Possible.
The majority of people I know in person would disagree I hope.
I agree that I am pretty combative here, but I am also tired of the ever same old and disproven arguments.
I am not even vegan myself, but ridiculing people for trying to save animals is just low imho so I kinda don't care if I am an asshole to people that do it.
I make this practically correct binary because in practice more than 90% of all livestock is kept in inhumane conditions.
The theoretical possibility of an ethical way to raise and slaughter livestock is irrelevant to my argument and in essence a straw man because I don't argue against a hypothetically well raised and humanely slaughtered livestock but against the fact that in reality livestock is mistreated, tortured and killed in horrible conditions in most of all cases.
If I go to the supermarket and buy meat I am all but guaranteed that the animal has suffered.
If you raise your own livestock out on open field and treat it right I don't have a problem with you. But you don't, do you?
And even if you just are a carnivore I don't have any problem with you, you can live your life how you see fit. I don't really care.
But if you go to the internet to shit on people that care about animals to feel better about the fact that you don't, I think you are a dick.
Not saying that applies to you specifically, but I have seen examples in this thread.
And I don't know how stuff works in America, but where I live with most public offers like libraries, public pools, graveyards and stuff like that the amount that the user has to pay is almost never enough to completely fund that thing.
It is still good to demand a certain price, since that increases the appreciation of this public good, decreases wasteful or careless usage and obviously helps to lessen the necessary subsidies from taxpayer money.
I am pretty sure the people enacting those policies understand that perfectly well.
If you would demand so much money from library users to fund the whole library, then noone would use it and a valuable public good would be lost.
On the one hand I totally agree, on the other hand I spent like 40€ on PoE for everything I wanted and got way more gameplay out of it than of many full price games.
I appreciate your response but I have to disagree.
Today I have a bit of free time and might get in a bit of gaming.
But it won't be POE because I didn't really enjoy the last two builds that I played a couple of seasons ago and the one with zombies I played before that doesn't seem super viable anymore.
So I would need to find another build, update my PoB, update my Lootfilter, look if all the trade plug-ins still work and then my free Saturday is half over.
None of those things are enjoyable complexity for me where I can express skill or individuality.
But if I just play without 3rd party stuff I will have a shit build, struggle with the acts and be useless in the endgame.
And that makes me kinda sad because actually playing POE is more enjoyable than the other games you suggested and I don't agree with the sentiment that there is no place for a more casual POE experience.
As long as I don't have to buy new inventory tabs I don't really mind.
Actually I think it is a good idea to start with a relatively clean slate, POE is pretty loaded with mechanics and maybe they can skim some off.
I don't think it's going to happen, but I would like it if I could jump back into the game every couple of seasons without having to follow a build guide or being dead lost and using like 5 different 3rd party tools.
I don't have a lot of time for gaming anymore and I want to play other games, too.
Then again I know there are people that love the complexity.
Like you don't KNOW there will be cops running towards filming witnesses while their colleagues make arrests and now you have to leave and can't film anymore.
"Hey you can't film while I am less than 8 feet away from you."
"Then don't follow me."
"Don't talk back, don't resist, GET ON THE GROUND!"
That is funny as fuck.