So I know the director of the game has already put to rest that the game will not have an easy mode. I also know the topic will not die. So, as a newly amazed fan of the game, I decided to reason out why Dark Souls 2 should have had an easy mode.
Now, I will say that I died. A lot. And in fact I even put the game down for extended periods because of the difficulty curve, the lack of guidance, or even so much as an idea how to proceed through the game. So I can see that as bar for entry to the game, that's for sure. Maybe they can put little arrows and include a helpful quest log that keeps track of what you need to do and what you have done. Maybe even some lore too.
And sure, some of the bosses are downright brutal. I mean, Quelaag was a vicious little bitch, a pain to kill.You know, having an NPC to aid you on every battle, maybe even various ones you can hire would be nice too. You know, to have some variety.
And, while we're on the subject, what about some very powerful items you can get through rich, storylined quests, or allow you to be a part of all of the factions and rank them up regardless of whether or not they conflict, all without penalty.
And you know, the game could use a lot more humour. It's so dark and moody, and depressing with its serious tones. Maybe some repeated dialogue from a host of NPCs, or some comedy relief characters. Maybe some wacky sidequests where wizards turn you into various animals or something.
So, basically... what they should do is just make it a watered down version of the game that apes Skyrim totally, forget the heart of the franchise, the direction of the director, or the desire of the true, loyal fans of the game just so we can appease of bunch of whiny, piss ass bitches who can't stand a game that doesn't hold your hand and kiss your fucking little boo-boos away.
Bitch, this ain't The Elder Scrolls, it's Dark Souls.
Prepare to die.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Saturday, April 20, 2013
So, having a vagina means you need a special HIV doctor?
Read the article below first.
Doctors call for gender-focused HIV care in Canada | CTV News
Done? Good. Now I will tell you why this is a humongous steaming pile of bullshit. You see, of late, I have been reading more and more about the neo-feminist movement, not the one that brought them to societal equals in at least as much as rights (even if there are still issues such as salary disparity). No, these new feminists feel oppressed, marginalized by society. They feel as though their needs are not being attended to.
Enter Margarite Sanchez. She is our paragon for this tale. She was not tested for HIV, poor dear. Even though she had tons of symptoms, the victim of an uncaring, inept system with inadequate, virtually third world resources!
Right, and I am the goddamn fucking pope. There are so many holes in this story that the Swiss would want to know her secret for cheese manufacturing.
First, the biggest plot hole: Why her doctor did not test her. She said she was not high risk. She didn't use drugs. She didn't work in the sex trade. Yet, she did not reveal where she got her infection, and, despite being in a committed, relationship, did not tell her husband once she found out.
I mean, seriously, what the fuck. You've just contracted a very much fatal, long-term, sexually transmitted disease... and you are not telling your husband? Why did your doctor not test you for HIV? Well likely because you were in a (supposedly) committed relationship and (supposedly) not a drug user. You didn't fit the risk profile, so why bother testing for it if you are being blatantly dishonest about what is going on in your life!
HIV just doesn't fall from the sky. You either fucked someone else, did intravenous drugs, or got transfused infected blood. And given that you concealed it from your husband, I doubt it was a transfusion. Your story is invalid. It is not the story of the failure of a system. It's the story of a liar who was caught in a lie and didn't want to admit it to anyone until her life was on the line. The system didn't fail, you lied and can't take responsibility.
Second, this mythical rainbow unicorn study. I went looking for it. Plenty of news articles site it, but the website that did it, doesn't have anyone that appears to be it. It might be buried inside one of the studies they purport to have done, but none of them has the conclusion that women are getting unfair treatment. They are, however, a lobby for woman-centric treatment centers. I wonder why? Perhaps for more funding for their efforts?
And what of these claims that doctors are outright refusing patients with HIV/AIDS? Why are they not filing grievances? Why is this not a national debacle? Oh, right, because it's hearsay. It's not first hand accounts. It's accounts by doctors running an underfunded clinic that specializes in woman's treatment. Seems like they'd see a large benefit if this issue were made front page news. Why, more money for more salaries, and a larger facility, more patients for more recurring revenue...
