#blizzard discourse

[sumi-sprite]

...are people JUST NOW realizing Blizzard dropped OW2 when it was half-baked because it was the equivalent to jingling keys in front of a mad toddler and it worked?

Blizzard Activision after getting away with the sexual assault allegations and tricking their player base into playing a half baked sequel that's never going to be finished

[illusory-torrent]

i’m sorry adam, i’m a ramattra stan now 😔

[spartanlocke]

yo did blizzard actually listen to their playerbase and get a new writer or something because i watched a few cutscenes from dragonflight and it’s actually...not that bad? besides wrathion suddenly being impatient and hotheaded again (despite BFA showing he had outgrown that) the writing and characters are pretty solid?? at least from what i’ve seen so far??

i’m still not giving actiblizz a penny but after four straight years of dismissing player feedback and apparently insisting their writing is Good Actually i wasn’t expecting this in the slightest. good for them, i guess?

[tartbedo]

all of my overwatch ship headcannons are objectively right and i will fight people over them

[shvoowsh]

it is fucking snowing today and Last Week i wore a sundress. make up your fucking mind, March.

unfolding into another spring

mahmood darwish, sylvia plath, v.e. schwab, ana mendieta

buy me a coffee

[marvel-starwarsfangirl]

Why Crosshair Will Live

(aka an essay by a Crosshair girlie who loves her clone husband too much)

So, I've been thinking long and hard about the final season and how it could end. Obviously, it's gonna be an emotional rollercoaster and all that. However, there's always going to be discourse about who's gonna bite it, especially since our main characters don't have plot armor and this show is allowed to go way darker than Rebels. Crosshair is my favorite character and I don't hide that at all. He's all over my page. But looking at his character, there's a part of me that believes he actually might make it out in one piece. Let's get started!

"Redemption Equals Death"- Out of all the tropes, this is the one Crosshair embodies the most. He was the villain for a season, but now he's changing his ways. In past seasons, I would've said this is how his story ends. His brothers find him and Omega on Tantiss and he goes out protecting them, proving he deep down he still loved them. But after season 3, I don't think that's the case anymore. I think he's passed the point. Crosshair in season 3 is actively redeeming himself through his actions and words with his family and the other clones. We don't need to see him go out in some big self-sacrifice because we already see the person he truly is inside. More importantly, his family sees the person he's become. He's already proven it in so many ways. Crosshair openly admitted his mistakes, saved Hunter from the wyrm, is very protective of Omega, and saved his brothers, Omega, and Rex + Howzer from CX-2. At this point, Crosshair has passed the "redemption equals death" marker. His redemption is playing out and the people around him are seeing the changes.

His Character Arc- Crosshair's character arc has always been about loyalty and identity. Go all the way back to season 1 with the infamous "this is who I am" line and his whole spiel about the Batch not being loyal to him. "Aftermath" shows us this poor man already beginning to struggle. In season 2, Crosshair is going through every hurt no comfort fic trope in the book. This man was pushed to the brink, with every sense of his being questioned. And he almost didn't make it. Crosshair in "The Outpost" was so close to dying after trekking through the blizzard and shooting Nolan. He's suffered through so much already from being severely burnt to freezing, and now almost drowning. Pretty much half way through season 3 and Crosshair's trials aren't over. His hand is still bothering him and he's still trying to find himself.

Although Crosshair has made peace with his family, I believe he still needs to make peace with himself. He's been humbled sure, but there's more to go. Who is he if he isn't a soldier or sharpshooter? Crosshair's arc will probably finish with him realizing being a soldier isn't entirely who he is. His hand tremor still could be related to his internal conflict, we don't know. So far, he's doing a great job. We've seen Crosshair begin to find peace on Pabu and comfort with Omega. It would be so satisfying to see him make it out of this mess alive. My best BB ending would be him (and his brothers) alongside Omega retired somewhere. They have each other and that is enough.

