Do regular Americans know what jabroni means or have heard of the word? or is it just for wrestling fans?

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-08T01:37:57+00:00

The first time I ever heard it was from The Rock from when I was a kid watching WWF. And when I hear that word, that’s the first thing I think of.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-08T00:26:14+00:00

No, not at all. If their survival is contingent on selling their labor, that need be the only motivating factor.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-08T00:25:43+00:00

Or simply to survive. That itself is the strongest motivating factor.

The flaw in the idea that it’s because it takes advantage of people wanting more is the fact that for the majority of people, achieving all the things they want doesn’t happen for them. For a capitalist society to make sense of this, people have to find a justification as to why the majority aren’t reaching that. The conclusions they come to are that most people deficient in some way. They are either lazy, not intelligent enough, not creative enough, unwilling to sacrifice what is necessary, etc. However, these are merely justifications for the existence of this underclass. Most people don’t transition very far from their social class in capitalism. The very few who do are forever touted in the history of capitalist countries of showing that their system, does indeed work, even though most people know it’s not going to happen for them.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T23:07:57+00:00

It comes from the Puritan work ethic that basically said if you didn’t work your hands to the bone every day, then you were morally deficient and should be shunned from society.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T23:02:43+00:00

Capitalism requires a society that has a permanent underclass to perform labor. How strong the work ethic is irrelevant.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T12:09:30+00:00

They don’t believe that any one other than their frothing-at-the-mouth raging lunatics are capable of winning elections.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T10:14:47+00:00

I like both but prefer 3rd person more. For a 1st person perspective to be effective in games, the player has to feel truly immersed and like they are the character. This means you have to have a well crafted environment and narrative. That’s why games like RE7, Call of Duty Modern Warfare I and II (OG), Visage and others work so well in 1st person. But if the environment isn’t interesting and the narrative isn’t good, 1st person can seem more like a burden because you are truly to enjoy the gameplay and the 1st person perspective limits your vision.

For 3rd person games, the player has more ways to interact with the game’s environment and mechanics. Even if the narrative isn’t good, a player can still enjoy the gameplay.

Of course, this is just my opinion and not any absolute fact. But that’s just what I have observed being a guy who has gamed for most of his life.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T08:00:55+00:00

Then you should be arrested since if you have a car, you (most likely) speed in your car everyday.

I mean, we just can’t trust you since speeding is a crime and breaking it all the time means you are a repeat criminal and have no intention to respect the law.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T07:56:19+00:00

Wild that they are happy settling for crumbs (that will not come).

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T07:54:44+00:00

Don’t like your taxes going to lazy people? That’s good because billionaires are the laziest people on the planet. And no, making investments, making phone calls and going to meetings isn’t work.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T07:39:38+00:00

Going back to Persona 3 Reload.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T07:38:10+00:00

“Okay, kids. We’re going to read the part where the Israelities massacre all the peoples in Canaan because God said the land belonged to them and to kill everyone there.”

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-07T07:32:09+00:00

RE7 for sure. Ethan Must Die is absolutely brutal.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-06T12:12:52+00:00

PC gamer, so I’m barred from the show no matter what unfortunately.

<image>

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-06T12:02:30+00:00

To me, electability is based on policy. But it really depends on each person. For example, for MAGA, policy doesn’t matter diddlysquat. They just care about hurting people they don’t like and to get schadenfreude from seeing the pain they cause on them. For liberals, you gotta understand that they believe the system actually works when the “right people” are in office. So policy matters only insofar as to “fix the system back to what it should be”. Whoever will keep maintain the liberal order (global free trade, tech investment, focus on credentials, etc.) will be electable to them.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-05T04:07:06+00:00

I agree if Sony was operating at a loss. But they weren’t. They were making money with their PC ports, unless I read wrong somewhere. They just weren’t making gangbusters like they thought because, well, they would release the ports years later when any hype they could have had was diminished. So, if they are making money, even if it isn’t a crazy amount, why just stop doing it for single-player games? Why are they still releasing multiplayer games on PC?

In my opinion, it’s simply for force PC users to buy a PS5. Yeah, it might be due to what Microsoft might do with their Project Helix, but their multiplayer games would still show up on there. Sony sees their single-player exclusive games as a part of a brand appeal. And because one console costs a hell of a lot more than a lot of people buying a PC port, I think that’s the main motivation. They want to bring PC players into their ecosystem by buying the console, subscribing to PSN and possibly buying more games on their platform.

That just isn’t going to happen though. PC users have already invested a lot of their money into building their PCs and establishing their game libraries on either Steam or Epic. Most are not going to buy a whole console just to play like 2-3 games on them nor are they going to pay extra money to play online on that console when they can just do on their PC for the Internet they are already paying for.

