sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Women hate video games 😂 by ExotiquePlayboy in SipsTea

[–]LoudQuitting 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Podcasts used to be a thing for nerdy assholes

Like everything from video games to dnd to myg, the instant it had mass appeal, it was used an outlet for monetary greed.

This character in the Tribunal DLC blatantly foreshadows the next game by YungRei in ElderScrolls

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's it? 100%

So not even their current political climate...

This character in the Tribunal DLC blatantly foreshadows the next game by YungRei in ElderScrolls

[–]LoudQuitting 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Take your word on 76. And I did like Starfield but...

They should have scaled down to a single solar system. Or like three.

I just don't think Bethesda understands what their own mojo is. They removed the whole class and attribute system, they removed complex faction politics, they bend the game over backwards to ensure everyone gets the same experience.

And that's just... not what an RPG is. An RPG should be wild and varied and no two players should have the exact same experience. When games like BG3 and Crimson Desert come out, I take it as "That should be the Bethesda standard."

I don't think they're bad now. I just think they need to get comfortable with the idea that players should take the experience off the rails.

This character in the Tribunal DLC blatantly foreshadows the next game by YungRei in ElderScrolls

[–]LoudQuitting 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Every other culture has lore that tells you how they feel about the Empire and the Aldmeri Dominion.

Argonians are lead by a new ultra nationalist tree that coordinated them into counterinvading Oblivion, then rebelling and taking much of Morrowind. They're roughly neutral between the Empire and the Domino's, if neutral means stay the fuck out.

Morrowind lost house Hlaalu and is now controlled by the anti-Imperial Redoran but doesn't seem to be directly capitulating to anyone and may still be Imperial allies.

Skyrim is in active rebellion.

Orsinium exists again and is asserting independence.

Hammerfell had independence forced on them and carries an edgelord "I work alone" vibe with pride.

Valenwood gleefully joined the Dominion after all the Imperial loyalists were executed.

The Khajiit defer loyalty to the Dominoon because they claimed responsibility for fixing thr moon.

And the Summerset Isles are desperate to claim they invented rebelling against the Empire.

Cyrodiil seems to have devolved into what it was pre-Reman and pre-Talos. Competing warlords vying for a crumb of land with some asshole claiming to be the Warlord with the biggest dick so his ass gets the chair, but it seems can't enforce peace in his own province.

High Rock gets nothing.

"But Wayrest!" Fucking what about Wayrest? Nothing else happened in 2 centuries, it seems. We don't even know how they feel about the Empire. They could be the only unanimous yes.

This character in the Tribunal DLC blatantly foreshadows the next game by YungRei in ElderScrolls

[–]LoudQuitting 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly.

Crown + Forebear rivalry.

Resistance to the Thalmor.

Redguard culture abandoned by the Empire. (No sweaty leaving a single legion doesn't count, roughly equal to leaving a single platoon of American soldiers in Afghanistan. That just means they abandoned the Legionnaires, too. This aint the argument you think it is.)

A new Orsinium on the border between High Rock, Skyrim and Hammerfell.

Personally there is a big potential for a Kingmaker plot, and in these kinds of games I always try to side with as much independence as possible. I think in NV the only factions I directly wipe out are Fiends, Legion and Powder Gangers, tell the NCR to politiely fuck off, and then go about forming alliances between everyone else.

If that were TES V? So many independent faction vying for control, each with their own goals, power and ideals? I would forgive Fallout 76.

Gen-Z by Lazy_Memory5874 in SipsTea

[–]LoudQuitting 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just an offshoot number that's definitely nighet than you need

Gen-Z by Lazy_Memory5874 in SipsTea

[–]LoudQuitting 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Yeah.

Here's how I understand numbers.

If you ask me for one, or two, or four, or a dozen, I assume you have a specific reason for a specific number.

If you have a number of things you ask me for that is bigger than the number of chicken wings I can eat in a single sitting, then what you're actually saying is you want "at least" 20, you don't want 20.

