• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by BTCollins8

  1. I might give it a go then. You know, this time next year, when I've finally finished the Witcher 3
  2. How is AC: Origins? I liked Syndicate but it's really the only AC games I've played. I thought about picking Black Flag up recently. Though I probably don't need to get any new games since I'm still working through the Witcher.
  3. I think my favorite recent development is Witch using anime gifs to get Balrog to look at pms Speaking of, Czar, I’ll respond later today. Finishing up my last final today so after that I’ll be free to get some writing done that isn’t essay driven.
  4. And at the end of the day, I agree with the idea that the internet is a utility and should be regulated as such. In this day and age it’s almost necessary to things like finding a job, running a business, etc. So if anything, I think the current net neutrality rules should be changed or amended, not totally repealed and done away with.
  5. You’re right about that. I think the general idea is the same, though, and while it’s not a totally accurate example, the idea that an ISP could cut up and package the internet is scary and something I’d like to avoid. As far as protecting small businesses go, I’m more worried about this stuff than up and coming ISPs.
  6. The problem I have with the argument that the FTC can and will ensure the ISPs adhere to the rules is that the FTC can only bring suits and fines against the ISPs, and I don’t think that’s a good enough deterrent to the practices repealing net neutrality allows. We’ve seen the government issue fines against companies that break the law before, but these companies are worth billions and a few million dollar fine is more than worth the money they’ll make before the FTC can catch them. Not to mention it’s a purely reactive body, and I personally prefer a proactive approach so I support this sort of regulation from the FCC.
  7. I think it’s no coincidence that Comcast did extensive lobbying for the repeal of net neutrality. Companies generally don’t undertake that sort of lobbying out of the kindness of their own heart. They see it as a way to make money by charging extra for access to services people use. Not to mention they did engage in practices forbidden by net neutrality prior to its institution, such as AT&T slowing FaceTime connections so people would by different cellular packages, or Comcast slowing down downloading speeds. No, it wasn’t on the scale that people discuss now in attempting to preserve net neutrality, but I don’t think for a second those companies will stop with minor things. As we’ve seen with EA, companies will do what the want to make money. Backlash might prevent the most egregious practices, but I doubt the attention span of most people is long enough to sustain protests that would prevent exploitation of a non neutral internet. The way I see it, better to be safe than sorry. I don’t see any reason to take a chance on this turning into the worst case scenario.
  8. I think the potential impact of it is huge, but it remains to be seen how it’ll actually be implemented. I don’t have a particularly hopeful view, though, given given we know companies (like EA, for instance) will do whatever they can to make money. And I know the loss of net neutrality in Portugal has resulted in some insane internet packaging. Like having to pay for a social media internet package and a streaming services one. Honestly, while the impact may not be huge, I see no reason not to have net neutrality except that it’s what the lobbyists want. The potential downfalls far outweigh any sort of benefit to the consumer. Especially those, like Colonel, who don’t have other internet options.
  9. Avocados are God’s gift to man for they enable guacamole. And they’re alright on their own but GUAC.
  10. I had a professor who studies Germany, especially the Weimar Republic and the Nazi Era and he was pretty adamant that he doesn’t think Hitler was a military genius at all and that much of the German military’s success was because they were more modern than the French and Polish. Since Hitler did fail to follow up at Dunkirk, foolishly fought in Hungary (I think? Maybe it was Romania) delaying the start of the Russian campaign and basically sinking it before it began. I was pretty persuaded. While he did build up the German military that wasn’t something he solely did and afterwards he didn’t deploy and use it like a military genius. And yeah, Caesar massacred the Celtic tribes in Gaul. The Hardcore History guy just had his most recent podcast about that very subject and it was titled “A Celtic Genocide” I think, because of the level of destruction by the Romans and Caesar.
  11. So, this came across my Twitter timeline today. It uses a version of a baseball statistical formula to calculate who was the best general of all time. It looks specifically at the tactics of the generals' battles, and not the overall strategy of their campaigns, so be aware of that going in. Even if you don't agree with everything, and it's missing some people, it's cool nonetheless.