This is not altruism. This is the wolf in sheep's clothing. They hold up an obvious liar as their example of a failing system, bolster it with some pretty outrageous claims with no backing evidence. and support it with a study that has either been retracted from the website or is a nested result of another study done by a group which already shows a bias towards woman's issues.
I'm all for better medical treatment. I am not against improvements made in our policies. But for fuck's sake, stop it with the gender politics. The woman in this case, the woman whose story you feel exemplifies the failures of the system, has lied. She concealed a lethal disease from her sexual partner. This is not the act of guiltless person. She lied to her doctor, who was "floored by the results."
This is why people see feminist conspiracy. Because now feminism is the hot new marketing term to get your way.
Doctors call for gender-focused HIV care in Canada | CTV News
Done? Good. Now I will tell you why this is a humongous steaming pile of bullshit. You see, of late, I have been reading more and more about the neo-feminist movement, not the one that brought them to societal equals in at least as much as rights (even if there are still issues such as salary disparity). No, these new feminists feel oppressed, marginalized by society. They feel as though their needs are not being attended to.
Enter Margarite Sanchez. She is our paragon for this tale. She was not tested for HIV, poor dear. Even though she had tons of symptoms, the victim of an uncaring, inept system with inadequate, virtually third world resources!
Right, and I am the goddamn fucking pope. There are so many holes in this story that the Swiss would want to know her secret for cheese manufacturing.
First, the biggest plot hole: Why her doctor did not test her. She said she was not high risk. She didn't use drugs. She didn't work in the sex trade. Yet, she did not reveal where she got her infection, and, despite being in a committed, relationship, did not tell her husband once she found out.
I mean, seriously, what the fuck. You've just contracted a very much fatal, long-term, sexually transmitted disease... and you are not telling your husband? Why did your doctor not test you for HIV? Well likely because you were in a (supposedly) committed relationship and (supposedly) not a drug user. You didn't fit the risk profile, so why bother testing for it if you are being blatantly dishonest about what is going on in your life!
HIV just doesn't fall from the sky. You either fucked someone else, did intravenous drugs, or got transfused infected blood. And given that you concealed it from your husband, I doubt it was a transfusion. Your story is invalid. It is not the story of the failure of a system. It's the story of a liar who was caught in a lie and didn't want to admit it to anyone until her life was on the line. The system didn't fail, you lied and can't take responsibility.
Second, this mythical rainbow unicorn study. I went looking for it. Plenty of news articles site it, but the website that did it, doesn't have anyone that appears to be it. It might be buried inside one of the studies they purport to have done, but none of them has the conclusion that women are getting unfair treatment. They are, however, a lobby for woman-centric treatment centers. I wonder why? Perhaps for more funding for their efforts?
And what of these claims that doctors are outright refusing patients with HIV/AIDS? Why are they not filing grievances? Why is this not a national debacle? Oh, right, because it's hearsay. It's not first hand accounts. It's accounts by doctors running an underfunded clinic that specializes in woman's treatment. Seems like they'd see a large benefit if this issue were made front page news. Why, more money for more salaries, and a larger facility, more patients for more recurring revenue...
This is not altruism. This is the wolf in sheep's clothing. They hold up an obvious liar as their example of a failing system, bolster it with some pretty outrageous claims with no backing evidence. and support it with a study that has either been retracted from the website or is a nested result of another study done by a group which already shows a bias towards woman's issues.
I'm all for better medical treatment. I am not against improvements made in our policies. But for fuck's sake, stop it with the gender politics. The woman in this case, the woman whose story you feel exemplifies the failures of the system, has lied. She concealed a lethal disease from her sexual partner. This is not the act of guiltless person. She lied to her doctor, who was "floored by the results."
This is why people see feminist conspiracy. Because now feminism is the hot new marketing term to get your way.
