[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

It's not happening for Game Pass right now. If Microsoft hoovered up Nintendo and all the other companies, leaving Game Pass with little competition, they'd flip in an instant. Then you'd have not only Nintendo games for an overpriced subscription, you'd have Nintendo and everything else Microsoft bought for an overpriced subscription, where Microsoft can do whatever they want because only they have the rights to those games.

I'm not arguing Nintendo's subscription services doesn't suck ass, I'm arguing that Microsoft would do the same thing if they got their mits on Nintendo's catalog, except potentially worse because they have more 'exclusive content' to lock-away in their garden and they can force their BS into Windows.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 91 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The ActiBlizz merger needs to be shot down and Microsoft Games needs to be forced to split off from Microsoft. This tactic of "Make all the money in one sector, then use that unlimited money to invade another sector, force small businesses out by operating at a loss, and then enshittifying the entire sector to a state worse than it was originally" has to stop - across all sectors.

If you can't survive in your own sector on your own merits without money from Daddy Corpo, you deserve to die.

I also hate that Spencer talks like "sitting on a big pile of cash" instead of gambling it on the market is fucking stupid. Classic "NOW NOW NOW" American capitalism.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 28 points 1 year ago

Why wouldn't it happen for Game Pass? It's happened for every new service. Start them with a great deal to undermine all competition because you can eat the cost and they can't. When the competition dies, slowly start enshittifying it, until it's as bad or worse than the original. Arguably Microsoft is already starting that process by killing off the $1 demo.

Microsoft isn't going to pass up free money, and if anything this email conversation confirms that they're drooling, waiting for the "fuck them over the barrel" stage.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago

Are they also going to alter their stance that Planned Parenthood and a children's hospital aren't charity?

37
submitted 1 year ago by Adramis@beehaw.org to c/gaming@beehaw.org

And just, wow. I'm a bit disappointed they tried to cop out Ramza and Alma's death, because it feels like that cheapens the whole thing, but it's easy enough to head canon.

As the credits were rolling, I was like "What happened to Delita and Ovelia!?" Google the ending as the credits are rolling. "Where is this scene, I didn't see it! Did I miss something?" Last scene plays...oof. I knew they couldn't have a happy ending because their relationship was fundamentally based on a massive power imbalance and one side taking advantage of that, but I was not remotely expecting that. The image of Ovelia on the ground, dead, next to the flowers is just stuck in my brain.

My first instinct was to say, "Well that was a sucky ending! It was just out of nowhere to make me suffer!" but after a few minutes of reeling, I realized that it wasn't. The point of Delita's character was that he started using people as pawns because he had to, in order to make the world a better place. But once someone starts doing that, and stops seeing people as people...they can't just turn that off, not even for the person they love the most.

Does that ultimately make them a "bad person"? Objectively, Delita saved thousands, if not tens of thousands or more lives by ending the war and preserving the peace in the era that followed. He made life better for the common people of Ivalice for hundreds of years (even though I take issue with the fact that he didn't clean out the church of Galabdos). But that also doesn't negate the fact that having to live as his political pawn, with no autonomy, after a life of being abused and locked away, wouldn't be a life worth living.

What does it mean to save others, if you become so damaged in the process that the people you love would literally rather die than be near you?

Two other observations:

  1. It took me a few hours to remember that Agrias gave Ovelia that knife at like, the start of Chapter 1. She could've stabbed Delita at any point, but she legitimately trusted him and that things would change once everyone was safe. Apparently, it didn't.

  2. Was Ovelia's tipping point when Olan released the Duria Papers? Delita probably had several opportunities to save Alma, but it wasn't part of his plan to get Ovelia on the throne, so he didn't bother. That directly led to Ramza having to follow Alma into Murond, where they died. In a sense, Delita didn't just leave them to die, but kind of encouraged it - he needed someone to deal with Ultima, but knew that whoever went down there probably wasn't coming back. I think that's what Ovelia meant when she said that Delita killed Ramza. I also wonder if Delita kept the church around to keep the people under control, so Ovelia finding out that the church is why Ramza and Alma died and then burning Olan at the stake for the truth would be...soul breaking.

