🔥 Popular | Latest

alphaflyer: ralfmaximus: My dad was a straight-ticket Democrat, gave money to the ACLU, and left the Catholic church when his local parish prioritized a new, bigger church over hungry parishioners. He was VERY liberal.  He voted for Al Gore in 2000. In 2004 (when he was 75yo) an injury forced him to spend time at an assisted living facility for rehab. The TVs there were all tuned to Fox News. All it took was six months. Upon his release that’s all he watched. He obsessed over Fox. Became convinced liberals were out to destroy HIS America. From 2004 onwards I watched my liberal dad – the guy who imbued me with my beliefs and values – decline into a ranting, angry, hateful person.  He almost died alone because I told him I simply could NOT stand to hear any more about how Obama was ruining the country. He relented, and I said goodbye to him in 2011 at his hospice, only because we agreed not to discuss “politics”. Fox News is pure 100% brainwashing. I’ve seen it up close, and it is evil. Thanks, Ronald Reagan, for abolishing the Fairness Doctrine for broadcasters.  If you’re looking for the innocuous-looking beginning of all this crap, that’s where you find it: in 1987. : alphaflyer: ralfmaximus: My dad was a straight-ticket Democrat, gave money to the ACLU, and left the Catholic church when his local parish prioritized a new, bigger church over hungry parishioners. He was VERY liberal.  He voted for Al Gore in 2000. In 2004 (when he was 75yo) an injury forced him to spend time at an assisted living facility for rehab. The TVs there were all tuned to Fox News. All it took was six months. Upon his release that’s all he watched. He obsessed over Fox. Became convinced liberals were out to destroy HIS America. From 2004 onwards I watched my liberal dad – the guy who imbued me with my beliefs and values – decline into a ranting, angry, hateful person.  He almost died alone because I told him I simply could NOT stand to hear any more about how Obama was ruining the country. He relented, and I said goodbye to him in 2011 at his hospice, only because we agreed not to discuss “politics”. Fox News is pure 100% brainwashing. I’ve seen it up close, and it is evil. Thanks, Ronald Reagan, for abolishing the Fairness Doctrine for broadcasters.  If you’re looking for the innocuous-looking beginning of all this crap, that’s where you find it: in 1987.

alphaflyer: ralfmaximus: My dad was a straight-ticket Democrat, gave money to the ACLU, and left the Catholic church when his local par...

Save
sindri42: d0cpr0fess0r: thefingerfuckingfemalefury: strixobscuro: softjunebreeze: knowledgeequalsblackpower: paulwalkersdogwalker: buttcheekpalmkang: hersheyhipster: Do Your Fucking Research *Nicki Minaj Voice* Wow… Lmao. Some people threw white paint on it a few years back. They want to be a victim so bad. Fun Fact: That’s a statue of the fist which Joe Louis used to knock out Max Schmeling, Hitler’s favored heavyweight boxer in 1938. Schmeling won the 1st bout by knockout in round twelve, but Joe Louis came back in the follow-up match and laid him the fuck out in the 1st round. Fun Fact: Schmeling was hated by the Nazis for losing to a black man and for having a Jewish manager, and he hated them right back, stating in 1975 that he was glad he’d lost the fight because the thought of  the Nazis using him for propaganda purposes sickened him. He also personally saved the lives of two Jewish children and later became lifelong friends with Joe Louis. So maybe don’t refer to him as “Hitler’s favored heavyweight boxer”… Thank you for this additional info! Reblogging this for the added facts and so people know that Schmeling wasn’t a Nazi or Nazi collaborator and was in fact a good man Imagine hating Nazis so much that when you get beaten up your response is “Good, now they can’t use me as a role model.” As far as I’m concerned, that’s America’s fist. : sindri42: d0cpr0fess0r: thefingerfuckingfemalefury: strixobscuro: softjunebreeze: knowledgeequalsblackpower: paulwalkersdogwalker: buttcheekpalmkang: hersheyhipster: Do Your Fucking Research *Nicki Minaj Voice* Wow… Lmao. Some people threw white paint on it a few years back. They want to be a victim so bad. Fun Fact: That’s a statue of the fist which Joe Louis used to knock out Max Schmeling, Hitler’s favored heavyweight boxer in 1938. Schmeling won the 1st bout by knockout in round twelve, but Joe Louis came back in the follow-up match and laid him the fuck out in the 1st round. Fun Fact: Schmeling was hated by the Nazis for losing to a black man and for having a Jewish manager, and he hated them right back, stating in 1975 that he was glad he’d lost the fight because the thought of  the Nazis using him for propaganda purposes sickened him. He also personally saved the lives of two Jewish children and later became lifelong friends with Joe Louis. So maybe don’t refer to him as “Hitler’s favored heavyweight boxer”… Thank you for this additional info! Reblogging this for the added facts and so people know that Schmeling wasn’t a Nazi or Nazi collaborator and was in fact a good man Imagine hating Nazis so much that when you get beaten up your response is “Good, now they can’t use me as a role model.” As far as I’m concerned, that’s America’s fist.
