Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hawkwing

  1. The RNG fails you when you create a tactically sound and reliable strategy. I replace all the horses with motorcycles.
  2. I agree. Forcing change will be met with opposition, while letting it be gradual means there will be troubles in the meantime. I don't really know a way to comment on combating subconscious thoughts without repeating what you said, so lets just say you took the words out of my mouth. I said earlier that any side can generalize another one. I would have originally said that the only difference was that one group had a choice and the other didn't, but one can legally change their nationality and there are ways to medically alter ones gender, and didn't want to deal with the arguments that came from that. I don't really have much to add that you haven't said already, aside from republicans and police not being the only groups that have power that they have used and abused. And that one can be a part of a group without agreeing with every idea they supposedly represent. I see what you are getting at. I don't entirely agree, as there are people who know themselves well enough to state their virtues and vices just as there are people who believe they are nobler than they truly are. Of course, this depends heavily on the individual, and it is not obvious to determine this at first glance. That is more or less my question. There are criticisms about white privilege all throughout this thread, yet few propositions on what the the people supposedly benefiting from these systems should be doing about it... ...aside from this. I know this is how such systems are combated, but my question is what do you believe people who are supposedly part of these systems in the meantime should do with their "privileges" that don't fall into "protest"? Not surprised you were confused. In hindsight, I focused a bit more on the "there can be factors outside of a creators control that affect the accuracy of a project" part than the "history is often twisted to suit whatever groups ends, no matter who does it" one. I could also point out how certain several strategy games have an almost obsessive focus with mechanically inserting the tactics, politics, weapon statistics, and more used in historical battles, but that is neither here nor there. I mentioned earlier that things that sound like weak excuses in one field can be legitimate issues in a different one. Robin Walker mentioned it an interview that there was an idea to make some of the cast females, but the team wasn't happy with the compromise, as the felt there was a "right way" to go about with the idea, yet in the end other aspects of development took priority. The memory issues and having to account for all the updates the game received over the years is likely the reason female versions of the characters haven't been added The main point is that adding diversity isn't always as easy as it sounds when every factor of game creation is taken into account. It should definitely be a goal, but no product can do everything they set out to do. Defeatist if politics is the be all, end all of change. It isn't to me. Small, everyday actions create ripples that have far reaching impacts. It does not happen overnight, and their effects are not immediately noticeable, yet they can cause change, whether for good or ill. Hey, I said it would be quick thoughts provided in a general manner. I was in no mood to write an essay, especially given most of the ones I write on this site end up being wastes of time. My mistake for commenting on that point, I suppose.
  3. Politely request they drink elsewhere, as alcohol and intelligent debates don't go hand in hand.
  4. The rebels in the next game have a slightly better excuse to rebel now. I try to convince IS to make Battle of Revolution a full-fledged game.
  5. The one that whispers bad ideas all the time. No one said I had to actually use them, and they could be good for a laugh every now and again. WYR be a one-man band or be the only one playing a unique instrument in an orchestra?
