Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mogster

  1. On 30/01/2023 at 18:10, Kingpin said:

    Halt and Catch Fire, S1 - 3.5/5


    I missed the boat on this one but feels good to have a new show with four full seasons to watch.

    I liked this season a lot - great idea for some historical fiction. For anyone who doesn’t know, early 80s setting revolving around early home PC development and competing against big blue (and others). 

    I can’t put my my finger on it but it felt like something was missing, but hoping it’s a case of the show finding it’s feet before smashing it out of the park over the remaining seasons. Good characters, good setting and I’m invested in the whole thing now. 

    I loved the first season, but it changes things up a little for the next three and becomes one of my all time favourite shows. :wub:

  2. Aside from the implied support of buying the game funding Rowling's transphobia, surely it's enough that people just don't want to give money to the hateful person?


    I've seen lots of posts here trying to justify it because it's just "a drop in the ocean" for her, or indeed somehow a positive thing as it's not "surrendering the argument". After all the best form of protest is no protest at all, as it's the last thing they'll be expecting!


    Personally my main reason for not wanting to give her my money is because I don't like giving money to hateful bigots, regardless of what impact it would or wouldn't have.


    And sure, there are better ways to make an impact than not buying a game, but I really don't see how that makes it okay to just buy it anyway and make no impact at all. It's really easy not to buy it.


    As for this thread, I'm starting to think the best solution is just to put it on ignore. It's just too depressing otherwise.

  3. 2 hours ago, Uncle Nasty said:


    This thread should assume that you've played both games and watched the latest episode.

    Absolutely not, for the same reason that any other TV show thread doesn't assume you've read the book, comic or whatever it's based on. 


    This show in particular has apparently reached far more people than have played the games, based on game sales and current viewing figures, so it would be very unfair to assume most people have played the games.


    That doesn't mean you can't talk about the games, obviously, but keep it to clearly marked spoiler tags.

  4. 2 hours ago, Popo said:

    A particularly nice touch that only really dawned on me this morning:


      Hide contents

    The final moment where the camera pans backwards through the bedroom window, settling on an iconic image for anyone who has played the game:



      Hide contents




    They talk about this in the podcast:



    The original idea was to start and finish every episode with a window shot, and even hold it there on streaming services with a "Press Play" button to start the episode.


    They abandoned this as being a bit impractical and restrictive, but the last shot of the episode was a holdover from that.


  5. I thought the last season was brilliant when it aired. It felt like everyone involved was just having a great time, and included a really good time loop episode. 


    The show managed to reinvent itself several times to varying levels of success, but it always managed to feel fresh at least.

  6. Yeah that was brilliant. Vague spoilers ahead:



    At one point I thought it was getting maybe a little cheesy, but I was in bits by the time the last meal scene was playing out. Overall it was really well done.


    Oh, and the letter got me as well.:(


  7. 53 minutes ago, Capwn said:

    Has anyone mentioned to Amazon that Tombraider has a shit story?

    The show will presumably have an original story though. I think the character and the "brand" are hugely recognisable in spite of the stories, and it's that which Amazon will want to to draw upon rather than come up with their own "Adventure Lady".

  8. 2 minutes ago, Qazimod said:


    The "casting" of the main party was always a bit rubbish - I think it got brought up once or twice in our GOTY round-up. The guys were a diverse range of old, out of shape losers and misfits...and then you had Saeko and (the optional) Eri who were relatively lithe and attractive and "safe" designs by comparison.

    That's fair, but while "safe" and boring I don't think I'd class them as problematic in the same way some of the other examples in this thread are.

  9. It really weirds me out to the point where I've avoided many Japanese games I'd otherwise be interested in. 


    I do think the Yakuza games are probably better than some of the other examples here. I don't remember anything particular dodgy in Yakuza: LAD, and it's a rare example of a JRPG dealing with characters my actual age (and certainly not underage!).


    I get the impression that part of the issue is that a lot of Japanese games seem to be aimed squarely at horny, straight male teenagers. That doesn't excuse the content of course, but I wonder if there's less of a market over there for older gamers? 

  10. 5 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

    Like, the general age-bracket of people here are surely too old to be Harry Potter fans anyway (different if you've got kids, of course!)

    Harry Potter has always appealed to people way outside the original target age group. I started reading them in my late teens, but there were people far older than me queuing to buy the books on launch day. It was a widely reported phenomenon.


    Until Rowling's transphobic views came out I still loved Harry Potter. I went to see The Cursed Child a few years ago and thought it was fantastic. I went to see Fantastic Beasts as well, which was, well.