Save
lyrica-in-nerdvana: daysofstorm: pilgrim-soulinyou: jeremyyyallan: fagraklett: Chinese emperor Ai of Han, fell in love with a minor official, a man named Dong Xian, and bestowed upon him great political power and a magnificent palace. Legend has it that one day while the two men were sleeping in the same bed, the emperor was roused from his sleep by pressing business. Dong Xian had fallen asleep across the emperor’s robe, but rather than awaken his peaceful lover, the Emperor cut his robe free at the sleeve. Thus “the passion of the cut sleeve” became a euphemism for same-sex love in China. — R.G.L. get you a dude who will fuck up his own clothing for you NO OKAY THIS IS REALLY COOL SO SHUT UP AND LISTEN KIDS. Ancient China was super chill about homosexuality okay. Like we have gay emperors and feudal lords, lesbian princesses who were girlfriends with their serving maids, gay ass poets who wrote lots of poems about that one courtesan who played the guzheng so well.In fact homosexuality was so okay that in Shiji, which is basically the Bible of Ancient Chinese history, there is an entire section dedicated to the gay lovers of emperors. What’s the best part? All the laws and criticism about homosexuality in Ancient China were all about shit like prostitution and rape. These laws were  outlawing homosexual stuff were all very specific. For example, there were laws banning male prostitution, but no laws against homosexuality. These laws were passed to stop the spread of prostitution and laws targeting prostitution in general were pretty common in Chinese history. There were also really strict laws about male rape. Rape was punishable by death, regardless of the gender of the victim. Rape a girl, you die. Rape a guy, you die. Have sex with a minor, you die regardless of whether it was consensual. The lightest sentence you could get was slavery where you were bound to the army.Also scholars wrote essays criticising the boyfriends of emperors, saying that they distracted the emperor from work blah blah blah but THEY ALSO DID THE SAME FOR THE CONCUBINES. That’s right - the issue wasn’t homosexuality but rather the hormones of the emperor. They didn’t care about the gender of the emperor’s favourite lover but rather the fact that the emperor was too horny to get shit done.“But WAIT, Modern China is a hardass about homosexuality!!!! How do you explain that!”Yes. That. That’s because of the late Qing years where Western influences entered the country and brought their gross ass homophobic attitudes with them. And the Qing government was so anxious to seem modern and be seen as equals to their Western counterparts. So they adopted Western ways and discarded their previous attitudes about homosexuality. Hence you have Modern China.So the next time someone tries to tell you that being LGBT is wrong because it goes against traditional Chinese values, tell them to go fuck themselves with 3000 years of Chinese queerness.  Here are all the illustrations of historical gay couples by Ryan Grant https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/artist-spotlight/2012/08/11/ryan-grant-longs-history-gay-love#slide-0 This is one of the best things I have ever read. : lyrica-in-nerdvana: daysofstorm: pilgrim-soulinyou: jeremyyyallan: fagraklett: Chinese emperor Ai of Han, fell in love with a minor official, a man named Dong Xian, and bestowed upon him great political power and a magnificent palace. Legend has it that one day while the two men were sleeping in the same bed, the emperor was roused from his sleep by pressing business. Dong Xian had fallen asleep across the emperor’s robe, but rather than awaken his peaceful lover, the Emperor cut his robe free at the sleeve. Thus “the passion of the cut sleeve” became a euphemism for same-sex love in China. — R.G.L. get you a dude who will fuck up his own clothing for you NO OKAY THIS IS REALLY COOL SO SHUT UP AND LISTEN KIDS. Ancient China was super chill about homosexuality okay. Like we have gay emperors and feudal lords, lesbian princesses who were girlfriends with their serving maids, gay ass poets who wrote lots of poems about that one courtesan who played the guzheng so well.In fact homosexuality was so okay that in Shiji, which is basically the Bible of Ancient Chinese history, there is an entire section dedicated to the gay lovers of emperors. What’s the best part? All the laws and criticism about homosexuality in Ancient China were all about shit like prostitution and rape. These laws were  outlawing homosexual stuff were all very specific. For example, there were laws banning male prostitution, but no laws against homosexuality. These laws were passed to stop the spread of prostitution and laws targeting prostitution in general were pretty common in Chinese history. There were also really strict laws about male rape. Rape was punishable by death, regardless of the gender of the victim. Rape a girl, you die. Rape a guy, you die. Have sex with a minor, you die regardless of whether it was consensual. The lightest sentence you could get was slavery where you were bound to the army.Also scholars wrote essays criticising the boyfriends of emperors, saying that they distracted the emperor from work blah blah blah but THEY ALSO DID THE SAME FOR THE CONCUBINES. That’s right - the issue wasn’t homosexuality but rather the hormones of the emperor. They didn’t care about the gender of the emperor’s favourite lover but rather the fact that the emperor was too horny to get shit done.“But WAIT, Modern China is a hardass about homosexuality!!!! How do you explain that!”Yes. That. That’s because of the late Qing years where Western influences entered the country and brought their gross ass homophobic attitudes with them. And the Qing government was so anxious to seem modern and be seen as equals to their Western counterparts. So they adopted Western ways and discarded their previous attitudes about homosexuality. Hence you have Modern China.So the next time someone tries to tell you that being LGBT is wrong because it goes against traditional Chinese values, tell them to go fuck themselves with 3000 years of Chinese queerness.  Here are all the illustrations of historical gay couples by Ryan Grant https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/artist-spotlight/2012/08/11/ryan-grant-longs-history-gay-love#slide-0 This is one of the best things I have ever read.