  6. Fire Emblem WOD is the only place I managed to find an actual translation, and it is in Spanish. Despite how warped Google Translate can be, there are some interesting tidbits: - It takes place near the end of the Edo period. - The land of Valentia is suffering from famine and destruction in several places, and its isolation has attracted foreign countries to its shores. - It seems that Celica is the leader of Zofia, and visits Valbar to request his aid. - There are people who support the Shogunate (the ruling military power) and those that want them gone. People all across the country feel strongly about the issue and aren't afraid to use violence to prove it. - Valbar and Celica gather allies, and when Valbar learns of the conspiracies behind the Shogunate, "his heart will hesitate. In the end, who really knows what they will believe?" - The destination of the final battle is called "The White Feather". -The game supposedly has a deep history, sub-episodes that show a characters past, and additional sub missions. - There is a Hanafuda Card System (essentially card Amiibo. Remember those?) that may or may not affect permadeath, and the game has amazing battle animations. - Unless it's a joke by the website, Chapter 1 is called "Blooming Flowers" and Chapter 2 is "Between Water and Fish". There also exists a magic system, supports, classes, and DLC. Character Descriptions: Valbar AKA Violent Steed: Although he is a native peasant, he is naturally kind and has a sincere personality, which led to him becoming the guard of "White Wind" (Zofia). His laughter always reaches the next village, and he is concerned about his "recent thirties-old belly". Leon AKA Love Man: A ninja who fled from Iga. He longs to ride for Valbar (who is also known as the Violent Steed... make of that what you will), even enlisting for him. Leon changes his red eyeliner daily, is dandy and skilled with their hands, which draws the attention of young women. May or may not be occasionally mistaken for a female himself. Kamui AKA Warrior Bear: A samurai without a teacher. He once brandished his sword against Valbar, which lead to him joining the "White Wind". Kamui hates being dominated, and despite his careless lifestyle is an expert with the blade. He is struck by a girl from a store, though he does not speak to her. Marth AKA Prince Blue Runner: A young runner from Archanea, a domain next to Valentia. In a strange twist of fate, he ends up becoming the sovereign of Archenea with his heroic runs and races. A free DLC character. These seem to be the (well, a) translations of the screenshots: Again, it's google translate, so there is some weird phrasing, but it sounds like a pretty solid idea for a Fire Emblem game if I am being honest.
  7. Is wondering why two different webcomics have "Reach for the Sky" as a comic title.
  8. Started on Lunatic Classic yesterday, though I switched to casual the first chance I got. I'll likely still play the same as classic, but I'd rather not have to deal with starting a map from the beginning or loosing a good unit thanks to screwing up at the last second. I remember it taking a few playthroughs of Awakening before I was comfortable with ironmanning that game, and both the Fates games remind me enough of the thirteenth installment that I'll likely start doing challenge runs after I've completed them enough times to get familiar with what to expect. I managed to get to the first map after the route split and did Mozo's chapter before calling it a day, and I have to say that the difficulty of Lunatic caught me off guard, but in a good way. I ended up resetting several times on every map after chapter 2 and before the split thanks to the difficulty, and while there was some trail and error, it was the fun kind. It wasn't trying and retrying a level just to find the correct way to proceed, but rather adjusting my tactics to continue with what worked and tweak what didn't. It never seemed impossible, but rather that I needed to approach an encounter from a different angle. It did make me wish Fates had some kind of turnwheel function (albeit a heavily limited one) to help same on time, though. I may not have spent a ton of time on Birthright yet, but something I noticed immediately was that a lot of your units did come off as weaker compared to the soldiers you get in Conquest. Rinkah started at E-rank, Hana and Subaki could be killed in two battles, and Sakura didn't impress me as much as Elise did, though that could just be the lack of a horse. Yet, in a way, I find it rather clever that the units that start out in the "peaceful" kingdom aren't as immediately competent as the ones in the "warlike" one. Similar case with it being easier to gather money and experience in the prosperous nation while gold and exp is a precious resource throughout Conquest. The writing may have fallen flat on the worldbuilding, but I do have to compliment how it was implemented in gameplay. Also, I am really looking forward to using the exotic weapons and classes that you constantly fought against in Conquest and only had the barest ability to use on your side. They were interesting to combat and looked fun to use. I am also curious how many battles there will be that feature Hoshidan classes as opponents. I know Conquest had its fair share of fights against Nohrian classes (almost too many; it barely felt like there was a war with Hoshido at points) so I am curious if Birthright does the same.