His Poster and Theme- Crosshair is the only character as of right now in the Batch who has a separate poster for season 3. Not even Omega has a separate one (although I can see her getting one later). In fact, Omega shares her with Crosshair. Both are wearing their prison outfits, showing their shared situation and stand against a white/grey backdrop. We also see Cross gripping his right hand, referring to the issue he's having with it. However, he also has one of himself in the same golden lighting as his brothers. Crosshair stares at his helmet with a calm look on his face and appears to be contemplating. That has to mean something. From my POV, I get the sense he's wondering about who he is. Wouldn't it be a great ending if Cross finds himself and lives to see that self be happy?

He is also the only member of the Batch (Omega aside) to have his own theme/leitmotif. He has two actually: his Imperial one and his heroic one. His heroic theme aka the "Mayday" theme is stunning and highlights his struggle perfectly. You can actually hear it in season 1 fun fact but it's faint. The fact that he does have a separate poster and theme from the others does give me hope that he will make it. Not to say that the others aren't important, but something about Crosshair and his journey is very meaningful to have warranted this. You can argue that he shares the title of "heart of the show" to some degree because his arc is the most dynamic of all the Batch. His struggles and fight back towards the light truly raise this show to greatness.

Crosshair is also season 3's "Batcher of Year" award and so far, they're doing everything we wanted and more. For two whole seasons, his character has been building and building towards this season. And they better give us a great payoff. Crosshair's character going to continue to soar as the season progresses. I can definitely see him making it through to the end because of the focus on him.

Omega- how can we forget about the kid who never gave up on our grumpy sniper? Omega (and we can argue Cross to a lesser degree) is the heart of the show. She gives the Batch a new outlook on life and it is through her that they grow and change. Omega brings out the paternal and softer side in each of her brothers. Crosshair, however, takes a bit longer to get there. He's the only character whose main development happens away from Omega. When he finally gets home, he becomes Crossdad. But Omega is still a kid, despite her capabilities. If the other Batchers die, who will take care of her? Omega being on her own just doesn't feel right. We also know going off with Rex wouldn't feel satisfying either even though he would take really good care of her.

Now that Crosshair is back, it feels like the show is propping him up to take over Hunter's role. Hunter parented for 2 whole seasons. As the mentor figure, he might bite it. But wait! Crosshair is still here. There is no way the writers would just let Omega finish alone or get killed off. She will have someone with her. Crosshair, having spent the majority of the show away, will probably be the best candidate narratively speaking. As mentioned above, he gets two posters showing just how integral he is this season. He's also been getting a lot of screen time with Omega. So, I can definitely see the show ending with just the two of them left. It would be bittersweet, but still satisfying.

Disney- let's ask the question: would Disney kill off an entire family aside from their child? My best guess is no (this isn't a Disney movie with a prince to save the day). Tying into my last point, I can't see this family-friendly company letting a literal child lose her entire family and end up all alone in the end. We all saw Rogue One and we know that this is a plausible option. However, I'm beginning to think that they aren't gonna do that because again, Omega is a child. She's gonna hopefully have one, if not all, her brothers alongside her. And I swear, if they give her to someone else not named Crosshair, Hunter, Wrecker, or Echo, I will blow a gasket. She needs her family. Disney and Star Wars is all about hope and it's not very hopeful to me if all of the BB but Omega dies.

Rebuttal- let's get this out of the way: if Cross dies, it will be with his brothers, protecting Omega, and defeating Hemlock. There is literally no other way he could go out that would be satisfying. He's redeemed and fought the Ghost of Crosshair's Future (aka CX-2). Backpedaling on his character arc would suck. If he dies, it will be as a Bad Batcher, a loving brother, and the best sniper the galaxy has ever seen.

But I don't think that will happen. I do genuinely think Crosshair has a chance to survive. But what do you guys think? Obviously, I'll still be nervous about the whole thing, but I'm trying here.

[omg-snakes]

I just wanted to check - there are albino corns, right? I know there are Snows and Blizzard morphs. Snake Discovery did a corn snake hatching vid recently and seemed to think there were no albino corn snakes, so I was a little confused. (They also didn't know the difference between Tessera, Motley, and Stripe though so I think they are just generally uninformed)

Hey friend!

I think the source of confusion here is that the term "albino" is a colloquialism developed for humans that doesn't totally work for reptiles.

