tedinthepaint

why does this site always seem to diminish negative public backlash? Gamers complaining about concord were labeled haters, now people not even being vitriolically negative, but just disliking a video en masse are made fun of. They're literally the people the product is intended for. If they don't like it, what exactly is the acceptable format for them to express that?

surprised this article header wasn't "The haters won" XD

I LOVE this game, but 9/10 for this expansion is too much. I become a cutscene skipper for how boring it was and how formulaic the presentation was. The end game content might end up being superb (loving crafting right now, readying up for extremes), but it was a slog getting to the fun trials and dungeons.

Helldivers 2 and it's not even close (so far). Just bought Rebirth, though, so maybe if I ever stop having so much fun diving with the boys it can usurp the king.

This actually looks interesting once they showed the gameplay, but man that monotone detached presentation of characters and world was difficult for me to get through. Let us figure that stuff out ourselves!

One thing I don't understand that admittedly might be some etiquette of journalism above my head: Pushsquare is already drawing attention to the spoilers to many who may have not known, and they want readers to engage in a discussion that presumably might revolve around the specific nature of the spoilers; so at this point, just provide a link to the spoilers for those who are interested.

It seems like such an arbitrary line to not cross when you're publicizing it. And obviously, I can google it (and already have), but if you're already going to get involved with spreading the word, just go all the way and give people the choice.

Can someone describe in a couple sentences what they like visually about the game? By no means is it ugly and I'm not trying to hate on it, I just don't get what makes it so special in that regard.

I never got into buying variations of essentially the same hardware for anything and my wallet is so glad for it.

Going back to Essential from Extra. It was a good tier, but it's that increase is just too much.

I don't WANT to want this, but when I'm on a gaming session, I feel guilty leaving the partner out to dry without the big TV. This would let her stream a show while I'm next to her getting some dailies done in ff14.

I just want a good co-op DC game p l e a s e.

@blockfight I think you're right. It's moreso the idea that using they when referring to an individual is a new concept tied to trans people that I'm arguing against.

@AlesXXVI @Jaz007 The usage guide for "they" as singular pronoun can be found here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/they. Is there some other dictionary you're using?

@Stocksy I don't know if it's been a while since English, but "they" isn't a non-binary pronoun, it refers to a person without invoking gender. Example: "How's your son liking their new playstation?" "oh, they love it!"
The parent isn't misgendering their own son, they're just using language in the way we've been able to use it for quite a while.

@theGoodChap I feel like you're coming at this in reasonably good faith, and I know the comment section isn't the place to disagree on this (but I'll do so anyway ):

it sounds like from your explanation, you're coming at this from your personal experience, which is fair because that's usually how we engage with the world. Maybe you don't have a strong attachment to your gender (how you present, how it influences your behavior/perceive yourself), and generally you don't see a difference between being born a male and being treated/roughly seen as a man in society as a result. All of these things are perfectly normal, fine, and we share basically all of these sentiments.

I think you'd also be able to agree that there ARE people who do strongly associate their gender with their identity, even taking trans people outside of the conversation. Someone could easily not remove being a girl or being a guy from how they view themselves to varying degrees (sometimes to harmful degrees, with a need to be perceived as hyper-masculine or for a woman that could not remove motherhood from their identity and feels lesser if they can't procreate).

I feel like if you can understand this concept, which I don't think is controversial, the concept of gender being important as part of someone's identity is probably not hard to grasp. It's just sometimes it seems that gender in someone's head does not match up with how they are seen/expected to be seen in broader society.

While I agree with you that there is no definitive male or female feeling, and trans people would probably also agree with us, there are broad expectations of how a man and a woman behave in relation to each other, and it differs depending on the region and time period. It is this difference that makes it easy for them to separate sex and gender, acknowledging that a male is born with certain genitalia/body differences, but the idea of a what it means to be a man could differ depending on the values of the society they inhabit. I think an example of this in the west at least is that while a man could or should be expected to be strong and providing, we have broadly worked to amend what it means to be "strong," emphasizing that being vulnerable does not equate weakness, as we see there is a disproportionate effect on men's' mental health in their pursuit in being perceived as strong (men's high suicide rates being tied to their broad feelings of loneliness due to not being afforded as many opportunities to connect to other people as women can).

Anyway, thanks for being civil. And especially for not acting like your first amendment right is being stripped away because they're getting comments removed on a review page, some of these users are trippin.

watching everyone patting themselves on the back for thinking they're saying anything other than values are subject to change when anonymous people online are varying degrees of mean to them. Very agreeable!

@SolaceCreed I don't think we disagree on much, but just have to say TWD deviated from the comics in season 1 quite a bit already with the dixon brothers and the CDC. I think the decline in the show was not because it did its own thing, but rather because they lost Frank Darabont as a writer in that season 2 timeframe you mentioned.

I feel like the school of thought of not moving the plot forward = bad is ruinous for a TV show of this quality. The whole thing made a connection (explicitly) to our MC with his moral need to find a purpose other than survive, while fleshing out more of the world during the initial outbreak, turned something that is regular seen as a joke (people who prep for the end of the world) as an unexpected asset, had some of the best acting for characters that only exist for one episode, and still ended with a forward motion towards why the season can continue (car). I am glad the show deviated, and hope it continues to do so in slight ways specifically because the game's gameplay aspects will translate to boring horror if the clickers are shown as often as they are in the source material.

Also, the letter was not for the audience, the letter was for Joel who did not see any of the growth in Bill. You could argue that Joel would have taken Ellie with him anyway without the letter, but there is no explicit change/reason for him to do so without the encouragement of his gruff counterpart.

I understand the ps4 games needing to be here, but there's got to be a way to remove duplicate entries aross ps4 and 5.

I've been enjoying it, especially using Jake a lot. Even though his specials might mirror Kirby a bit, his floaty aerial playstyle reminds of Mr. Game & Watch.

Is this just a republished list from last month?

Maybe the tedium of the game got to them, but I haven't read a more depressing tone in a review. Please take some PTO if you need it John lol.