Even the people who seem to be in favor of it all seem to be talking about how they'll write going forward.

With that said, editing older works to fit different contexts isn't new at all. I remember reading my grandmother's collection of Reader's Digest Condensed Books, and cable companies routinely overdub curse words in movies and cut out sex scenes. Different edits for different audiences. It's weird (it's not weird) how we only start getting pissy about it when it comes to editing out slurs and stuff.

I don't think anyone's arguing for completely banning books that use shitty stereotypes and nasty racial language. The "unabridged" versions, much like the "theatrical releases" of movies, aren't being thrown into a giant shredder. If someone wants to read an anti-semetic rant by Dahl, it's out there. But we've never once at any point in the past gave two shits about editing content to make different editions for different people, and I haven't heard an argument about why we should care when it comes to this specific version of the practice.

We'll make a deal.

Our schools will teach more about the horrors of the atomic bomb, and their schools will teach more about the horrors of Unit 731. I think that's a fair trade.

The Arkansans have figured out a way around the new no-porn law.

This guy obnoxiouses.

Wait, no, that's not right.

Uh, instructions unclear, dick stuck in Reddit? How's that?

Nobody. They are the Supreme Guardian Council, which is why I will only ever refer to the so-called "chief justice" as "Ayatollah Roberts".

The kind where Ken goes off on a super-badass special forces mission and says "Take a bullet for ya, babe," as he leaves the house.

in true Calvinist fashion it doesn’t matter what choices people make, there’s no action one can take to change their position.

Exactly. Like how all the "self-made men who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps" slag off on AOC for having had to work a real job once.

I left right before High Isle came out, but nothing I've tried since has really caught my attention the same way. Even GW2, as awesome as it is, and as many QoL features it has that I deeply missed in ESO, just... isn't the same.

Did they ever get the Champion Points re-worked into something that doesn't suck? I hate the way the green constellations worked, particularly; whose idea was it to say "Nobody harvests, chest-hunts, fishes, and searches for crafting recipes at the same time, so obviously it's silly to let players equip all those bonuses at once"??

Even if not, I think I might drop Netflix and re-up my subscription. If just to remind me why I left, maybe?

Games are like an interactive movie and there’s a ratio of moviness to gaminess and this one leans heavier on the moviness side.

The last Final Fantasy game I played was 8, and it was exactly because of this. They stripped out almost all the "game" bits (although they did give us a really cool card game minigame) and turned it into basically a movie you could occasionally interact with. The battles were mindless (there was no reason not to use your strongest summon every round, because it was both more effective than anything else and because it was totally free to do so), the "equipment" system was entirely optional (which was good, because interacting with it required mega-grind), and overland travel was a total afterthought. It was more of a "game" than anything Tell Tale put out, but that's a low bar, since Tell Tale only produces movies that sometimes throw in an attention check in the form of a quicktime event.

It was a real shame, because I had entirely switched system allegiance from Nintendo to Playstation just for FF7. Then the followed it up with 8, and it was obvious where they were taking the franchise. So I'm not surprised to see, all these years later, that the newest FF game is even more of that.

It's a fine argument for people who grew up during a time when "colored people" was the less racist way of referring to POC.

Like, maybe this guy's great-grandfather, seeing as the NAACP was named in 1909.

But, to be a bit more charitable, his grandfather probably used the term (it peaked in usage in the 1960s), and maybe his father, if his father was one of those people who stubbornly resists change. But Rep Crane himself was born a decade after "colored" had gone from the least racist term to a decidedly mid-level racist term (after social shaming began to be applied to the more racist ones).

Are there ghosts? Because I'll pay a premium if there are for sure ghosts.

I wish people would stop trying to use Discord as an information repository/hub. It's a chat program. It's designed for people to engage in transient, real-time back-and-forth communication, not to store discussions or information for long-term use. I get so cranky at people who insist that Discord can be used like a web forum when it so obviously sucks nuts at it.

A forum has content that can stay up indefinitely, where the message history on narrowly defined subjects is packaged into a convenient container and is visible as far back in time as one cares to go. It's easily searchable, and old discussions for which a user has new questions can be brought back up to the top of the list, in full. Trying to recreate that kind of functionality on Discord is not only stupid, but also generally futile. It's the exact opposite of what Discord is intended to be.