🔥 Popular | Latest

107bees: randomslasher: zoblogs: daphnetrodon: daphnetrodon: didyouknowmagic: froglezbian: straight people shut up challenge Frank stop. Go read a book or yell at a cloud it would be just as useful as this statement you left on Twitter. He did add this later, which is… something? [x] good ending This is what people mean when they say that privilege is invisible to the people who have it. It never occurred to him that knowing someone’s orientation would be important to anyone, because to him, a straight man, representation is everywhere. It’s overabundant. It’s so common as to be taken for granted. To him, representation of his sexuality isn’t important because it’s there.  I love that he learned. I love watching people understand their own blind spots when it comes to privilege.  Can also be filed under: why cancel culture is dumb, people need to make mistakes to grow : 107bees: randomslasher: zoblogs: daphnetrodon: daphnetrodon: didyouknowmagic: froglezbian: straight people shut up challenge Frank stop. Go read a book or yell at a cloud it would be just as useful as this statement you left on Twitter. He did add this later, which is… something? [x] good ending This is what people mean when they say that privilege is invisible to the people who have it. It never occurred to him that knowing someone’s orientation would be important to anyone, because to him, a straight man, representation is everywhere. It’s overabundant. It’s so common as to be taken for granted. To him, representation of his sexuality isn’t important because it’s there.  I love that he learned. I love watching people understand their own blind spots when it comes to privilege.  Can also be filed under: why cancel culture is dumb, people need to make mistakes to grow

107bees: randomslasher: zoblogs: daphnetrodon: daphnetrodon: didyouknowmagic: froglezbian: straight people shut up challenge Fran...

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
twentyratsinatrenchcoat: waywardmasquerade: jabletown: manicpixiedreamalien: did-you-kno: Scottish sculptor Rob Mulholland creates creepy mirrored sculptures out of acrylic glass that makes them blend into their surroundings until your perspective shifts and they suddenly catch your eye. Source Source 2 imagine getting lost in the woods and coming across these on a scale of 1-10 how ready for death would you be i didn’t know chaotic evil looked like someone’s dad from north dakota Some one needs to stat these mirror beings ASAP Mirrorfolk Medium construct, lawful evil AC: 15 HP: 100 (8d10+20) Speed: 30ft STR: 14 (+2) WIS: 16 (+3) CON: 10 (+0) INT: 16 (+3) DEX: 18 (+4) CHA: 20 (+5) Skills: Perception (+5), Deception (+9) Senses: Truesight, low-light vision, passive perception 13 Languages: Common Challenge: 5 (1,800 XP) Immunities: Mind-affecting spells, poison, sleep effects, paralysis, stunning, disease, death effects, and necromancy effects Proficiencies: No armor; simple weapons Natural Camoflauge: A mirrorfolk can blend in easily to any environment by reflecting the world around them. In order to notice a mirrorfolk using it’s camoflauge, players must pass a check with a DC 18. Reflection: Three times a day, a mirrorfolk may reflect a spell cast at it by passing a dexterity check (DC 16). This acts as though the mirrorfolk had cast the spell with the original caster as the target, or as though it had been directly reflected from a mirror (ex. A fireball caught by a mirrorfolk directly reflects the cone of effect). The Eye of the Beholder: A mirrorfolk may cast Charm Person, Hypnotic Pattern, Suggestion, Crown of Madness, or Enemies Abound up to four time per day at their base level. The four times are total, not for each spell. It may cast Minor Illusion or Prestidigitation at will. However, any illusion created by these spells (including Hypnotic Pattern) uses its own surfaces. The Scott’s Pet: Mirrorfolk act as guards to a human mage named Mulholland the Sculptor. Their primary goal of creation is to divert attention from Mulholland, and do so either through illusion or through turning party members against each other. They will also act as living shields if need be. However, mirrorfolk are considered awaken constructs, and their loyalty comes strictly from Mulholland’s kindness towards them. : twentyratsinatrenchcoat: waywardmasquerade: jabletown: manicpixiedreamalien: did-you-kno: Scottish sculptor Rob Mulholland creates creepy mirrored sculptures out of acrylic glass that makes them blend into their surroundings until your perspective shifts and they suddenly catch your eye. Source Source 2 imagine getting lost in the woods and coming across these on a scale of 1-10 how ready for death would you be i didn’t know chaotic evil looked like someone’s dad from north dakota Some one needs to stat these mirror beings ASAP Mirrorfolk Medium construct, lawful evil AC: 15 HP: 100 (8d10+20) Speed: 30ft STR: 14 (+2) WIS: 16 (+3) CON: 10 (+0) INT: 16 (+3) DEX: 18 (+4) CHA: 20 (+5) Skills: Perception (+5), Deception (+9) Senses: Truesight, low-light vision, passive perception 13 Languages: Common Challenge: 5 (1,800 XP) Immunities: Mind-affecting spells, poison, sleep effects, paralysis, stunning, disease, death effects, and necromancy effects Proficiencies: No armor; simple weapons Natural Camoflauge: A mirrorfolk can blend in easily to any environment by reflecting the world around them. In order to notice a mirrorfolk using it’s camoflauge, players must pass a check with a DC 18. Reflection: Three times a day, a mirrorfolk may reflect a spell cast at it by passing a dexterity check (DC 16). This acts as though the mirrorfolk had cast the spell with the original caster as the target, or as though it had been directly reflected from a mirror (ex. A fireball caught by a mirrorfolk directly reflects the cone of effect). The Eye of the Beholder: A mirrorfolk may cast Charm Person, Hypnotic Pattern, Suggestion, Crown of Madness, or Enemies Abound up to four time per day at their base level. The four times are total, not for each spell. It may cast Minor Illusion or Prestidigitation at will. However, any illusion created by these spells (including Hypnotic Pattern) uses its own surfaces. The Scott’s Pet: Mirrorfolk act as guards to a human mage named Mulholland the Sculptor. Their primary goal of creation is to divert attention from Mulholland, and do so either through illusion or through turning party members against each other. They will also act as living shields if need be. However, mirrorfolk are considered awaken constructs, and their loyalty comes strictly from Mulholland’s kindness towards them.

