Skyrim really is a magical experience like that. I wish I was old enough to experience it on launch in the early 2010s just so I could experience that with the rest of the community for the first time
I didn’t get it right away, since I try not to buy anything in the first month it’s out so I get a good feel of the game. Also, you know… poor. But mostly the first thing.
But holy shit the videos of dragon fights… I had to fight an impulse buy.
Since then I’ve spent over $100 on various copies for various consoles and my computer, all on sale. It may not seem like much, but when 95% of my library was purchased during sales and events… That’s a lot.
It’s not perfect, but there are so many mods for it, you can tailor it to whatever you want. Personally, I like a bit of survival mechanics like food/water and temperatures/wetness. I also like the older oblivion style of magic combat.
Bethesda may not have made the greatest video game of all time, but at this point it might as well be the best fantasy RPG-lite sandbox I’ve played. The only thing that could make it better is a settlement system like fallout. I like to build.
Survival is what I went for on this Modpack too. I have survival Mode enabled, along with a whole bunch of clothes and stuff for warmth. I’ve been trying to to get the Campfire and Frostfall mods to work but they won’t load in game for some reason so I may just have to give up
I would kill for a settlement system like Fallout 4’s or a C.A.M.P System like Fallout 76. Even just a revamp of Heart fire using the new system might be enough to get me to buy a 4th rerelease of Skyrim
Well, i haven’t neen much of a gamer for years (got too adicted to WoW), but just started again this year. I am amazed by Skyrim, and am now modding it up.
I also just got Cyberpunk 2077, and will get into it soon.
My understanding of this phenomenon is there is a committee of “You can’t eat salsa, that’s cultural appropriation” types who have the final edit on them, which is why you get movies like “What if Beauty and the Beast, but more feminist grudge porn, and a 🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈GAY🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈 character!” or “What if Mulan, but it’s about Chinese people so there can’t be anything fun or amusing in it, and…look we’ve got to get rid of this character arc shit. We can’t have this character be intrinsically weak and then learn to use her wits to compensate for it. She’s a girl, she has to be perfect and effortlessly better than the men from the start or we’ll hold our breath. That’s what a Strong Female Character is.”
That’s why they’re not fun. People who are not fun are in charge of making them.
What a garbage answer. You can make fun content and still be inclusive, execs just don’t want to take any risks on new IPs because they can milk old ones. Stop blaming inclusiveness when the real answer is greed.
What about those live-action remakes are “inclusive?”
They cast a black Ariel and portrayed Gaston’s sidekick as gay, in both cases so they could say they did it?
From the WIkipedia article on Mulan (2020 film):
The film received generally positive reviews from Western, non-Asian critics, who praised the action sequences, costumes, and performances, but was criticized for the screenplay and editing. It received unfavorable reviews from fans of the original animated film, Chinese diaspora, and Chinese critics, who criticized the character development, its cultural and historical inaccuracies, and its depiction of Chinese people.
The article goes onto say there was controversy about a lack of east Asians in the production team of the film, as well as the removal of the character Li Shang as a response to the MeToo movement which was then criticized by the LGBTVNX8L community, who saw the character’s romantic relationship with Mulan’s male persona as representation of bisexuality.
Yeah nah this sounds “inclusive” as fuck.
execs just don’t want to take any risks on new IPs because they can milk old ones
To my knowledge none of the “live action remakes” or the animated features they’re based on are original Disney IP; Dumbo was based on a children’s book, The Little Mermaid was a fairy tale, Beauty and the Beast was a French short story and then an old silent film, Aladdin was a middle-eastern folk tale, Mulan is based on a Chinese legend…Disney’s never not been milking old IP. They’ve been doing it consistently since Snow White. Thing is, they used to make it work. Those animated features were huge hits. These live action remakes aren’t.
Stop blaming inclusiveness when the real answer is greed.
Greed has ALWAYS been Disney’s motivation. To quote Disney CEO Michael Eisner:
We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make a statement. To make money is our only objective.
Disney’s greed hasn’t changed since they were a reliable classic factory, only the implementation of that greed has changed.
One way they’ve changed their implementation is to remake things they’ve already done before. The strategy seems to be to target millennials like myself who grew up during the Disney Renaissance and who now have children of their own to take to the theater. “Oh look honey, they’re remaking Aladdin! Let’s take Aiden Brayden and Cayden down to the octoplex to see it!” Honestly I think that part of the strategy is sound. I get why Disney Corporate had these movies made.
I take issue with the idea that these remakes are any more “inclusive” than the originals. Disney isn’t being “inclusive,” they’re pandering to a very particular demographic’s taste for performative virtue signaling and grievance airing. Pissing off the LGBTQ community via censoring a character in anticipation of MeToo feminists is a rather on the nose example of this.
Reminder: We’re talking about fairy tales for children here.
The kind of people who add a scene to Beauty and the Beast where some of the villagers break Belle’s washing machine because “white men be oppressin’, amirite?” aren’t the kind of people capable of making fun movies for children. They’re simply too hateful.
