Babylon Fell.

Waiting for the inevitable $9.99 sale of Ubi games will now be the norm.

Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 17:49:

LordSteev wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 17:37:
I'm not sure you're getting the context of what I'm arguing. I'm a bottom-up, tax the rich to help the poor Democrat. I don't view people with student loans as the bottom. Hard luck is getting good grades through high school and then not going to college because you can't afford it. Those are the people who have to feel screwed by this.

If someone from the bottom goes to trade school to become, say, an electrician, how do you think he pays for it? Is your contention that anyone with a trained skill is too fancy and too far up the socioeconomic ladder to justify receiving debt relief?

No. But I don't consider someone making less than $125,000 a year to be poor, either. Please don't try to spoon feed me my convictions. It's useless to talk with people who have decided what your opinions are for you.

jacobvandy wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 16:18:
LordSteev wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 15:41:
Who gets to decide which ones will be bailed out with taxpayer money? Oh, Joe does.

And so did Donald, and Barack, and George, and Bill, on down the line... $300M ain't even that much compared to what's been done before, either. So why is this one so bad?

It's billion, not million.

Yep, I was remembering the estimate from before the official announcement, that's why I edited it out. General meaning of my post remains unchanged, though... It's not a Joe Biden or Democrat thing to bail people out, it's a US government thing. Why so much disdain for a bail-out where the vast majority of the money is going to help those in the lower middle class and below, as opposed to the rich fucks who usually get the free money AND find as many ways to weasel out of paying taxes as they possibly can?


I'm not sure you're getting the context of what I'm arguing. I'm a bottom-up, tax the rich to help the poor Democrat. I don't view people with student loans as the bottom. Hard luck is getting good grades through high school and then not going to college because you can't afford it. Those are the people who have to feel screwed by this.

As far as Government giveaways, you're right, it's a good one, better than most. At least it goes to people who genuinely have a need. But you asked where I'd like to see the money go instead, and the truth is I think it could be better spent on Homeless Shelters, warming houses, meals for the poor. Spend the money on people that most people don't even treat like people.

jacobvandy wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 16:18:

LordSteev wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 15:41:
Who gets to decide which ones will be bailed out with taxpayer money? Oh, Joe does.

And so did Donald, and Barack, and George, and Bill, on down the line... $300M ain't even that much compared to what's been done before, either. So why is this one so bad?

It's billion, not million.

Hardline Mike wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 15:34:

LordSteev wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 15:17:
FYGM you don't support. How about Fuck You, could have gotten mine if only I'd have thrown financial responsibility to the wind?

I don't really feel like somebody's student loan debt is automatically the result of irresponsibility on their part. Lots of things can happen that change the value of a degree, or that stop you from completing the degree in the first place. Without actually graduating and getting a good paying job, you aren't in any better position financially to repay that loan than you were to send yourself to college in the first place.

But even if it was a foolishly entered loan agreement, I'm not of the opinion that anything that mitigates the consequences of a person's bad decision is automatically bad for society as a whole. Very few of us ever have to bear the full consequences of our mistakes, and we all benefit from some measure of forgiveness or luck. This type of thinking also skirts pretty close to some of the thoughts I hear about abortion rights, and how if they didn't want to be saddled with 18+ years of obscene expenses and stress, they just shouldn't have opened their legs. There's this through-line that implies that the forgiveness and luck I had is fine, but everyone else has to suffer the full consequences of their actions.

I see what you are saying, and agree with you to some effect. I'm thinking more of people who never went to college because they didn't think they could afford it. They feel like the real losers out of this to me.

I doubt a single one of us hasn't made a financial decision we later came to regret. Who gets to decide which ones will be bailed out with taxpayer money? Oh, Joe does.

Hardline Mike wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 15:07:
Given the predatory nature of student lending combined with the fact that even complete financial ruination and bankruptcy can't discharge it, I have zero problem with this. If anything it doesn't go far enough to stick it to predatory lenders. Also my taxes pay for a lot of shit I either don't support or don't benefit from, so if I'm going to complain that my tax dollars are helping people who don't meet my exacting personal standards I'm going to be complaining about it for the rest of my life. I don't subscribe to the mindset of "fuck you, got mine."

This won't stick anything to predatory lenders, unfortunately. If anything, it'll get them paid off sooner. FYGM you don't support. How about Fuck You, could have gotten mine if only I'd have thrown financial responsibility to the wind?

