Lurker > DarkRoast

All of Psychic Type's weaknesses are common fears of the mind:

Bugs
Ghosts
The Dark

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/16/politics/ron-johnson-pocan-judge-biden/index.html

Party of Doublethink

Whew it's over.

That was absolutely wild.

Unspecified_NPC posted...

Is the second one the same as an aura? Know a few people who have chronic migraines

Yes, scotomas are visual auras basically.
I don't have a headache, though. I do have migraines, but this probably means the oncoming migraine is gonna be for real

I've never had one anywhere near this bad. My entire vision is just a wavy shiny cloud, it's crazy
If you've never had one before, they often precede a migraine or a seizure and look like this:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/1/4/AAeEwGAAC8Cm.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/1/5/AAeEwGAAC8Cn.jpg

Kegran posted...

Fauci was still in charge of that.

No, his only job was to get advice to the president as a representative of the NAID. Advice that you may have noticed he ignored repeatedly, then turned around and gaslit Fauci.

Irony posted...

Yeah like doing pandemic doctor stuff lmao

As an internist, I can tell you I wouldn't trust a surgeon to do just about anything other than surgery

monkmith posted...

we should go back to the good old days of hiring people with the exact opposite skills/education for the job, like putting a shitty neurosurgeon in charge of HUD or an oil company lobbyist in charge of the EPA.

To be fair to the neurosurgeon, he was actually a good neurosurgeon. He just wasn't good at anything else.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Isn't that all that matters?

It should be. But TC thinks otherwise.

(Master's degree from MIT)

So this person is qualified in that field?

Or should we nominate a pillow salesman?

Literally anything or anyone that asks for info about their lives is Big Brother, but they demand to know the exact time and location someone's child died in a school shooting or it didn't happen.

They're disgusting.

I'm fiscally conservative which is precisely one of many reasons why I don't support the GOP.

That and they're fascists.

One of the few things I did like about 2077 back when it launched was the story arc between V and Silverhand.

But the rest of the game just felt kinda meh.

It looks and runs quite a bit more polished on PC now than before.

I never really played more than a few minutes of it on console (PS4 version on PS5) but it seemed real crappy back then.

Dlss will always be hardware dependent because it literally uses RT cores to perform calculations that are inefficient on a normal GPU. I hate nvidia, but DLSS's hardware limitations are inherent to how it works. Granted, they could make it open source, though.

monkmith posted...

its open source and every GPU brand can use it, and while its not as nice looking as dlss it does give a good performance bump. why would developers cater to only a portion of their PC consumers and be forced to pay nvidia for the right, when they can use FSR for free and even implement it on consoles?

nvidia could fix this, they could take stop gating DLSS behind the gameworks banner and let developers use it for free.

The problem with FSR is that it's not dlss. It wasn't even designed to be like dlss. It's quite literally just a form of upscaling. It was grossly oversold as a viable way to improve performance without hurting image quality.

monkmith posted...

its neat for the 2 games i've played with it. unless they make it easier and cheaper for game developers to implement i dont see it sticking around when they can just choose FSR.

FSR looks like shit though.

I don't even know why it exists. It's awful.

It has basically gotten to the point where if a game has dlss as an option, even if I already get good performance without it, I still turn it on because often times the game actually looks better and runs better with it on.

One of the very few times where a hyped Nvidia feature actually lived up to the hype.

cjsdowg posted...

No it was just bad writing all around. And she beyond not telling him the plan. She didn't tell him that plan existed. Poe literally did nothing wrong. And why did people have to stay on the other ships say they blew up. And hell how can they go ship to ship without being noticed. I hate that movie so much.

That's exactly how I interpreted it. It might have been a little bit more justifiable if it weren't for the fact that the literal entire Republic fleet was getting murdered around them while she kept telling them it's no big deal.

Holdo's entire schtick falls apart when you place yourself in Poe's shoes and view her from his point of view and not the audience's.

