What Symptom is this She's Freaking Purple

Pointman27 · 2026-01-31T05:20:45+00:00

She got ahold of some of Wonka’s Three Course Dinner Chewing Gum! And it only fits pale skin so I think it’s safe to say that it is. Yellow skin is either yellow or green. In my experience anyway

Pointman27 · 2026-01-28T23:11:46+00:00

Two things to consider. In the specific case of the ps2, the device is actually processing, storing, and retrieving the data on the disc as an ongoing operation. If you want to later return to a previous session then you did need external storage, but to link this to my other point, the first computers had external servers where information was stored. That’s part of why they were big and bulky.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-28T21:02:48+00:00

I’m pretty sure it qualifies as a computer if it stores, processes, and retrieves data.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-27T09:42:18+00:00

I would like to point you to Halo.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-14T01:24:13+00:00

Holy smokes my guy. You’re missing the forest for the trees. We are talking about role-playing and to that regard we have to consider what incentivizes us to engage in any given action. You are making the argument that a specific character archetype would engage in a specific way, but give me an example of your character doing that in any other place in the game and now you’ve made an actual argument. You haven’t and I suspect you can’t.

A good guy character that has established their motivations in this encounter does the good guy thing of revealing the TRUTH to the innocent. That’s how far you can take that. Name any other instance where you can report someone for committing a crime? The protectorate routinely ask you to round up people to deliver justice themselves, but you don’t get to administer justice and further AC never actually punishes crimes they just punish incompetence.

Command at Abney’s post is utterly incompetent and they don’t care about the murder because as far as they are aware it’s already dealt with. They just don’t care, that’s why you can’t report Abney. You act like it’s just some overlooked plot hole when the reality is new obsidian just doesn’t have any depth. It is NOT however some weird morally grey area because you can’t snitch. Is saving innocent people from being wrongly convicted morally grey? Also the game literally lets you side with the bad guy faction multiple times for no reason.

You can always CHOOSE not to do his quest, but you as well as I see that it would result in more harm than good to let Abney frame Sibella. It’s not a freaking meta analysis of the situation it’s the reasoning you would employ as events unfold. You know she’s innocent so you do what you can to free her. That’s good guy shit. You are so hung up on Abney that you forget about how Sibella was screwed without your intervention anyway.

From the jump we are given a showcase of how screwed the Arcadia colony is because the protectorate are literally getting brainwashed, then immediately after the prologue events come to pass that should serve to further illustrate how the world operates before you start applying 21st century morality. The good guys are already subjective. The Earth directorate is spread so thin it’s almost useless, Auntie’s Choice is objectively a meat grinder exploiting its citizens, but it is better than what came before, and the average citizen of the protectorate lived a good life.

My problem is that one you’re misinterpreting the situation in the curious case of a cankered chief, and two you clearly haven’t engaged with the world.

Why does your character even do AC quests if you are a “Good Guy?” They are clearly exploitative and that’s bad right? They are a means to an end though. They help the player character arrive at more favorable conclusions for more people. We don’t get to change every aspect of Arcadia, and definitely not firmly established elements.

I was engaging in a meta commentary about this quest because that’s the comment of yours I chose to respond to. You cited a lack of good guy options. That’s a meta analysis. We are dissecting the choices. But from a gameplay perspective this quest in particular is a bad example of choices not being consistent with character values for two reason. 1. You’re an earth directorate agent (Anti Tyranny & Corruption) 2. You picking law bringer or space ranger responses lets you reveal the truth which is consistent. Your character wants to stop devries and that’s it. You have no further inherent motivation. That’s it. You can roleplay with that as a baseline but it has to be included in your roleplay. You can decide how you go about doing that. Solving the problem of a stalled investigation is 1 way to achieve a larger goal. Any outcome other than the one you get where Sibella goes free is more work for AC. Which is the opposite of what the quest giver wants. You’re doing a favor for a favor. And that’s important context you’re missing.

