Lurker > DarkBuster22904

Sakurai: "I give them all their fan favorites back. Hell, I include every character in the history of the franchise. AND I give them the one character everyone's been demanding for over a decade. And THIS is what I get?

Fuck it. We're putting tripping back in. With twice the rates. Fuck you guys."
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Personally I'd really like to see him featured meaningfully outside of collab/party games. Put him in warioware or... something.

Right now the best we have is his minor villain role in DDR Mario mix. Which... COULD lead to a fun movepool, I guess.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

EA is typically a big contender at e3, but has successfully bred so much animosity over the last year that there was really no hope for them. And then they showed up with... this. No hype there.

Sony shat the bed so hard with this conference they may have even undone last year's hype, too. Then theres the fortnite thing which put them on the top bunk with EA.

Microsoft had a solid show, but xbone reception has been so lukewarm since launch that it hardly matters.

Nintendo brought 2 games.

If bathesda had more than a pan-shot for TES6, they could have walked away champions. But they didnt.

SE showed off a bunch of stuff we already knew about, saw in other conferences, of just didn't care about

I mean... yeah. There was so little to get hyped for.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

R_Jackal posted...

He also gave his only child at the time to a person who has wanted to murder him for years to train.

"Gave" nothing. He was dead. What was he gonna do, bleed on him? Send krillin?
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

IslamMD posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

Y'know, hes gonna feel really bad if that actually happens

The professor said the student would later kill himself by jumping out of a classroom. He didn't really feel bad about the grade he gave him. Maybe the death but felt he deserved an F.

Jesus christ. Sounds like a pleasant guy.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Y'know, hes gonna feel really bad if that actually happens
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Unless children or trafficking were involved, wouldnt arrest a perfectly healthy one for that, tbh
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Gendo ikari from Evangelion gets my vote
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

iPhone_7 posted...

I dont understand why someone even bothered asking this

---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

So, like, will I have to unlock games to stream by opening randomized "rental bundles" for $4.99 a pop? With, like, a .03% chance of getting the game I want, 1% for a $60 triple A game, and 98% chance for shovelware? How about the DLC? Will it be loot boxed too?

Will I have to pay for a $20/month "gold pass" on TOP of the $15/month "basic pass" in order to have half as many ads interrupting the gameplay? This on top of PSN/XBL for sony/Microsoft's case?

I could go on. I could not think of a more usual batch of usual suspects. I'm actually excited at what new and inventive way they find to fuck it up
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Make no mistake. Chrono cross is a great game.

Just a shit sequel to chrono trigger.

Its like making Empire Strikes Back a sequel to the Shawshank Redemption
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

also everybody from the first game dies off screen, except magus who's not magus anymore but is probably magusbut not really cuz we dont have time
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

soyforsteaks posted...

he could have just doubled the universe

Eh, logic there is that if you just double resources, the issues he was trying to solve would rapidly catch up to the new norm, creating the same problems. Nothing would be solved, and one would constantly need to increase everything again and again and infinitum

Better to trim the hedges, as far as hes concerned.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Warioman
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Minecraft
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Squidward smells
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

knuxnole posted...

Damn_Underscore posted...

everyone has an iphone now tho

Exactly. I pull out the iPhone and search the internet while I wait for food after the order kicks in

Restaraunts are not a social place

By that logic literally nowhere is a social place
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Activision holding MW Remastered hostage behind IW preorders ensured the game would be hated.

Of course, not to be outdone, they butchered MWR soon after, so...
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

DippinSauce posted...

BLAKUboy posted...

I mean, he's definitely more deserving of being playable than literal fucking Daisy.

Or Pichu.

Pichu at least has the excuse of falling into the "literally everyone who was ever in smash" category.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Close your account.

no, seriously. Make a new one. Itll start fresh, with no recommendations.

If you're looking for a less pain-in-the-ass way... shame on you. This is YouTube, son.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

ET for Atari 2600 literally broke the entire industry with its failure. Yeah, it may have just been the straw that broke the camel's back, but it's hard to argue any other single game had a worse failure. It literally nearly doomed home gaming altogether
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Both of the first two tasks were just to give advantages in the third. How you did in the first two determined the order you entered the maze.

Because she didn't finish, she entered the maze last, well after the other 3. That's a significant disadvantage she was at.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Tyranthraxus posted...

