Jump to content
Register Now

Reality vs Adventure

Members
  • Posts

    3,506
  • Points

    7,866 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Everything posted by Reality vs Adventure

  1. Just wondering if it is safe to rebuild database to clear up space. Is this something to be done regularly? Will it delete anything saved on there? I noticed a couple games that I deleted the application only, also have deleted screenshots. Is there any way to get the screenshots back?
  2. AC Odyssey- not playing around Fallout 4- tired of playing around
  3. History Human history has built castles History has shown mountains have eroded or moved from plate tectonics History in the wrong hands blinds man from making the same mistake History in the right hands opens people's eyes to learn from
  4. The old man had his memory extracted to the young man and forgot it happened so he doesn't realize he's going to be incinerated
  5. The person messed up by opening their eyes again to keep reading the steps. That's if they closed their eyes in the first step. So the curse was a trick at the start.
  6. Lebron is a great basketball player and has proved himself. When he started in Cleveland, they were in the playoffs and as soon as he left, the team fell apart. I would have more respect for him if he stuck it out in Cleveland and kept trying for a championship there. Instead he chose an easier way to get a ring by joining with Miami, which was an all star team at the time always making the playoffs. He just had to get his ring. Then he proved himself again when he went back to Cleveland. But now, in joining another big team like the Lakers stocked with other big players, simply makes the sport a monopoly. It's the same teams in the playoffs every year. Lebron is a great player, but he chose stardom over sport. Sport is competition, not a contest where you put all the tall players on one team and all the short on the other. But he is one of the best. He has defense, charges the basket, makes 3's, and hits his free throws, all under pressure.
  7. Because man has to mine for gold! Or tear down the mountains looking for it
  8. It seems now you would rather get involved with their hierarchy of government which would mean that you place yourself into their conflicts. And giving them what they want in return to get things you want I agree would be a longer alternative to rule. But there would have to be a balance maintained. What if either side, you or them, weren’t offering enough or wanted too much? That to me looks like more of a mafia racket by offering protection and in return they offer you pleasantries, whether it be gems, women, booze, or food. You are correct that it isn’t necessarily malevolent, but rackets like that could get violent very easily. That idea would be more rational, but to take women as an offer would not be sympathetic. To assume their lives would be better is just a tactical excuse. From top down in their government, how would they acquire women for your pleasure? Would they volunteer? Would they be kidnapped? What happens when the public does find out? And do you stop at a certain number of women and expect nothing else? Cities usually have a brothel, maybe you can spend your resources to buy some ladies for the night if you become that desperate. How much of what rare foods would you want? Would you take all their silk for a soft bed and wardrobe? Would you pluck all the birds for a bunch of pillows? Would you harvest all their gems to shine on your body? That would mean to force labor camps into dangerous mines or working conditions to get enough. Would they then use child labor for extra help? These are consequences from what you propose. Is it that much different from all out forcing them yourself or get stomped? How much is enough? These are the realities in rackets. Who does the dirty work to get what you want? The ‘little’ little people. And when those refuse to take that abuse, then who is gonna get what you want? Their government comes up short. You act in retaliation. Then the delicate balance becomes chaotic. You would have to offer something for the people and not just their government bodies if you want to maintain rule and peace. The ‘little’ little people are just as integral to stability as their government and foreign influence would be. To satisfy them, you would have to grant them rights. So that would be the most rational, and in effect creates the most sympathetic way to rule, which also in effect creates a longer and more productive rule. To help your case, if there was a time of war between the little people, then your proposal will shine the greatest. You will provide the protection and some would even be willing to sacrifice personal things for you. But I guess that would only work in a warring state. In a time of peace, I don't see how that would last that long. But even if there was war, and you abuse your leverage, they could defect. Always different scenarios playing and nothing set in stone. With force, there is always a cold response. When they all have rights, they respect you, their government, and would never defect. But once they lose that respect. All options are on the table.
  9. So it would **NOT** automatically update 8.00. Don't know how I made that typo
  10. I can't use network features on the ps4 because it keeps telling me to update the 8.00, which I keep canceling and deleting. I had to turn off network to charge controller so it would automatically update the 8.00. Anyone else having this problem not being able to sign back in w/o having to update it?
  11. Yeah, that's what was getting me confused as the different universe uses different terms.
  12. I've wondered that too. But if it was going to take place in modern times, then that means there would be modern weapons involved. So that would eventually lead to a shooter game, which will take AC in a direction that would miserably fail. Not saying it can't be done, but it would turn into a MGS or Clancy game. I don't know how it would work get shot at with machine guns while you wield an axe or pirate pistol. Once you get that semi automatic, AC and role play goes out the window. One of the legacies of the game is taking place in a mysterious world, in a mysterious time.
  13. And another thing about AC Odyssey is being able to create your own quests or play other's personally made quests if you have the internet. It's not perfect. The dialog you have to read everything because there is no voice over or lips moving since it isn't part of the game. But with improvements, can you imagine how awesome that can be? Something like that is definitely flirting with the future of gaming.