The root Latin word, albus, just means "white." The term albino was originally coined by Portuguese and Spanish colonizers (boooo!) to refer to the children of Black slaves who were born without melanin. It then went on to describe any animal without pigment, particularly the black pigment melanin, which resulted in white hair, pink skin, and pink or very light blue eyes.

As science marched on and we gained a better understanding of how genetics and pigment work, we came to realize that there are multiple pigments at play in most animals. Even humans, whose main pigment is melanin, have two different kinds of melanin which result in the rich diversity of skin tones across the human species! Albinism works as a descriptor for humans because we only have melanin, but it falls apart fast when we start applying it to other forms of life.

So in corn snakes there are three main pigments: melanin (black), erythrin (red), and xanthin (yellow).

An amelanistic, or Amel, corn snake is by definition an "albino" with no melanin and red eyes. But they look like this:

That doesn't exactly look white...

If we're looking for white snakes to call albino, a Snow corn snake has amelanism and anerythrism in combination, but they still have yellow xanthin pigment. A Blizzard, on the other hand, is a combination of amelanism and a slightly different mutation called Charcoal that removes both erythrin and xanthin. By the original intent of the word, a Blizzard would probably be an "albino" but a Snow might not fit the bill. Or might, depending on who's deciding, since they technically lack melanin!

To bring up another example of pigment mutations, leucism is the absence of all pigment, not just melanin. This mutation is most commonly found in birds and reptiles. Leucism and albinism look similar, and the mutations do similar things from a "looking at animals on the outside" perspective, but they're genetically distinct from each other!

It falls into semantics and discourse, so I think the easiest way to go about it is to think of albinism as a blanket term to describe a range of genetic color morphs found in mammals, but not a scientific description of what's actually happening. We could probably skip using it to describe reptiles because even when it's technically applicable, it's not the whole story.

I'll end this by saying that YouTubers in general are entertainers, not educators, and I don't think I'd take anything any of them say seriously unless they're providing references. Snakes are a huge and diverse group of lifeforms, and even if one were to know every detail there is to know about one species, that knowledge may only tenuously apply to even a similar-looking species.

This is exactly why exotics veterinarians are expensive and why you should treat them very kindly and with a great deal of respect.

[shadykazama]

Season 12

So, the season 12 trailer came out and it looks like Venture isn't getting a skin... again. That'll be THREE seasons of this character getting no legendary, which is actually ridiculous. Blizzard hasn't done this to any of their other characters, and I'm willing to bet they won't be doing it to Juno.

And it's not like Venture isn't popular! They were a huge hit and have a huge community. ATP we have to assume Blizzard is doing it on purpose either because they're scared to get everyone talking about venture again (because of all the discourse that happened when they released), OR the people in charge of releasing content for the characters simply don't like Venture (and we all probably know why).

Not to mention, Venture is literally PERFECT for the battlepass theme!! They got introduced messing around in the temple of Anubis 😭. They're an archaeologist!

[dicesmasher]

The Long Dark Rant - Cougars

It has just come to my knowledge that Hinterland Studios has just temporarily removed the cougar from The Long Dark after massive backlash after it was added a few days ago. Good riddance! I only hope they'll learn from this and re-implement it in a way that is actually good game design and fits in with the game's established framework. My problems with the cougar are multi-fold and shared with much of the rest of the TLD community.

I think I can speak for much of the community when I say I was very excited for the cougar. New wildlife is a rare event in TLD updates and for good reason. Everything has a reason to be here, and I appreciate the game is careful not to bloat itself with half-baked features. The cougar would provide a unique, exciting threat a cut above the usual wolves, timberwolves, bears and occasional moose. The idea of being stalked by a silent predator fit right in with the dark, pseudo-horror theme of TLD. But when the cougar finally arrived after years of waiting, many of us were emotionally (and sometimes physically) gutted with what we were given.

I will start with a problem I don't hear many people talking about, as the main discourse is about the behaviour of the cougar itself. One of my biggest problems is the immersion-breaking and hand-holding way in which the cougar is telegraphed.