Saturday, March 23, 2013
#Donglegate is a good thing
I am glad Adria Richards has been fired and fled the Internet. I hope she does not stay gone, but I think this is a great learning experience.
“Oh, my gawd, Pawk, are you saying that she deserved threats of rape? DEATH THREATS?!?”
No, but she most certainly earned them. Now, before you rage and decide to hate me because of that statement, let’s take a closer look at the person who is the central cause of all this drama. Richards has done this before. She has flown off the handle, overreacted and gone public to wage her war for feminine equality. And she rarely ever actually does it in a subtle or even rational fashion. She lashes out, publicly. She doesn’t talk to those she attacks, she just attacks.
She has a history of this. The company who hired her did so as a PR move, plain and simple. They knew she would be a handful. They knew she might cause an issue. They hoped she would take the opportunity and show that she could handle it. What she did was blow it on a scale and size of which warrants termination. It doesn’t matter the reason. They are not cowards, they are wise business people. They took a risk and it blew up in their face. They are cutting their losses, not abandoning a valuable employee.
Richards does not deserve to work in the capacity she did. As it was clearly seen, she is using her access inappropriately. This would be the same with someone who frequently told secrets being given a job in R&D snapping a picture of the latest tech and tweeting it out. She violated what her role required of her, and as such she needs to remain terminated.
The greater lesson, the lesson I hope has now been forcibly pounded through her skull, is that overreaction is bad. She has felt the brunt of overreaction. She got one guy fired. She did not kill anyone. This guy will find work again, likely not without struggle, but he will work again. Everyone will move on. And yet, a good segment of the Internet turned on her, raging and lashing out as she has done in the past, simply with more unconstrained vitriol than she has had in the past. However, she should now know that her constant jump to the ultra-dramatic, the public shaming, is no better than the abuse she has suffered for doing that.
There is a way to create a change. You know how that is? By following the example of Kenzie Wilson. She saw a lack of games. She has a passion for gaming. So she asked her mom to go learn to program, and started a fundraiser on Kickstarter to do just that. And in a week where “Donglegate” (GOD I hate that Watergate was ever a thing) makes us think the industry is not changing, along comes who is truly the future of gaming to show us it is changing, and will continue to do so.
Kenzie is a feminist. Not Adria. Adria is a drama queen, a self-promoting jackass who got served a quintuple helping of the crap she has been dealing out for damn long time. She has learned that, just because the world offers you a stage, it does not give you a pass when you do something to hurt another person with no better reason than that you can. She could have been polite, asked them to stop, and if she was rebuked, outed them. She could have ignored it. But she chose the absolute worst option, followed through, and paid the price.
And no, those guys were not in the right. It was a bunch of innocent, 12 year old potty humour. It’s fine when your audience is cool with it. And it’s not like Richards herself was above it when it was in her favour. But, by the same token, by all accounts, it was not nearly as bad as she said it was, and did not warrant termination of anyone. But, you see, that is what happens when someone has a platform and an inability to understand the consequences of its misuse.
With great power, comes great responsibility.
Monday, March 18, 2013
The myth that we are born equal
Yes, it's a myth. Before you start saying anything like "I can be anything I want," or "we are all born with rights," stop and read.
First, I am not saying that everyone doesn't deserve equal treatment or that people should not be given the chance to do whatever they want in life. What I am saying is that, in reality, when we are born, we are not the same as one another. Some people will dream of the NBA, but will be uncoordinated. Some people will dream of writing a novel, yet cannot write a decent story. Some people will grow up singing to the radio, wanting to be a musician but be unable to carry a tune.
We all have different strengths and weaknesses. We cannot be everything we want to be. We can have what success our genetics allow us, but at some point, you will reach a limitation on what you can do. So, no, we are not born as equals. But then why would we want that to begin with?
This idea that we should all be the same detracts from the spectacle of the truly talented. I've seen grade school virtuosos, teenage geniuses, and spectacular athletes. They amaze and inspire us all with what humanity has the potential to be. But if we were all like that, or worse, if we were all middlingly mediocre, what kind of world would we have?
