstanding new technology notably machine guns or to be even more correct a military career structure and organisation which prevented people who understood new technologies and try to shake the boat to rise in ranks while putting conservative officers in control of the army.
The reputation of the French tax office is that it is the sole branch of the administration which is actually run correctly. This is not far from the truth imho.
> Oh and there's the surprisingly little known fact that French citizens torched most of the cars and half of the government departments, including Police stations, in Paris (and Marseille, and Lille, and Toulouse, and ...) on a regular basis for 5 years now.
That’s a funny one. My advise is to stop watching Fox News and actually spend some time in France.
Well then I’m being absurd because we are sharing the same planet and the fact remains that they are stupidly burning coal. The fact that they are late to the party doesn’t magically make it stop affecting all of us.
There is no place for virtue signalling here. At some point, some serious pressure will have to be put on countries which are not sorting their shit out or we will all pay the price.
Plus I guess moving to England if you have never been exposed to anything else than the standard American friendliness and uber positiveness might feel alienating.
Not that the US shouldn't also stop burning coal, mind you. Same with Germany.
I think it’s a bit late for what you are proposing however. Most of the world population is quite young.
As you can see the most emitting sector is energy production. That’s mostly driven by countries using coal as energy source and countries with significant oil and gas reserves. It is a lever at the strategical and political level. Same with industry where gains are mostly achieved through regulation.
Construction is direly in need of innovation regarding its emission but unless you want people to sleep in the street remains somewhat unavoidable.
That leaves agricultures where people have a huge role to play by consuming less meat and somewhat transportation (even if that’s actually extremely linked to the offer of effective public transport).
For the rest and as much as I would like to believe in it, most actions I see people doing are actually fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. I’m a bit annoyed by it because it somehow lulls people into thinking they are doing something for the problem while the actual issues stay unaddressed.
Honestly my first guess here is that we are in the presence of a confounding variable. I can somewhat imagine the life style which goes with having to drink two cans of Red Bull everyday. The cause of the sleep problems starting at the beginning of early middle age might actually be found here.
The issue is not really people. The worst emitters are out of reach from us.
It’s good to make people more conscious of their environmental impact but what good does it really make when what is saved is a minute of energy production by the average Chinese coal power plant.