So they already promised no loot boxes and no pay to win

If only EA promises were worth more than non-premium currency in mobile game

Inb4 they gut the game of any decent customization in favor of a microtransaction shop that puts Evolve to shame.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

It's EA. The fact they weren't booed off the stage after all the shit they've been pulling is astonishing enough as it is.

If they somehow manage to not fuck Anthem up with EAisms, it'll be a biblical miracle.

And its gonna take a hell of a lot more than some meticulously-crafted, focus-group-tested, marketing department guff to convince me. Theres no way to possibly convince me until the game is out. Along with a comprehensive breakdown of their future support, proving they arent planning on shoveling shitty lootbox-esque crap in later.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Removable batteries were for a time when battery life was so shit that people needed multiple batteries.

So an iphone after two or three updates
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

As someone who was once extremely fat and eventually got his shit together and is now pretty damn fit... people like TC are the worst. "Motivate" nothing, shitballs showing off to laugh at the fatty do more to discourage than damn near any other factor. Most fat folk have enough self esteem issues without being made to feel like shit while they're actually trying to get better.

Dont get me wrong, its nobody's job to be their psychologist, or even give a shit about their feelings. But at least do them the dignity of ignoring them and letting them get to their lives. Dont go and pretend like you shitting on then is done in any way to motivate them. It's not, and everybody fucking knows it. I know, you know, and they know it's just because you're a kid on an anthill with a magnifying glass. Nothing worse than a bully that thinks they're somehow justified.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

HydraSlayer82 posted...

Gangs helped me change a flight tire. Am I doing this right?

Stealing your hub caps doesnt count as helping change a flat
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Jiren could have been great, if they kept him as an actual hero of justice trying to save his universe. Make the idea of eliminating him an actual moral quandry.

Instead they make him yet another self absorbed, power obsessed shitlord who attacks the crowd in a tantrum once he starts losing. Yawn.

Once again, the manga seems to be doing it better.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Irony posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

MrK3V posted...

EverDownward posted...

Pepys Monster posted...

MrK3V posted...

that whole arc is doodoo

No, its pretty good. Who didnt want an evil Goku saga?

But we already had an evil Goku in Turles

im waiting for someone to go "not canon" lol

I won't go "not canon."

I will go "not good."

This applies to Goku Black too

Yeah, hes not the best.

Still, I find "nihilist god succumbing to saiyan instincts" and following up on the old ginyu idea of learning how to use a swapped body a bit more interesting than "vegeta steals goku's 'do and makes a bomb-ass fruit salad"
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

MrK3V posted...

EverDownward posted...

Pepys Monster posted...

MrK3V posted...

that whole arc is doodoo

No, its pretty good. Who didnt want an evil Goku saga?

But we already had an evil Goku in Turles

im waiting for someone to go "not canon" lol

I won't go "not canon."

I will go "not good."
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Goku black himself is actually surprisingly good.

It's his fuckboy little green gremlin buddy that's dogshit.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Darmik posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

Darmik posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

Guerrilla Soldier posted...

the first argument is the one that sells it for me

in gambling, there's always the possibility to lose everything and gain absolutely nothing.

with loot crates, you'll always gain something. even if you personally feel like it's 'useless' or 'worthless', you're still actually getting something for the money you put in.

I promise you that if casinos changed slot machines to spit out one square of toilet paper every time you spun and then said "ok, it's not gambling, you always get something, kids can do it now," that wouldn't fly. I fail to see why it should fly with game publishers

The analogy doesn't quite match up because the purpose of gambling is to make more money than you put in. Toilet paper doesn't give you that.

Well sure it does. That toilet paper is worth fractions of a cent. Minimal value, but still 'something.' More than empty air. At least as much of a something as the filler filling most loot boxes.

Why, with enough duplicates of them, you might get enough for a whole roll, which is worth what, a dollar? Because that's basically exactly what loot boxes do with their deliberately shitty filler

People gamble to make money. You can't make money off lootboxes.

People buy lootboxes to get their shitty consumables, common weapon drop, a rare cosmetic etc. They're guaranteed what the lootbox promises even if they're never guaranteed a specific item.

I'm not defending the practice but it's not really fitting the same hole.

Does it prey on a similar addictive personality? Yes. But it's still it's own unique thing.