ChocoboMog123 posted...

I forget, was there a specific reason she didn't share her plan with an main character? Clearly other people were in on it.
Maybe Poe's plan would have succeeded with her support, but she didn't even seem willing to open discussion to two war heroes.

If there was a reason, it wasn't conveyed clearly or rationally.

BakonBitz posted...

The frustrating thing is that I totally appreciate Rian's viewpoints and what he was trying to do for the franchise (which is why I'm willing to give a Rian-directed trilogy a shot), but doing it in the middle of a damn trilogy that wasn't his to begin with was a mistake.

I actually very much appreciate what he tried to do with the second film, but I don't think it was a very well made movie. One of the problems I had with it, perhaps the biggest, is that Holdo has nowhere near enough character development to justify the smug unwillingness to tell anyone what's going on while the rebellion is crumbling around them. Watching the film, I actually thought it was possible she was a saboteur. So I wound up agreeing with Poe, Finn and Rose. I found it pretty disconcerting that the movie goes to great lengths to chastise those characters for not following her plan. I certainly wouldn't have followed her plan.

I'm sure that wasn't his intention as a director, but coming into the movie with zero knowledge, and given the limited information I had about her, I could only conclude that her actions were irrational. Although that did not turn out to be the case, hindsight is something the characters don't have. I'm not so sure it was the goal of the director to convey that kind of message, but nevertheless that's how it panned out to me.

Xavier_On_High posted...

Definitely Doom.

Half Life set a precedent by which shooters were judged for nearly two decades, but it itself doesn't hold up. Whereas not only does Doom hold up, but its formula still works just as well.

Doom is a good example of how simplicity executed well ages better than unrefined complexity.

Which is why the 16-bit era aged better than the N64/PSOne era.

Got nothing in my 14 saved pulls

Dude's deadpan sarcasm is so good. "Yeah, an idiot wants to get in a fight in a stealth ship"

I got one for like $15 when they went on fire sale.

It's absolute garbage. Also they should've used DualShock considering how many full 3D games it has.

The NES and SNES Classic put it to shame.

There's no way I'd ever vote Republican again.

I honestly though the themes of the second film would lead to a conclusion where Kylo and Rey realize that there is no point in favoring "light" or "dark" because it leads to an imbalance in the Force that breeds conflict. Rejecting your emotions can make you blind to your feelings and the empathy of others, and allowing your anger and fear to take over robs you of your objectivity.

But yeah that didn't happen. Ironically that would've also had a creative meta-subtext about the contrasting themes of the two films revealing an "enlightened middle."

s0nicfan posted...

I don't think it's unreasonable to say he's more at fault for the tonal inconsistency when you had one director managing the tone of the movie before and after his who also gave him a detailed outline of things he was planning on carrying forward. Johnson could still have told his story without seemingly going out of the way to kill every single dangling plot thread from the first movie for no reason other than to laugh at the people who had fan theories over them.

I agree. But I'd argue that it truly went off-the-rails with RoS doing the same exact thing to TLJ.

You can almost justify "weird tonal shift second film" by having a third film that fuses the two themes. But that's not what Abrams did. RoS was just... so obnoxious.

The movie practically opened with "hey Rey, your parents DID matter and the Jedi ARE good and hot shot pilots ARE important and the Sith ARE back and..."

s0nicfan posted...

Disney really should never have given their middle movie to someone who once famously said that he didn't want to make a movie that everyone loved, he wanted to make a movie where half the audience loved it and half the audience hated it. He gave them exactly what he promised. It was also dumb of Johnson to completely toss the three movie outline notes that Abrams gave him and I have to imagine at least some of his "twists" were explicitly designed to destroy that outline out of some weird creative temper tantrum. Dude was a troll and successfully trolled the entire franchise and then went on to make knives out which proves he's perfectly capable of making a movie and just chose not to.