twentyratsinatrenchcoat: waywardmasquerade: jabletown: manicpixiedreamalien: did-you-kno: Scottish sculptor Rob Mulholland creates...

Save
pinceauarcenciel: 🌈 Fairyary 2020! ✨ Thanks for your patience, here’s finally this year’s prompt! 🦄 🧚‍♀️ Fairyary is a challenge I initiated to invite myself and other people as well to draw more fairies and spreading fairies love during February. 🧚‍♂️ 📣 NEW 📣 now on instagram too: https://www.instagram.com/p/B7ybDpEBiNc/ You’re most welcome if you want to join this challenge! Draw as much fairies as you can during February! Try to draw each day! Write if you prefer writing to drawing, whatever! The prompt is only here to help you if needed~ (and there’s plenty of other February-Fairies themed prompt too!) ✨ • Tag your works with #Fairyary and #Fairyary2020 so everyone doing the challenge can see them too! 💮 • You’re allowed to repost the prompt on other social medias where I haven’t posted it myself (so NO instagram, tumblr or deviantart) and, please keep the credits. Of course reblogs and other ways of sharing (like insta stories) are always welcome!
 • Pour les francophones pur jus, vous pouvez aussi tagger avec #Féevrier et #Féevrier2020 ! : pinceauarcenciel: 🌈 Fairyary 2020! ✨ Thanks for your patience, here’s finally this year’s prompt! 🦄 🧚‍♀️ Fairyary is a challenge I initiated to invite myself and other people as well to draw more fairies and spreading fairies love during February. 🧚‍♂️ 📣 NEW 📣 now on instagram too: https://www.instagram.com/p/B7ybDpEBiNc/ You’re most welcome if you want to join this challenge! Draw as much fairies as you can during February! Try to draw each day! Write if you prefer writing to drawing, whatever! The prompt is only here to help you if needed~ (and there’s plenty of other February-Fairies themed prompt too!) ✨ • Tag your works with #Fairyary and #Fairyary2020 so everyone doing the challenge can see them too! 💮 • You’re allowed to repost the prompt on other social medias where I haven’t posted it myself (so NO instagram, tumblr or deviantart) and, please keep the credits. Of course reblogs and other ways of sharing (like insta stories) are always welcome!
 • Pour les francophones pur jus, vous pouvez aussi tagger avec #Féevrier et #Féevrier2020 !

pinceauarcenciel: 🌈 Fairyary 2020! ✨ Thanks for your patience, here’s finally this year’s prompt! 🦄 🧚‍♀️ Fairyary is a challenge I initia...