  12. I was very happy I convinced her to go to Kaer Morhen and give me the research. I actually did that quest line before most of the Baron and Crone stuff. I was worried about how it might end once I realized what she was doing, but I’m glad things resolved how they did. Also, my Geralt didn’t sleep with her, since he had just found Yennefer again. I thought that would be pretty messed up. Plus, I thought Geralt should have a friend in Keira, and sleeping with her didn’t feel right. And of course after he realized it was all a trick to get the research I think that was the right call. But I’m glad it ended amicably. Her going to Radovid wouldn’t have ended well, I think.
  13. My thinking was that, since the Baron was also going to tell me some information about Ciri, and that based on the location of the Bog and Crow’s Perch she likely was with the Baron last, the Crone’s information wasn’t necessary. So I was more concerned with saving the kids since I knew the Baron would have info to give as well. Plus, I thought the nature spirit wouldn’t be as bad as the Crones, even if it did kill the villagers, though now that doesn’t seem true. And while I found the Bloody Baron interesting, I didn’t exactly like him, so I was more upset that Anna died than anything. But the kids were saved and their family got a goodbye which is more than most people get so I can’t say it was a bad ending. Just a damn hard choice I wasn’t expecting to make, and wasn’t expecting to have such far reaching consequences. Lol, this is such a good game. I can’t believe I waited this long to play it. And I still haven’t even crossed the Pontar or gone to Skellige!
  14. So, I just finished Return to Crookback Bog in the Witcher 3 and...
  15. By resolution I mean more than just the radio or tv report or whatever it was where the politician or pastor denies the rumors. I didn't expect them to get taken down by Marty and Cohle but something more than what felt like a throwaway line. Even if it was just a fruitless confrontation, that would've felt more like a resolution. I do think the point was that the evil was too embedded to be pulled out, but I would've like to see some attempt to do so, or some confrontation toward that end. I don't think they needed to succeed at taking them down for it to have been better resolved. Ignore him. Authorial intent, imo, only extends so far. If its not in the story, I think that's a purposeful and meaningful indication that you can interpret things in different ways. If they had felt it important to have it all be naturally explained, they would've explicitly stated as such.
  16. I don't think you have to accept it. They way I remember the season, it always felt equally plausible that the events were natural or supernatural. Regardless of the dude's intent. I never really took issue with the lack of confirmation, in the show, one way or another. Though I'm not as infatuated with the show having to be one way or another. I think it works well with both interpretations. My issues was the lack of resolution with the pastor dude and the politicians involved in the cult, and the fact that that plotline wasn't wrapped up in a satisfying way.
  17. That dude in Vizima?! He kicked my ass too. I’m definitely using higher the Gwent difficulty now though. It’s way too easy with this deck.
  18. I usually just light the gas on fire. I guess using Aard is probably safer, though, since I have hurt myself on occasion just blowing it up. Thanks guys! I’m glad I can finally join in on all the Witcher discussion. Or at least start to, since this game will probably take a long while to finish.
  19. Oh yeah, I definitely loot everything. I just crafted the Griffin Witcher gear, which I can't wear yet, but I will once I level up. I've been rolling with light armor and have the ability or perk or whatever that gives me a 25% critical hit bonus for each piece of light armor I have. That and the sword I have that does extra critical hit damage means I was rolling and dodging like a mofo and getting really nasty critical hit damage. But it can be deadly really easily if you don't dodge right. I usually like to play heavy armor characters that just tank damage but I have liked dodging and getting those critical hits. And yeah, I learned that about the weapons, Doc. It seems every time I get a new one I end up replacing it within a level. Which is fine, tbh, since it means I get to use lots of different weapon styles. Also, I really like the Quen sign. Especially with the upgrade that makes it explode and knock people back when they hit it. I haven't delved a lot into alchemy yet, though I do make sure to collect as many ingredients as I can. I'll probably start delving into it, since I started to with the Jenny of the woods contract after she kicked my ass a couple times. I made sure to hunt down the ingredients for specter oil after that. And yeah, especially with light armor, having the health potions will definitely help. I will say about the monsters, nothing was as scary as running into a fiend or whatever those antler wearing dudes are. I tried to fight it, took one attack that nearly killed me, and then barely outran his wolves. And of course, I always buy Gwent cards lol. Unless its a Poor ******* Infantry. My Northern Realms deck is stacked with siege engines and that leader that lets me double that damage, plus three Blue Strip Commandos. I wrecked that little shit Haddy in one try. Haven't completed any other decks enough to use them yet. But I do play Gwent every chance I get. It's really easy but fun nonetheless.
