• 0 Posts
  • 15 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • I mean looking at it upon first glance, it looks fine?

    I mean, what’s “10 years old” anyway? “Vampire Survivors” came out in 2023, has retro graphics and plays really well. Arkham City came out in 2011 and still holds up well graphically today, especially considering Gotham knights is a thing lmao.

    I’m not too crazy about the look of the game, but it has to play well. Starfield feels like an old game to play because all those loading screens aren’t something I’m expecting in 2023. The cumbersome inventory management and poor decisions make it feel like it came out over 10 years ago.

    A lot of scrutiny on this title. Any criticism will be well deserved, good or bad.








  • This. I rarely if ever saw a bug, even on release.

    My gripes with the game had more to do with the features we were missing: a metro system, character customisation (hair stylist, tattoo artists, visible cyberware modification, cyberpsychosis, car customisation…), a gang reputation system, meaningful lifepath repercussions, like being able to join a gang as a streetkid, or own a cool car/apartment as corpo, or have your own custom tricked out car as a nomad…

    The game feels much better than it did - driving was not great at release, and the perks you unlock now actually feel impactful and meaningful, but I still would have liked some of those features included.


  • I don’t think so, personally.

    I can’t imagine Elon spending over 40bn to buy up a company that he then desperately needs to enact measures in order to recoup the lost money in ways that just dig him a bigger hole.

    I think he’s really that dumb. He tried to devalue the company prior to purchasing by saying bots are rampant etc. The case against him said he needed to buy the company at the original price.

    Until this point, his reputation had him as some kind of infallible tech messiah, so in order to not lose face, he bought it at the original price, knowing his plan backfired and he had to borrow billions in order to complete the sale.

    Every decision he made after just attracted ridicule and caused the platform to fall further into a heaping mess. Once his reputation was revealed to be a petulant child, he just doubled down and destroyed it.

    Elon, it turns out, just isn’t as clever as he (or many of his backers/fans) thought…





  • This… Isn’t the answer.

    More to the point, every answer to this question is talking about something completely different. Vader was distracted. Vader was only clued into Leia’s existence after Luke thought about her. Vader had too much on his plate…!

    But this answer, even among all the above, is reaching at things that just make no sense. By your logic, every force user would be crippled at the battle of Geonosis, with hundreds of jedi and sith present.

    Qui-Gon and a young Obi-Wan took on Darth Maul, where the latter was able to use his ability without seemingly any hindrance at all. Similarly with Obi-Wan and Anakin against Count Dooku. When Yoda steps in, it’s 3 jedi against Dooku. There’s no evidence of Dooku bring weakened, as he matches Yoda in force abilities without much effort. By your logic, the sith in both encounters should have been weakened. That is clearly not the case.

    The simple and obvious truth is this: at the time of writing, Lucas never intended for Leia to be Luke’s sister (hence their kiss) and so, there simply wasn’t anything for Darth Vader to sense. Retconning that and then adding in some wishy-washy explanation just trashes the credibility of the franchise.