You are free to make your own interpretations as far as how he portrays/portrayed women in his comics. It's been almost 20 years since that comic went up, and standards in social mores and comedy have changed a ton in that time, but when I read those comics back then, only being familiar with Buckley through CAD comics and nothing else, he never struck me as a narcissist or a misogynist. His self-insert character was a Homer Simpson type ("which was the style at the time"), which is hardly the caricature of a narcissist in my opinion. I find it's very easy to invent a narrative about who someone is from how they portray themselves publicly, and also...it's been 17 years. Whoever he was 17 years ago is very likely not who he is today. I don't know that he's a bad person, I don't know that he ever was a bad person, and I don't think it's admirable to hound someone with a joke about something that they put out into the world so long ago. Surely whatever he learned from that experience has been learned, and we can move on. I didn't feel good when I saw that comic the first time, nor was I intended to, but I definitely don't feel great whenever it's brought back up either.
I believe that in the life experience that he's drawing from, that he based his self-insert character on, he's in every panel, yes. I certainly took it to mean that he too was grieving the child that he expected to be born into the world. I found it distasteful to make it into a meme because the subject matter it's mocking is fucked up, plus bullying is kind of disconcerting in general.
I never saw it as a dick move. It always seemed to me like any other creative person putting their life experiences into their work. That didn't make it good, but his best work in a comedy comic isn't likely to come out while he's grieving. It was sort of a shark jump moment for that site, but it always seemed way more distasteful to me to make it into a meme.
This one and FairGame$ are both screwed, and they'll mark the end of an era for Sony and live service. What's funny too is that Bungie was purchased in large part for being experts in making successful live service games, but it reminds me of something in investing where those who appear to be very smart after a string of successes are compared to being "expert coin flippers" who just got heads a number of times in a row. As we've gotten a peak or two behind the curtain after the purchase, it certainly looks like Bungie was only lucky.
Typically, when Steam handles the matchmaking, it's peer to peer. But in general, they also sort of broker the connection between you and the other player or server. Street Fighter 6 runs its own servers and matchmaking, but if Steam cuts out, I lose my connection to them.
It's a lot of cutting out for about a minute, but that's just enough to interrupt a fighting game match. If it was once per week at a predictable time, that might be okay, but it's been happening more and more lately when it used to only be on Tuesdays.
As a customer, why would I ever shop at Epic if the game is also available on Steam and typically has more features? Epic doesn't solve any problems for me and actively introduces others, like a lack of Linux support. Do I want to play Alan Wake II? Of course I do. Am I going to buy it when they could push an update tomorrow that breaks compatibility with my operating system and offers me no recourse as a customer since it was unsupported in the first place? No, I'm not.
There are things worth solving that Steam does poorly (if they also support Linux customers). Finding out if my multiplayer game will be playable without external servers is a nightmare; DRM sucks, and I want none of it; Steam's multiplayer/friends network has more downtime than is acceptable; Steam Input should be a platform agnostic library; etc. Instead of solving those problems, they made the store enticing for suppliers (publishers) but not customers. If I'm shopping someplace other than Steam, it's GOG and not Epic.
Do you think there's any stopping the industry's shift to digital at this point? Because we just saw another quarter where we went even harder in that direction.
Well, playing through the first KC:D now, I can tell you it was rough to go from Avowed's combat to KC:D's, but that's okay, because KC:D has other strengths. When development gets restarted, it's not because it was shaping up into a better game than what we ended up with.
Every time you buy a PC, you're buying a platform that Microsoft couldn't care less if it sells at all, and that's all this will be. It will be supported by Microsoft as any other Windows PC, for better or worse.
Allegedly, it's an improved Windows experience so you get the compatibility without having to use a desktop operating system on a handheld game machine. So, you get Game Pass and kernel level anti cheat games with a UX similar to the Steam Deck (ish). And besides, "everything is an Xbox". They don't care how many of these things sell as long as you're on Game Pass or buying their games.
I finished the game already, but the biggest quality of life update is being able to use Soul Pods to dispel illusions so you're not more or less locked in with Yatzli while exploring in the later Acts. Set your expectations appropriately, and Avowed is a hell of a game, but it's got more in common with Dark Souls or God of War than it does Fallout: New Vegas or Skyrim.
Negative hundreds of millions of dollars. But the point still stands that they believed this was a rational way to make a boatload of money. With hindsight, we're all geniuses, but yes, this was a stupid move.
ampersandrew @ ampersandrew @lemmy.world Posts 105Comments 2,419Joined 1 yr. ago
You are free to make your own interpretations as far as how he portrays/portrayed women in his comics. It's been almost 20 years since that comic went up, and standards in social mores and comedy have changed a ton in that time, but when I read those comics back then, only being familiar with Buckley through CAD comics and nothing else, he never struck me as a narcissist or a misogynist. His self-insert character was a Homer Simpson type ("which was the style at the time"), which is hardly the caricature of a narcissist in my opinion. I find it's very easy to invent a narrative about who someone is from how they portray themselves publicly, and also...it's been 17 years. Whoever he was 17 years ago is very likely not who he is today. I don't know that he's a bad person, I don't know that he ever was a bad person, and I don't think it's admirable to hound someone with a joke about something that they put out into the world so long ago. Surely whatever he learned from that experience has been learned, and we can move on. I didn't feel good when I saw that comic the first time, nor was I intended to, but I definitely don't feel great whenever it's brought back up either.