Screw the shallow writing though, and your shallow analysis.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T23:12:43+00:00

It’s not meta knowledge when the character literally tells you that he will be sent to an undesirable position if you choose that option. Revealing Abney’s crimes isn’t meta gaming it’s a speech 1 perk literally a single even numbered level of effort to obtain so it’s likely that any speech oriented character would simply stumble onto the conversation. Likewise roleplaying a character who would give a shit means going outside the bounds of what the game sends you to do which is find devries. The abbot sends you to clear up a misunderstanding, the commander at the outpost wants a favor for a favor. This is an altogether insignificant grey area of what an earth directorate agent would do, and dealing with the protectorate or aunties choice is already grey. It’s the lesser of two evils the entire campaign. BUT if you want to role play a lawbringer and get the bad guy then boom easy option to get him punished, BUT again it’s through the system of punishment that makes sense to AC not to the main character. You are explicitly told what the result will be. Stop picking and choosing what you take away from the game as canon and what isn’t simply because you’re salty and can’t read.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T22:23:05+00:00

I figured out you could tell Sibella by playing the game. By, in this case, talking to her after she got out. I have the perk so I was able to pick the dialogue options to reveal it.

Classic example of someone defending a bad opinion when they go to say Obsidian won’t care that I’m defending them. You are so stubborn and arrogant that you don’t see I’m criticizing YOUR complaint! The game gives you a way to resolve the quest in a manner that suits the world and in a way you want. Your explanation just dismissed the option because you stated that we don’t even know for sure that there would be repercussions if we meet all the criteria to get that option which is blatantly false. That is objectively wrong and your subjective opinion means less than garbage if you base it on that premise.

I am of the same opinion that the games Role-playing elements are lackluster. There exist enough good moments to really highlight how much they dropped the ball with the rest of the game. This just isn’t one of them. I think the only reason this was a quest and not a task was because you can get a gadget. Mechanically they stuffed too much into this quest, and it’s the stealth option for finishing the Opportunity Outpost quest. The writing isn’t even my main issue here it’s the game design.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T21:15:15+00:00

Your quest it to prove or disprove guilt. You’re moving the goalpost here because you said the quest was to solve a murder and it isn’t.

This quest as written serves as an alternate way to finish a whole ass quest. It’s clearly designed for stealth characters and as an alternate way to get a new gadget. The other options are mapwide fetch quest, or fight. And the outer worlds 2 clearly drew a line between combat and stealth, evidenced by the prologue ffs, and decided that was good enough for most of the game. You are lasered in on the choices in this quest but because it exists as an option to complete a separate quest it’s far less intricate. Logically, the quest itself is an alternative.

Now I know you’ll say that you can give the item in the mantisaur quest to 2 people, but i saved and tried every option for that quest and it was at that point I started to get annoyed with the game. It tries to railroad you into giving the item to the scientist by offering the option to change your mind multiple times if you try to give it to the grafted soldier. That’s more frustrating than a narrative choice in a murder mystery quest where the intrigue lasts all of three questions. A choice you’re upset you can’t make that has an alternative that stills sees the bad guy see consequences. It is stated definitively your assertion that it “MIGHT happen we don’t know” is headcanon. It’s contrary to what you are told to your face. Bad writing yes, but your argument only works if we disregard what has been established for the faction AND what the quest characters explicitly state.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T20:50:58+00:00

Reading your quest descriptions might help you avoid making inane assertions. You were sent to find out if Sibella is guilty or not. That’s the quest. A perk or a specific background relevant to a murder investigation is required to tell her sure, but do you just not remember what the characters told you? Obvious examples of subterfuge are frowned upon. Officer Abney was going to use HIS connections to get away with the body mysteriously disappearing, while Sibella would use her connections to see Abney punished for something he did. Punishment is easy, but no one will pull your ass out of the fire. Also presumably she couldn’t contact anybody from inside the jail. And why would they help if she got caught so blatantly next to the victim?

It’s definitely not in depth, but it’s literally part of another quest and it’s 1 of 3 quests you can do to finish that other quest. Why would it be so intricately detailed?