We used to celebrate the victor. We used to revel in the win. Now, we teach children they are entitled to winning. That effort is more important than the result. That they can be whatever they chose to be, regardless of what the world says. And while there is value in the lesson that you can overcome and find some success, we much temper what we teach is possible. We have to stop giving everyone those lovely participation awards and go back to having winners and losers.
We need to make children understand that they are entitled to nothing, not even a chance. They need to make their way in life. Otherwise, we will be left with generations of children with no motivation but to maintain the status quo, with no fire in their heart to follow their passion, and without the desire for greatness, merely the acceptance of mediocrity.
First, I am not saying that everyone doesn't deserve equal treatment or that people should not be given the chance to do whatever they want in life. What I am saying is that, in reality, when we are born, we are not the same as one another. Some people will dream of the NBA, but will be uncoordinated. Some people will dream of writing a novel, yet cannot write a decent story. Some people will grow up singing to the radio, wanting to be a musician but be unable to carry a tune.
We all have different strengths and weaknesses. We cannot be everything we want to be. We can have what success our genetics allow us, but at some point, you will reach a limitation on what you can do. So, no, we are not born as equals. But then why would we want that to begin with?
This idea that we should all be the same detracts from the spectacle of the truly talented. I've seen grade school virtuosos, teenage geniuses, and spectacular athletes. They amaze and inspire us all with what humanity has the potential to be. But if we were all like that, or worse, if we were all middlingly mediocre, what kind of world would we have?
We used to celebrate the victor. We used to revel in the win. Now, we teach children they are entitled to winning. That effort is more important than the result. That they can be whatever they chose to be, regardless of what the world says. And while there is value in the lesson that you can overcome and find some success, we much temper what we teach is possible. We have to stop giving everyone those lovely participation awards and go back to having winners and losers.
We need to make children understand that they are entitled to nothing, not even a chance. They need to make their way in life. Otherwise, we will be left with generations of children with no motivation but to maintain the status quo, with no fire in their heart to follow their passion, and without the desire for greatness, merely the acceptance of mediocrity.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Why SimCity needs bad press
There is good reason to hold EA and Maxis accountable for the mess that is SimCity's latest release. It may be a good game, but it is a step in the wrong direction. It needs to be shoved under EA's nose and held there till it realizes it will not be tolerated.
Online only has its place in some games, while other services do quite well with a frequent check-in service. (My feelings for that service were not always that way...) But taking a game that previously was a single player game and cramming in multiplayer not to add to the experience but to act as psuedo-DRM is patently ridiculous and needs to be stopped.
 |
| This should not be a thing for a SimCity game |
We are already seeing the results of an excited launch day pretty much crushing the under prepared EA servers. But worse, this means that EA can now force upgrades. Simply shut off the server for this version, and you need to buy the next to have access.
This sort of DRM is disgusting at every level. They did this to Diablo 3, one of the major reasons I voted with my wallet and did not buy it. I loved SimCity, and I love the screens and videos coming out of this game. But I refuse to buy it until it has a dedicated, offline only mode. If they cannot offer that, Good Old Games is still out there, so I'll just go relive the days when games were made for gamers, not for investors.
Saturday, March 9, 2013
Why SamProof failed to buy Stickam
For those few who may not know, Stickam is shut down. For those like me who had no idea what Stickam was...
Stickam was a cam broadcasting site who launched around the same time as another major media site. You might have heard of that one before. It was, apparently, quite an awesome place. And with my brief brush with their culture, I can see why.
I wrote about how we are disconnected by technology not long ago. Ironically, Stickam did more to connect people with several shared experiences. There were users everyone knew and talked about, events everyone covered in their own way. And then there was the mundane everyday. And that's how I met SamProof.