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
solacekames: 8:08 AM PDT 8/16/2019 by Kareem Abdul-JabbarThe NBA great and Hollywood Reporter columnist, a friend of the late martial arts star, believes the filmmaker was sloppy, somewhat racist and shirked his responsibility to basic truth in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.’Remember that time Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. kidney-punched a waiter for serving soggy croutons in his tomato soup? How about the time the Dalai Lama got wasted and spray-painted “Karma Is a Beach” on the Tibetan ambassador’s limo? Probably not, since they never happened. But they could happen if a filmmaker decides to write those scenes into his or her movie. And, even though we know the movie is fiction, those scenes will live on in our shared cultural conscience as impressions of those real people, thereby corrupting our memory of them built on their real-life actions.That’s why filmmakers have a responsibility when playing with people’s perceptions of admired historic people to maintain a basic truth about the content of their character. Quentin Tarantino’s portrayal of Bruce Lee in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood does not live up to this standard. Of course, Tarantino has the artistic right to portray Bruce any way he wants. But to do so in such a sloppy and somewhat racist way is a failure both as an artist and as a human being.This controversy has left me torn. Tarantino is one of my favorite filmmakers because he is so bold, uncompromising and unpredictable. There’s a giddy energy in his movies of someone who loves movies and wants you to love them, too. I attend each Tarantino film as if it were an event, knowing that his distillation of the ’60s and ’70s action movies will be much more entertaining than a simple homage. That’s what makes the Bruce Lee scenes so disappointing, not so much on a factual basis, but as a lapse of cultural awareness.Bruce Lee was my friend and teacher. That doesn’t give him a free pass for how he’s portrayed in movies. But it does give me some insight into the man. I first met Bruce when I was a student at UCLA looking to continue my martial arts studies, which I started in New York City. We quickly developed a friendship as well as a student-teacher relationship. He taught me the discipline and spirituality of martial arts, which was greatly responsible for me being able to play competitively in the NBA for 20 years with very few injuries.During our years of friendship, he spoke passionately about how frustrated he was with the stereotypical representation of Asians in film and TV. The only roles were for inscrutable villains or bowing servants. In Have Gun - Will Travel, Paladin’s faithful Chinese servant goes by the insulting name of “Hey Boy” (Kam Tong). He was replaced in season four by a female character referred to as “Hey Girl” (Lisa Lu). Asian men were portrayed as sexless accessories to a scene, while the women were subservient. This was how African-American men and women were generally portrayed until the advent of Sidney Poitier and blaxploitation films. Bruce was dedicated to changing the dismissive image of Asians through his acting, writing and promotion of Jeet Kune Do, his interpretation of martial arts.That’s why it disturbs me that Tarantino chose to portray Bruce in such a one-dimensional way. The John Wayne machismo attitude of Cliff (Brad Pitt), an aging stuntman who defeats the arrogant, uppity Chinese guy harks back to the very stereotypes Bruce was trying to dismantle. Of course the blond, white beefcake American can beat your fancy Asian chopsocky dude because that foreign crap doesn’t fly here.I might even go along with the skewered version of Bruce if that wasn’t the only significant scene with him, if we’d also seen a glimpse of his other traits, of his struggle to be taken seriously in Hollywood. Alas, he was just another Hey Boy prop to the scene. The scene is complicated by being presented as a flashback, but in a way that could suggest the stuntman’s memory is cartoonishly biased in his favor. Equally disturbing is the unresolved shadow that Cliff may have killed his wife with a spear gun because she nagged him. Classic Cliff. Is Cliff more heroic because he also doesn’t put up with outspoken women?I was in public with Bruce several times when some random jerk would loudly challenge Bruce to a fight. He always politely declined and moved on. First rule of Bruce’s fight club was don’t fight — unless there is no other option. He felt no need to prove himself. He knew who he was and that the real fight wasn’t on the mat, it was on the screen in creating opportunities for Asians to be seen as more than grinning stereotypes. Unfortunately, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood prefers the good old ways.: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Bruce Lee Was My Friend, and Tarantino's Movie Disrespects Him 8:08 AM PDT 8/16/2019 by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Alamy Stock