It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I got a little confused at first, but I figured it was a new sort of gender friendly approach to grammar or something. With the insanity of the last year all bets are off.SBFord said:Meh...shit happens. It's Friday after 5, been up since 1 am. At least "her" was spelled right.
That said, I have to admit I'm not sorry to see him go. Class design in Legion is some of the worst ever. Hopefully, they can right the ship the nearly capsized.
As a young boy it was the asskicking, bullet deflecting bracelets, rope of truth, and an INVISIBLE JET! She made the 6 million dollar man look like a flabby sweaty middle aged man in a ugly leisure suit. Oh wait.Sovrath said:I'm sure I was impressed by her strength as well. I like women who aren't wishy washy.kitarad said:I know why guys like her but as a girl I was very impressed by Wonder Woman's strength.
Having said that, as an adult and as someone who started re-watching the old series prior to the movie, she shouldn't turn her back on the enemy when they all agree to walk down the stairs to check out the basement.
I was literally yelling at the TV.
No, another say what you mean "bullshit detector" post from Torval. If you say things like "it's crap, but hey I never said I didn't like it", then yeah, I'm calling that. It's called backpedalling.TheDarkrayne said:Ah, another feeble attempt at trying to twist words or pull things out of context from Torval.Torval said:So you like shallow offerings that are of low value and hardly worth the money. I'll be sure to remember that when you comment highly about a game, that your standards aren't very high.TheDarkrayne said:No one said they didn't like it.BillMurphy said:Guys, it's OK to not like Destiny 2. But it's ALSO OK to like it a lot.
Liking something doesn't mean you automatically ignore it's faults, especially when it comes to the business model.
If you have an actual criticism then you'd have a lot more to stand on. Thoughtless grandstanding isn't criticism.
I like Destiny 2's gameplay, I wish the expansion was better, longer and offered more. I'm criticising the expansion, not Destiny 2.
This review is for the expansion right? It's not just a "How much do we like Destiny? 8/10" article, is it?
You see, I'm confused here. I look at something like Path of Fire that offers hundreds of hours of actual content, new features, multiple maps, new class builds, hundred of new items, etc. and I just laugh at this kind of thing. I mean, what is standard for comparison here? What is the 8/10 being compared to?
You're clearly a Destiny fan, surely you wish this expansion had at least five times the content. What they've released is a poor effort that didn't require a lot of development resources. We deserve better.
Gamers are too busy looking for an opening to play the victim card to have a sense of humor.SBFord said:People should have a better sense of humor on a Friday morning.
The question and issue really comes down to what this is about. Is this really about saving the children? If so then data driven problem solving should be engaged.CrazKanuk said:Torval said:Virtual "items" don't have explicit inherent value. That is the different between a personal good, real property, and virtual goods. Personal goods are physical but not considered "real property"d and are taxed differently.CrazKanuk said:kitarad said:Does it have to be real to have value. Bitcoin ?
This is actually a great example because it doesn't. It has a commonly accepted value at this moment in time, but consider Steam is dropping it due to escalating fees and bitcoin volatility, I think it illustrates how value can change drastically, quickly for virtual items. A virtual item will carry some sort of value as long as it's transferable. There are plenty of black market sites selling WoW items, for instance. However, selling an original WoW item to someone today would get you MUCH less money that it would have 10 years ago, because there is simply better stuff available. So virtual items CAN have value, but it's subjective and isn't commonly accepted.
Real property in the US is essentially real estate and has different laws, rights, responsibilities, and taxes associated with it. And even though deeds of ownership exist they are more like permanent leases as the government has loopholes to take the land if you don't comply (eg: pay your property taxes).
Virtual good only have value when they're explicitly assigned value like Superman's example. If the bitcoin markets closed tomorrow then all the "bitcoins" would have no value. If all the gold markets closed tomorrow, gold would still have value. Like you said, virtual goods can have value, but even some of those that do don't have an inherent value.
In the US this is why coupons have a value of some crazy small number like .01 cent because this way they can't be considered a currency or an item of value and taxed or regulated accordingly. The government has specifically left loopholes in that system for business to operate outside of those fees and regulations imposed on high value item transactions.
Of course this all varies state by state as do gambling laws. This is why some states are always excluded from giveaways like McDonald's Monopoly or the Elder Scrolls Online prize events.
Maybe in states with draconian regulation some game services won't be legally offered. Maybe it will affect all regions and games will be designed and monetized totally differently and we'll all have to deal with those changes. We don't actually know the consequences of these changes will be. Some people naively think they'll just go away and we'll return to some earlier design and monetization trope. That won't happen.
And this is pretty much my point. So with grand sweeping changes the impact will be too massively wide-spread that it would directly impact the economy by a non-trivial amount. So regulating beyond throwing a warning label on the box, or maybe publishing odds (which I'd be cool with) would mean tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars and the grand outcome will be something of minimal impact. Whereas, if an educational program is put in place that actually informs people about gambling, dispelling myths about gambling, and common gambling fallacies, I think you'd wind up with much more informed people. Trying to STOP people from gambling who are pre-dispositioned to gamble is like trying to stop an addict. Do you think that by getting rid of heroin, you're solving the drug addict's problem? SOLVED! Lol.