  9. Yes. Blame the sweeping generalizations both sides have made about the other and the difficulty of finding a middle ground for that. Especially when I've seen how off most of said generalizations are with my own eyes. So you are basically saying "Everyone is prejudiced, lives in a prejudiced system, and it is unavoidable to be prejudiced no matter what"? Perhaps as human beings it is unavoidable not to notice another skin color, but we also have the ability to choose for that not to influence our decisions. The thoughts may pop to our head without us wanting to, but nothing forces us to listen to it. Also, what do you propose the common citizen to do to avoid benefiting from these "racist" systems? Would a white person get anywhere by asking their professor or teacher to take the exact same test as the black person? Or to request during a job interview not consider their race? We don't get to choose the circumstances we are born with, but we can choose what to do with the resources we are given. Some use these opportunities prudently, others squander it, yet we can always decided how to react to whatever life throws our way. I agree that these systems should be changed to make the playing field even. Yet while the common citizen can advocate for a change, it ultimately it is up to law makers to create the laws. Even then, enforcement of said laws won't always be fair, as mentioned a few times on this thread. I doubt anyone chooses to be part of a supposedly unequal system, yet that does not prevent people from being able to treat others equally and respectfully, regardless of race and position. It's also common for history to be twisted so that certain groups and people look less or more villainous or heroic, and to exaggerate or downplay certain actions that took place. Sometimes this done because there is only so much you can put into a product in the case of things such as movies, video games, and books, as well as studios having to account for the age rating. Even then, they aren't except from from doing what anyone can do; twist the past to fit their own views for their own ends. Any side can do it. It is why critical thinking, awareness, and research as so vital when discussing history. What came to mind in when writing that section of my post was why Value didn't add female versions of the mercenaries in Team Fortress 2, as it is a good example of how a company can have plans to add diversity but other factors result in the idea getting cut. I was going to link the video originally, but decided against it since while the research and facts are sound, the presentation rather informal for this kind of topic. Anyway, memory was the main problem Valve faced with inserting the idea, as having multiple models for a single class would lead to performance issues, which is one of the last things you want in a fast paced multiplayer game. This issue was compounded by the production costs of creating distinctive designs for the new characters, building the models and the animations for them, hiring voice actors (keep in mind that the game has over 4,000 voice clips just for 9 characters), and how the work required to update the game with new items would be doubled with the addition of a female cast. On the competitive side of things, the different models might have different hitboxes, meaning that players would likely pick the gender model that is harder to hit over the one they like, and making both models exactly the same to prevent this issue would defeat the purpose of having two different characters. Robin Walker, one of the developers of the game, has stated in a few interviews that while adding female characters is not impossible, it is unlikely to happen due to the potential costs in game performance and production, and the development team never found a satisfactory compromise they were happy with in their attempts to implement the idea. This is far from a universal reason as to why certain videogames don't have more diverse casts, but it is a good example of how a developer may have wanted to implement one but other factors prevented the idea from coming to fruition. This point I can agree with. The characters, well, character matters most at the end of the day, yet there is nothing to loose from having greater diversity. Or my original post was pointing out how Disney has always been embarrassed about Song of the South and how refurnishing a ride would bee seen as a standard business practice if the timing of the announcement weren't so suspect. That, and how different news sources are saying different things about certain aspects of these protests to push their own agendas, and how this is nothing new. Doesn't help that most of the issues I care about won't be solved by politics, but rather the attitude of the larger culture and society, and I don't expect those things to align with everything I believe in anytime soon. It's why I believe the greatest impact anyone can have is treating everyone we meet, whether neighbors, family, coworkers, or random people we don't know with respect and focusing upon inward characteristics over outward ones. Some points that came to mind on the positive side of things (speaking generally): - It throws the idea out there, which in turn the allows people to ignore, praise, criticize, dissect, analyze, apply or reject it. It can have an influence on others and can provide encouragement for others to present their own ideas and views on the matter. - Even a flawed execution can still raise awareness and, perhaps unintentionally, encourage people to research something to get a more informed view. - It takes time, but the more commonplace an ideal is, the more accepted it tends to become. On the Negative: - Intentions can change quickly, and it is easy to drop support of something if another group offers a better deal. It's even possible to play both sides if it is profitable. - People fight back against being strong-armed into showing support for an ideal they don't agree with. There are a multitude of positive examples of people standing firm in their own believes despite the danger and strength of the opposition, even if it costs them their life, just as there are destructive cases where people do as much in their power to hamper growth and hang on to their old ideals for as long as they can. Both of these send strong messages, whether encouraging or destructive. - A flawed execution of an idea can be just as dangerous as it can be helpful. It can encourage research, yes, but if someone doesn't put in the effort, it give them a warped perspective of a situation (especially if they don't do anything to combat it), which in several cases can build up over time and lead to taking actions based upon a biased or flawed viewpoint. Again, I am speaking generally, and this is more giving some quick thoughts than writing an essay.