Save
tiggymalvern: mistfather: melanin-monrow: Also this Are we going to ignore that his slogan is “Hale Yes”?! Christopher Hale’s Republican opponent is Scott DesJarlais.His intimidation and emotional and physical abuse of first wife became public knowledge in 2010. He was reprimanded by the Tennessee medical board for having sex with patients in 2012. He has a consistently Republican anti-abortion voting record, despite the fact that he’s pressured multiple women into having abortions. That’s not hearsay, by the way - there’s a recording of a phone conversation in which he says that he did.He has continued to win every election for the past decade, the last two with a thirty point margin, because Republicans don’t care what kind of immoral, hypocritical, violent misogynist is representing them, only that he’s a Republican. : tiggymalvern: mistfather: melanin-monrow: Also this Are we going to ignore that his slogan is “Hale Yes”?! Christopher Hale’s Republican opponent is Scott DesJarlais.His intimidation and emotional and physical abuse of first wife became public knowledge in 2010. He was reprimanded by the Tennessee medical board for having sex with patients in 2012. He has a consistently Republican anti-abortion voting record, despite the fact that he’s pressured multiple women into having abortions. That’s not hearsay, by the way - there’s a recording of a phone conversation in which he says that he did.He has continued to win every election for the past decade, the last two with a thirty point margin, because Republicans don’t care what kind of immoral, hypocritical, violent misogynist is representing them, only that he’s a Republican.

tiggymalvern: mistfather: melanin-monrow: Also this Are we going to ignore that his slogan is “Hale Yes”?! Christopher Hale’s Republ...

Save
priscilladyke: witchesversuspatriarchy: Thought this could fit in well here Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians: Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.” : priscilladyke: witchesversuspatriarchy: Thought this could fit in well here Ok I don’t mean to be doing this too often but I literally just wrote a paper about this so I thought I would comment! The English translation is The Cursed Woman but the original French is La Femme Damnée. “Femmes Damnées” was the title of a Baudelaire poem from his acclaimed 1857 book Fleurs du mal, which was known, among other things, to be a collection that famously dealt with the subject of lesbians. The poem tells the story of the desires and passionate love between two lesbians: Delphine and Hippolyte. As a result of this poem and of the book as a whole, the terms “fleurs du mal” and “femme damnée” became lesbian monikers of the turn of the century. Though some have deemed the term “damned women” to be accusatory of some moral dissonance, the poem it is derived from is actually quite sympathetic to the condition of lesbian love as it is a love which is unable to fully flourish in that time. Regardless, the translated title of Tassaert’s painting is misleading, as the original French is less accusatory and more identifying. The title is more accurately “the lesbian.”
Save
solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing is Watching you’re seeing someone’s experience Playing you’re experiencing it I watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it I have to go 50/50 on that one because I tend to avoid fights in AC: Syndicate Isn’t the whole point of AC to avoid fighting? Or did that change since Brotherhood? Syndicate is based on victorian era & there’s gangsI literally had to hide because I keep walking to area higher than my current level because of main story line Goddammit AC. You had one job: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing is Watching you’re seeing someone’s experience Playing you’re experiencing it I watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it I have to go 50/50 on that one because I tend to avoid fights in AC: Syndicate Isn’t the whole point of AC to avoid fighting? Or did that change since Brotherhood? Syndicate is based on victorian era & there’s gangsI literally had to hide because I keep walking to area higher than my current level because of main story line Goddammit AC. You had one job
Save
solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing is Watching you’re seeing someone’s experience Playing you’re experiencing it I watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it I have to go 50/50 on that one because I tend to avoid fights in AC: Syndicate Isn’t the whole point of AC to avoid fighting? Or did that change since Brotherhood? : solaredarisen: randomnightlord: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing is Watching you’re seeing someone’s experience Playing you’re experiencing it I watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it I have to go 50/50 on that one because I tend to avoid fights in AC: Syndicate Isn’t the whole point of AC to avoid fighting? Or did that change since Brotherhood?
