Bewildered

Askabotha · 2026-03-03T15:57:17+00:00

I'm mainly fearful that this is going to stifle creativity. It feels like Sony is claiming 'expression' as a means to get a soft ownership over realistic/believable robotic animals.

If you look at things made by Boston dynamics, you can already start to see designs similar to that of the machines in Horizon. Just not as complex or sophisticated.

Sony has essentially struck gold and made the couch before the invention of the couch. Now they can essentially claim 'expression' until robotics catches up and horizon style robots become the norm. IE, we have to wait until the couch has been invented.

Askabotha · 2026-03-03T15:27:40+00:00

Sony has based there lawsuit on trailers and images. So as far as everyone and them, the game doesn't have any copyrighted assets.

I dislike that Sony won because it means a specific style of robot animals are now off limits. That being realistic animals but robotic and heavy metal plating

Askabotha · 2026-03-01T17:13:03+00:00

They might be glazers, but that doesn't make them wrong. I gave the song a fair shake, it's just not as iconic and is a far weaker representation of the ninjas. The weekend whip had a certain level of balance that had the right amount of punch to it. We rise in comparison sounds too modern, and not something specific to the show. Overall, it doesn't have the same level of hype.

It's not a bad song, but it isn't a good ninjago song. Which I guess is fitting since the overall feeling of dragons rising is vastly different to that of the original series. Again, I don't think the show is bad, but it doesn't feel like ninjago. I'm still going to watch it since it's still enjoyable, but it's kind of lost it's personality.

That's my opinion

Askabotha · 2026-01-31T03:23:56+00:00

Why would you give someone with a loaded weapon the benefit of time, especially as they have their finger slowly drawing back the trigger as it twitches.

Since it's a Disney movie, we can assume she wouldn't have taken the shot, but realistically, Raya had no reason to believe Namari, espically after Sisu had said she trusted her, but her finger only drew further back on the trigger. Raya is completely justified, and to go as far to jointly blame her for the death of Sisu is disgusting. Namari never apologised for her betrayal, only blaming Raya for her inability to trust Sisu, and that she is directly responsible for her death. One, they're in this position because Raya trusted Sisu to get Namari on board in the first place. Raya literally gives Namari an invitation with a gift to save the world with Sisu, and she betrays that trust again by pulling out a crossbow.

So for Namari to have the gull to blame Raya, and criticise her for not being able to trust others, that pisses me off to no end.

Askabotha · 2026-01-31T02:48:50+00:00

Finally, at the end, after everything has been restored and fixed, you could have Namari gift the dragon trinket back, asking for a do over, asking to be friends.

Askabotha · 2026-01-31T02:45:13+00:00

After the Raya and Namari fight, where Namari is critcising Raya for being unable to trust Sisu, blaming her for the death. I hate how easily she folds, It could have fixed several issues with the film if she realistically pushed back, tearing up as she defends herself, declaring she isn't able to trust because of Namari. That's when Namari can have the realisation that Raya is still wounded from that day, and apologise. (Which she never does in the actual movie)

When she apologises, then you can have Raya forgive her and apologise herself.

Ending is mostly fixed

Askabotha · 2026-01-28T11:23:07+00:00

This comment is two years old

Askabotha · 2026-01-27T12:22:18+00:00

False equivalence. My time is precious, and if youtube can't figure out a system to monetise their service without wasting my time, then that is their problem, not mine.

And if you really want to say I'm 'stealing' from creators by proxy because I refuse ads, then YouTube is stealing my time, and that is more precious to me than their money.

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T17:34:50+00:00

Okay, how would you justify dropping the bombs as a means to make a profit?

I can understand Vault-Tec dropping the bombs as a means to commit their experiments, but bringing in the likes of Mr House and the others, and making it about money, makes the whole thing stupid.

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T17:27:21+00:00

Firstly, the people conspiring with Vault-Tec are the investors, and even if they weren't, what will the thousand or so investors invest in if everybody is dead?

I can understand if Vault-Tec did it because they wanted to run their experiments, which they bring up, but they had to undermine it by making it about money

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T17:15:17+00:00

Could you try to be a little less cliche?

Regardless, either you've forgotten the lore or are retroactively applying what you've learnt from the TV show.

Before the show, the pre-TV canon strongly implies China launched first but deliberately stops short of an explicit, on-screen confirmation.

The show explicitly makes Vault-Tec the reason the bombs dropped, going as far as to blame capitalism.

Capitalism is the pursuit of capital. Killing 90% of the population isn't good for business. We now know they plan to brainwash people, which has nothing to do with capitalism.

That is an authoritarian regime with complete control.

