I’ll be honest: If I were you, I’d be bragging about this. A well-paying job where you do nothing? Sign me the hell up. Besides, you’re not there to do things; you’re there so they have someone in case shit hits the fan. 99.99% of this problem seems to be in your head.

Given the insane (and insanely sticky) price gouging we’ve seen these past few years, I strongly doubt this. But hey, we’ll see in a few months.

Maybe they think that when Muslims hear Allahu Akbar they immediately explode?

(It’s bigotry).

So we’re doing the bad apples thing now? We know who the leaders of the Democratic Party in New York and nationwide are and many of them either waited for months or just straight up didn’t endorse the literal primary winner, who by all means everyone should endorse from day one. If it was a leftist refusing to endorse, I don’t know, Newsom they’d all be up in arms about leftist division and purity testing. I don’t give a shit what random Democratic official #3011 said about Mamdani; the people running the show showed exactly zero unity with the Mamdani and the left.

They’re not pussies; they’re authoritarians trying to get political clout.

Godspeed, Leo Sturbgetter.

Passing authoritarian laws, bending the knee to Trump, breaking that one strike (I might be misremembering this one) and failing to address the underlying issues plaguing Canadian society (something something housing crisis). He’s a halfway competent liberal technocrat, but status quo politics are only going to doom (and are, in fact, dooming) Canada.

Uh… Schumer???

Edit: Also you have to seriously be out of your mind to think Biden wasn’t supporting genocide.

Anyone who supports genocide isn’t “the left,” and is in fact a liability to the left. We’ve already seen this with Biden and Harris.

Then they label the intended difficulty with “recommended” and say that will give the best experience and that if you choose a difficulty higher or lower you might impede the intention of it.

You’re missing the point, which is weird because I explicitly stated it. To repeat, an artist might not want to create an inferior version of their art, irrespective of the utility of doing so. Art is an egotistical affair.

I really don’t see the problem with having options.

Options can make sense in some games but not in others; a developer deciding not to include them has likely either figured they wouldn’t work with the game’s structure, wouldn’t be a good use of their time or both. Difficulty options are simply not a one size fits all solution, for the same reason it wouldn’t make sense to demand all painters make colorblind-friendly versions of their paintings.

Random Silksong shill here (all hail Bilewater), what are you struggling with in act 3?

I meant that the story/easy mode wouldn’t conform with their vision. To expand on my example, if your game is portraying a grueling trek through a swamp where enemies abound and rest is scarce, the struggle would be an inalienable part of the experience; removing the struggle would fundamentally alter the story being told through the game. It’s not about their vision being intact or not; it’s about not wanting to intentionally make an inferior version of their art.

Then your president managed to be worse than narco terrorists. How does that feel?

Two weeks before the election, four months after the primary. Too little too late.

Little bit of column A, little bit of column B.

Fascists? Moderating themselves? Not gonna happen. Besides, another couple of years of Carney fucking up and they’ll win no matter what they do.

Sure, depending on who you mean by “left.” Folks like Schumer and Jefferies, however, would certainly need to be excluded for the “unity” part to make sense.

But don’t you know NYC forgot?!

I wish her a long and painful death.

I mean, given that humans now cultivate them en masse they are succeeding given that the task is to reproduce.