Save
solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing isWatching you’re seeing someone’s experiencePlaying you’re experiencing itI watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it: solaredarisen: randomnightlord: mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? The different between watching and playing isWatching you’re seeing someone’s experiencePlaying you’re experiencing itI watched a lot of gameplay and playing some of the games myself have a very different feels to it Understandable but why waste money on a 70 bucks game if you cut out like 30 or 40 percent? That’s not worth it
Save
mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience? : mordinette: rocketmermaid: atelierabintra: pmseymourva: dreamwalkertara: enigmaticagentalice: theheroheart: glitterpill: dropkicks: lesbianmooncolony: sinbadism: maxofs2d: guitarbeard: alexxdz: GO WATCH A MOVIE Next up on Worth Reading: The other team should just fucking let me win when I play baseball.  well this isn’t necessarily a bad point. there are games with great stories and really awful shoehorned fighting sequences. then you also have handicapped/disabled gamers who don’t necessarily have the dexterity to finish a game but would still like to be able to. optional “cakewalk” modes aren’t that bad of an idea. what if i want to just see the story of the game and dont want to actually play it? like?? as it is i would never pay for a bioshock game or a fallout game but i am very interested in the story. so i just watch youtube videos of it. they could get money from me if they sold the skip combat mode i’m a games developer and an avid gamer and i really really think games should let you skip combat honestly one of my favourite things about la noire was when you failed a sequence twice the game was like “yo do you just wanna skip this bit?”the gaming industry/community has a huge problem with accessibility tbh. like, thank god for standardised control schemes (although bring back full customisation jfc not enough games have that anymore) but fights require time, literacy in both that type of gaming & in the individual game, you need to be able to navigate the system which can be anywhere from slightly difficult to hellish for people with visual/audio processing disorders. and tbh sometimes you just wanna enjoy the story and not get stressed the hell out doing the sAME FIGHT 700 times. it’s why i always put a game on easy/casual when I’m replaying unless i’m specifically going for difficulty based achievements.not to mention SO MANY GAMES have either poorly designed battles or fights that have been shoved in for no reason other than to pad out the game (dxhr & da2 come to mind immediately) that sometimes it’d honestly improve the gameplay to just skip them altogether Imagine if you were a gamer with arthritis or MS or some other disability that took away your ability to click buttons quickly, and every fight became as frustrating as THAT GODDAMN DA: ORIGINS OH FUCK I’M ON FIRE SLIDE PUZZLE.  Yeah. Skipping combat might seem like a not bad idea then. Mass Effect 3 has this: [Screenshot from a Mass Effect 3 menu, with title: “Choose Your Experience”, showing the options ‘action’, ‘role playing’ and ‘story’.] ‘Action’ makes most story choices for you and conversations become straight up cutscenes. ‘Role playing’ is the default experience, both challenging gameplay and character/story building. And ‘story’ has the roleplaying but very easy combat, letting you breeze through it. (You also have a ‘casual’ difficulty setting that’s a bit more rewarding but still pretty easy.) The thing about video games (particularly RPGs or in general games that allow you to explore or direct the story) is that the interactivity is what makes it different from movies or watching LPs on youtube. And I’ve played games that got FAR stronger emotional reactions out of me simply because I had to carry out the actions myself rather than just watching. And that experience should be more accessible. Because SHOCKINGLY: games aren’t always about winning, or being good at it. It’s about having fun. This is kindergarten education here. Yeah, it always baffles me when I see people react so negatively to a perfectly reasonable suggestion like this. Why the hell shouldn’t games let you skip combat if you want to? Why shouldn’t there be a super-duper-easy-peasy mode for everything? No-one is gonna force YOU to play it like that if you don’t want to! Continue to be as hardcore as you like! I just don’t understand the resistance at all. What we’re talking about is simply having more options for gamers. You’re adding something that would make games more accessible and fun for loads of new fans, and you’re not taking ANYTHING away from existing fans. Like…do you…not want more people to enjoy these games?? Do you really hate the idea of other people having fun so much that you’ll rile against it even when it literally has no effect on you or your experience whatsoever?? Are you honestly that selfish?? I am *horrifically* bad at gaming, but it’s a genre that I’m intensely interested in and very desperately want to be more immersed in. I would HAPPILY buy so many more games if combat was a skippable option.  Not to mention one of the best indie games out right now is pretty much telling you if you want the best ending, don’t fight. Yeah, I hate the elitist mentality that only those ~*~*hardcore*~*~ enough should be allowed to enjoy video games. I mean, gaming should be an experience to be had and not just an obstacle to clear, right?Then again, my poor mental health situation and chronic pain+mobility issues on my right hand means that my gaming options are severely limited nowadays. So I’m all about making gaming accessible for everyone in the first place.Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. Anyone who thinks gaming will be ruined by making it more accessible need to realize that they have already ruined gaming for many. I’ve had to stop playing certain games because all the button mashing aggravated my carpal tunnel pain, and I rage quit some because they had a super frustrating part that I could never get past. Games should be fun, not a test of endurance. At least, they should let you skip the difficult parts you are unable to do. They can still have a hardcore mode for people who enjoy a challenge. They would still get to brag about their accomplishments without preventing others from enjoying an otherwise fun game. Unpopular opinion but just watch the game on youtube then? Why spend money when you don’t get the full experience?