Firstly, based on your difficulty level, you can know exactly how many days it takes for the cougar to arrive in your area. For Voyageur and Stalker, it's 30 days, which by the way, is frankly way too forgiving. A whole month! Most survival runs don't even last that long. Animals shouldn't work like that, especially in a video game where uncertainty is part of the design. There should be a random range of days, say 7-15 on Stalker, that it should take for the cougar to encroach.

Secondly, you get divine insight from God or something, and the game straight-up TELLS you the cougar is approaching. Now you could argue this is for the sake of fairness, as you are now presented with the decision to stay and face the cougar, or leave the region before it starts properly stalking you. But what next, should I get a notification that a blizzard is on the way tomorrow? Or that the bear I killed a while ago has respawned? Should I be told exactly how many timberwolf packs are in my region? The game should give you precise information on things that relate directly to the survivor - your hunger, thirst, etc. levels, carry weight, the condition of your clothes. It shouldn't do this for external factors that you shouldn't have any way of knowing.

Leading on from this, if you stay in the rgion, the game once again TELLS you the cougar is in the region and actively stalking you, with an icon that sticks to the left of your screen and stares at you menacingly. And only NOW do you start getting in-world signs that the cougar is here, namely in the form of distant yowling, and bloody carcasses of small animals, and of course, a distinct cougar theme that plays when you step outside for the first time.

If you decide to leave at this point, once again the game TELLS you EXACTLY how many days you need to be out of the region before the cougar leaves you alone. It's all so predictable that I don't know what the devs were thinking. Is the cougar a good idea or not, considering you felt the need to give the player ALL the information needed to avoid it?

The only point where the cougar becomes unpredictable is exactly when it will jump you. And this brings us to the next problem, and the one that most of the TLD community is clamouring about. The cougar DOESN'T EXIST in the world like any other animal. At some random time while you're being 'stalked' and being outdoors, you'll get an UNAVOIDABLE jumpscare cutscene as the cougar pounces you, destroys your clothes and gives you heavy lacerations and multiple infection risks, and cuts down a large chunk of your condition.

I have no problem with the brutality of the struggle - the cougar is supposed to be the most dangerous animal in the game. The problem is there is literally no way to defend yourself before the struggle like with any other animal, because the cougar doesn't exist until the struggle happens! The only way to kill the cougar (which is something the game incentivises you to do) is to let yourself get mauled by it!!! Then you have a chance to shoot it as it walks away from you.

This would be fine if there was no incentive to kill the cougar, but there is!!! The cougar claw knife is incredible for wolf defence, and the cougar skin headwrap is a valuable piece of gear. The rewards for killing the cougar means the game is essentially enticing you to try it, but this isn't a game of skill, other than aiming your gun at it in slow motion after the struggle cutscene. It's not a risk-reward situation. 'Risk' implies that with enough skill you could get it done unscathed, but there's no risk here, it's a predictable, guaranteed punishment, a tax, essentially, of your equipment and health before you have the opportunity to kill the cougar. This is not what TLD is about, and the game has never had anything like this before! With respect to how TLD is supposed to be designed, this is bad game design!

Nobody is saying killing the cougar should be easy, nobody wants that. But give us an opportunity to defend ourselves, even if there's a window of only a few seconds. Most of the problem would be fixed if the cougar just spawns in 10 metres behind you and starts running towards you, giving you a moment to turn around, aim your gun and kill it or drive it off.

Additionally, the cougar should be unpredictable, and constantly on my mind. Don't tell me the cougar is encroaching, just make me hear the distant yowls. Then, give me 2 or 3 days to get out of the region before I start hearing breaking twigs and closer vocalisations that signify it is stalking me, and start seeing freshly dead animals in the morning. Don't give me any icons, just environmental cues - that'll be enough to make me paranoid. Then, at some random time, spawn the cougar a little ways behind me or otherwise out of sight, and give me a test of skill as I try to shoot it before it reaches me.

I understand that coding an AI for the cougar that would make something that constantly exists in the world with such complex and evasive behaviour would be extremely hard. That's why a compromise of having it spawn a short distance from you is something I think will be perfectly doable and make the cougar a valued game mechanic that feels more like part of the ecosystem.