Unfortunately, part of finishing the game so late is that I missed all the discourse about the ending when it originally happened, so I would love to hear people's thoughts, plot-wise or mechanics-wise.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 83 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh no, CrImInAlS. We'd better make sure only big corps can use this tech and legislate against individual use. /s

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 84 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Post: Uses the word normies in a positive sense and literally says it's great that gaming is more accessible

Fediverse: Is this a neckbeard?

It's amazing that a non-slur single word can get y'all so fucking bent out of shape. It was worth a double take, but not shitting on the entire post. It's literally a post about a non-traditional gamer / not-power-user / etc person finding a sense of community and fun because of the rise of handhelds. Is shutting down that discussion over one word worth more than seeing the good in recent trends?

I hope we continue to see more good handhelds get made - I'd personally love a Steam Deck, but seeing Valve get some good competition would be good for the technology (not you, Apple / Meta). Maybe I'm just too old, but I'd love to see slide-out keyboards again...

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 50 points 1 year ago

Good - fuck Blizzard. They literally were like "We're going to OW2 for PvE! I promise we're totally not just doing it because we want to monetize it more!"

Shocked_pikachu.jpg

73
submitted 1 year ago by Adramis@beehaw.org to c/gaming@beehaw.org
[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 22 points 1 year ago

Peak "WTF" moment. I'm really sorry you went through that.

Hopefully stuff like this video means that things are getting better - I hope that translates into better experiences for you in the future.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

"Those are very human emotions to be feeling" isn't a valid answer, though. It's an internal, unfair bias that hurts other people, and that shouldn't be acceptable in a community that is trying to be all-inclusive.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bi transman here - the answer to your question is because queer people have a lot of misandry. There's been a great movement to push people to recognize their misogyny, but misandry is still largely acceptable and even popularized to some extent. Because people equate "masculine" with "privileged", people equate men with the shitty assholes in their life who have put them and other queer people down, even when the men they're talking to have always been allies and often haven't had a lot of the privileges people think they've had. There's lots of axes of oppression, but even so queer men especially often lose a lot of the male privilege people assume they get.

I've had transwomen tell me that men should be rounded up and killed, and when I said that was sexist, told that included me. I've had non-binary people tell me that they identify as transmasc but not as a transman because men are toxic - even knowing that I am a transman. That person was a long-term 'friend' of several years. I've had multiple people say they'd feel safer in shared spaces if there weren't men present, even while I was sitting there, as another queer person trying to find a safe space.

It's a really big problem in the community that has gone largely unaddressed. I think things are getting better, but it's extremely hard not to feel isolated from the only community that is supposed to be accepting of us.

FWIW though the video is supposedly talking about that problem and how to make it better. It's a god-awful title for a community that's supposed to be very caring and careful about people's trauma, though, and proves the point that the community is much more accepting of misandry than of misogyny. If someone posted a video titled "Why we hate bi women" with the thumbnail of "Don't date bi women", it would probably have already been removed for being triggering, even if the point is to lampshade the problem.

There's lot of us out here, even if it doesn't feel like it. I'm really hoping we'll find more spaces that are really, actually accepting of us.

[-] Adramis@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's great to not be 'chained by societal expectations' - but some people want to look like the traditional American 2023 cisgender man. That's not being chained by societal expectations, that's expressing our gender identity the way we want to. Let us have our space and our discussions without subtly acting like being non-binary is morally superior to being binary.

As a transman 3 years on T I don't even agree with some of his advice, but it's important for transmen to be able to have these sorts of conversations and give-and-take without everyone breathing down our necks.

1
submitted 1 year ago by Adramis@beehaw.org to c/news@beehaw.org
view more: next ›

Adramis

joined 1 year ago