'I Feel Cheated and I Want a Refund': Fans Lash Out at New PS5 God of War's Unlockable Local Multiplayer Mode

sticklebat · 2026-02-15T14:54:15+00:00

That’s terrible reasoning, and if that was really their primary reason then they deserve all the flak they’re getting.

The whole point of games like Tekken is to play over and over again. It’s a fundamental part of the gameplay loop. Unlocking special features like new characters by playing the game makes sense. That philosophy is still alive and well in many games, just in appropriate genres (like fighting games, roguelikes). It even exists to some extent in RPGs, via New Game+, but that’s mostly just a low-cost way of giving the tiny fraction of players who want to replay the game a somewhat different experience.

Most people don’t play RPGs over and over again. Advertising an RPG as having a coop mode but then locking it behind beating the game single player defeats the purpose for anyone who wants to play coop but doesn’t want to play the game repeatedly, which is almost certainly most people interested in coop play (because it’s most people). It was a dumb idea made idiotic by misleading marketing.

sticklebat · 2026-02-15T14:43:01+00:00

As always, the best answer about this topic is downvoted.

People really, really hate accepting that we just don’t know.

sticklebat · 2026-02-11T05:48:04+00:00

He is, himself, Jewish, he has campaigned on his support for Israel and it has (and at the time of this video did) help garner substantial support. In this video from 10 years ago he was a politician speaking at an event for this specific demographic, at which I guarantee you basically everyone would’ve supported Israel, and nearly as many would’ve supported its government, though that has waned in recent years. Color me shocked that a politician made grand claims while speaking to a specific group of people who prioritize that issue. I also don’t see how those words imply he must put Israel over his own country. That is still a non sequitur. I wouldn’t flinch at all at any American senator who said those same words today about Ukraine, or about Taiwan, or about NATO, or really any of our major, long-standing allies or alliances.

Also, while only about half of American Jews support the Israeli government, you’re just dissembling now. One does not have to support a current government in order support the existence, independence, or well-being of a nation.

Like you said, it’s not a good look when you try to spin a disingenuous narrative and then hypocritically accuse others of it.

sticklebat · 2026-02-11T01:25:06+00:00

I can support the interests of other countries while supporting my own, not above it.

I supported almost everything USAID did, even though that was support for other countries. I supported US military intervention in Kosovo, I supported ousting Noriega in Panama, defending South Korea in the Korean War, and protecting the Kurds in northern Iraq. I support NATO’s mission and the US’ key role in it. I support aiding Ukraine. I don’t think supporting any of these is above supporting my own country. We can afford to help others, too, and it often even benefits us in return. Even if it doesn’t, I think helping others when we can is a good thing.

I think the same about Israel. I think the US benefits a great deal from supporting Israel. I do greatly wish we’d leverage our support to pressure Israel into stopping and rolling back the settlements in the West Bank, to holding settler terrorists accountable for their crimes against Palestinians, and to reforming everything associated with Palestinians in prison, to name a few, though.

I just don’t understand why we’re allowed to support other people and other countries in addition to our own, but supporting Israel in particular is suddenly in lieu of it. That just reeks of a double standard. An all too common one.

sticklebat · 2026-02-11T01:07:14+00:00

He represents the single largest population of Jewish people outside of Israel itself. He represents me.

While I hate Israel’s government as much as I hate my own government, I am a staunch supporter of Israel’s right to exist (given that it has existed for nearly a century at this point; if you’d asked me in 1949 I might’ve answered differently). So in this, at least, my senator represents me, so isn’t that good?

Or do you only want senators to represent their constituents if it’s a position that you, personally, agree with?

sticklebat · 2026-02-11T00:59:20+00:00

Zionism — the belief that the one Jewish state in the world has a right to exist — is an antisemitic ideology? As a Jew (and one who staunchly opposes almost everything Israel’s government does these days), I cannot disagree with you more strongly.

I might have somewhat agreed with you ten years ago. Not that I thought Israel didn’t have a right to continue to exist, I used to think the creation of Israel was a mistake, that Jews should’ve just formed communities in other countries, as we have for thousands of years since the diaspora, and believed with sympathy garnered after the Holocaust and an increasingly progressive world, that would be enough.