Rant over. I don't get the impression that Tumblr has a big TLD community but this is the best place for me to write rants.

[comradcat]

Oh, it certainly is a lotta nonsense. Of all HP media, of all things to be mad of in the name of trans support, Hogwarts Legacy not only features a trans character, but leaves ample room for the player character to determine their identity in that regard.

With Dress style, face & facial features, full access to all hairstyles, either masculine or feminine voice with additional pitch options, and preferred address of either Witch or Wizard, players are in full control of crafting a character with whatever identity in mind.

So for the 'trans allies' to get angry and try to boycott this game and threaten its players...it's ridiculous. It's very telling of instigation from external political movement influence, as anyone who plays the game can counter their arguments. Typical for almost any controversy to reach beyond the gaming community, I'd say. This reeks of the "hating-rowling-with-a-passion" bandwagon's doing rather than any issue with the game itself.

After all, those controversies with Blizzard & Riot DID ellicit a big response and a lot of justified anger...in the gaming community that is. Outside? Not so much.

So yeah, I don't blame you for being confused about this whole affair.

Re: Hogwarts Legacy.

I wish people would have cared at least 1/10 of how much they care about HL when the scandals of Blizzards and Riot games came out.

JKR might have fucked up ideas, but actual suicide and sexual harassment should be the priority. Instead everyone is still playing LoL or Overwatch.

Where was the solidarity back then? I bet 99% of people who go around saying to not play HL and posting spoilers is still watching Arcane and playing Overwatch.

That would be one of the reasons I think there's someone or some group of some sort agitating.

This does not feel like a rational response to everything going on with this game.

Also there's several other things blizzard has done that warranted a big response as well, whole thing in Hong Kong for one.

I don't get why this is the one people are latching on to.

[milijanakomad]

Product design and psychology: The Role of Grinding in Video Game Design

Keywords: Grinding, Video Gaming, Game Design, Player Engagement, Psychological Manipulation

Abstract:

This paper scrutinizes the utilization of "grinding" as a technique in video game design, particularly as a method of psychological manipulation that affects player engagement and behaviour. Case studies are explored to deliver a comprehensive understanding of the practical application of grinding and its implications, all from a product design viewpoint.

Introduction:

The design principles governing video games frequently incorporate mechanisms intended to stimulate player engagement and prolong interaction time. One such prevalent mechanism is "grinding," defined as the practice of executing repetitive tasks within the game environment to achieve specific objectives. While grinding can evoke a sense of achievement, it also carries the potential to induce exhaustion and frustration among players. This study endeavours to explore the intricacies of grinding, its role in game design, and its influence on player experience.

Explanation:

Coined from the concept of persistently "grinding away" at a task, the term "grinding" in the gaming context implies the undertaking of repetitive actions by a player to attain certain results or to advance within the game. In numerous instances, such actions may not directly correlate with the game's primary storyline or objectives but are aimed at accumulating experience points, in-game currency, or specialized items.

Grinding is an omnipresent component across a vast array of game genres, with its prominence notably manifested in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs). In these games, the player's progression and performance are often gauged based on their character's level, skills, and available equipment.

From the standpoint of game design, grinding assumes several roles. It serves to extend the game's lifespan by instituting goals that necessitate substantial time investment. Additionally, it fosters a sense of accomplishment and progression and can encourage social interaction in multiplayer environments. Despite these advantages, critics contend that grinding can lead to monotonous and ungratifying gameplay experiences. The considerable time commitment required by grinding may propel some players towards purchasing in-game enhancements using real-world money, thereby generating additional revenue for game developers.

Further, there is an ongoing discourse concerning the psychological implications of grinding. Its repetitive and rewarding nature might precipitate addictive behaviours and excessive consumption of time, mirroring the effects typically associated with gambling disorders. Through the exploration of these aspects, we aim to shed light on the complex dynamics of grinding in the context of modern video gaming.