This also pisses me off as a Democrat hoping to keep majorities in both houses. It's a stupid move with backlash that's going to lead to more Republicans in office. Since they all seem to be rabid election (fact) deniers, bent on subverting the will of the people, I worry about long term consequences here.

Beamer wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 14:29:

LordSteev wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 13:19:
I'm with Curt on this one. Lifelong Democrat, but spent a lot of years paying off my own loans. Why in hell should I have to help other people pay theirs? I know a lot of people who didn't go to 4 year college because they figured they couldn't afford it. If they'd have known the Gov. would pick up the tab, it might have changed their lives. I'd rather see the 300 billion go to feed the poor.

I get this, but feel it's a bit short-sighted, and also feel that this has become a topic people are angry about while ignoring things that have had a greater, though less direct, impact:

1) We objectively know that people are drowning in student loan debt, and that it's delaying them from doing things like buying a house or starting a family. These are things we want to encourage, and that strengthen our nation. These delays are not good for us, regardless of why they're happening

2) It isn't as if we don't do bailouts regularly. This is a fraction the size of the PPP bailouts. I can't figure out why those were ok but this is creating such strong emotions

3) Also a fraction of TARP and the 2008 bank bailouts, which didn't get the ire this is

4) The "but I did everything right" argument isn't a great one. For one, it can be used to prevent any progress, ever. What would have happened to the first public fire department if everyone that ever had to pay to have a fire put out in their house, or saw their home burn because no one could take care of it, complained?

5) Keep in mind, most of these borrowers also "did everything right." They've been told from birth that the secret to being middle class is college, and objectively, it's much harder to get there without it. They were strongly encouraged by every major institution to take out these loans. They based their decision upon information from schools that was often misleading. And they signed up for loans before they were even old enough to buy beer or rent a car

6) Not to mention, unlike other loans, they can't get out of these other than paying them off or dying. Do you have credit card debt? You can declare bankruptcy. Mortgage issues? You can foreclose. Student loan debt? Sorry!

7) We did this to them. We privatized student loans. States dramatically reduced their investment into colleges. We set the loan rates to what is basically predatory (mine were 8.5%!) And we ended the right to bankruptcy.

8) And this will benefit all of us. This will lead to increased money going into the economy, or being saved so that we have fewer people needing handouts as seniors

I don't know. If I see someone drowning, I'm not going to avoid throwing them a life preserver because no one threw me one, or because my friend decided not to even get into the water. I paid off almost $200k in loans. I feel like I have an obligation to make things better for those coming behind me.

Some of these points are valid, I guess, even if not provable. But does a contract mean nothing, in spite of how young and stupid you are when you enter it? I have friends who did not go to college, not because they didn't have the grades, but because they didn't want to owe money for the rest of their lives. I understand that student debt is a hardship, but in no way do I pitty the poor college grads who have earned a debt because they wanted to put themselves ahead of the common rabble.

What about kids who graduate 5 years from now? Should we pay for them, too? If college is going to be free, just make it free. Don't bail out bad choices. I'm saying all this as just my opinion, and I certainly don't hold yours against you. Who knows, in the long run, you may be proven right. It's just a kick in the nuts for some people.

Steele Johnson wrote on Aug 26, 2022, 13:35:
Yeah, seems like just a way to buy votes from young voters rather than fixing the actual issue (i.e. the high cost of college tuition). Subsidizing loans just seems lazy and short-term, and doesn't actually fix anything (and will likely make the real issue worse)

All true, plus it rewards people for being financially irresponsible. If you honestly looked at your financial situation and didn't take a huge student loan, because you didn't think you could pay it back, you're now out of $20,000 that you could have had if you'd of just rolled the dice.

Rewarding poor decisions by college grads may indeed win their votes in the short term, but how many other people are you pissing off with this decision?

Dems were doing so good, too. Some good legislation passed recently on energy and climate. Polls were showing some improvement. They always shoot themselves in the foot.

I'm with Curt on this one. Lifelong Democrat, but spent a lot of years paying off my own loans. Why in hell should I have to help other people pay theirs? I know a lot of people who didn't go to 4 year college because they figured they couldn't afford it. If they'd have known the Gov. would pick up the tab, it might have changed their lives. I'd rather see the 300 billion go to feed the poor.

