1ostA5tro6yne @ chocosoldier @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Posts

18

Comments

321

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's long-established established canon that Leia is force-sensitive (Luke outright says as much in TLJ), and that force-pulling can be done without training (though I'm sure she picked some things up from Luke over the years). If Leia using the force caught you off-guard I'm sorry but like that was like my first expectation when I heard Leia would be in the sequels.

Also it's so strange to me that people say it looked like Mary Poppins to them. have you never watched video of people in microgravity? it was honestly a pretty realistic depiction of how things behave in vacuum and zero-g, and I found the scene breathtaking.

In fairness, all the space combat in Star Wars is nonsense. It's modeled on WW2-era dogfighting (hence the bombers), and none of it makes any sense in space.

or maybe the opinion you thought was so ridiculous that nobody would ever seriously hold it isn't as ridiculous as you thought and you need to get some perspective

the objective definition of garbage fire is literal refuse that is aflame. the sequel trilogies are movies, not quickly-oxidizing litter. the phrase can be used subjectively to describe the percieved quality of something, which is what you're doing here. if you're going to pedant at least do it right.

FUCKING THANK YOU, there was nothing wrong with or continuity-breaking about the Holdo Maneuver, or most of the things in TLJ people love to bitch about (like Leia's spacewalk which was pretty consistent with IRL zero-g physics and the character's established force-sensitivity as well as being a breathtaking cinematic moment) are either conflicts with their personal headcanon (people really be getting mad about the fine points of high-dimensional travel in a cheesy movie franchise about mystical space wizards and writing essays about it and shit) or are not any worse than similar issues the OT itself (ESB has some serious issues with wonky timelines for example). The pacing isn't great in places but nothing is so jarring as to interfere with my willing suspension of disbelief, and the story didn't feel beat-for-beat the same as basically the rest of the franchise. TLJ was a breath of fresh air, it's weird to me how divisive it is despite being one of the higher points in the franchise IMO.

That said, AotC at least had the neat space-opera-noir thing for part of it where Obi-Wan was playing detective, I can't think of anything redeeming about Rise of Skywalker.

I'm a bit younger than you but I grew up with the '95 box set and saw the PT in theaters, similar experience, and I agree with your assessment of TFA, it's not great but has its moments. Personally I really liked TLJ despite its flaws and it made me hope the series was finally about to go somewhere new. But yeah don't bother with RoS, it's a disjointed mess of a film made of IRL petty grudges played out on screen strung together with lame maguffin storytelling and "plot twists" from left field.

no you must be shamed into compliance with my opinion that Age Old Franchise 5 (the fifty-fourth Age Old Franchise game) was decent and acceptable therefore AAA is good.

people who complain about ads and microtransactions in games are confusing to me. just don't buy it -> no ads no microtransactions ezpz. people really be throwing money around every year out of FOMO and complaining about the thing they knew they were buying afterward.

fine, whatever. i still don't know or care what the difference is and neither do the majority of people, pedantry notwithstanding. because it's niche.

I did, I ditched those lame nerds who play games where you sit and wait most of the time and act like something's wrong with you when you don't love it.

Their average is more than one a year but okay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Street_Fighter_video_games

Nowhere in that post did I say it was shit. In fact nowhere anywhere have I ever said anything about the actual quality of that game, I described the company "shitting out" another one because they do so every year and it's not a notable event in my book. Christ bro, Capcom will be fine without you rushing to their defense over someone on the internet being disinterested I promise. my god you are a thin skinned weepy bunch in here

A lot of the worst experiences I've were trying to run games to get friends into it, doubly so because I have so little practical experience running a game beyond reading books and copying from them thinking I'm about to have fun, and none actually playing beyond what I described.

I've explored alternate systems such as GURPS and tried brewing a few of my own. I can criticize the rules all day but at the end it was always much the same experience trying to run those against a group that intentionally spites any prep (usually geared more toward worldbuilding and important NPCs than any specific story arc, I realize you can't force that stuff) I tried to do. Anything that I had a sheet of paper for, they would turn and walk away every single time.

As for setting... fam there's not a lot I can do when everyone i know who plays only ever wants to play vanilla DnD or their take on MtG flavored DnD, and they're not going to change what they're doing just because I'm sick to death of generic corporate fantasy worlds and waiting around for 9/10 of the time we're at the table.

sorry anything short of abject praise registers as shit talk to you, up to and including subjective reactions to seeing gameplay. the game does not look to my taste and i think i would have a bad time with it. If I'm coming across negative it's because people have been trying to shove this game up my ass for 12 hours and throw fits when I say how it looks to me. not everything is for everyone and I wish we could be adults about it and let people speak their fucking minds here.

i watched a 40 minute video but please continue assuming ignorance and stupidity on my part and reading it into everything i say.

Why do you feel the need to whiteknight for a game when someone takes a good look and concludes it's not for them and they wouldn't enjoy it? Don't you have better things to do than try to strawman and shame someone on the internet into complying with your opinion about a video game?

...it's a niche genre bro. That's not the same as being obscure.

you try getting dogpiled for 12 hours for saying how a game based on a game you don't like in the first place looks to you and see how cool your replies are

CDPR makes amazing graphics and nobody can take that away from them. However, neither game's story hooked me, the gameplay in both felt frustrating and clunky to me, I hated both Geralt and Silverhand (particularly the latter, his nagging was the last straw), I didn't care for any of the supporting cast, every cutscene felt twice as long as it needed to be, the physics in both are hilariously bad, and so on and so forth. And both of these have been shoved at me from all sides, hailed as the best game ever or whatever, and I couldn't stand playing them.

I can understand having different taste. What I don't understand is the weird need people have to whiteknight for popular games when people don't like them for reasons.

... bro I'm allowed to think it looks tedious and awful, because that's how tastes work. I don't have to pretend to like something because it's popular or other people think it's "the best". I'm fine with turn-based games. What I don't like is extended cutscenes, generic fantasy settings, or TTRPG gameplay, particularly DnD. It's a kind of game I don't care for in the first place, based on a game that I find to be 100% pure tedium, in a type of setting that I am very weary of.

What baffles me the most is why its fans seem so keen on assuming the shallowest take possible and putting words in my mouth because I said their favorite game looks terrible to me. Grow up.