  10. Last year I borrowed my cousins copy of Fire Emblem Fates: Conquest, and asked for some advice. Once again, I thank everyone who responded. I frequently referred to the topic throughout my playthrough and it was helpful each time. This time, I asked to borrow Birthright, and my question is what difficulty should I play it on? I completed Conquest on hard casual, and in terms of pure gameplay, I would consider it the best in the series. It remained challenging yet fair throughout, it knew when to inform the player about a gimmick or mechanic and went to let the map design and enemy abilities speak for themselves, and I can count the amount of bullcrap specific to this game on one hand. That said, the sheer number of things to keep track of, combined with how long certain levels could last and how certain gimmicks could have been given a bit more time to stew, did result in me getting exhausted with the game. I know that Birthright is considered much easier, so after beating Conquest, would it be a good idea to start a blind playthrough on hard or lunatic difficulty? I also ask how well does the game handle permadeath, as I am curious whether to start on casual or classic mode. I enjoy doing Ironman runs for most games in the series, and I have done blind Ironman runs for Shadow Dragon and Blazing Sword, so this wouldn't be my first rodeo. Thanks in advance. (Also, I swear I am going to do a Ryoma Solo run of the game after my first playthrough, as I am legitimately curious if he really is that powerful.)
  11. Not a curse, but it could be seen as an excuse to diminish the work someone did simply because of their race. Or the opposite side, saying that someone had a door of opportunity close on an opportunity solely because of their race. I am far from saying race is not a factor, but considering it the only one is a pointlessly limiting viewpoint to apply to every situation. Hence why I believe these situations should be analyzed, but it much easier to judge based on appearances. I suppose I should just say outright that I distrust any label, given how abusable they are, even when they have some degree of accuracy. Call it disillusionment from how polarized our current political and social climate is and how difficult it is to find a middle ground. Again. it is being used appropriately in this context, but it could easily be a different story in another one. I am not in the entertainment industry, so I am not privy to how frequent hiring based on race is. I do know that casting someone for their abilities over their appearance is far from uncommon. Execution matters most at the end of the day, and tokenisms are rightfully a frequent topic of criticism in today's day and age. Since it was brought up, I do want to mention that simply because a field may be historicallu dominated by a certain group does not mean that said group is hostile towards diversity. I've taken several college classes in the field of manufacturing and worked in a few industrial jobs that were historically male dominated, yet still had a number of female employees/students. There was no hostility towards this minority by coworkers and those in charge, even though male employees outnumbered them. Being accepting towards a group does not immediately result in an even ratio, as that takes time to occur, which is something I've seen some groups struggle to understand. And I'm not in charge of any corporations and I can't make any laws. It's a stupidly simple change to remove race, gender, nationality, religion, and so on from the equation, and every employee handbook I've seen points that out. Enforcing it is the difficult part, as there is always going to be at least one person against change. I can choose as an individual not to care about a persons appearance and instead care about their character, as that's what truly matters at the end of the day. I won't be changing society or the political landscape, but I can decide how I personally act. This is something shared between every single human being on the face of the planet. That was more a point about how absolute a viewpoint about a group can be, regardless of the variances of the people within said group. I suppose I didn't make that aspect clear enough. Point is, the same attitudes can be leveled at groups that didn't choose their lot in life as much as organizations made up of all kinds of people. Couldn't that itself be considered a racist statement? That it is supposedly impossible for white people to not be racist about anything? That someone with white skin can't ignore the pointless physical attributes about another person and