2 picks for me: Stardew Valley, most boring shit ever, I don’t see the appeal, seriously how the hell did that thing sold 20 million copies?

And Witcher 3, I own that game since 2019 and I regret buying it, funny thing is that I’ve finished Dragon Age 1 and 2, which are kinda same genre but I actually enjoyed those games. I guess the old BioWare sauce carried those games unlike Witcher where there’s nothing to enjoy in its massive pointless world.

  • masquenox@lemmy.world
    0·
    4 months ago

    I’m just a speaker you can ignore.

    I’m not ignoring you - I’m giving you (and the rest of the liberals in here) the perfect opportunity to extoll the virtues of liberal “see no white supremacism, hear no white supremacism, speak no white supremacism” ideology.

    Unsurprisingly, there are no takers. I am left to draw the obvious conclusion - that liberals are no less invested in the maintenance of racialized society than their fascist cousins are. It’s just the way this investment is expressed that differs.

    • Xanis@lemmy.world
      0·
      4 months ago

      Hahaha, yeah, you’re right, we ain’t biting. :)

      You could, and this is just a thought, also choose to look up the many arguments and discussions on this exact topic online, since you’re so keen to explore it. Bootstraps, my friend. Gotta put in the work!

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        0·
        4 months ago

        also choose to look up the many arguments and discussions on this exact topic online

        Hold on a sec while I follow your advice…

        Hold it…

        Hold some more…

        Just one more sec… done!

        You mean like this?

        “The white conservatives aren’t friends of the Negro either, but they at least don’t try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the “smiling” fox.” - Malcom X

        • Xanis@lemmy.world
          0·
          4 months ago

          You know what you’re doing. Taking a single radical source and using it to try and get people to pivot and engage. However, I now know you have the capacity to do a Google search. So good luck on your journey of information discovery and in challenging your beliefs. If you are fair in what you read and open-minded in what you learn, much of the time you will gain wisdom. Heck, you may even look back with some consternation at conversations and beliefs you once held. It’s in those moments of self-reflection and embarrassment where many of us realize how much we’ve grown as people.

          That said, I will say this:

          Inequality exists not due to Man, though rather due to nature itself. Therefore, as Man, we must then seek to challenge nature so that we may thrive in unity. If you personally were to take the dichotomy of our modern political and sociocultural systems and challenge them to prove their efforts in supporting a more inclusive and just world, which side would you choose?

          The Red or the Blue?

          One or the other. Because we both know they are not the same thing, not really, despite the words spoken by a man more than 60 years ago.

          • masquenox@lemmy.world
            0·
            4 months ago

            Taking a single radical source

            Oh… you thought that’s the only one, huh?

            Try this one on, then.

            I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

            Also, FYI… don’t use the term radical as a slur - it demonstrates how politically incompetent and intelectually shallow you really are.

              • masquenox@lemmy.world
                0·
                4 months ago

                Your question is irrelevant - but if you must have an answer… you can take both and stick 'em where the sun don’t shine.

                • Xanis@lemmy.world
                  0·
                  4 months ago

                  There’s the problem. You are unwilling to compromise. Change on this scale will require either a small miracle to do overnight, or I’d guess at least a solid 10 years of hard, consistent work by people much more intelligent and decisive than myself, and that’s just to set the foundation and create the outline. The first is an act of God and I don’t know about you, I’d rather keep religion out of this. That leaves the second, which means compromise to achieve a greater good over a longer period of time.

                  You see, I don’t really care about your beliefs, or anyone else’s, so far as they are yours to believe in. Thus action must take the place of opinion. I asked you to commit to something and the only action you were able to take was to tell all of us that you can’t stand it. That choosing between what is statistically and factually a greater evil and one that is statistically and factually attempting to be a far lesser evil, is not something you can do.

                  I’ll tell you what I believe in, and it’s pretty simple: I believe in what I feel will do good by the world and by its people. Not complete good untarnished by greed or malice, just a good that tries to do right. It doesn’t matter the source of the idea; all that matters is whether it is enacted in a way that helps more than it harms. Right, left, middle, none of this means anything. Though at the moment far more malice and hatred is coming from the Red than from anywhere else.

                  Malcom X and MLK fought for a more equal country, at the end of the day. If their words ring true in your ears at all, it should be obvious where your support must, by necessity, move towards. Else the only way out may be more Malcoms and more Martins.

                  • masquenox@lemmy.world
                    0·
                    4 months ago

                    You are unwilling to compromise.

                    Compromise with whom? You?

                    You have nothing to offer except more of the same, Clyde…

                    factually attempting to be a far lesser evil

                    …and you’re going to have even less to offer when your “lesser evilism” claptrap hits rock bottom either this November or, if you (somehow) manage to kick the can further down the road, in four year’s time.

                    Since I’m not mean, I won’t ask you what (supposed) “actions” you will be “committing” to if that should happen (because I know your liberal ideology has left you too intellectually paralyzed to think any further than that)… but that doesn’t change the fact that you have nothing to offer except more of the same.

                    Malcom X and MLK fought for a more equal country,

                    Don’t use radical figures to try and hide your investment in the status quo, Clyde - that only works on liberals.