Glide

What an insane take. If both sides are equal on one completely undefendable thing, then you vote based on other issues. One of the two parties are going to be in power at the end of this election cycle, regardless. Both are permitting genocide, and it's a fucking problem, meanwhile only one of those parties are actively working to strip the people's right to do something about that.

All this "both sides" bullshit feels disingenuous. If you were really concerned, you'd be focused on paths to solutions, rather than focusing strictly on trying to devalue Democratic votes. I certainly don't see any path to stopping this genocide that starts with permitting a Trump presidency.

"I'm a gamer myself, and therefore I know what I'm talking about"

Should we call it a fallacious call to authority, meme on it for being a "how do you do, fellow gamers" moment, or simply mock the guy for whoring himself out in favor of daddy corporate? I could write an essay on the ways this is an absurd statement.

Gamers hate Denuvo because it doesn't "simply work". It limits paying customers from accessing their content, bogs down mid-range machines that are already overtaxxed by poor optimization and, in admittedly uncommon cases, full on breaks some games until patches and fixes roll out. Stop pretending that "gamers" are out here rioting because they're too cheap and immoral to pay for content. Quit your fuckin' lying.

Fucking real, though. The cultural group responsible for checks notes "shaming people who have the wrong bubble color in texts"?, suddenly think they're the one's being unjustly preached to? The joke in this image is not the one OP thought they were making.

Second. The guillotine.

It kinda gets different when you're talking about a series of actors intermingling in an environment designed by the seller. There are certain expectations for the experience that was sold to you, and another customer disregarding the social contract of what the expected environment is supposed to be like is problematic.

It's like buying a ticket to go to a theatre. You expect the people around you to also use the product and environment in a way similiar to you. Someone on their phone, screaming at the movie, throwing their feet up on your chair, etc, isn't okay, and the people who defend their selfishness with "I paid to be here, I can do what I want" deserve to be kicked out. Cheating on an online, competitive game is no different, and I expect such players to be kicked out so the rest of us can have the experience we were promised when we made our purchase.

Does this mean the game in question should have full control over the code you're running on your machine? I mean absolutely not, no one is strip searching you at the entrance of the theatre, but there need to be some degree of limitations on how individuals interact with the shared environment that consumers are being offered. The theatre doesn't allow you to take videos, and doesn't give you access to a copy of the film to clip, or edit to your hearts content, and the notion that the consumer should have such rights seems insane. But taking an online game, editing the files, and then connecting to everyone else's shared experience and forcing your version on others should be protected, because the code is running on your machine? To be clear, I don't think you're seriously suggesting that is the case, but therein lies the problem: there's a lot of weird nuance when it comes to multiple consumers being provided a digital product like this. How they interact together is inherently a part of the sold product, so giving consumers free reign to do what they want once the product is in their hands doesn't work the way it does with single player games, end user software, or physical products.

The real problem is the laziness of devs not hosting their own server environments, so I hear you there. But that is, unfortunately, a problem seperate from whether hackers should be held accountable for ruining a product for others.

Sick. I've had Rollerdrome on my wishlist for a while now, but have never seen a good sale, nor found myself with the free time and desire to play it on the spot to demand a full price purchase. I will gladly pirate and experience this now.

I mean, fuck Take2, I'd rather be able to hand these people money for a good game, but in lieu of being able to do so, I am happy to oblige their request.

I hope this is a joke. North American economy has been in a downward spiral for the past 4 years.

It doesn't matter. Convservativea cannot accept the notion of a "good weird" because it removes all justification from their beliefs. The whole conservative belief system is founded on the notion that there is an effective normal and that normal must be protected from those that would upset it.

They cannot say they're the "good kind of weird", because that means admitting that weird can be good. And if weird can be good, they have no ground to plant the roots of their beliefs in. They have to be normal, because if they're weird, all the time they spent attacking others for being weird in the defence of what's normal doesn't make any sense. Calling themselves the good kind of weird is a complete 180 on what it means to be conservative and alienated a massive portion of their voting base who only vote conservative because they see people who are "just like them", not weirdos who are willing to redefine sex and gender, or question historical narratives.

The "weird" angle of attack has been so effective because it deconstructs the very notion of what it means to be a conservative. Giving them an out through the "good kind of weird" doesn't change that.

Imo, the neat thing about this current "weird" discourse is that only right-wingers could ever find it genuinely insulting. Any sensible, self-actualized human being who isn't obsessing over the sex and genetalia of others is like "haha, yeah, I am kinda weird".

But the right wing is built on the misconception that they are "normal" and everything else is a problem. They're the only ones that could ever be bothered by being told they're weird, because it deconstructs the very foundation of their beliefs. Without the core of "we are normal and everyone else is causing problems in our normal society" backing up their every decision to threaten others over the religon, sexuality or life choices of others, they instead have to face reality: it's normal to be a little weird, and it's normal for some of that weird stuff to take root and become normal. And to refuse it and obsess over it is, in its own way, kinda weird.

I purchased Rayman Legends on a big Steam sale because it is a great game and I wanted to play it again. I installed it. I hit play. It tried to install the Ubisoft launcher. I uninstalled it and refunded.

Fuck off, Ubisoft.

God, I wish I had a mortgage.