instead care about about the qualities that actually matter? Perhaps that wasn't what you were aiming at, yet the attitude that one can't be racist or sexist towards a majority still exists, and it simply flips the problem instead of actually solving anything. Oh I most certainly agree. There really is no excuse to have diverse casts in this day and age, although execution of the concept obviously varies between works. Historical works with an aim of accuracy is perhaps the only field that can "get away" with supposedly racist or sexist casting (or at least, it receives the least amount of criticism for doing so). Models take time and money to create, voice actors aren't cheap, and characterization goes out the window on the competitive scene, among a plethora of other elements that go into making sure a game runs and is fun to play. Of course, it is always a good idea to design a game with diversity in mind, yet so much goes into the development process that not every idea can come to fruition. There are a lot of legitimate issues that developers have to face that would sound like lazy excuses in a different field. It is entirely possible to aim at something and miss the mark due to factors outside the creators control, with no hostile intent on their part. On the flip side, a game having great diversity does not always mean it is fun to play or well-designed, even if said diversity can still be a positive element that draws people to a game. There are enough examples where the gameplay sucks yet other elements such as the story, characters, music, art style, and so on still get people interested. It is awesome when a game manages to achieve this diversity while also having excellent gameplay, but considering how many games out there have excellent ideas yet don't always execute them well, this is far easier said than done. I never trusted any large group to have the common persons best interests in mind, hence why I stopped giving a crap about politics and why I've accepted that scummy business practices will always be a thing, even if it is a worthwhile fight to stamp it out. Learning that car companies are entirely willing to ignore known issues because it is easier to pay off lawsuits than fix the problem, even if it results in a number of deaths, will do that pretty quickly. I see both productive and destructive qualities in this statement, though perhaps that's just my philosophers side coming out. I'll give it some thought before starting any debates.
  12. SomecallmeJohhny, Retropolis Zone (an underrated reviewer, even if the length of their videos is a double-edged sword), and the game costing 10 bucks on the E-shop convinced me to get the MegaMan X collection. Don't regret my purchase, even if I quickly realized that it has been a long time since I have last played a platformer. SomecallmeJohhny's reviews of Metal Gear got me into the series, although Awkward Zombine and the "Let's Destroy Metal Gear!" comics by Hiiamdaisy also had a hand in that. Despite only playing two games in the franchise thus far, I quickly fell in love with its unique blend of silliness and seriousness, thought-provoking plots, and extremely well done stealth gameplay. The Completionist and the Resident Evil marathon by SomecallmeJohnny (noticing a pattern?), as well as being $20 on the E-shop led to me getting Resident Evil 4 on the Nintendo Switch. Needless to say, I have no difficulty seeing why this is considered one of the most influential videogames of all time and why it is a favorite of many. I had fun from beginning to end, my complaints were few, and it didn't take long before I started a new game to experience it all over again. These are the only cases I can think of where a reviewer convinced me to buy a game. Generally, I tend to watch reviews for fun and to either learn about a game I didn't have much knowledge of before or to get a different perspective on one I had already played. When actually buying a product, I tend already have some knowledge of the game beforehand, or it was cheap and the marketing blurbs and screenshots looked interesting at stores where you can buy older games.
  13. To do something normal in a world full of crazy. The proper way to react to the fact that you haven't done something in over a year is...
  14. Ask if he has time to sit down and discuss the best stat.
  15. I'll just smile, nod, and go along with whatever the story is this time around.
  16. Banned because ads are one of the few ways that websites and content creators can get money.
  17. Give him the quest reward so that he will stop coming to my door.
  • Create New...