• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle



  • Everyone seems to forget the second paragraph of the quote.

    No. The “as long as” does the necessary lifting there. Far-right rhetoric is a denial of reality and of any argument with a complete lack of shame or self-reflection, therefor this second part doesn’t apply.

    There was a time when we thought rational argumentation and logic were good enough to convince, but that has been dead for a few decades, and the US just paid that price.

    signed under duress

    I didn’t ask to be born the point is if you don’t sign the contract you’re not protected by it and you get no benefit, that’s not duress. If you sign it but break it, you pay. No one is forcing you to sign, but if you don’t, you can fuck off.






  • I can’t believe we haven’t learned anything since “it’s about ethics in games journalism”. “It’s about monetization in AAA games” now, apparently.

    I totally agree that there has been a hate campaign about DEI right-wing complains, but there’s two subjects that came to head at the same time here because it was on the same big title:

    Star Wars Outlaw and AC Shadows had the same business model, Star Wars showed that it failed, and Ubisoft got spooked and said they’d have another look at the monetization model for AC. People did get pissed at both games when their business models with passes and editions everywhere were revealed.

    It’s just that AC also had at the same time the matter of racist and misogynist hate because of the protagonists. I don’t think this happened on Star Wars, and the fact that it failed too shows that it isn’t the only complain people are having against Ubisoft.

    Apparently the monetization guy is stepping on the minority hate campaign subject, he’s the one conflating the two problems here just because his job title. We shouldn’t forget that Ubisoft did pull an infuriating and deplorable stunt with that monetization model.


  • Oh Luke was definitely asking her about their birth mother, knowing that it was the same woman. The question here is that Leia didn’t know what he was talking about. Since she gives him an answer about someone who died when Leia was young, maybe she’s just thinking that Bail remarried later.

    Before the prequel trilogy came out, it could have been their birth mother she was talking about, and she just didn’t know that Luke was her brother; but after ep 3 came out, and we see Padme die, we have to assume Leia was adopted by the Organas, but Bail’s wife died when Leia was young and he later remarried, and Leia is thinking about that woman after Padme and before Bail’s new wife, thinking that she is her real mom.

    And yeah, it’s completely possible that Lucas originally intended for Padme to be the one Leia was talking about, but the point is, the movies don’t actually specify if she meant Padme or the middle wife, so it can still be explained.


  • That detail wasn’t in any of the movies so the line in ep 6 still makes sense the way you thought. I’m pretty sure anyone would assume that’s what she meant, since we never hear that she knew she was adopted. Whoever made Bail’s wife die in the explosion of Alderaan is the one who messed up, or Lucas ignored that addition when making episode I.




  • Uruanna@lemmy.worldtoGames@lemmy.worldLegend of Zelda
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’ve been playing the series since LttP. Twilight Princess is my top, for presentation and storytelling.

    I feel like Skyward Sword tried to repeat that, but the dungeons and style / atmosphere of the world of TP still come out on top (even though I’m not very much into gothic style and furries). I think SS is way too cartoonish and happy-go-lucky for a world where the surface has been abandoned to the demons and yet everyone who lives there is cool (gorons, kiwis, moles, proto-Zora), that’s a massive tonal dissonance between the narration and the actual environment and it just takes me out.

    The next ones on my top list are Minish Cap and Link Between Worlds.


  • Mythology is not a monolith. We’re talking 3000+ years of cultural evolution across multiple cities that united and separated multiple times, each having their own local cult that rose to prominence or got supplanted by a different one.

    When some of them got together and overlapped, they might have taken different facets of “death”: Osiris is not strictly a god of death itself but a judge of your soul, and grants eternal life in death, while Anubis was a god of funerary rites and graves, so the physical aspect of handling dead bodies.

    When a city took prevalence over another, either because the pharaoh set up shop there or because a temple in that city became more famous and gained influence, that city’s major cult could overshadow other gods worshiped in other cities and take over their duties.

    Then there were bigger gods that got cults that split into different aspects, like how Hathor and Sekhmet come from the same goddess but Sekhmet specialized in bloody war and the sun burning in the desert (an aspect she took from her father, a more general sun god) while Hathor specialized in motherhood.

    Other aspects are passed around in the same way, starting with the role of sun, there are countless aspects of the sun that were embodied in different gods. Even the scarab is an aspect of the sun - because it emerges fully matured from the dungball of its parent the same way the sun comes out from the underworld in the morning, so there was a god for that. Death is a major aspect that remained a big constant in Egyptian religion, that’s why those two are seen the most often.

    If you look at which city becomes the center of Egypt’s rule as time goes on through the different kingdoms and intermediate periods, and check which major temple is in that city, you see which cult takes over more duties.


  • I know what you mean, but Nintendo is a pretty bad example to illustrate that sentiment. I mean, they totally do corporate crap to benefit them and not the players obviously, but the Zelda series is literally built around the gimmicks of the console. They start thinking about a gimmick, either on the console and / or how to turn that into a gameplay gimmick, and then they make a Zelda game around that. OoT had the rumble pack and then tried to do Ura Zelda that was supposed to be the system seller for the DD64 - but that blew up and was salvaged between Master Mode and Majora’s Mask. The GameCube had Four Swords with the connection to the GBA and the multiplayer. The Wii had Skyward Sword with the motion thing, the Wii U had the separate tablet. The DS then the 3DS weren’t too relevant for Zelda but they tried, and other games did rely on it.

    I’m not saying it’s a fact for the whole series, but Nintendo is particularly famous for developing a gimmick console and then building games around that, so yes, the physical console is actually relevant to the game you want to play it on, you’d be hard pressed to port that elsewhere and emulators are always weird and have a lot of work to adapt into something that makes sense on a single screen with a basic gamepad.