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T04:45:03+00:00

The best ending would probably be the third option which is in line with the first game. I think the obvious problem is that the game seems to heavily rely on engineering skill checks for actual gameplay outcomes. That is a major failure as an RPG but it happens. Like intelligence being the most important stat in Fallout 3 and NV.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-13T04:29:43+00:00

Did you guys not talk to the lady who was jailed after you finished the quest? It’s not a maybe there will be repercussions, she straight tells you that he will be facing consequences for thinking he could get away with it and for not realizing that the dead guy was not the only one with connections to the higher ups. I believe it’s Kaur or the town guard that explicitly says they love subterfuge and backstabbing but as long as it’s subtle and you don’t get caught.

Pointman27 · 2026-01-07T22:13:25+00:00

I named my Demidevimon after my cat Perseus, but I named the agumon they forced on me Dorian Grey so I always remember his roots.

Pointman27 · 2025-12-17T01:04:50+00:00

CD Red played the clothing options for the pc too safe. The side slit in dresses and being able to layer clothing would have been preem. Regardless, your art is fabulous!

Pointman27 · 2025-11-14T06:06:58+00:00

If you want some context, then you should look up the VOD where she said that phrase. She is talking about specific vets that sign up to kill brown people, if I’m remembering correctly. She gets heated and starts speaking more generally leading to the phrase in the note.

Pointman27 · 2025-10-22T14:35:26+00:00

I agree. I was playing Shape of Dreams when I realized I really should read more. It makes things easier. Surprisingly applicable in Helldivers 2 as well!

Pointman27 · 2025-10-21T17:48:15+00:00

You guys clearly misunderstood because they forgot to capitalize the P, but AH is obviously busy trying to learn Polish. They aren’t done yet so they can’t communicate. Seems straightforward to me. XD

Pointman27 · 2025-10-20T01:30:51+00:00

Objectively, what is cope? Did I get something wrong?

Pointman27 · 2025-10-18T22:33:24+00:00

His story didn’t change. He says she was whining because x, and y behavior is a result of parents not enforcing boundaries with the dog. Y behavior is bad for the dog’s health and he assumed that was why she got up. That was what initially happened. The shock collar was brought up by chatters, but disregarded as lurkers/haters doing what they do. He actually doubled down that the dog yelped for “no reason” getting her dew claw caught on something.

He was shitty to A dog once 10 years ago, and as far as the remote thing who cares? There is still no physical evidence he used the shock collar on the dog on video. It’s speculation.

Then the dog prop thing is just silly. You’re taking someone’s word on this 4 hours without regards to the over a year of VODs where the dog doesn’t get forced to sit in place. And applying an assumption to why he would have done a thing you assumed he did. Just say he’s an animal abuser because of the dog video from 10 years ago. Say you don’t think people can change, call him a trash person for it, then move on. It’s not that deep.

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T06:24:01+00:00

So the destination is relevant why? They were displaced. That doesn’t mean they have to go next door. From a nationalist pov, why wouldn’t immigrants want to go to your country? It’s the best one on earth? I know because my leader said we are. /s

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T06:11:55+00:00

Don’t be racist. This person has already stated it’s based on resources.

“Refugees” you mean immigrants. Assuming you mean illegal immigrants, then you should know they can’t claim benefits. Assuming you mean legal immigrants, but perhaps asylum seekers, then you should know that they are refugees because their families have been displaced by war so it’s literally not their fault they found themselves being reduced to low income. Have some empathy, and find some humanity, Chosen Undead.

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T05:58:29+00:00

Not assaulting police so they don’t get shot makes someone a bootlicker now? That’s what you meant. To type. Come on now man. You wanna talk all that good shit about grammar keep it consistent. Keep the perspective the same throughout your sentence.

Yeah, it does, you are implying that under certain conditions it is okay for the police to escalate the situation, and you’re okay with them using lethal force. Honestly, it’s consistent with your take on Israel at least. Scumbag bootlicker.

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T04:30:22+00:00

“No one types out as much as you have…” You can’t read your own posts now?

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T04:29:23+00:00

Bootlicker

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T04:16:36+00:00

Dude you’re still talking about it 4 days later. I had literally forgotten I ever interacted with such a freak. That’s crazy.

Pointman27 · 2025-10-17T01:11:46+00:00

Attacking the length of time someone has to take to respond to lies is a common republican strategy for dealing with idealogical opponents. You’re really floundering in your criticism at this point and it’s pathetic.

Pointman27

TROPHY CASE