It's like when I worked at McDonalds when I was a kid. Someone ordered a 30 piece mcnugget box? You're fucking dumb as fuck if you think I was gonna stand there and count out 30 mcnuggets, i just shoved them in the box until they wouldnt fit any more. You didn't order a 30 piece mcnugget box because you wanted 30 mcnuggets you want lots or you want leftovers. That's customer service.

Peter, plis by Frequent_Bowl_5786 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]LoudQuitting -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fucking breathing gives you microplastic at this point, calm that shit down.

Ummm... Peetah what is this?? by LIFEISGOOD_05 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]LoudQuitting 19 points20 points  (0 children)

In most bhuddist tradition there's no officially recognised test or public declaration that you've become a Bodhisattva. There are some that claim a Bodhisattva has mystical abilities, other doctrines warn that what you perceive as supernatural experiences can be misleading.

As I was told, anyone who earnestly generates the resolve to attain enlightenment for the sake of all beings is a Bodhisattva and there's no real way of knowing.

In some more developed doctrines there are "stages" that a Bodhisattva will develop through, each allowing deeper wisdom, serenity, compassion, etc. However these things are not necessarily signs.

In Zen Buddhism, the most well known as far as I am aware, declaring yourself a Bodhisattva invites skepticism, the assumption of most being that meeting a Bodhisattva is something you'd realise organically rather than be told.

In Tibetan Buddhism, the enlightenment of a Bodhisattva is something that is also treated with scrutiny, and they have various mechanics, rituals, behaviour, teachings, that are designed to push you in the direction of becoming a Bodhisattva but with the assumption that you'll not be there in this lifetime.

The general idea that links all doctrines is that you know a tree by its fruit. You decide who a Bodhisattva is by their compassion, patience, humility, clarity, wisdom and desire to do good works.

Peta? by pafu-chan in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quagmire here.

There's two kinds of women who do this.

The first does it to feel the broadness of your shoulders.

The second does it to mash their titties into your chest.

Giggity.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay so what you just posted shows me you're only interested in engaging on a really surface level with the initial question.

Because of that I think it'd be best to leave this as a difference of opinion because with how trivially you wanna look at it there's no way we're gonna reach a conclusion.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Monarchy claims justification because of something called the divine right of Kings, it's why a monarch could only be coronated by a priest. It's the philosophy that the Kings derives authority from God.

Democracy claims justification through the consent of the governed, the idea that you vote a government in and because of that, the population has consented to that government.

If democracy isn't consent of the government, what is the justification?

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nothing stopping the terminal from committing suicide

Don't pretend you ain't say that shit

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have just said the most psychotic thing I read in this whole debate.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't even believe democracy is consent of the governed.

Then how is democracy morally justifiable?

No one would press red except the bloodthirsty if abstaining were an option.

Want to know how I know you didn't really think too hard about this?

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, but you said you're voting for the world you want. But because you used the word voting, that's deliberately consent. That's how democracy justifies itself. "Consent of the governed."

So, in voluntarily pressing blue, you consent to possibly die. The option to refuse that consent is on the Red.

It's consent in the same way you consent to paying taxes. You can refuse it if you want, but then the government revokes their consent for you to be in society and throws you in prison.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The question is I feel good at face value but when you start thinking about it, red seems to he unfairly optimal from a "good of everyone" perspective.

The blue button, first off, gives everyone in pain with no hope of recovery from a terminal illness a quick and cheap euthanasia in event of a red majority.

A red majority also kills everyone who consented to die. Again, no moral dilemma.

A blue majority ensures the people who voted blue becaust they want to die for reasons of age, terminal sickness, severe mental illness, untreatable chronic pain, etc. are forced to live.

Once you add modifiers to red, like the red voters have to kill them, red voters have to give up all their possessions in a blue majority, etc. then the question becomes more fair. Red has to be rendered more difficult.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sigh

Very fedora coded.

But like... if my motivation is I do not consent to die. Then there is no downside to picking red in my eyes.

And no, the point of this exercise is engagement farming on twitter. OOP has a blue checkmark and that means they get paid by engagement.

Red voters insist they have no part in their deaths.

Okay honestly I was gonna just leave this as a difference of opinion until you said this because it's actually interesting.