Photo Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Bruce Lee during the filming of 1978's 'Game of Death.' solacekames: 8:08 AM PDT 8/16/2019 by Kareem Abdul-JabbarThe NBA great and Hollywood Reporter columnist, a friend of the late martial arts star, believes the filmmaker was sloppy, somewhat racist and shirked his responsibility to basic truth in ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.’Remember that time Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. kidney-punched a waiter for serving soggy croutons in his tomato soup? How about the time the Dalai Lama got wasted and spray-painted “Karma Is a Beach” on the Tibetan ambassador’s limo? Probably not, since they never happened. But they could happen if a filmmaker decides to write those scenes into his or her movie. And, even though we know the movie is fiction, those scenes will live on in our shared cultural conscience as impressions of those real people, thereby corrupting our memory of them built on their real-life actions.That’s why filmmakers have a responsibility when playing with people’s perceptions of admired historic people to maintain a basic truth about the content of their character. Quentin Tarantino’s portrayal of Bruce Lee in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood does not live up to this standard. Of course, Tarantino has the artistic right to portray Bruce any way he wants. But to do so in such a sloppy and somewhat racist way is a failure both as an artist and as a human being.This controversy has left me torn. Tarantino is one of my favorite filmmakers because he is so bold, uncompromising and unpredictable. There’s a giddy energy in his movies of someone who loves movies and wants you to love them, too. I attend each Tarantino film as if it were an event, knowing that his distillation of the ’60s and ’70s action movies will be much more entertaining than a simple homage. That’s what makes the Bruce Lee scenes so disappointing, not so much on a factual basis, but as a lapse of cultural awareness.Bruce Lee was my friend and teacher. That doesn’t give him a free pass for how he’s portrayed in movies. But it does give me some insight into the man. I first met Bruce when I was a student at UCLA looking to continue my martial arts studies, which I started in New York City. We quickly developed a friendship as well as a student-teacher relationship. He taught me the discipline and spirituality of martial arts, which was greatly responsible for me being able to play competitively in the NBA for 20 years with very few injuries.During our years of friendship, he spoke passionately about how frustrated he was with the stereotypical representation of Asians in film and TV. The only roles were for inscrutable villains or bowing servants. In Have Gun - Will Travel, Paladin’s faithful Chinese servant goes by the insulting name of “Hey Boy” (Kam Tong). He was replaced in season four by a female character referred to as “Hey Girl” (Lisa Lu). Asian men were portrayed as sexless accessories to a scene, while the women were subservient. This was how African-American men and women were generally portrayed until the advent of Sidney Poitier and blaxploitation films. Bruce was dedicated to changing the dismissive image of Asians through his acting, writing and promotion of Jeet Kune Do, his interpretation of martial arts.That’s why it disturbs me that Tarantino chose to portray Bruce in such a one-dimensional way. The John Wayne machismo attitude of Cliff (Brad Pitt), an aging stuntman who defeats the arrogant, uppity Chinese guy harks back to the very stereotypes Bruce was trying to dismantle. Of course the blond, white beefcake American can beat your fancy Asian chopsocky dude because that foreign crap doesn’t fly here.I might even go along with the skewered version of Bruce if that wasn’t the only significant scene with him, if we’d also seen a glimpse of his other traits, of his struggle to be taken seriously in Hollywood. Alas, he was just another Hey Boy prop to the scene. The scene is complicated by being presented as a flashback, but in a way that could suggest the stuntman’s memory is cartoonishly biased in his favor. Equally disturbing is the unresolved shadow that Cliff may have killed his wife with a spear gun because she nagged him. Classic Cliff. Is Cliff more heroic because he also doesn’t put up with outspoken women?I was in public with Bruce several times when some random jerk would loudly challenge Bruce to a fight. He always politely declined and moved on. First rule of Bruce’s fight club was don’t fight — unless there is no other option. He felt no need to prove himself. He knew who he was and that the real fight wasn’t on the mat, it was on the screen in creating opportunities for Asians to be seen as more than grinning stereotypes. Unfortunately, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood prefers the good old ways.

solacekames: 8:08 AM PDT 8/16/2019 by Kareem Abdul-JabbarThe NBA great and Hollywood Reporter columnist, a friend of the late martial ar...

Save