Save
Save
ophidahlia: Coca-Cola (and Dixie Cup) pioneered the recycling movement in the 40’s to get people to return valuable glass bottles by charging almost half of the cost of the drink in a returnable fee. Nearly everyone returned their bottles; it was a huge success. When they switched to plastic in the 50’s it became more profitable to just toss bottles away so they used shell organizations to secretly lobby congress and senates to kill recycling bills while simultaneously creating massive ad campaigns to convince the public that recycling was all the consumer’s responsibility. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s public knowledge that gets drowned out in the noise made by their PR firms. Last year Coca-Cola was still up to the same environmental villainry. More recycling advertising campaigns and killed bottle-fee bills which have been long proven to massively boost recycling rates but also push the cost of recycling from the consumer onto the manufacturer. That’s also detailed in the previous link. Don’t ever make the mistake of thinking that large corporations care about this world or anything in it other than profit. They’ll engage in charity as an investment if the campaign offers good return for their brand value and public image, but don’t think for a second we can get capitalists to behave ethically through any other means than forcing them to do it. : ophidahlia: Coca-Cola (and Dixie Cup) pioneered the recycling movement in the 40’s to get people to return valuable glass bottles by charging almost half of the cost of the drink in a returnable fee. Nearly everyone returned their bottles; it was a huge success. When they switched to plastic in the 50’s it became more profitable to just toss bottles away so they used shell organizations to secretly lobby congress and senates to kill recycling bills while simultaneously creating massive ad campaigns to convince the public that recycling was all the consumer’s responsibility. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s public knowledge that gets drowned out in the noise made by their PR firms. Last year Coca-Cola was still up to the same environmental villainry. More recycling advertising campaigns and killed bottle-fee bills which have been long proven to massively boost recycling rates but also push the cost of recycling from the consumer onto the manufacturer. That’s also detailed in the previous link. Don’t ever make the mistake of thinking that large corporations care about this world or anything in it other than profit. They’ll engage in charity as an investment if the campaign offers good return for their brand value and public image, but don’t think for a second we can get capitalists to behave ethically through any other means than forcing them to do it.

ophidahlia: Coca-Cola (and Dixie Cup) pioneered the recycling movement in the 40’s to get people to return valuable glass bottles by char...

Save
meara-eldestofthemall: girlactionfigure: Eugene Lazowski was a Polish doctor who saved thousands of Jews during the Holocaust by creating a fake epidemic that kept the Germans away from their town. Eugene received his medical degree before the war started. After Germany invaded Poland in 1939, he became a military doctor with the Polish resistance. He was imprisoned in a German POW camp for his anti-Nazi activities. After his release in 1942, Eugene moved to a small town, Rozwadow, with his wife and young daughter. There he reunited with a friend from medical school, Stanislaw Matulewicz.Stanislaw made a medical discovery that seemed minor but proved monumental. He found that healthy people could be injected with a typhoid vaccine that would make them test positive for the deadly disease without actually contracting it.Eugene hatched a brilliant plan. He knew that Germans tended to be germaphobes and were terrified of typhus, a contagious bacterial disease. When a Polish town was found to be infected with typhus, the German occupiers would quarantine the entire area. Eugene also knew that by implementing his plan, he risked the death penalty, which applied to Poles who helped Jews. Undeterred by the risk, Eugene injected thousands of people with typhus and sent blood samples to the Germans to report the “epidemic.” He made sure to inject non-Jews as well as Jews, so the Nazis wouldn’t just come in and massacre all the Jews in town. Because it appeared to be a widespread epidemic, the Nazis stayed clear of Rozwadow. By late 1943, the Gestapo was suspicious. The entire town was supposedly infested with typhus, yet nobody was dying. Eugene learned a German medical team was being sent to the quarantined area. He frantically approached the oldest and sickest-looking people in town and asked them to wait in a squalid shack. When the visitors arrived, the villagers welcomed them with a party - featuring large quantities of vodka. After the celebration, the German doctors were taken to the “patients.” Eugene said, “I told them to be my guest and examine the patients, but to be careful because the Polish are dirty and full of lice, which transfer typhus.”The doctors quickly took blood samples without conducting full examinations of the patients. When the samples tested positive for typhus, the German health authorities were satisfied the epidemic was still raging. They never came back.After the war, Eugene didn’t tell anybody of his heroic acts, not even his wife. It wasn’t until a documentary was produced in 2000 about the fake epidemic that Eugene received the accolades he deserved. He passed away in 2006 at age 92.For risking his his life to save the Jews of Rozwadow, Poland, we honor Dr. Eugene Lazowski as this week’s Thursday Hero. Accidental Talmudist It’s important to remember that not all heroes wear tights and a cape. : meara-eldestofthemall: girlactionfigure: Eugene Lazowski was a Polish doctor who saved thousands of Jews during the Holocaust by creating a fake epidemic that kept the Germans away from their town. Eugene received his medical degree before the war started. After Germany invaded Poland in 1939, he became a military doctor with the Polish resistance. He was imprisoned in a German POW camp for his anti-Nazi activities. After his release in 1942, Eugene moved to a small town, Rozwadow, with his wife and young daughter. There he reunited with a friend from medical school, Stanislaw Matulewicz.Stanislaw made a medical discovery that seemed minor but