That's the only way we support tariffs and he knows it because hes said it multiple times. Hold his feet to the flame till he does

I guess you. can thank the PC Gamer article whining about it being “disturbingly heterosexual” or something like that. Always cracks me up how they can tell me certain things weren’t made for me but if a game/movie is attacked as heteronormative or not diverse we can’t say it simply wasn’t made for them. Too bad they didn’t say that to Heather Antos, Zoey Quinn, or Sarkisian.

Anyway, Sims has always been a guilty pleasure of mine so it looks like I’ll enjoy Inzoi

With KCD2 and AC Shadows both promoting wildly inappropriate gay romance options, I’m wondering if we’ve reached a point where the gay is essentially mandatory in modern AAA western game dev? Are we going to see any strictly heterosexual player romances in any of these games going forward?

I didn’t buy AC Shadows because I don’t have brain damage. Asscreed games have been complete slop for like a decade, so no big loss when they decided to pozz the shit out of the latest entry. But KCD2 is a game I absolutely would have supported if not for the gay pozz. I’m never buying that shit regardless of discount, and that’s fine by me. Fuck ‘em.

I guess I’m curious to find out whether or not virtually all AAA western (story-based) games will be non-starters at conception going forward. If the gay is mandatory from here on out, I’m literally never buying another AAA western story-based game ever again. That’s probably not a bad thing anyways, but it still feels strange after decades of supporting this industry.

I first saw a clip of him on X discussing the crap in the Congo and I thought it was okay, not so bad what's the deal right?

So I listen to last night's show, and what an honest wholesome man he is

I can feel the transphobia running through my veins

Feel like it's worth making this post, especially in light of the last Switch 1 Presentation only a while ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrTVeYm4iIM

Personal Thoughts:

Really, it does just seem to be an attempted linear upgrade of the switch. I had a suspicion a while ago it might be hard to top the Switch era in some respects, so this seems to be more just a matter of new hardware... though for a lot of hardcore gamers (and people of scored), that probably won't do much for them.

I feel like Nintendo at least seems to be subconsciously trying to do a convergent evolution with PCs to some degree, at least with the new mouse controls. I've heard similar things about the next Xbox effectively being a PC, so if they are smart they might try this too.

Raidou Remastered and the New Professor Layton are the only new games that stick out at me right now, and those were announced before this point.

The New Donkey Kong and The Duskbloods seem to be the only real things that might grab major attention.

I hope the freeze in the middle of the stream isn't an ill omen of things to come.

Otherwise, not much of note here, at least to my eyes. Maybe they will pick up from this period of little note once the Nintendo Switch 2's successor arrives next decade, but for now it seems rather quiet.

EDIT: I did just see on that they have seemingly joined the 80$ for a game bandwagon with Mario Kart World Tour. Let's hope this isn't a sign of a worrying trend to come... though fate doesn't seem so kind these days.

Heard back from a friend of mine whose advice I regard pretty highly. He's in Canada now.

I asked, back in November just after the election, what kind of "learnings" can we absorb from this election, and what does it mean about 'operating' in a democracy? And I sent him a little song-and-dance presentation, said, tell me what you think.

He said, as long as the most powerful man in the country can impose his will over the courts, there isn't rule of law anymore:

"As for your attached materials, my fundamental problem is that I do not believe that the United States federal government operates under the rule of law, if you define the rule of law as the opposite of the rule of man. The key definitional distinction is whether, when the most powerful man breaks the law, it is the man or the law that bends. In the case of America today, it is very clear. In light of that, I do not see a peaceful path to the transfer of power. Many current Trump officials are criminals, and the peaceful transfer of power is a personal threat to them. If that, in turn, is the case, then this thing gets pear-shaped pretty fast. In other words, I do not see how elections matter anymore if one side has been extremely clear that they will not accept any election result that they do not win, and now they have ample legal and kinetic power to enforce that. "

I've been thinking about that a lot today especially since the Wisconsin Supreme Court election results got announced.

I don't know that he's wrong because of one election result.

I recall, in fact, that Musk's million-dollar giveaway still happened, just under very slightly different wording, and he still hasn't been punished for either that or his previous pay-to-vote scheme back in the 2024 campaign season.

And Trump announced two days ago that he thinks he can run for a third term; given the Trump administration's open defiance of the courts, it is entirely possible that he'll just ignore the law and do it.

Maybe it's just more complex than all that, I don't know.

And between my friend and Tim Snyder now both leaving the country it's sort of got me thinking about a lot.

This is the new topic du jour on X. The opposing camps roughly fall into people who think that building a $30M app should make you a shoo-in, and people who think that he was rightly rejected based on his personal statement.

I have some sympathy for the first position given that DEI still has to be eradicated, but this is one of those strange circumstances where I'll side with the second. One can set aside the issue of whether a minority with a 1300 SAT got into Harvard in the same cycle, because even if you completely eliminated DEI admits you're still left with far more top-SAT, top-GPA applicants than you have positions.

So what's left? Incredible, elite achievements, but also, the kid sounds like a jerk. First, he brags about how much money he made at each stage of life instead of any way he helped people and disfavorably contrasts his classmates to himself. He follows this up with a one-two combo of a press release for his app plus bragging about not needing college.

Then his moment of euphoria comes when he compares himself to Steve Jobs at a Japanese tourist site where he is hit with a ChatGPT banality from the heavens, complete with 4 hyphens.

Sorry to say it, but the essay sounds like a parody. I'm left to wonder how closely his success story in Silicon Valley parallels Elizabeth Holmes/Theranos. Either way, it's clear that no one, including the kid himself, knows why he wants to go to Harvard.

edit: "my motivation of going to college is just to have a social life." Yeah, a multimillionaire who's mainly interested in catching up his party life does not need college, or vice versa. I second some people's idea that he should just buy an apartment in Boston and start a tech incubator or something.