Honestly I think that part of the strategy is sound. I get why Disney Corporate had these movies made.
I’m old enough to remember people complaining about the feminism in the original Little Mermaid / Beauty & the Beast. There was even a spat about Aladin being Satanist.
The complaints about these movies are almost as old and hackneyed as the movies themselves.
Surely there’s a difference between an animated movie loosely inspired by a traditional story with original songs, character designs, and dialogue, and remaking that movie beat-for-beat with just a few scenes changed for pandering.
Which does make me wonder why not just re-release the original animated features to theaters. Surely “Returning to theaters this summer: Disney’s Aladdin!” That seems to be the lazier way to make a buck off of old properties, you don’t have to hire a cast and crew, build sets wardrobe and props, etc.
It is my understanding that broadway adaptations of their animated features have been reliable money makers, so were the coke addled executives at Disney thinking “Let’s make Aladdin the movie the broadway show: The Movie! It can’t fail!”
Inside Out 2 is the second highest grossing animated movie of all time. Yes I know it’s a sequel, but the original IP is less than a decade old and the movie isn’t a remake. Frozen 2 is third and Frozen is fifth.
They try to go as close to the source material (their own version) as possible while following a checklist of fixes. That checklist involves things like CinemaSins-tier critiques of the original, and what corporate execs think as “good representation” (the most corporate-safe way, e.g. gay characters that can be cut out for certain audiences, because you need that money from Saudi, Chinese, Russian, etc. audiences), with the latter being the most blamed for the issues. But the actual greatest issue itself is that they try to redo even the stuff that only works within the realms of animation in live action.
Animation relies on exaggeration, which doesn’t work in real life, thus getting rid of the most fun part of the animation medium, just to win over the “cartoons are for children” crowd. This leads to stuff like The Lion King “live action” remake, with its expressionless realistic animals acting out what cartoon animals did in a previous, animated version of The Lion King. The same is in to different extents and versions in all the other “live action” remakes.
They try to go as close to the source material (their own version)
Except they changed Mulan to appease a Chinese audience. Before release everyone thought the remake would be closer to the original story because of the rumor that the movie targeted the Chinese market. But they turned it into a Marvel movie and made Mulan a superhero resulting in that almost everyone disliked the movie.
Everything about that was puzzling. They changed the story supposedly to be more culturally accurate, but what they came up with wasn’t culturally accurate at all. How did that happen?
Besides, when Chinese people want a culturally accurate Mulan, they watch one of the many Chinese-made adaptions of the story. The animated was appealing because it was a fresh take, a Disney musical that Chinese could relate to. The remake was just a huge miscalculation.
But the animation flopped in China. Mainly because it felt foreign for the Chinese. They even found Mulan’s design too westernized. That’s why Disney thought they had to make a different Mulan story.
That’s how it all started. Guys in planes with handguns.
The French eventually put a forward-mounted gun on the plane but had to install deflectors on the prop that would protect it from bullets. On the German side Fokker developed an interrupter gear to be mounted onto the Fokker Eindekker which prevented the mounted gun from discharging when the propeller was in the way. It wasn’t perfect, but better than the deflectors.
ETA: The story goes that Fokker himself went up to demonstrate the forward-mounted machine-gun with the interrupter gear, but once he got behind an Allied scouting plane, he didn’t have the heart to kill the crew. It didn’t take long, before other pilots gladly started shooting down enemy planes.
With biplanes, guns were sometimes mounted on the upper wing to evade the problem, though eventually the central powers developed their own interrupter gear mechanism.
Note that those flying contraptions were considered more valuable than pilots, and they were sent up without parachutes in order to given them incentive to return with the plane, or at least get it to the ground with less damage. As I flew WWI flying simulations, I noticed I had a while to think up some good last words while staring at the looming ground. Too bad no one would ever hear them.
in general, things do exist out of the U.S, its just people in the U.S do it more publicly. Its like racism, and how some people think U.S is the most racist due to media and social media, its actually very far from that on the general scale of things when compared to other countries.
In Australia I knew I guy who was a SovCit and he would do stupid things like quote the bill of rights. We’d say “what bill of rights?” Australia doesn’t have one. All his info came from the US and he just followed it with realising none of it was relevant in a different country.
True. But things like the UCC are real laws. Sovcits just hilariously misinterpret them. There is no such law in other countries. Plus sovcit stuff is based on common law. It makes even less sense in civil law jurisdictions.
Fortunately I haven’t bothered keeping up with him for many years, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if he was doing that. And protesting vaccinations too probably.
There is a similar movement to SovCits that is at least properly adapted to other countries (specifically the Commonwealth and Ireland’s) laws called “Freeman on the Land.”
that would of course be count Binface, who is a space alien and thus obviously is only subject to any human law in so far as that he chooses to go along with it.
Engineers also discovered, as they plowed past the first 14,800 feet (4,511 meters), that the rock had much more porosity and permeability. That, paired with the extremely high temperatures, made the rock behave more like a plastic than a solid, rendering drilling virtually impossible.
lemmy.world
Active