He was streaming to the last on the final day of Stickam. And making a sandwich. Yup, a sandwich. Nothing spectacular or awe inspiring, just chilling with his dog and talking to anyone who happened by. That included me. I watched as others showed up and chatted about the old days. And I watched as he decided to try to save the home he had known for so long.
When he launched the IndieGoGo campaign, I donated what I could, and wished I could do more. I truly wanted to see him succeed at dragging the site back from the brink of destruction if for no other reason than to see it done. Yet I watched as the days wore on that it was not going to happen. People tried to get the ball moving in the right direction but to no avail.
So, what happened? Where did it all fall apart?
Well, for one, the biggest stars did not throw in together. They each had something on the go. If they could have combined their efforts, maybe things would have turned out differently. For another, it was last minute in being announced, so it meant building up a grass roots movement was hard with everyone turning nomad in search of a new home.
But the biggest reason is the disposable view the world has towards many things these days. It colours a lot of what we do, and this was no exception. Sure, gathering 5 million dollars sounds like an insane amount, but when you consider that the last traffic numbers pegged the amount of users to around 500,000 people, that would have been 10 dollars a person for the bulk of the cash. Factor in that seeing those users drop down 10 dollars each would have caused buzz around the site, I'm sure Sam would have found a corporation frothing at the mouth to get in on it.
Apathy led to no one wanting to cover the news that one of the major stars was rallying to save the site. If any one of the sites that came to dig Stickam's grave had run a piece about Sam trying to save it, there would have been a major upswing in the donations. That is for damned sure. But instead, it's just another site, who cares, there are others.
It's sad to see him fail to even crack the thousand dollar mark, and I wish it would have gone better. In the end, he will survive, as will we all, without that one streaming site. There are plenty of alternatives. It's just sad to see one with such a welcoming community die while the Internet just stood by and watched.
Stickam was a cam broadcasting site who launched around the same time as another major media site. You might have heard of that one before. It was, apparently, quite an awesome place. And with my brief brush with their culture, I can see why.
I wrote about how we are disconnected by technology not long ago. Ironically, Stickam did more to connect people with several shared experiences. There were users everyone knew and talked about, events everyone covered in their own way. And then there was the mundane everyday. And that's how I met SamProof.
He was streaming to the last on the final day of Stickam. And making a sandwich. Yup, a sandwich. Nothing spectacular or awe inspiring, just chilling with his dog and talking to anyone who happened by. That included me. I watched as others showed up and chatted about the old days. And I watched as he decided to try to save the home he had known for so long.
When he launched the IndieGoGo campaign, I donated what I could, and wished I could do more. I truly wanted to see him succeed at dragging the site back from the brink of destruction if for no other reason than to see it done. Yet I watched as the days wore on that it was not going to happen. People tried to get the ball moving in the right direction but to no avail.
So, what happened? Where did it all fall apart?
Well, for one, the biggest stars did not throw in together. They each had something on the go. If they could have combined their efforts, maybe things would have turned out differently. For another, it was last minute in being announced, so it meant building up a grass roots movement was hard with everyone turning nomad in search of a new home.
But the biggest reason is the disposable view the world has towards many things these days. It colours a lot of what we do, and this was no exception. Sure, gathering 5 million dollars sounds like an insane amount, but when you consider that the last traffic numbers pegged the amount of users to around 500,000 people, that would have been 10 dollars a person for the bulk of the cash. Factor in that seeing those users drop down 10 dollars each would have caused buzz around the site, I'm sure Sam would have found a corporation frothing at the mouth to get in on it.
Apathy led to no one wanting to cover the news that one of the major stars was rallying to save the site. If any one of the sites that came to dig Stickam's grave had run a piece about Sam trying to save it, there would have been a major upswing in the donations. That is for damned sure. But instead, it's just another site, who cares, there are others.
It's sad to see him fail to even crack the thousand dollar mark, and I wish it would have gone better. In the end, he will survive, as will we all, without that one streaming site. There are plenty of alternatives. It's just sad to see one with such a welcoming community die while the Internet just stood by and watched.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)