Grinding in Gaming: Conceptualization and Design

Grinding typically refers to the act of performing repetitive actions in a game to attain a specific goal, often associated with levelling up, obtaining items, or advancing in-game skills. Although it can give players a sense of progression, it can also serve as a roadblock, encouraging players to consider alternative paths to progress, such as microtransactions.

Case Study: World of Warcraft

Blizzard Entertainment's World of Warcraft (WoW) extensively employs grinding. Players often engage in repetitive tasks like fighting the same enemies, repeatedly battling against non-player characters (NPCs), or completing the same quests to increase their character's level, to gain experience points, in-game currency, or rare items. This grind contributes to a sense of achievement but has also been criticized for sometimes leading to a tedious gameplay experience.

Case Study: Candy Crush Saga

King's Candy Crush Saga uses grinding as a monetization strategy. As players progress and levels become harder, the option to grind through the game becomes more attractive. Alternatively, players can buy power-ups and boosters to surpass the grind, effectively translating grinding mechanics into revenue for the game developers.

Case Study: Destiny 2

This game provides an example of a 'loot grind.' Players repeatedly complete activities like strikes, raids, or public events to earn 'engrams' – randomized gear drops. The goal is often to collect more powerful gear to increase a character's power level.

Case Study: Old School RuneScape 

In this MMORPG, players might grind by repetitively performing tasks like mining, fishing, or woodcutting. These actions, though monotonous, boost the player's skill levels, enabling them to perform new tasks, quests, or create new items.

Implications for Game Design

Grinding, while a tool to extend game playtime and potentially drive monetization, must be thoughtfully implemented to avoid player fatigue or burnout. Game designers should strike a balance between meaningful progression and repetitive grind, ensuring the game remains engaging and satisfying.

Conclusion

Grinding, as a mechanism of psychological manipulation in video game design, can greatly impact player behaviour and engagement. Striking a balance between challenge, satisfaction, and repetition is vital to ensure a rewarding gameplay experience. As the video game industry advances, it will be intriguing to observe the evolution and refinement of grinding mechanisms and their psychological impact on players.

References:

Sicart, M. (2013). Grinding in Games: Understanding the Appeal. Philosophy of Computer Games Conference, 8-11.

Hamari, J., Alha, K., Järvelä, S., Kivikangas, J. M., Koivisto, J., & Paavilainen, J. (2017). Why do players buy in-game content? An empirical study on concrete purchase motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 538-546. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.045

Blizzard Entertainment. (2004). World of Warcraft [Video Game]. Blizzard Entertainment.

King. (2012). Candy Crush Saga [Video Game]. King.

Bungie. (2017). Destiny 2 [Video Game]. Activision.

Jagex. (2013). Old School RuneScape [Video Game]. Jagex.

Yee, N. (2006). Motivations of play in online games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(6), 772-775. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772

Johnson, M. R., & Woodcock, J. (2019). The impacts of live streaming and Twitch.tv on the video game industry. Media, Culture & Society, 41(5), 670-688. doi:10.1177/0163443718818363

King, D., Delfabbro, P., & Griffiths, M. (2010). Video game structural characteristics: A new psychological taxonomy. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 8(1), 90-106. doi:10.1007/s11469-009-9206-4

Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining "gamification". MindTrek '11: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, 9-15. doi:10.1145/2181037.2181040

[skymagpie]

Man it's not that the Alliance is not bad, because they are and they could be worse, but homogenizing the Alliance when you mean to say "human" is just as annoying as homogenizing the Horde as "irredeemable savage war criminals".

But let's be real, the way Blizzard (in their infinite racism) wrote most of the Horde races is pretty bad, like we have alien invaders who actually came to colonize, we have a group who constantly uses chemical weapons, a whole civilization built upon sacred troll land and genocide and we have a guy who built Mount Rushmore on native Night Elf land... like it's not a good track record. These are things as bad as the stuff the Alliance has done, if not some being worse.

Saying "Well Horde actually good and Alliance bad" is equally stupid as saying the opposite. The trolls, tauren, vulpera etc, haven't done anything terrible, or have done very little just how the draenei, gnomes and who have you from the Alliance have nothing to do with Stormwind politics.