proved monumental. He found that healthy people could be injected with a typhoid vaccine that would make them test positive for the deadly disease without actually contracting it.Eugene hatched a brilliant plan. He knew that Germans tended to be germaphobes and were terrified of typhus, a contagious bacterial disease. When a Polish town was found to be infected with typhus, the German occupiers would quarantine the entire area. Eugene also knew that by implementing his plan, he risked the death penalty, which applied to Poles who helped Jews. Undeterred by the risk, Eugene injected thousands of people with typhus and sent blood samples to the Germans to report the “epidemic.” He made sure to inject non-Jews as well as Jews, so the Nazis wouldn’t just come in and massacre all the Jews in town. Because it appeared to be a widespread epidemic, the Nazis stayed clear of Rozwadow. By late 1943, the Gestapo was suspicious. The entire town was supposedly infested with typhus, yet nobody was dying. Eugene learned a German medical team was being sent to the quarantined area. He frantically approached the oldest and sickest-looking people in town and asked them to wait in a squalid shack. When the visitors arrived, the villagers welcomed them with a party - featuring large quantities of vodka. After the celebration, the German doctors were taken to the “patients.” Eugene said, “I told them to be my guest and examine the patients, but to be careful because the Polish are dirty and full of lice, which transfer typhus.”The doctors quickly took blood samples without conducting full examinations of the patients. When the samples tested positive for typhus, the German health authorities were satisfied the epidemic was still raging. They never came back.After the war, Eugene didn’t tell anybody of his heroic acts, not even his wife. It wasn’t until a documentary was produced in 2000 about the fake epidemic that Eugene received the accolades he deserved. He passed away in 2006 at age 92.For risking his his life to save the Jews of Rozwadow, Poland, we honor Dr. Eugene Lazowski as this week’s Thursday Hero. Accidental Talmudist It’s important to remember that not all heroes wear tights and a cape.
Save
bogleech: cazort: marvelousgameofdisneythrones: pangur-and-grim: my favourite part of the Evolutionary Biology courses I took at the University of Toronto was learning that several bird species have 3+ sexes? the ruff bird is a great example - each male variant has a different (and successful!) reproductive strategy, and a different chromosomal sequence. unlike the ruff bird, human sex falls into a bimodal distribution - this means there are two strong peaks (”typical” male and female morphs), with a whole lot in between. evolution is nice way of saying “statistics played out longterm among living organisms”, and evolutionarily successful traits….aren’t something to hold up as natural or moral, or representative of an advanced state. it’s literally just fuck tactics that make your group size increase. (though fucking isn’t always the best route, as asexual reproduction is massively advantageous as a short-term strategy, and certain species dominate the landscape by switching between sexual/asexual depending on environmental conditions) besides all that, the strength of humankind has always been our ability to work together communally, and that’s straight science. so even if you went down the extremely problematic path of valuing fellow humans based on their potential evolutionary contribution (coughs, eugenics, coughs), there would still be zero scientific basis behind discriminating against trans, non-binary and intersex people.  tl;dr here’s a challenge to all the bigots out there: please stop using “science” as a defence when the actual science is (overwhelmingly) against you. Science: pissing off bigots of all kinds since its inception. I find White-throated sparrows fascinating. They have two color morphs, the bright one: And the drab one: The two morphs have very different behavior. The bright ones are more aggressive, setting up territories and defending them, being more aggressive about defending against predators. They sing more often. The dull ones are quieter and less aggressive. They are more attentive to the nest, and better at feeding nestlings. The morphs tend to make a good pairing for raising children because they specialize in different roles. The dull-colored birds, being more camouflaged, are safer when sitting on the nest, and are better able to hide. The bright-colored birds, being more visible, are better able to intimidate predators and rivals. Interestingly though, both color morphs occur in both female and male birds. And birds tend to pair up with both opposite sex and opposite color morph birds. The dimorphism and different roles that, in most birds, are strongly associated with biological sex, in this species has evolved to be abstracted and separated from biological sex. Some people have described this system as the birds having “four sexes”. It’s been proposed that some life may have only first split into multiple sexes in order to confuse or slow down parasites so maybe some folks get offended cause deep down they just think roundworms will get them : bogleech: cazort: marvelousgameofdisneythrones: pangur-and-grim: my favourite part of the Evolutionary Biology courses I took at the University of Toronto was learning that several bird species have 3+ sexes? the ruff bird is a great example - each male variant has a different (and successful!) reproductive strategy, and a different chromosomal sequence. unlike the ruff bird, human sex falls into a bimodal distribution - this means there are two strong peaks (”typical” male and female morphs), with a whole lot in between. evolution is nice way of saying “statistics played out longterm among living organisms”, and evolutionarily successful traits….aren’t something to hold up as natural or moral, or representative of an advanced state. it’s literally just fuck tactics that make your group size increase. (though fucking isn’t always the best route, as asexual reproduction is massively advantageous as a short-term strategy, and certain species dominate the landscape by switching between sexual/asexual depending on environmental conditions) besides all that, the strength of humankind has always been our ability to work together communally, and that’s straight science. so even if you went down the extremely problematic path of valuing fellow humans based on their potential evolutionary contribution (coughs, eugenics, coughs), there would still be zero scientific basis behind discriminating against trans, non-binary and intersex people.  