I honestly don't think he's any more at fault than Abrams.

If you think about it, Abrams gave him nothing to work with. The Force Awakens was almost literally just a retread of A New Hope. It had nowhere to go except "the dark, subversive sequel" route like Empire. And you can't just do another Empire. So instead TLJ was sort of an anti-empire.

But TLJ was not the right kind of movie to follow TFA.

I don't mean that each movie was bad (I'd only level that complaint against Rise of Skywalker, honestly) but that the fundamental narrative flow of each movie isn't compatible with a cohesive trilogy.

The first film is clearly embracing the tradition of the Original Trilogy while paving the way for a similar story arc for Rey. It removes the overly complicated political drama of the Prequel Trilogy for the more "less talk more shooting" vibes of A New Hope.

Star Wars has always used the middle film to throw a wrench into storytelling, by subverting some of the themes of the first.

But while Empire subverts A New Hope by painting a world more complex, deceptive and morally ambiguous, The Last Jedi subverts Force Awakens by essentially saying the very themes of the film (and by proxy, all previous SW films) are archaic, self-defeating and backwards-thinking. And it's not necessarily wrong in doing so, given that a common theme in the tangential Star Wars lore is that the Jedi are self-defeating in their obsession with tradition and a humanity-crushing moral code. They essentially create the need for the Sith, who embrace their emotional needs.

This is an OK angle to take, but TLJ rejects everything. It rejects Rey's past. It rejects the "rogue hotshot pilot" motif with Poe. It rejects a deliberately set-up villain in Snoke. It (literally) destroys the Jedi's foundations in order to upend the table of the SW universe in an attempt to rewrite what SW is.

None of that is necessarily bad, except it doesn't work as a sequel to a movie that explicitly embraced and celebrated those things. It's a middle film for a trilogy that wasn't actually made, and it stands out as perplexingly obsessed with rejecting the first film. It doesn't help that some characters (particularly General Holdo) are seemingly meant to be viewed more favorably than their actions (or inactions) would warrant.

But that's nothing compared to the dumpster fire of the third movie.

What if you took the slavish devotion to tradition of the first movie and then added the weirdly cynical rejectionism of the second? That's what you get with RoS. This film is by far the worst of the three, because it's a combination of the derivative predictable camp of the first and the nihilism of the second. What you get is a film that seems laser-focused on undoing the second movie in ways even the second movie wasn't attempting to do with the first. It comes across as alarmingly antagonistic with the themes of the second film - even going so far as to make fun of the silly "Holdo Maneuver." The way it so blatantly sidelines Rose (a character that seemed out of place in the second film but was at least given narrative gravitas), focuses so heavily on Rey's parentage, and re-introduces old conflicts for seemingly no reason (and in direct opposition to the second movie's theme of casting away the whole "Jedi vs. Sith" duality as archaic and self-defeating).

It's such a crazy set of movies.

DirkDiggles posted...

No question it is Doom. You wouldn't have Duke Nukem or Wolfenstein without Doom.

Wolfenstein came out before Doom

Everything about Guzzlord is ****ed up. He literally hails from the distant alternate future where Alola was destroyed.

I'm including Descent because there's basically no genre they fit into

Game was amazing. Basically an homage to the original Legend of Zelda with voxel graphics. It was extraordinarily silly and wonderful.

And FromSoftware made it.

"There, they're and their" is the worst
But "which and witch" is pretty bad too

What bothers me more than anything is that literally anyone in the GOP administration can pretend that what happened post-Nov 2020 was normal or acceptable in any fucking way imaginable.

The fact that ZERO politicians have been held accountable for Trump's egregious assault on the institutions of democracy is unacceptable.

BTW what's fascinating is that she's the only Electro character I know that can use the 4-piece Electro set effectively. Doing electro-charged reduces the CD of her E every time, meaning she can spam the hold E

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/3/6/AAeEwGAAC7fA.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/3/7/AAeEwGAAC7fB.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/3/8/AAeEwGAAC7fC.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/3/9/AAeEwGAAC7fD.jpg

<3

Aitz posted...