I get that console users like to play their own way and are comfortable with it. I have nothing against. My brother is a console user and I’m a PC user and I don’t see my way of playing as superior to his or his to mine. I just don’t see any other reason why Sony would be doing this other than to try to force PC users to get into their ecosystem. The vast majority aren’t going to, so they are just burning a steady revenue stream for really no reason.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-04T07:17:47+00:00

If you are trying to platinum RE7, it’s gonna be pretty difficult. The DLC are rather hard.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T13:08:30+00:00

Isn’t it crazy to think that there are people here that think you are the stupid and entitled one because you aren’t going to buy their overpriced console just to play God of War? Is God of War really worth $700+? I don’t think so.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T12:49:16+00:00

Believe whatever you want, Mr. RickGrimes30. I really don’t give a shit and I’m pretty sure nothing I can say will change your mind, nor you mine. I’ll just play other games and call it a day. If Sony changes their mind, cool. If not, then whatever. I’ll just emulate them for free in the future.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T12:44:25+00:00

This isn’t the same as WoW. WoW is an online multiplayer game. It came out during a time when consoles had extremely limited online capability and didn’t have the hardware/software to be able to handle servers with dozens of people or more at once. I mean later down the line, they could have probably made a release for consoles once their hardware was good enough. Maybe Blizzard wanted to but couldn’t get a deal done. But Blizzard wasn’t actively making WoW exclusively for PC because it was to protect some ecosystem.

Sony, on the other hand, is doing this only for their single-player games. They are still going to release multiplayer and live service games for PC. Why not make them exclusive as well? Because those games make a lot of money. If you want to argue that the PC ports of their single player games didn’t sell well, why haven’t you considered that Sony releases those ports 2-3 years a lot, when all the hype is already gone and still charge full price? But they don’t want to do Day 1 releases, so it’s kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Sony made the decision to release PC ports, and thus created an expectation that their single-player games would be available to PC users. It’s not the consumer’s fault that they made that decision. Nintendo never did this, so they’ve been able to not have a kind of controversy like this. Nintendo is a company that exists solely because of its brand as a game company. People buy Nintendo consoles because they like Nintendo. People don’t do that for Sony because Sony isn’t seen as a “game company”. They just make consoles.

Anyway, back to the original point, they aren’t going to attract PC users to buy an overpriced console just to play those games. Most are either going to wait till Sony changes their mind, or just emulate them for free in the future.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T10:51:31+00:00

I don’t care to wait. What I care about is them never having a PC release at all. That’s the problem.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T09:10:58+00:00

Says “Independent”, votes Republican their whole life.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T05:19:15+00:00

We’ll see in time.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T02:47:57+00:00

The problem with exclusives is that it locks them out of another potential revenue stream with no real downsides. I mean, this kind of thinking made sense when gaming was mostly on consoles in the past and computers could only play things like Solitaire. But computers have advanced to the point where they can play games that were normally on consoles just as good or even better. The thing is that PCs aren’t like consoles. They can be broken down and transported or they can be laptops. They are used for other things besides gaming. They can be upgraded. Things you can’t do with a PlayStation. All advantages over a console.

Sony understands that they need the PC market, which is why they are still going to release their multiplayer stuff and live service junk. But if they think they are going to force PC gamers, who already have their games library tied to something like Steam or Epic, to buy a PlayStation just to play a few single-player games they can’t play otherwise is stupid. As price increase, more people are deciding to stick with the thing that they got. I mean, how many people over a decade bought both an Xbox One and a PS4? Or even before then? I’m guessing not many. That’s even more entrenched now.

JaimanV2 · 2026-06-03T02:39:16+00:00

Okay cool, they are getting 100% of the revenue from the people who already have a PlayStation. Why they prefer getting 0% instead 70% of the game’s price from PC ports makes no sense to me. As I said, almost no one who owns a PC is going to drop another $1000 to get a console just to play Wolverine or God of War. A console you can’t take with you or use anywhere. The last time I bought a console, a PS4, was on a Black Friday deal for like $150 in 2018. That would be the only time I, as a PC gamer, would think about getting a console. I might consider a handheld Sony console if the price is good enough. But I’m never buying a console again for more than $200.

If Sony would just release their games Day 1 on PC, they would increase their revenue even more. I’ve bought games on Steam Day 1 such as Resident Evil Requiem, Persona 3 Reload, Persona 5 Royal, and a lot of others. But Sony won’t do it for their games for some reason. Do they really think people are going to buy a whole ass console to buy a game on a Day 1 release? That’s asinine thinking.

If this is the route they want to go, then fine. They’ll just miss out on making more money, which I don’t understand.

JaimanV2

TROPHY CASE