Blueberrydreamer

We're talking about memory recall, not mind control. Memories are fundamentally unreliable and are very easy to influence, intentionally or not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory

Hypnotics regression absolutely 100% does not work. You're creating false memories, which is incredibly easy to do. Human memory is very, very, very fallible. This nonsense is exactly what triggered the satanic panic in the 70s, where there was a sudden proliferation of stories of childhood ritual abuse all coming from this kind of hypnotic regression, and every single one turned out to be complete fabrications from the subjects being hypnotized.

Yeah, definitely, I'm not questioning the leaks as a whole, just this story. Big leaks like this are a great opportunity for trolls to throw made up stuff in the mix to try to get it to go viral.

These couple stories just seem really disjointed and without any real structure or meaning. It could certainly be just a mediocre writer playing around at writing fairy tales, or maybe I'm missing context due to translation or something, but I don't know, just kinda reads like AI written stuff to me.

I have a real hard time believing these are real. Those stories are nuts, but in a completely nonsensical way. They seem like AI generated spooky stories to me, someone just trying to jump in on the leak drama.

You are failing the very basics of reading comprehension here.

"according to your take, literally every animal ever discovered was discovered by a cryptozoologist, because something is impossible until it is already known."

This is so much nonsense I can't even figure out what the hell you're talking about. Are you just a word salad AI bot? As I've said repeatedly, real zoologists discover and document new species every day. Nowhere have I suggested anything is impossible.

"except the ones who investigated and discovered legendary animals that turned out to be real by gathering information, theorizing the existence of an animal, figuring out where the information pointed them, doing field research, and finding those animals."

Again, every single one of those discoved by not a cryptozoologist because the concept wasn't invented until 1950. You're completely dismissing the work of naturalists, biologists, and the occasional trophy hunter, and instead crediting a concept that wouldn't exist for half a century.

"like the conclusion most people had that there are no way gorillas can be real because there was no evidence for them until a guy went to the jungle, found a skull, and suddenly gorillas were "real"."

Again, that's the work of a naturalist.

I'm not gonna keep banging my head against this wall. I assumed you were misguided but interested in the subject, but now it's clear you have some emotional attachment to the 'romantic' idea of cryptozoology and you aren't interested in reality. If you do decide to actually learn something, I suggest you start with the Wikipedia article that started this conversation.

I think moreso an opportunity for developers of specific genres to get attention in an increasingly crowded marketplace.

Feel free to point to a single species discovered by a cryptozoologist.

Zoologists discover and document unknown animals every day. That's the real science involved in known or unknown creatures. That's the equivalent to chemistry in your atrocious analogy.

Cryptozoology is more akin to Alchemy. It's people who fundamentally disagree with basic scientific principles, starting from a conclusion and trying to force whatever paltry evidence they can find into a preexisting mold while ignoring all evidence contrary to their beliefs. There's a reason Cryptozoology is tied so closely to young earth creationism.

All the animals you've mentioned here were well known for decades (even centuries) before the (pseudo)science of Cryptozoology was established in the 1950s.

It is absolutely pseudoscience. The only subjects of study are creatures that have no concrete evidence of existence. In the 75 years since the establishment of the 'discipline', no new species have been documented by cryptozoologists. Meanwhile, actual biologists discover (and more importantly document) hundreds of new animal species every year.

Even if some famous cryptid were to be proven to exist, it would immediately be no longer a cryptid. They're just animals, and would be studied by zoologists just like Komodo dragons are.

Don't know why the headline is so shitty, but the "mmo" seems to be a splatoon-like multiplayer game unrelated to pokemon.

Did that have any effect on your game? Minor UI issues are pretty common in plenty of games, I personally can't see that as much of an issue. Certainly not the game-breaking bugs of launch Oblivion and Skyrim

Did you even play it, or are you just jumping on the hate bandwagon? It's hardly perfect, but I literally didn't find any significant bugs in over 20 hours of playtime. The game has plenty of fundamental issues certainly, but the bugs are more of a meme than anything.

Just look at the mod sites to see how many bugfixes are out there. It's been improved in the years since it launched, but it's far from a bug free game.