  20. The first time I played I completed one or two quests but didn't get to the griffin fight. I don't think it was being overwhelmed, since I had seen my brother play some and knew how expansive the game was. For me I think I bounced off the combat initially. When I first played it, I didn't really know how to time parries and dodges and rolls and such. Which isn't hard, but if you don't take some effort to do that, you're going to get continually beat up. Honestly, I didn't really give it much of a chance. Only played like an hour or so. I always knew I'd come back to it eventually, but I think it didn't grab me and the ease and rhythm of combat wasn't what I was used to from other games. I always expected I'd figure it out and play it at some point, which I finally have. On that note, any tips from y'all that have played it? I know I'm still not sure what the difference different armor actually makes besides the armor bonuses it provides. Any benefit to light/medium/heavy versus the others? Anyway, I'm enjoying it a ton. Especially the Witcher contracts. I think I could play an entire game that was just hunting down monsters and fighting them with the Witcher mechanics. Though I was saddened to see that a basilisk and a cockatrice are just reskinned versions of each other. Give me some monster variation! Still, fighting most anything is way more satisfying than most other games
  21. Not to mention the development of tech like engines, integrating those for each game, longer and more advanced games, and bigger games in general necessitates the need for longer development times, more employees, and thus higher costs. I really don’t see how costs of making games could’ve stayed the same. The microtransactions obviously have greed as a motivitation, but I also think there’s more to it than just that. EA is definitely trying to get as much profit as possible but I do think we’re seeing, in general, video game companies looking for ways to make money besides base game prices, even good companies, which to me indicates something larger than just profit motives behind it.
  22. I mean, the price of games has been consistent regardless of inflation, so $60 doesn’t buy as much profit as it used to. Though I think games forgoing hard copies is one way they’ll stave off increasing the price of games. Keeping the $60 price on digital only copies means they’ll make more profit that helps them keep up with inflation. And not rock the boat by increasing game prices. But I think it’s not bullshit that, unless they start cutting costs some other way, video game companies are going to look to find some way to make more money. DLC and microtransactions are just another way of increasing the prices of games to make up for rising costs. I think game companies would’ve turned to this model sooner if there has been a need, but them doing so now I think speaks to their need, or that they feel the need, to make more money. It could be simple greed but even companies who don’t operate on those principles sell DLC and whatnot, so I don’t think it’s that.
  23. I think there will always be single player games, or at least games that have almost total single player content with marginal online content. Games like Witcher 3, Skyrim, Breath of the Wild, the Uncharted Series, The Last of Us, and more recently Horizon Zero Dawn have all done well enough with limited or no online play that those games will never totally go away. I see the prevalence of online games or online components, and micro transactions, a reaction to the fact that video game development costs have gone up while the price of video games really hasn't. Selling DLC, and trying to reach as wide an audience as possible through more casual content, is about trying to make profit while still not exceeding the $60 price tag. Companies like EA are especially egregious in this regard, imo, because they're so large a company and have shareholders and executives who not only want profit but growth, so they will do almost anything to make money. Other like CDPR are smaller and less beholden to those more corporate ideas. Not to mention they've shown that they can turn out single player games and turn a healthy profit. Bethesda is hard to place, since they're privately owned. While they aren't beholden to stockholders, they do seem to be especially greedy lately. The optimist in me wants to think they're trying to expand their brand so that their next game is a big success, but its more likely they are just trying to make as much money as possible. Maybe its about funding their next game as well if they've had some development issues. Who knows. Anyway, as long as single player games sell well, we'll keep getting them. Based on the backlash against the only multiplayer Battlefront and to the microtransactions in the sequel, I think we'll keep getting single player stuff.
  24. I like and have used a decent amount of the lore from Daggerfall, and enjoy going through the game’s books and such to uncover stuff I think would be cool to incorporate. But the gameplay definitely hasn’t.