  14. For me it's definitely Assassins Creed Odyssey. Honestly, I'm not too much into the story. I think all the amazing things they have done to the game was at the sacrifice of the story. But the story isn't bad. It's about average I would say. But it is the environment, and cities, villages and large map full of never ending places to explore that makes me love the game. There is a lot of detail in absolutely everything from people in the towns, animals, weather, caves and landscape. Even the sea battles and major land battles are cool. I can swim deep in the water and soar above everything with a bird's eye view using the eagle. Taking pictures is a treat I haven't seen in any other game by being able to have a 360 view and zoom in or out, and even edit pictures. I don't have problems with weight issues with all the cool gear. And the gear is amazing detail. Being able to switch out a helmet, chest piece, arms, feet, waist, weapons, and abilities, is something I love playing with. And having a female character that is beautiful and strong is a plus cause I'm tired of the same ol dumb he-man b.s. I do wish there were more options to have more available horse gear to play with. A negative is that it is easy to get carried away doing too many repetitive quests. But you really don't even have to do them in the first place. I love being able to tame animals such as a lion or any wild cat, bear, wolf or dog. Wish there were even more options there like taming a boar or even a goat. The fighting is pretty good. I can take a good pic right in the middle of an action and it always has great detail no matter which angle. I also love being able to climb on top of pretty much anything. That is true open world. I can change it from night to day anytime I want. It's a fun and beautiful game. I hope their future games keep all these great features, but improve on the stories and quests. It would actually be a masterpiece if they did.
  15. They call anyone who plays video games a gamer like it's an immature thing. But I don't call them a tv watcher. I don't call them a reader. I don't call them an internet surfer. And all those so called adults that watched something like the Game of Thrones fantasy series or the new Witcher series on tv, well, welcome to entertainment bitches.
  16. There are a lot of things I can propose that you haven’t thought about because you are not rational or sympathetic. And it isn’t anything new. Even things you think you can place in your favor, you will still underestimate the little people. I can pop many ideas into your head, and different scenarios, but it will come down to your unescapable authoritarian views that just aren’t realistic in any possible manner. You jumped from ruling them abusively to proposing a spy network. So now you see your first proposal isn’t a reality? Tell me, how would you propose a realistic approach to infiltrate them? Do you want to move on to infiltration techniques? The females you carry in your pockets, you will be untouchable for how long? Your days are numbered. They want their women back. Once again you propose retaliation. Everything you propose is a path to retaliation. You are dreaming and fantasizing if you think you are the great persuader to turn tribe against tribe. And use a spy network after you admitted to wanting to rule them malevolently. So now we are discussing spy networks. After you have gained rationality? Intelligence? First, you would have no idea which side to persuade. Like you said, they are nothing to you. Their ideas mean nothing. They are ants. Now you are considering them as being an equal? People you think you can persuade? And your irrational behavior at the start to control them eliminates any possibility to gain any influence in the so called world if there are others.
  17. Quality quests and unique non repetitive dialogue. Be able to fly over the terrain and view the world from a bird's eye like in Assassins Creed. That was a brilliant treat. Let us fly a dragon and wreak havoc. I remember playing Destroy All Humans and you get to fly a spacecraft around and destroy things. And they remastered it now for the ps4 which I want. But to be interactive in the air as much as on ground would be fun.
  18. If they had enough technology to create more giants, then they also have the technology to destroy one. So it would be a lot easier to take out one giant than to have to deal with many of them later. Look at the USA with the greatest arsenal in the world, but infiltrating its satellites and energy sector would cripple it and all that supreme artillery would be useless. They would have to fly blind and drop bombs directly over enemy territory because they wouldn’t be able to launch missiles from anywhere. Not from a carrier, jet, tank, or from absolutely anything, at least not with any accuracy. So with the right technology, your giant size would become irrelevant. What exactly would be the best way to rule for the longest period of time? For this topic you give two options, but there is always a third to not rule at all. But in this situation, to rule by demoralizing them always ends violently. And through our own history, leaders like that usually create turmoil in their own sphere of power and can even fall from the inside. But since it’s just you and them, your reign to demoralize them can only last so long as they have something to lose. Once they feel they have nothing to lose anymore, whether it be population, pride, sense of purpose, then they will revolt. And you say you will try to keep them at bay and only take so much so they wouldn’t feel the need to retaliate. And that is a 50/50 chance you fuck it up and get too greedy, or take one too many women, or eat 100 too many cows. You have no idea their toleration levels. You would think they would be too demoralized to do anything. But they aren’t all in chains under constant watch. You can’t monitor their every move. And remember, in those situations people would flee and go underground. From there they will build resistance. You can’t possibly keep an eye on every one of them so far above. And once they break away, you can demoralize the cities all you want, but that resistance will continue to grow. Reigns like that always go up in flames because there is no other way around it. If you don’t rule in that manner and decide to rule another way, then you are ingrained in their society and become their protector. And it does take more effort and intelligence, but it will last longer. It lasts longer because their existence would mean something and they become productive. We are talking about one civilization right? Because if there were more groups spread out around the planet, there will obviously be conflict brewing eventually. And we can go on about that situation. But this is one group or civilization. Heck, maybe they have allies! That’s why you need to be rational from the start. The intelligence that requires you to reign in peace is rational. It has purpose other than self, and becomes a very productive society. The easy way is to use force. That cripples rational thinking. There is no rational thinking when you openly desire to abuse them. Rational thinking starts when you look at all the options: stay away, help their civilization, try to peacefully assimilate? Rational thinking also includes what to do if they attack, what if they involve me in their conflicts? But all of the above rational thinking goes away the moment you decide to act first without any evidence of them plotting and subjugate them out of paranoia and pleasure.