Not much of a trailer, but still. The games listed as to where these people have worked in the past reads like a top-10 favorite list of games all-time for me. I know exactly nothing about this game, and it's shot to the head of my most wanted list. Obsidian has done some great things with Bethesda's tools. Can't wait to see what happens when they collaborate.

I hope they're given the money and time to do what they do best. Even The Outer Worlds could have been a great game, with more time and money to flesh things out and make all those inventory items useful for something.

Judging by the trailer, I'm guessing 2026 at the earliest for this, but still, something to look forward to! I also love that they've named the company 'Something Wicked Games'. Sounds edgy. Sounds like they'll take some chances. Sounds way better than 'Pretty Little Wall Flower Games'.

I've got to say, that Atomic Heart Trailer looks fantastic to me. I love a weapon in one hand and casting spells with the other. The game looks like it uses serious parts of Half Life, Control, and BioShock. It looked like real gameplay, and lord knows what they're running it on, but it looked butter-smooth.

I think it's Russian, though....but I keep telling myself it's not all Russian People who are evil. (Though maybe letting yourself be blindly led is it's own lesser evil.) I have to think most of them wanted to invade Ukraine about as much as I wanted us to invade Iraq, though at least here you're not jailed for speaking up about it.

Anyway, Cool Game. I'll buy it.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Aug 24, 2022, 20:17:
The video gets one thing right and one thing wrong. Humans are, indeed, very, very stupidly short sighted creatures that let their lizard brains take over at the drop of a hat. We spent the last four decades proving that, no, we don't "need" communities and instead go out of our way to be as reductively tribalistic as possible.

And all the while we turn a blind eye to the fact that we're destroying the only real Spaceship we have. Starship Earth.

One of my favorite games of all time, and I'm not even a Star Wars geek. I hold it as one of the best games ever made, but hey, It was so long ago it's hard to say how it would have held up. Definitely one of the best games of it's time, let's say. They could bring huge improvements to level design and detail with a remake, but if memory serves correctly, other than quality of life improvements, any effort to change the core gameplay would probably backfire.

Just my .02

Mr. Tact wrote on Aug 20, 2022, 09:25:
Man, I thought the Fins were more laid back that that. "She is at a party!" Oh my! "She was dancing with someone who was not her husband!" Get a rope! *sheesh* People get a grip.

Amen to that.

If they want to get all over her for dancing and having fun, maybe we should reconsider letting them join NATO. lol

BigVlad wrote on Aug 19, 2022, 17:18:

LordSteev wrote on Aug 19, 2022, 17:00:
I remember way back, when playing rpg's that hadn't been optimized for profit, it used to be fun to find a chest and stumble on a new outfit. Maybe you even built a back story around it and gave it some stats to match. Now you just hop into your regional Medieval K-Mart and bust out your REAL gold. No story, no stats. Something that should have been included for the price you pay for the game. The times, they are a'changing.

Diablo isn't really an RPG in the traditional sense anyway. Character development and story are not that important in the Diablo franchise, so cosmetic purchases don't have to make sense or fit in the story, in my opinion. My only issue would be if they offered completely ridiculous attire like modern business suits, huge cow heads, and so on. That would kind of ruin the theme.

You're certainly right about Diablo not being an RPG. Also about business suits and cow heads, too. I'm just a sentimentalist who's getting old and not appreciating the lack of thought and effort going into making games GOOD and MEMORABLE anymore. It's profit over substance in almost every case these days, which I guess is the inevitable result of going corporate. Doesn't mean I have to like it.

I remember way back, when playing rpg's that hadn't been optimized for profit, it used to be fun to find a chest and stumble on a new outfit. Maybe you even built a back story around it and gave it some stats to match. Now you just hop into your regional Medieval K-Mart and bust out your REAL gold. No story, no stats. Something that should have been included for the price you pay for the game. The times, they are a'changing.

Skill Based Passing was in what, 4 or 5 years ago? Then out for the last 3 or so...seems like every 5 years or so they rotate things from past iterations and sell it as 'something new' again.

How about scouting and a draft that doesn't suck?

HAH! No Vax, no cookie.

Cool! Looks a little like Midnight Suns, another one I'm looking forward to. I haven't had turn-based strategy fix that I found really satisfying since XCOM 2. I expect to like Midnight Suns, since same people, but this looks good, too.