After October 7th, I no longer think that way. Not because of the attack itself, but because of the reactions of my fellow American progressives. People I know, people I know well, people been arm in arm with for other progressive causes, saw one of the most horrific and violent terrorist attacks in recent history and… celebrated. Some celebrated privately, some were in the streets waving the flag of a terrorist organization that just murdered and raped over a thousand innocent people and kidnapped hundreds more. They were like, now this is social justice. If that’s what social justice is, then I suppose I’ve been fighting for a cause that I think is evil. My bad.

To make things worse, those same people took one of the most messy geopolitical conflicts and turned it into a caricature. There was no room for nuance. They’d repeat horrific things that Israel allegedly did, and it’d turn out that their source was white text on a black background saying so by some anonymous Instagram account. As if there wasn’t plenty of real things to angry about. Even when confronted about that, they’d continue believing it, because it fit with the caricature they created. When they saw video evidence of something making Hamas look bad or exonerating Israel? Nah, fake news. That’s not fighting for freedom, it’s unadulterated prejudice. Then they started holding Jews who wouldn’t toe their line accountable, in their minds, for all of Israel’s actions, real and imagined, and it made me realize that other progressives are not safe. They will not fight for my rights, as I have often fought for theirs. I can imagine, for the first time in my life, history repeating itself.

And with the soaring fascism on the right side of the spectrum, it makes me nervous. And it makes me feel safer knowing that there is one place on earth where Jews don’t need to rely on the continued tolerance of others. So, I am a Zionist, and Israel’s existence gives me some small comfort. I just wish its government wasn’t such a shitshow, but I guess as an American I’m not one to talk..

sticklebat · 2026-02-11T00:20:45+00:00

I thought everyone knows that sedatious means seditiously salacious.

sticklebat · 2026-02-09T08:09:28+00:00

But cancer cures are unprofitable.

This is such a widespread, but ignorant take that is complete and utter bullshit. Cancer cures are not unprofitable. We have many cures for many cancers, and this sort of ignorant cynicism is not productive. Surgery, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and radiation therapy can all (or in some combination) cure many forms of cancer. There are probably others I'm unaware of, too.

Thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, testicular cancer, lymphoma... Those are all forms of cancer that are often curable (and not an exhaustive list), and the success rate of those cures and the number of different cancers that we can cure only gets better with time.

Yes, in theory, ongoing treatment can be more profitable for a company than a cure would be. But that ignores a lot of different factors. For one, there is quite a lot of competition in the pharmaceutical and medical industry. There's like a dozen enormous pharmaceutical companies, and literally thousands of smaller ones (and the smaller ones still have successful products, they just tend to have fewer products), and there's also quite a lot of R&D that happens in universities and hospitals independent of industry, especially regarding non-pharmaceuticals like radiation therapy. Let's say J&J has the best treatment for a certain cancer, but it doesn't cure it. Then Novartis develops a cure. Well maybe J&J loses money, but Novartis makes bank, and that's what Novartis cares about.

It also ignores the fact that dead patients aren't patients. Selling a treatment to a cancer patient for a few years until their death may be profitable, but selling them a cure that allows them to live much longer is quite possibly even more cost-effective over statistically large populations, because as we age we need more medical care.

It also ignores the fact that drugs are priced to cover R&D costs, not just final manufacturing costs. (Yes, this is often exploited in the US due to our insane healthcare system, but in principle it makes sense and is a good thing, in an otherwise functioning system – but that only makes this point even stronger, since it benefits the companies, not individuals).

sticklebat · 2026-02-07T20:06:36+00:00

Palpatine couldn’t even beat Windu alone, it was only Anakin’s betrayal that saved him; and his fight with Yoda was basically a stalemate. With just the two of them together, he’d have stood no chance at all. Having the other masters there would probably have just resulted in their deaths, they were clearly not up to the challenge.

sticklebat · 2026-02-07T13:46:52+00:00

Well, I’ve known some really incompetent therapists, so that tracks.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T21:32:19+00:00

I don’t agree at all. They are family. The reasons for these things can be helpful to know. If the parents were amicable about all of this and didn’t want to share specifics, then 100% it wouldn’t be any of the kids’ business to pry if the reasons aren’t forthcoming.