tl;dr here’s a challenge to all the bigots out there: please stop using “science” as a defence when the actual science is (overwhelmingly) against you. Science: pissing off bigots of all kinds since its inception. I find White-throated sparrows fascinating. They have two color morphs, the bright one: And the drab one: The two morphs have very different behavior. The bright ones are more aggressive, setting up territories and defending them, being more aggressive about defending against predators. They sing more often. The dull ones are quieter and less aggressive. They are more attentive to the nest, and better at feeding nestlings. The morphs tend to make a good pairing for raising children because they specialize in different roles. The dull-colored birds, being more camouflaged, are safer when sitting on the nest, and are better able to hide. The bright-colored birds, being more visible, are better able to intimidate predators and rivals. Interestingly though, both color morphs occur in both female and male birds. And birds tend to pair up with both opposite sex and opposite color morph birds. The dimorphism and different roles that, in most birds, are strongly associated with biological sex, in this species has evolved to be abstracted and separated from biological sex. Some people have described this system as the birds having “four sexes”. It’s been proposed that some life may have only first split into multiple sexes in order to confuse or slow down parasites so maybe some folks get offended cause deep down they just think roundworms will get them
Save
blackwitchmagicwoman: auroraluciferi: askmace: scholarlyapproach: DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!! Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good. They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up. THEY DID THIS TO RIBS. Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up. DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!! They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it. It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’. But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot. I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious. Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages. Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating. Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food. Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. LMAO. Wait. : blackwitchmagicwoman: auroraluciferi: askmace: scholarlyapproach: DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!! Listen in the past the poor have had to improvise cheap food the rich never wanted as a means to survive. And over the many years of innovation made the food taste good until eventually the rich where like: “Oh hay you actually like that garbage? Why on earth would you like it?” Then they try it, love it, start buying it, and then drive the price up so much it becomes a luxury good. They do this and its devastating, the food typically never becomes affordable again. It don’t matter how cheap the foo dis to produce, it doesn’t matter if there is almost no meat on the bone or its super difficult to eat and messy. Once the poor discover how to make some bit of cheap food taste good, the rich take it away via driving the price of it up. THEY DID THIS TO RIBS. Ribs were garage meat. Just look at them, there is hardly any meat on the bone, you have to eat them by hand usually, and they are messy. They where an undesirable cheap source of junk meat. But the poor being the poor made them taste good. (Because they don’t have much to choose from.) The rich discovered the meals the poor made with them and decided they liked ribs too. People discovered they could sell a few ribs to rich people and make way more money then selling lots of ribs to poor people and the price was driven up. DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!! They did the same to brisket.  You used to be able to get brisket for less than a dollar a pound, which meant you could get a twenty pound brisket fairly cheaply.  And then you smoked it, sliced it, and had meat for weeks if not a full month.  And it was tasty.  I grew up eating brisket at least once a month because my family could afford it. It was a cheap meat because no rich person looks at the dangly part of the neck of a cow and goes ‘ooh, that looks tasty!’. But then Food Network started showcasing things like barbecued brisket.  Rich people started showing up at places that weren’t just Rib Crib to get their barbeque.  And the price of brisket went up.  A lot. I regularly see it for over five dollars a pound in stores now.  And while yeah, that might not seem like a lot when you’re talking only a pound or two of meat, brisket is normally sold in ten to twenty pound sizes.  It’s become completely unaffordable to the people that made it delicious. Sushi used to be really cheap, too, until it became ‘trendy’.  Guess why you’re now paying twelve dollars for your order of California rolls?  Because rich people discovered something that poor people had been eating for ages. Noticed the prices of fajita meat, chicken thighs, or ham hocks has gone up recently?  You guessed it.  Rich people are taking our food and now we’re scrambling to afford the things that we grew up eating. Lobster is a perfect example of this phenomenon. For hundreds of years, lobster was regarded as a sort of insect larvae from the depth of the sea. It had zero appeal as a “luxury food” until people living in NY and Boston developed a taste for it. Before the 19th century, it was considered a “poverty food” or used as fertilizer and bait - some household servants specified in employment agreements that they would not eat lobster more than twice a week.It was also commonly served at prisons, which tells you something about prison food. Only by cleverly marketing lobster as an indulgence for the privileged made it cost so much. It became a vehicle for enormous profit spawning a multi-billion dollar global industry in the process. This mythical affection for lobster flesh - not its practical value in terms of taste, nutrition, or any other reasonable consideration - drives its value. LMAO. Wait.