  19. That is a good point. They could spend more resources on realism and deprive the game of other substance. But if they can make it look real and do massive world building like in AC Odyssey then that would be pretty awesome. But there is a trend in photorealism and actually trying to make the game as real as possible like fixing your weapons, gear, and nurturing your horse along with having the scenery look real. I think that trend could take away from enjoyment. If it is strictly a survival game, then that would work. But yes, it is going to get hard to separate photorealism and physical realism where things become a chore. Soon characters will need a shit break. Leave some of those realities out please.
  20. I think that if a company wanted to pay off a president to promote its product for a political message, then that could be considered lobbying because that message could sway public opinion and votes, which in itself could cause bills to be passed that they wanted in the first place. So it is more of an indirect lobbying. To do it just to gain sales in a new market that is politically motivated simply opens up a crisis in the gaming world. One side will boycott games they oppose and the gaming world becomes forever political as one company tries to outdo the other in their political motive. A game that has politics from past history is different because it's all old blood. But current events in a game is open wounds that enables fresh blood to spill.
  21. For me, linear better have a good story, or lots of scares and gory scenes. Open world better have beautiful environments worth exploring. Most of my games are open world.
  22. Intervening is a responsibility if one side is clearly in the wrong and putting others in danger. That wouldn’t be authoritative of me. That would be a moral obligation. Giant or not. And if there isn’t a clear aggressor, then we have the full capability to try and understand both sides and see if you can diffuse it somehow. Taking a side at that point w/o a clear aggressor would not make me feel obligated to interfere unless of course they go to war and one side wants to torture, enslave, rape, and genocide the other. Then again, I would be obligated to interfere. It seems your main argument is to control them first before they have the chance to attack you or involve you in their conflicts. That is a failed human perception. Paranoia. You have clearly shown paranoia and the need to subjugate out of fear and for pleasure. That is a package deal for you. Fantasies need careful consideration. Usually fantasies are perfect. Reality isn’t. If you are loved and respected, attention can be turned to other important matters and be very productive. Your reign will last much longer and stronger if they respected you. You propose a life of quarreling. Subjugation from fear is nothing but opportunity for conflict. Your proposal invites conflict in order to justify your intentions. The little people have feelings too and if it was their wife or daughter in that bottle stuck in your pocket, damn right some will retaliate. And a few can turn into many. And that is what I mean how you would justify your complete rule over them, by instigating it all. If they rise up, in return you retaliate back and crush them. Yes they will be afraid. In these situations, anger will boil over. Then peace of mind over abuse becomes more important than life itself. They would rather die than be subjugated to any more cruelty. You then lose the reign. Once you reduce their population, there wouldn’t be many to rule over at that point. Or they will be so terrified and pissed, they will become scattered nomads in hiding and possibly even make an underground network to thrive, repopulate, and either outlive you, or take out your eyes while you sleep. But let’s say they attacked you from the start without you doing anything. Would you be justified to counter attack? Of course you would. But like any unknown animal in it’s own habitat, you have to respect its boundaries because you don’t know what it is capable of. Honor those boundaries and try to offer a sign of peace or leave it be. But if they want to chase you to the end of their tiny world relentlessly, then sure, you have the right to slay the beast. And from there you have to make the choice to either rule benevolently or malevolently. Or not rule at all, that is a choice also. Abusing others has nothing to do with survival. There is a difference between surviving and thriving. To thrive is to evolve. To survive is the fight or flight response. It isn’t rational. It doesn’t take the time to look at the whole picture. Being quick to react instead of being rational is a devolved sate. It is the most raw form of humans and other animals. And since it is just you and your DNA can’t mix with one 1000 times smaller than you, then evolving is redundant. You become a basic animal just trying to survive. Your state of mind becomes devolved. That is if you choose to make the little people enemies or abuse them. But if you work together, maybe you can save your humanity and evolve and thrive together. You mark will be left for the rest of their future generations in helping them with things that they couldn’t ordinarily do given your strength. That would be a legacy worth having, instead of having them make monuments for you that they will want to tear down once you are gone.
  23. If we can pass a law to ban lobbying, that would eliminate much need for companies to get political in the first place. If they still feel the need to go rebel in a game, know it opens the door for all to go rebel. Nothing like a republican fascist holding my flag claiming to be a patriot. You have confederate flags for a reason red hats.
×
×
  • Create New...