I do think people will regret what they're wishing for with Government regulation with this stuff. That has never worked well for video games. Battlefield 2 being seen as a failure is the ideal scenario and I hope it happens more.

People gamble to gain something. That something doesnt have to be money. It basically just has to have value. And as soon as money is put in, like it or not, it has value. Because nothing bought is value-less. If it were, it wouldn't be bought.

Moreover, I've said it already. Gambling isn't age restricted just because the government doesnt want kids winning money. Anymore than alcohol is restricted to stop kids having fun social nights with friends.

I agree, government regulation shouldn't be the answer. It'll be overblown, overreaching, and a net negative. Unfortunately, unless the fucknuggets in charge reel it in and recognize the implications of the shit they're pulling, its inevitable
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

CapnMuffin posted...

You just described Chuck E Cheeses.

And at least there you can go down the street and get that pencil sharpener for a quarter from a store. More than you can do with a bad lootbox
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

He tries to plug in his headphones
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Darmik posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

Guerrilla Soldier posted...

the first argument is the one that sells it for me

in gambling, there's always the possibility to lose everything and gain absolutely nothing.

with loot crates, you'll always gain something. even if you personally feel like it's 'useless' or 'worthless', you're still actually getting something for the money you put in.

I promise you that if casinos changed slot machines to spit out one square of toilet paper every time you spun and then said "ok, it's not gambling, you always get something, kids can do it now," that wouldn't fly. I fail to see why it should fly with game publishers

The analogy doesn't quite match up because the purpose of gambling is to make more money than you put in. Toilet paper doesn't give you that.

Well sure it does. That toilet paper is worth fractions of a cent. Minimal value, but still 'something.' More than empty air. At least as much of a something as the filler filling most loot boxes.

Why, with enough duplicates of them, you might get enough for a whole roll, which is worth what, a dollar? Because that's basically exactly what loot boxes do with their deliberately shitty filler
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Guerrilla Soldier posted...

the first argument is the one that sells it for me

in gambling, there's always the possibility to lose everything and gain absolutely nothing.

with loot crates, you'll always gain something. even if you personally feel like it's 'useless' or 'worthless', you're still actually getting something for the money you put in.

I promise you that if casinos changed slot machines to spit out one square of toilet paper every time you spun and then said "ok, it's not gambling, you always get something, kids can do it now," that wouldn't fly. I fail to see why it should fly with game publishers
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Zeus posted...

chrono625 posted...

Zeus posted...

Maze_ posted...

solosnake posted...

The reasoning behind that is that players always receive a specific number of items in each pack, and secondly, EA does not provide or authorize any way to cash out those items for real-world money.

What kind of argument is that?

The same reasoning why buying packs of trading cards isn't gambling. Technically, the logic is sound.

No it isnt.

My trading cards have a real world value that I can trade for. If I have a Honus Wagner card I can get cash for it from someone.

These fifa packs contain cards or items that you cannot trade or sell. It's not nearly the same.

So basically it's even less like gambling than cards or figurines because you don't even have a secondary market with assigned values? So what's the issue then?

DarkBuster22904 posted...

That's why this is a debate. Right now, they aren't gambling if we go by strictly the legal definition. The question is, should that definition adapt?

Because, despite that lack of legal definition, it hits on most of not all of the benchmarks of gambling. You have a wager of money against a desired outcome. You have all of the pleasure receptors in the brain firing in an identical fashion to how they would if you were actually gambling with money. Despite lack of legal definition, from a purely psychological and psychiatric perspective, there's functionally little difference between a slot machine and a lot box. And, given that the money going in doesnt change, the simple fact that there's no money coming out doesnt mean that similar regulations shouldn't apply.

The illegality of children gambling has nothing to do with the government not wanting children to get money. It has everything to do with the psychological and addictive qualities gambling possesses. The exact same qualities inherent in lootboxes.

Hence why people are saying the letter of the law needs to change, to include these systems that straight up didn't exist to be regulated when existing legislation was written

Edit: there's also the argument that the "they have no value" argument is bullshit because no company would create, market, and sell a product that they deem to have "no value" because by assigning a price to it you are by definition giving it value and hoping the consumer sees value enough in it to buy it. But that's another debate.

---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

CapnMuffin posted...

chrono625 posted...

QassTank posted...

Honestly though, I've always been surprised that TCG packs aren't considered gambling...