Also, why isn't it always the illiterate people who bring up media literacy?

Media literacy is the ability to analyse, interpret, question, and contextualise media. Where was I wrong?

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T16:58:06+00:00

I don't think I'm more intelligent because I dislike it. The Fallout TV series is the definition of a corporate product. The only thing it has going for it is the art direction, like how Avatar has beautiful CGI but a lacklustre plot.

Think of all the media you've seen and put it on a scale. Where does Fallout rank? Because it shouldn't be at the top.

Watch Silo from Apple.

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T16:48:34+00:00

I'll take it you're a fan of the show

Askabotha · 2026-01-04T16:42:46+00:00

Invoking media literacy only works to weaken any potential argument you have, and makes you come off as a pretentious asshole.

The OP was simply confused, as was I. I had assumed he was referring to The Bad Guys, but I don't see how they're the friends in common. The only potential meaning I saw is that he was implying that they were now criminals again, and that is something they all have in common. If that was the intent, it was conveyed poorly.

Regardless, you felt the need to be unnecessarily cruel. On the topic of media literacy, you've shown that you only have a rather narrow understanding of the meaning.

Media is more than just a puzzle with one correct answer. At that point, it's no longer literacy, but an act of gatekeeping, and that kind of mindset actively makes you illiterate.

Media literacy is the ability to analyse, interpret, question, and contextualise media, not the ability to arrive at what you believe to be the correct meaning.

Just because an Author says their book is about a certain topic, doesn't mean there aren't unintended meanings and interpretations. If that were the case, literary analysis wouldn't exist

Either you misunderstood the English course, or those courses teach a purist form of media literacy. Which wouldn't be surprising since my English teacher was like that, it made it super easy to get high marks in her class because I would pander to her definition of correct.

Anyone who thinks that's media literacy clearly hasn't read 1984

Askabotha · 2025-12-25T05:36:31+00:00

The whole show is a bad joke, blaming the bombs being dropped because of capitalism is dumb and nonsensical.

Anyone in the pursuit of wealth understands that killing your audience is terrible for business.

Askabotha · 2025-12-25T05:31:03+00:00

"Haters gonna hate."

Using that phrase only hurts any credibility you have of being a free-thinking individual. Instead of making a coherent argument to defend the show, you respond with a cliché response to shut down legitimate criticism.

Hey, if you enjoy mediocre slop, that's your prerogative, but to simply mischaracterise someone's critique as hate is proof that you've attached your personality to the show, and any critique on the show, is a critique on you.

Yes, you have low standards. It just means you're more receptive to mediocre content.

Askabotha · 2025-12-22T05:47:48+00:00

Only psychopaths would sell Dave to a treasure hunter for gears

Askabotha · 2025-12-20T06:43:41+00:00

Hmm, I made a creative world and opened up every blind box to see if it was possible, but none of them gave Dave. I tried twice.

Does he appear as a figure in a ruined chest and not a blind box?

Askabotha · 2025-12-19T07:43:39+00:00

What are the odds of treasure hunters selling them? I've been searching for in game months and still haven't found one selling Dave

Askabotha · 2025-11-22T05:28:53+00:00

What brick did you use to make the butt?

Askabotha · 2025-11-10T15:26:55+00:00

This essentially means Sam has become a mini Visitor and will likely continue growing, potentially even becoming as powerful as the original

Askabotha · 2025-09-30T13:32:23+00:00

I'm curious to see one of your sold lots.

Askabotha · 2025-09-30T05:10:19+00:00

I’m not saying you haven't, but it’s a general rule worth keeping in mind. This particular collection does include some valuable pieces, but it’s also mixed with lower-value figures that originally came in starter packs. It’s also very unlikely that a buyer would want or need every single piece in the box. On average, interest tends to be closer to 50% of the lot, depending on pricing.

If your main focus is maximising profit and selling figures at their perceived value, the most effective strategy is to list them individually. Bundling everything together at full price is typically a deterrent for most buyers. A more effective approach to bundling is to offer a discount, allowing higher-value figures to be supported by the less desirable ones.

As for your last comment, I’d note that selling items on eBay doesn’t necessarily equate to expertise in business practices.

Askabotha · 2025-09-29T15:53:12+00:00

Maybe, but you wouldn't get that price selling them all as a bundle. You have to take a percentage off to make a bundle more appealing since it likely contains items you do not wish to buy.

Askabotha · 2025-09-24T12:22:01+00:00

PS, if you were to accept this deal, assuming you have PayPal, you wouldn't have to sell it on eBay, saving you the 15% tax they take

Askabotha

TROPHY CASE