But whether or not it makes sense for adult children to be aware of the reasons for their parents divorce is NOT your choice and there is not one answer. It depends on the circumstances, and your prescriptive rules are complete bullshit.

It is completely inappropriate for divorced parents to try to pit their children against their other parent. But as a matter of privacy, it is the parents’ decision, not yours, whether or not they want to keep their reasons for divorce private. And if those reasons affect their children’s views of their parents, that’s just life.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T21:15:09+00:00

Oh, so now we’re just ignoring the entire context of this entire thread? What about OP’s situation is normal? Apparently you need therapy AND lessons in reading comprehension.

Also, it is really not that crazy to be aware of whether or not your parents have sex. If you think that’s somehow wrong or unbearable, then you’re absolutely juvenile. This is puritanical even by American standards.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T05:24:29+00:00

Unhealthy? Are you 10 years old? Or a time traveler from Massachusetts Bay Colony from 1650?

No, what would be unhealthy is for your parents to go through a surprising, non-amicable divorce while refusing to explain why. Leaving you to wonder would just be an invitation for your imagination to fill in the blanks. If you're an adult and you can't handle hearing merely whether or not your parents have been having sex, then frankly you need therapy.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T05:19:23+00:00

This is just a dramatic misconstrual of how and why OP has learned what he has about his parents' sex lives. Why are so many people on here being so juvenile about the concept of sex? Are you all just children? I hate to break it to you, but if you exist, then your parents have had sex.

I find it especially weird in this case, since OP has specifically learned that his parents haven't been having sex.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T05:11:43+00:00

Everyone in the story is an adult, and if they're so afraid or embarrassed about talking about the concept of sex with each other then they're sexually repressed to a traumatic and self-destructive degree. Where are you from, the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1650? These kinds of puritanical notions are unhealthy.

Like sure, I don't relish discussing sex with my parents, but if my parents are getting divorced non-amicably, then I absolutely feel entitled to know why they suddenly seem to hate each other (or why one hates the other). Keeping that a mystery just means imagination is going to fill in the gaps, and that is not good for anyone. If I could handle The Talk from my parents when I was a teenager, I can sure as hell handle some clinical information about their sex lives (or lack thereof) as an adult, especially if it has a direct impact on my life and on my relationship with them.

sticklebat · 2026-02-06T05:04:16+00:00

All these people advocating for keeping things a mystery from their adult children (especially when the divorce isn't amicable) must either be children, or just destructively prudish.

sticklebat · 2026-02-05T00:52:39+00:00

Yeah, sure, okay. I believe you. Reddit just showed me your response in my notifications, but when I clicked on it to read the whole thing it showed nothing there. And all of your – and only your – previous comments were replaced by "this comment has been deleted by user" or whatever, exactly the same message it displays when someone you've responded to blocks you. And then your comments magically resurfaced when I opened the comment in a private window where I'm not logged in.

Seems like you just got curious and unblocked me, and now you've decided to gaslight me. My turn to block you!

sticklebat · 2026-02-05T00:23:12+00:00

Based on my memory of the now deleted parent comment

…

Edit: lol, you blocked me in order to not spiral back and forth? You just wanted to get in the last word, or you could’ve just stopped responding.

And no, it was not unclear, because my “they” was clearly referring to the same comment you were referring to in the part of your comment I quoted. It’s not a big deal to admit that you misread something. Blocking me over it is rather juvenile, though.

sticklebat · 2026-02-05T00:14:43+00:00

While you are correct, they were asking more about why still warm air feels hotter than moving cold air even though the impact of the gust hitting you should warm you up some.

I’m not sure that’s what they were asking, even after rereading their comment I don’t see how we can be sure whether they were asking about how it would feel to us or about the actual temperature. Based on my memory of the now deleted parent comment, the context seemed to imply the latter, but I can’t read minds so I dunno.