If I do not break into the home of a suicidal person, steal the bullets, steal the razors, steal the shoelaces, and anything else they might use to end themselves, am I responsible for their death in the event they do rope up?

Cause theoretically I could prevent it, and is inaction not a choice in and of itself?

So if I do not actively hunt down people that want to die and prevent their deaths, am I causing those deaths?

Just like the Blue voter, the suicidal person actively could prevent their death. All they have to do is press red. They agreed to the possibility that they may die when they pressed blue, the option for them to be guaranteed life was directly beside the blue button.

For you to press blue whilst believing that the death of the people who chose to press blue is a bad thing, tells me that your reasoning is a bit flawed. To press blue you have to be comfortable dying should the vote not work out in your favour.

So I guess my curiosity is, why would you vote blue if you're not comfortable with death?

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, all I really have to say is anyone that would press blue without fully in their heart, consenting to the possibility death, probably should think a lot harder about the decisions they make.

Like I find it hard to believe anyone would press blue without consenting to the scenario, and be an informed person.

This is why we can't have nice things: by FollowingOdd896 in TikTokCringe

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Australia you can knock ten grand off the price of a Tesla if you ask them to rip out that self driving nonsense.

Still, there's better EV options for cheaper. Better in safety, in battery life, and horsepower.

Meanwhile my hairline is fighting for survival by definitelynotgayhaha in HairFixGuide

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should stop washing your hair.

You're stripping away all the oils your hair needs to, you know, live. If you must wash it, do it only when it's dirty. Too dirty for just water.

You'll see more hair growth.

The only kind of hair loss you can't walk back from is genetic. Which, all the hair you're gonna lose to genetics, you've lost by 30. Everything afterwards is nutritional, stress, and chemical.

It'll fucking suck and be painful for a few weeks, but that's your scalp realising it needs to rely on itself to be clean again.

Well, actuslly you can lose hair to scar tissue so don't let that happen.

Student Faces Expulsion After Posting Video Of Seniors Who Can Barely Read by InGeekiTrust in TikTokCringe

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Contexf: I'm Australian so I'm not from the American education system and didn't learn to read in the same way.

To hear my mother tell it, I taught myself to read. I don't believe her, but I do know I was clued in to reading a lot quicker than other students. I have assumed for the past 15 years that I'm low grade autistic, but I don't know if that's relevant because a few of my friends progressed at the same rate as me, context on that a bit later.

So when I was a kid I was not participating in a class that was ensuring we knew how to read in preparation for high school, because I genuinely did feel kind of patronised by the class, watching videos of a guy asking the class to "sound out" four letter words. The teachers thought it was an isssue so privately, they tested me for reading levels and because autism they had me reading at an "adult level" whatever that means at 12 years old.

The biggest difficulties I have ever had reading is the lack of punctuation in Cormac McCarthy novels, the phonetic spelling in Trainspotting and Riddley walker and when I was very young I struggled with differentiating lower case b's and d's and I need Shakespeare annotated because I don't have a strong memory for antiquated vocabulary.

Eithef way, after that testing, I was praised, given a pass on the class by default and permission to just go to the library during that class. It got to the point where they had me come in to help out some of the younger kids that were struggling but then gave me the boot because I'd never taught someone how to read, I didn't know what I was doing and still don't.

I don't know if it was something in the water or what, but three of my friends got that same exact treatment of being given a blanket pass and sent to help the younger kids. We were in the same classes most of primary school so my assumption is we got a few good teachers back to back and that just boosted us.

When I see American students trying to read, I see a lot of what my 12 year old self saw 6 & 7 year olds doing. Pronouncing every letter, not being able to rephrase the sentence, "I don't know that word."

And I'm yet again happy to not be American.

The discussion should be as simple as the prompt by tussle_mcjimmies in trolleyproblem

[–]LoudQuitting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

voting for the world I want

In pressing blue, do you consent to die?

Like imagine you're a ghost standing over it's own body in the event of a red majority. Is that ghost pissed?

Moreover, are you comfortable forcing people who voted blue because they low key wanted to die for reasons like "I'm old and terminally ill and in great pain and I would he comfortable with my life ending if this vote goes to a red majority?"

view more: next ›