Here I can see the theory behind it.

The problem is, is that those cards are mine. I can sell them and I can trade them to someone who wants them.

With these loot boxes you dont even technically own anything.

You cant even sell your account either as per their TOS.

That actually helps their case that it isnt gambling.

Unfortunately I dont see this as the legal definition of gambling. People are forking over cash for a random assortment of digitial information that you neither own nor has any intrinsic monetary value.

Its stupidity, not gambling.

That's why this is a debate. Right now, they aren't gambling if we go by strictly the legal definition. The question is, should that definition adapt?

Because, despite that lack of legal definition, it hits on most of not all of the benchmarks of gambling. You have a wager of money against a desired outcome. You have all of the pleasure receptors in the brain firing in an identical fashion to how they would if you were actually gambling with money. Despite lack of legal definition, from a purely psychological and psychiatric perspective, there's functionally little difference between a slot machine and a lot box. And, given that the money going in doesnt change, the simple fact that there's no money coming out doesnt mean that similar regulations shouldn't apply.

The illegality of children gambling has nothing to do with the government not wanting children to get money. It has everything to do with the psychological and addictive qualities gambling possesses. The exact same qualities inherent in lootboxes.

Hence why people are saying the letter of the law needs to change, to include these systems that straight up didn't exist to be regulated when existing legislation was written

Edit: there's also the argument that the "they have no value" argument is bullshit because no company would create, market, and sell a product that they deem to have "no value" because by assigning a price to it you are by definition giving it value and hoping the consumer sees value enough in it to buy it. But that's another debate.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

prince_leo posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...
"Oh, but technically it's not altering-" piss off. If you'd been asked before these rumors whether lando was straight or not, you would have said yes. Its altering de facto, no matter how many hairs you split.

lol

Whatever, dude. I don't even care about whether they make him bi or not. I'm just saying, a week ago, not a person alive would have said he was. There was nothing precluding it, I guess, but equally there was absolutely nothing indicating it, canon or not, in 40 years of character history.

And when the only metric by which you judge whether a character might be bi is "x character didn't have a scene where he expressly indicates he's repulsed by the D," then I daresay almost every character ter in fiction could technically be bi. Doesn't mean they are.

That's why I say it's an alteration rather than a revelation. Just because nothing precludes it doesn't mean it doesn't come out of absolutely nowhere
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

ASithLord7 posted...

DarkBuster22904 posted...

That said, sigh. Why are they doing this? Not because I can't see lando being bi. I can. It sort of works. But because I can't think of a single time in history where altering a established character's race, sex, or orientation has actually been received favorably. Every time it's done, there's a shitshow.

How would making him bi alter his established orientation? He has no established orientation. He's attracted to Leia, he doesn't fucking say he doesn't like men. You realize bi people like women right?

DarkBuster22904 posted...

"Oh, but technically it's not altering-" piss off. If you'd been asked before these rumors whether lando was straight or not, you would have said yes. Its altering de facto, no matter how many hairs you split.

---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

Because running to the future is also bad, for... reasons Jay didn't bother explaining.

That said, it's unreliable. Both times he went to the future he saw a future that didn't end up happening. That immediately makes any info he gets there suspect, assuming he ends up in a future where they beat deVoe at all
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?

darkjedilink posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Changing the sexuality of already-established characters is stupid, pointless, and only serves to piss off prospective viewers.

Did we ever see Lando really do anything relevant, apart from briefly eyeballing Leia?

Lol, 'breifly eyeballing.' Literally every scene they shared before Vader's reveal had him mackin' Leia hardcore.

Which is like 2 scenes for a collective 20 seconds and 2 lines of dialogue.

That said, sigh. Why are they doing this? Not because I can't see lando being bi. I can. It sort of works. But because I can't think of a single time in history where altering a established character's race, sex, or orientation has actually been received favorably. Every time it's done, there's a shitshow.

"Oh, but technically it's not altering-" piss off. If you'd been asked before these rumors whether lando was straight or not, you would have said yes. Its altering de facto, no matter how many hairs you split.

You know where there's almost never a shitsjow these days? New characters.

You'd think they'd recognize this movie is gonna have a hard enough time connecting with an underwhelmed, uninterested audience, without pulling the trick scientifically proven to piss off fans the most.
---

There's somethin' strange on the message board.
Who you gonna call?