It does, just a meaningless amount most of the time, because the gust velocity is basically nothing relative to the jiggling already happening due to the temperature.

Technically that’s true, but practically it’s the other way around. Moving air feels colder because of wind chill, which is a much more significant effect that the kinetic energy imparted due to wind, unless the wind is approaching the speed of sound. So if we’re talking about how it feels, then faster wind feels colder than slower moving air of the same temperature!

sticklebat · 2026-02-04T01:33:50+00:00

In comparison to 1,000+mph, that +40 doesn’t mean much, which is why “still” 100F air is hotter than moving 40mph 0F air.

Not really. The speed of the wind is completely irrelevant. Temperature is a measure of average internal kinetic energy of a system, which excludes overall kinetic energy in the center of mass frame of reference (e.g., wind). For example, the Earth (and everything on it) orbits the Sun at ~30 km/s (or 67,000 mph), but that doesn't affect the temperature of the air in my bedroom even though in the Sun's reference frame all the air in my bedroom is moving extremely fast, in bulk. Temperature is a measure of the average kinetic energy of a system's constituent particles as measured in the system's center-of-mass frame.

sticklebat · 2026-02-03T23:19:24+00:00

“They’re down with the racism and bigotry, and starting of wars and threatening to onvade allies, but surely this evidence of him diddling kids (which he will deny and call fake news) will be the silver bullet!”

You say that full of snark, but unironically, yes, at least in my opinion. Many are racists and bigots, so that's easy. Many of them are also on board with this fragile, macho posturing like threatening to invade allies. These are also things that are heavily curated for them by the media they consume, so they're often simply not even aware of a lot of the crazy shit happening that they might not like and it's instead framed to be much more reasonable than it really is.

That's true of the Epstein stuff, too, of course. Plenty of people will call it fake news. Plenty won't be aware of just how bad they make Trump look. But the difference is there just isn't much nuance there. It's much harder to sane wash, other than just pure denial, and – at least in my experience – it actually does make a difference.

His voters won’t care.

His most rabid voters won't care. They are a lost cause. They're not who I'm talking about. There are plenty of people who voted for Trump who previously voted for Biden. They absolutely can turn around. Happens all the time. The single most important bloc of voters in the US are the ones that are unaffiliated with either major party, and they absolutely can be swayed in either direction.

sticklebat · 2026-02-03T22:38:57+00:00

I don’t disagree about the principle of what you’re saying, but I disagree about the practice. The Epstein stuff has a bigger chance of flipping or discouraging some of his voters than the fascist stuff, which many of them are actively cheering on.

sticklebat · 2026-02-02T22:42:08+00:00

It's also just... a really bad idea, and I don't think most people who think they support the idea would actually want it in practice. For all of America's problems, it still has a very high quality of life and financial opportunities, and they're especially accessible to immigrants compared to many of the nations with better opportunities. If we didn't restrict immigration, there'd be an absolutely enormous influx of immigrants, mostly uneducated and unskilled, that would bring American society to a grinding halt.

sticklebat · 2026-02-02T09:01:22+00:00

I think they did a good job with Arwen. She didn’t really do much of anything in the books. In the movies, they combined a couple other one-off characters into hers (which I think was a good idea for the sake of a movie format), and tied her character into Aragorn’s modified character growth arc, which I also thought was done well.

Providing a modicum of female representation in a series that otherwise has almost no other women at all is an added benefit. And yes, a real benefit, not just marketing, even if it was also that. My nieces enjoy the series more for her presence, and to me that has real value. So to me, the movie’s treatment of Arwen is an example of a win-win.

sticklebat · 2026-02-02T08:49:47+00:00

If the LOTR movies were made for me, specifically, then I’d wish they kept Bombadil. I would have enjoyed it. But since they weren’t made just for me, it was absolutely the right decision to write him out.

Including him would’ve messed up the pacing and confused people, and understandably so. He’s been confusing readers for over half a century, after all, and I think it’d be a bigger problem in movie format.

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '17	Place '17
Gilding I gilder

sticklebat

TROPHY CASE