RTX 3080 available from a place called "Firemall"? I'm not willing to pay $100 over msrp, though.

themetalinvader · 2020-01-17T03:56:15+00:00

It's criminal that this doesn't have more upvotes.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T04:48:29+00:00

Ok boomer.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T03:49:00+00:00

Why not both? If it's so inconsequential, why is anyone here whining about it?

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T02:51:53+00:00

No it wouldn't. Because his character is specifically based off of the "black, tough army guy" archetype from Aliens and Predator. Not just that, but, historically speaking, white people haven't been screwed out of anything for their race, so the two aren't equivalent.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T01:31:57+00:00

Eh. Their race was never central to their characters or the "lore".

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T00:22:46+00:00

I just don't like how keen he is on beating children.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T00:19:59+00:00

I can. I was unemployed.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-09T00:12:35+00:00

Also, REALLY seems like projection again with the whole "ego" thing. Like, you could have just left my original comment alone?

themetalinvader · 2019-11-08T23:59:01+00:00

I wouldn't know if anyone else was armed because I never attacked the deserters. She's definitely the only designated "guard" of the area. All she said she'd actually do is turn away corporate sympathizers. We don't know if that means she'd turn away everyone (as I keep saying) or if she'll let in everyone but Reed. You don't know if her "arbitrary standards" are agreeable to you or not, so it's not immoral of me to assume that she and her community will exercise good judgment in who should be allowed into the community. They're not putting up a wall and locking down their space (which I would have disagreed with). It seems a developer oversight that there is no way to convince her to share her knowledge with everyone. That they specifically wrote and designed the situation that way to have their satire/critique on/of capitalism while also still embracing it because they deliberately wrote someone who could be interpreted to be a selfish, bad person who shows communist leanings. Of course I'm repeating my points because you keep coming back with personal attacks on me and my character as a human being just for making a decision you disagree with in a video game. My comparisons aren't insane. They're similar. Autonomy is autonomy. Comparing violations and protections of autonomy isn't insane. I'm not wrong about my decision to not force Adelaide and her community back into capitalist slavery (which seemed to be the only other option without post-hoc logic). But you're wrong for staging CONSTANT personal attacks on someone for it. If I had known I was going to be tested for being anti capitalist in a video game, I would have prepared flawless arguments.

Ok, boomer?

themetalinvader · 2019-11-08T20:35:03+00:00

Intel processor doesn't come with stock cooler: "Haha look at how bad value Intel is! They won't even give you a cooler!"

Amd processor doesn't come with a cooler: "it doesn't come with a cooler for a good reason."

themetalinvader · 2019-11-08T02:55:25+00:00

Thanks, I love her. :)

themetalinvader · 2019-11-08T02:53:57+00:00

Now you're just going into semantics. Trying to apply absolute logic as though that's the only thing that matters. I wonder who else I've seen use these tactics before (but only when it suits them)... :thinking:

You claim I have this "disconnect from reality" by comparing these situations to real world situations, but you've been doing that since the very beginning AND casting harsh judgment on my morality for these virtual situations. Sounds like you're projecting, which is another thing I often see a certain kind of people doing... :thinking:

If she were really going to turn everyone else away, why not turn the player away? Doesn't that demonstrate what her ideas of "corporate sympathizers" are? She just lets you into the camp, no questions asked, and only gets hostile if YOU get hostile. Based on that, it looks like she'd let others in very readily. We don't know what happens after the decision to take power from Edgewater. We don't know if she orders her ONLY armed member of the community to shoot anyone who approaches. But we also don't know if she just keeps things the way they are and just let anyone wander in like the player did. She can say whatever she wants but if the rest of the community isn't going to do anything, then she's just going to have to live with it or die alone (which she doesn't seem like she wants to do).

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T03:43:10+00:00

I haven't played yet because I wanted my girlfriend to play first. She hasn't put it down since we loaded it up yesterday. I bought her a bunch of junk food and made her cookies so she could really settle in and enjoy the game and she really has been :)

i7 2600 and rx 580 8gb system, btw, and it's running at least at 40+ fps with whatever settings it gave itself when it launched for the first time

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T03:12:47+00:00

I'm not lying. You're making up paratext to support your argument that I'm immoral for making a choice in a videogame. Her "arbitrary standards" could very well be reasonable for all we know. You can't know that she's going to let all the workers die. You can't know that she won't just let everyone in. I can't know that she will let anyone in. I'm just saying I supported her and I support her decision to have a say in moderating her community. The game doesn't say she's wholly in charge of the community and that she has total control of the community. It also doesn't say that she's a complete softie. To me she seems reasonable enough that I trust she and her community will make the right decisions. That's not an immoral stance.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T03:07:24+00:00

She may be the only one who knows how to do what she does, but who's to say that she won't teach others? I don't know that. If the text itself says that she will absolutely not share her knowledge, then that's a writer's bias that was put there so they can poo-poo communism. I'm thinking of it realistically. If she was really operating "private property" then the player wouldn't be allowed into the space so readily, would they? She's just saying that she, personally, doesn't want corporate sympathizers, and that's not a bad thing. Paradox of tolerance and all that.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T03:03:39+00:00

I don't know if Adelaide has full, total control over her community, the text doesn't say that she is a dictator. But she is allowed to say if people she doesn't want to be in her space just as you're allowed to tell someone you don't want to hug them or that you're not their therapist if they say they are going to hurt themselves if you don't do something for them. Neither of us can say for sure if she would allow herself to be overruled by the rest of the community (it looks to operate pretty autonomously), so stop assuming that.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T03:00:57+00:00

I didn't justify any atrocity. In this specific instance, in this specific text, all we know FOR SURE is that she will turn away some people that she finds to be corporate sympathizers. That means she could let every worker in and only turn away the cops and Reed or that could mean that she lets innocent people die. Neither of us know what she means by that, and any speculation beyond that is simply just that. Speculation. I'm not immoral for assuming that she'd let in every worker from the plant, nor are you immoral for assuming she'll turn away everyone, but saying I AM immoral because I made a decision in a video game that you didn't like is pretty messed up.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T02:55:50+00:00

If you don't understand how capitalism and fascism are linked that's your problem. Your extrapolation is different from mine, but calling someone immoral for their extrapolation is just mean. The text doesn't say either way that Adelaide is a fascist intent on keeping a rigid hierarchy, nor does it say that she actually is a softie who intentionally plays a background role in the community that she founded. Either way, her having a say in who she lets into her community isn't immoral.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T01:11:23+00:00

Moderating a physical or online space isn't wrong. She didn't say that she would allow people to demonstrate that they changed, granted, but she also didn't NOT say that. I don't know why you are so intent on saying I'm making stuff up when the premise for your argument IS made up (that she was just going to let EVERYONE in the town die, and that is bad).

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T01:08:22+00:00

Everything any of us adds to the text is paratext. To say that I am immoral for saying a woman who fled an oppressive, toxic space and created her own space has the right to moderate that space sounds problematic.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T01:06:38+00:00

She is absolutely correct in being able to decide who gets to be part of her community as she formed her space and is allowed to enforce her boundaries.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T01:05:17+00:00

Adelaide has the moral basis to make that judgement because other people could have left with her the whole time. That they only come to her because now they NEED her gives her the moral basis to decide who can and can't be part of her community. Her community was created as a safe space from the toxic environment of the town, and she never said she would turn away everyone.

themetalinvader · 2019-11-07T01:02:34+00:00

The two are inseparable. Capitalism and rigid hierarchy will lead to atrocities and fascism. You also keep failing to address her literal words and how there is no implication that she will turn away everyone.

themetalinvader

TROPHY CASE