bh11235

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago

In the latest patch for Baldur's Gate 3 they added a "six months later" party reunion. One of the party members says "we should do this more often", and you can respond "well, getting a group of friends to regularly agree to a time and place is notoriously difficult"

[–] [email protected] 34 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Add a "refuse" button that pops up a short text box detailing the consequences. The End, credits roll. Problem solved, now they can all go explain to everyone on the forums why this is the best ending

[–] [email protected] 57 points 11 months ago

Now of course one could make some damning argument about the state of the tech industry in practice, resulting in one of those bell curve memes with "using SQLalchemy is a sin" on both far sides and "noooo it's just a name it's fine there's no fraud involved" in the middle

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Jules Verne wasn't a technical expert either, but here we are somehow. Don't underestimate a keen and observant imagination.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

that is so fetch

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Makes sense, given the ending of automata. Need to get a whole new dev team now

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

yet you participate in society

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've always viewed this as a politics problem in disguise.

The cook wants to oust the king. He has no allies and no claim, but swears profusely that once he is king, every person who failed to back him is going to pay. Do you back the coup? What if you say yes and the cook's assistant, who overheard you, proclaims that whatever punishment the cook had in store for your lack of cooperation, he's going to do even worse? Do you switch your allegiance to the assistant then?

What if this is a hypothetical cook, who the assistants are speculating they could bring over from abroad and are also speculating would mete out the punishment to end all punishments to his non-backers, because he is petty like that? They haven't even met him, but they figure surely a petty enough cook to fit this description has to exist out there somewhere, and inevitably someone will find him, and bring him over, and he will surely attain power once everyone understands that this is inevitable? Do you throw yourself behind their coup and challenge the king? What if the jesters overhear you and proclaim "oh wait until you hear about our hypothetical jester, he is even worse than that hypothetical cook" -- do you switch your allegiance to the jesters then?

If implicit, empty "once I have power!" threats were horses, beggars would ride

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The conclusion is correct (don't glorify the Confederacy) but the argument is really shit tier. Neil Armstrong spent just 22 hours on the surface of the moon, which is about 16% of the total running time of Keeping Up With the Kardashians, which proves... I'm not sure what. "hurr durr you're comparing the moon landing to the confederacy" no I'm saying the length of time that a thing spanned is not a good indicator for the historical importance of that thing.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

unauthorized bread

view more: ‹ prev next ›