blackwitchmagicwoman: auroraluciferi: askmace: scholarlyapproach: DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO CEREAL!!! Listen in the past the poor have...

Save
how programming languages got their names: y @TheStrangeRoots How programming languages got their names Bash Clojure The creator wanted to include the letter 'c' (C#), 'I (Lisp) and 'j' (Java) and liked that it was a pun on 'closure! The word 'closure, the act of closing, comes from the Latin 'clausūra' stemming from' clauděre' which means 'to shut or close! Bash is an acronym for Bourne-again Shell, a pun on the Bourne Shell - named after creator Stephen Bourne - being "born again". 'Bash' is also a verb meaning 'to strike with a heavy blow', possibly from the Danish 'baske' meaning 'to beat, strike! Quite simply C got its name because it was preceded by a programming language called B.C spawned its own children including C++ and C#.It is the third letter in the English alphabet and was originally identical to the Greek letter 'Gamma', Java Go Elixir The name Java was the result of a highly- caffeinated brainstorming session. Java, or 'Jawa' in Indonesian, is the name of a large island in Indonesia that produces strong, dark and sweet coffee. It has been a slang term for coffee in the United States since the 1800s. One of the Google developers said the name Go, sometime referred to as Golang, was chosen because it was 'short and easy to type' The word 'go, meaning 'to travel or go somewhere' stems from the Old High German 'gan' (to go). The word 'elixir', meaning a potion or essence that prolongs life or preserves something, stems from the Arabic 'al-ikst' via the late Greek 'xerion', a powder for drying wounds. Appeared in Middle English from the 14th century. Java JavaScript Kotlin Perl Originally named Mocha, a type of fine quality coffee, it was later renamed JavaScript, combining Java, US slang for coffee, + 'Script, 'something that is written' from the Latin 'scriptum, 'a set of written words or writing. Inspired by Java, it was named after Kotlin Island in Russia. Originally called Kettusaari by the Finns ('fox island') and Ketlingen by the Swedes, (maybe stemming from 'kettel' meaning 'cauldron'). After Russia won control of the island in 1703 it was Initially named Pearl, the alternative spelling was adopted as the name was already taken. It comes from the Middle French 'perle 'meaning 'bead' or 'something valuable' and the Latin 'perna' meaning 'leg, also a mollusc shaped like a leg of mutton. JS renamed 'Kotling' then 'Kotlin. PHP Python Ris named partly after the first names of the first two R authors (Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman) and partly as a play on the name of S, itss parent langauge. It is the 18th letter in the alphabet and derives from the Greek letter 'Rho' php Originally known as Personal Home Page Construction Kit, this was later shortened to just PHP (an acronym for Personal Home Page). It is now accepted as the initials for PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor. Creator Guido van Rossum named Python after TV comedy Monty Python's Flying Circus. The word 'python' comes from the ancient Greek 'Puthón, the name of a huge serpent killed by the god Apollo. Later adopted as a generic term for non- poisonous snakes that constrict their prey. Ruby Scala Rust Influenced by Perl, the developer chose a colleague's birthstone which followed it in the monthly sequence (June is Pearl, Ruby is July). Ruby comes from the Old French 'rubi', a 'reddish precious stone', and the Latin 'rubeus, 'red'. Rust's name comes from a fungus that is robust, distributed, and parallel. It is also a substring of robust. Rust, also the reddish coating formed on oxidized metal, stems from the German 'rost' and possibly the Indo-European base of 'red. Scala is a combination of the first letters of 'scalable' and 'language! It is also the Italian word for 'stairway', as it helps users to ascend to a better language. The logo is also an abstraction of a staircase or steps. SQL Swift TypeScript SQL Originating from the shortcomings of JavaScript, hence the similarility of the name. Its name combines 'Type', meaning a kind or class (from the Greek 'tuptein' 'to strike'), with 'Script, 'something that is written' from the Latin 'scriptum'. First called "Structured English Query Language" (SEQUEL), pronounced "sequel", it was a pun that it was the sequel to QUEL. It was later shortened to SQL. The word 'sequel' stems from the Latin 'sequela' from 'sequr' meaning 'to follow. The word 'swift' means 'moving with great speed or velocity' and can be traced back to the prehistoric 'swipt' meaning to 'move in a sweeping manner'. The swallow-like bird became known as a swift from the 17th century and is used as the language's logo. TS how programming languages got their names

how programming languages got their names

Save