But she is not a fox mommy!

But she IS a fox

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/1/9/AAeEwGAAC7ev.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/2/0/AAeEwGAAC7ew.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/1/5/AAeEwGAAC7er.jpg

So anyway everyone is going for Electro Mommy today but we already have Electro Mommy

Looks like it'll run great on my 2080 MQ

It's great.

Zikten posted...

They should have had no poke balls in Legends. Just have them walk by your side.

In all fairness, in Gen II they specifically talk about how the original Pokemon trainers "hollowed out Apricorns to make Pokeballs". It's why Apricorn Balls are generally considered rare and cool to have in the later games. You usually only get a handful of them in each game, if you get any at all.

Love Ball / Moon Ball / Fast Ball / Level Ball / Heavy Ball / Lure Ball / Friend Ball

The ultimate desire is to have a Pokemon that could only be caught in an Apricorn Ball in a single generation and then bring it to a later one.

Hambo the Hog posted...

Yes! Members of both clans bring that up constantly and then in the end they're just like "oh it's just another way of bonding with your pokemon" as if pokeballs couldn't be used to enslave them by less kind trainers.

And yeah they throw this excuse around but it doesn't explain a pokemon only staying in the ball if it's asleep or paralyzed or if it's a master ball. No consent involved there.

I mean it's pretty fucking clear that some Pokemon don't want to be caught, considering they try to break out of the Pokeball

Tyranthraxus posted...

They should run a bit about how Pokemon can actually just up and leave the pokeballs any time they want to but choose not to because they actually like the trainers.

And canonize the game systems in reality. Pokemon like to be made to fight each other because that's how they get stronger and evolve.

I don't think it completely counters the morality issues of pokeballs but it makes things more interesting.

I mean I'm willing to assume that in the actual Pokemon universe people don't just go around catching 900 Pidgies and leaving them in the computer storage system, but it's still kind of fucked up to think that Pokemon can just be deposited in storage and left there forever.

CrimsonAngel posted...

They've stated that Pokemon want to be partners with humans the only reason they fight is they want a worthy partner. It's handwave but real world ethics aren't relevant.

I agree, they're not relevant.
But the problem is that they become relevant when you directly try to address them the story, though. It just makes things super weird and uncomfy.

When it's played off as a meta joke (for instance, Link destroying every pot in the house literally full of pots in Wind Waker and then the guy coming in and asking "who the hell DOES THIS?") it can be funny, but this isn't.

Hambo the Hog posted...

They bring it up again in Legends and just kinda shrug it off. They should really just stop questioning the ethics of pokeballs if they aren't gonna emphatically and convincingly justify them.

Yeah I just got to the part where Calaba basically says "oh so you're catching them in those balls and making them fight, huh?"

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

Yeah but Ghetsis was lying about it and just using it as a way to control N to get what he wanted.

I get that. But the problem is that it's a legitimate argument, even if it's used illegitimately.
It's not something that should be pointed out and then just excused away as the machinations of a villain.

It IS a fundamentally screwed up thing that people capture Pokemon and fight with them. The way to get around that is to simply not bring it up, otherwise you're acknowledging that the people of your world do recognize the ethical ambiguity of it.

Flockaveli posted...

Just another Pokemon game where the idea is okay but their execution is immoral.

It's why I like Team Rocket.

They're the mafia. That's it. That's their thing.

CrimsonAngel posted...

Didn't Ghetsis also want to control all Pokemon too?

The fundamental problem is the original argument he made is legitimate, and was left unaddressed.

Better not to bring it up than to do it and then pretend it's just a ruse.

Bad Guy: "Enslaving Pokemon and forcing them to fight for you is inherently immoral"
Bad Guy: "Because I'm the bad guy"