I think faction discourse is the most annoying thing both tumblr and twitter produces, because we argue which faction is bad and which is good, instead of discussing why Blizzard shoved the majority of the non-white coded races into the faction that they write to constantly commit terrible things while the other one does moderately terrible things. Maybe the racism call is coming from inside the house.

[ask-nyc-boroughs]

I know this hc maybe is losing its popularity, but I never see anyone do it well. By this I mean, people hc Alfred as being from New England specifically from Massachusetts and see him as some sort of Harvard intellectual.

And yeah but no when I say Alfred is from Massachusetts, his true nature deep down behind that American boy next door facade- he is a Masshole. And he may deny it to everyone else and put on a show that hides his true nature, but drop him back in Massachusetts- see how he acts in his natural habit.

Like I think deep down, he’s got this pissy New England attitude in him and he’s just really good at keeping it in. He swears like a sailor. He drinks a concerning amount of Dunkin���. He is weirdly proud of the most random things that he claims are only in New England but yk are everywhere else. His driving skills are questionable. He has no problem just wearing shorts and a tank top in a blizzard.

He may put on a general northern US accent for everyone else, but once he gets back home it’s “youse” and a lack of pronunciation of the word r (ex: car -> cah). He’s a big patriots fan too.

(I do hc him from New England just cause I do take a regional folk ways approach and I have US states and US cities to fulfill other needs/ cultural influences and discourses).

[bookwyrm7]

I would rather not get involved with this discourse but i haven't seen anyone else mention this anywhere, so i might as well.

Its all very well calling for boycotts for the currently relevant wizard game because of who its supporting, and i agree dont get me wrong. Not buying something because the profits will be used to do wrong makes perfect sense, and so does encouraging others to do the same.

But why dont you practice what you preach. All these posts about hogwarts legacy while activision-blizzard is stacking sexual harassment lawsuits like its jenga, Scott cawthons response to the outrage about his Republican donations was to step back from the franchise, but i have seen nothing that indicates he plans to change his worldview or his spending habits.

Why is no one using any of this passion against Rowling to go bigger, why is no one in overwatch stream chats calling put streamers, why are there no posts calling people out for buying fnaf games. Do we really have that short of an attention span as to allow these problems to be buried under this new problem? Or are people only hopping on the hogwarts legacy train because its whats relevant right now. Will this go the same direction and fizzle out once a new drama pops up?

IDK, criticism is always welcome but it just doesn't make sense in my mind how people can so passionate decry one thing while completely ignoring another thing with similar issues that is actually still pretty relevant, hypocrisy isn't the right word unless they are paying for those things but it gives an impression that this whole debate is less about not supporting people who do bad things and more not supporting one specific bad person while kinda turning a blind eye to everything else

[roadhogsbigbelly]

the thing that's frustrating about blizzard discourse is that alot of people seem to view blizzard as like a uniquely evil company and that everything they do is a smokescreen for their workplace harassment lawsuits, and not the actual reality that blizzard is a company full of genuinely good people who are just trying to work on a game they love but are being constantly fucked over by assholes who just want to make a profit. just like literally every company that produces movies, tv shows or video games, or any piece of art, there's going to be a dissonance between the people creating the art and the people profiting off of it.

[tauforged]

genuinely curious, why do people not like the toothpaste flag? I can never find a clear answer

i personally don’t like it because it feels unnecessary (the rainbow flag is literally right there) and i don’t like that it’s literally just a blue/green colorshift of the lesbian flag popularized after that one took off and feels indicative of a weird ‘blue for boys pink for girls’ mindset . it’s also ugly like i’m sorry it just sucks to look at i am a known enjoyer of greens and blues but it simply doesn’t look good i think it’s disrespectful to the original rainbow flag to act like just because people tend to use it as an all-encompassing ‘lgbt flag’ it’s also somehow not the gay flag and we need to make a new one.

ultimately flag discourse is meaningless and stupid and feels like it should have been left in 2017 so i’m not about to die on this hill it’s just baffling to me when i see the mlm flag in like corporate pride merch in real life or in a blizzard game it’s like a jumpscare