Shalakushka @ Shalakushka @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

236

Joined

2 yr. ago

So it's not astrology when you agree with it?

I'm sure you actually know a lot about psychology and aren't an armchair philosopher or anything. Wanna show us some of your papers? It should be easy to get published in a psych journal if it's just astrology, right?

Go back to bed, Orson Scott Card.

I agree with this assessment a lot. The art and environmental design is gorgeous. The music is top notch (the battle theme is a bit polarizing though). In terms of production it's seriously well put together, for the most part. But, it suffers a lot of the worst excesses of 90s JRPG design, with a meandering, nonsensical plot and a battle system that's more interested in being fiddly than in being fun. It feels like one of the worst examples of a company just straight up not understanding the appeal of a game and making a "sequel" that could easily have been called something else. As a recommendation for someone just coming off of Chrono Trigger, I can hardly imagine something worse, oddly.

I'd like to give people in this thread the warning I wish they had given me about this game. Don't go into Cross expecting it to have anything to do with Trigger (or expecting it to be 10% as good as Trigger). They made a weird JRPG where every character is just a text filter and then decided in the last 3 hours that it was the sequel to Chrono Trigger. It has nothing in common with CT except a couple of place names and some dead characters, and would be a much better game if they called it Lynx Quest or Radical Dreamers 2 or what the hell ever.

Oh no, my democracy is going to represent the people rather than an arbitrary subset of the people that happen to align with my biases! The horror!

Democracies should have strong, broad participation. Why would you want a democracy that hears the voice of fewer of its constituents, other than to do things they would never accept given the choice?

You think any change to the voter base is negative for some reason - it's not. Some changes make the democracy less representative of the people living in it (e.g., arbitrarily deciding some people shouldn't be able to vote) while some make the democracy more representative (e.g., removing arbitrary barriers to voting).

Yes, disenfranchising people is exactly the same as enfranchising people, your big centrist brain has it all figured out

You said it shouldn't be on shelves, what do you think that means?????

Whatever it takes for you to decide it's the U.S.'s fault, I guess.

No, I think adults should be able to buy booze and children shouldn't. We should not have to modify the options available to adults to suit children. Your logic is that no R rated movies should exist because they are not suitable for one section of society (children). When I point the absurdity of that logic out, you accuse me of wanting children to be able to drink alcohol (????). My logic is that it's stupid to ban something for everyone because one person had a reaction.

Literally any food can send you to the hospital. Taking it off of shelves because one person had a reaction is an overreaction.

Biden in the presidential election. By "this guy" I meant the fascist weirdo with the fetish for the inside of people's mouths who drew this.

Should alcohol be illegal for everyone because it harms children? That's the case you are basically making.

Please stop "ironically" supporting this guy

Who, pray tell, should have run in his place on his platform?

You sure he's not a coward and a fool?

This would be devastating if conservatives cared at all about hypocrisy or logical consistency.

A good 80% of home schooling is done so religious crazies can shelter their children from anything that disagrees with their holy book.

Renters by and large don't benefit from Airbnb, landlords do

I want them back in a hotel too.