    I would definitely be interested in this game if it wasn't for Rowling's views.

  11. 3 minutes ago, footle said:

    And that is fine. But the alternative: “people who buy the game are supportive of her views, because it will be taken to be supportive of her views, by her” is ceding a unwinnable argument. You do get that?

    No? :unsure:


    Once again, nobody's saying that buying the game means you are supportive of Rowling's views. Buying the game absolutely supports her and her views, but that doesn't magically transform the buyer into a bigot if they're not already.


    This is the first time I've ever seen anyone trying to twist a boycott into somehow supporting the target.


    3 minutes ago, footle said:

    it’s like brexit all over again: don’t let the enemy define the ground on which you take your stand.

    You'll have to explain this I'm afraid. Are you saying people against Brexit should have voted for it instead?

  12. 24 minutes ago, footle said:


    Given the game will succeed anyway, wouldn't your time be better spent pushing the idea that the success of the game is entirely independent of Rowling's views on transphobia? Given that there are only going to be a few terfs who deliberately buy it because of Rowling's views on transphobia?


    You are otherwise ceding an unwinnable argument to a TERF. Which feels a bit ridiculous.

    Now we're just going round in circles, but once again it isn't ceding anything to not reward Rowling for her views. It's very easy to not buy this game.


    And yes, I have no doubt the game will be very successful. That doesn't mean I should want to be a part of that.

  13. 17 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

    So saying "5 million people who bought this agree with JKR's views because she says so" is ceding that narrative to her.


    A personal choice to sidestep it makes complete sense. But using that to reflect what everyone else is thinking doesn't help imo.

    I haven't said this. I've said many times that a purchase of the game is perceived this way, regardless of the intention of the person buying it. Lots of people will buy this game and be completely in the dark regarding Rowling's views, but the success of the game will still be used to indicate support.


    14 minutes ago, Sixkiller said:

    This is what I would have to fundementally disagree with, and if people on one 'side' believe and act like every person purchasing that game is on the other 'side' then they only risk pushing more people away from their cause and argument, not attracting them to it.

    Again, I have claimed no such thing.


    15 minutes ago, Sixkiller said:

    I've googled it, but can't find anything that points to the content of HP books/films/etc being transphobic, all the content I can see relates to the idea that the 'magic' of HP has been ruined by her subsequent political output.  That doesn't diminish the value that I can see for some to opt out because of her views, but it also doesn't diminish my feeling that people enjoying HP is in itself a problematic thing itself, so long as they keep their distance from the creator's post-HP obsessions?

    There is certainly transphobic content in her Strike novels, but Harry Potter's issues lie more in the realms of casual racism (Cho Chang, 'nuff said), and indeed the general attitude towards not challenging the toxic status quo. That steve video essay on the subject posted a while ago addresses this stuff perfectly, highlighting for instance how Hermione is teased for her anti-slavery activism, and eventually proven "wrong" for wanting to free the house elves.


    It's not like the pages of Harry Potter are filled with overt hatred and bigotry, but you'd have to be very selective to not think they're at all problematic.

  14. Just now, thesnwmn said:


    Why accept it?


    Rowling can use it as she wants. And will. So ignore her. What matters is the wider take on whether it means that.


    Stop ceding ground to people who just claim it.

    I also agree with it though. Buying the game is a show of support. It sends a message that you're okay with what she's doing, or at least don't care about it.


    Besides it takes an impressive amount of doublethink to think that buying a product that directly benefits Rowling is somehow a protest.

  15. Just now, thesnwmn said:


    I don't think it's being misinterpreted, just a statement that reverse of your position applies.


    It is those against the purchasing of the game who risk creating a narrative that the success of this game directly reflects support for JKR's views.


    That just isn't the case. So by all means don't support it. But vilifying those who does creates the situation people might be worried about.

    That's demonstrably not true though. That narrative already exists, as shown by Rowling's own tweets.

  16. 7 minutes ago, Sixkiller said:


    Choosing to not buy the game is a perfectly valid way of opposing her views, I get that and fully support peoples' freedom to do that.


    However, to imply that anyone buying it therefore shows support for her and her views is wrong.  They've been quite clear she's not involved in the creation of the game, so it doesn't carry any of her messaging (I'm not aware of any HP material pushing her views?).  Yes, if you follow the financial trail you can argue she, or at least her company, will receive financial benefit from a purchase, but that does not equate to a vote in favour of her views.  Just because someone holding back their cash sees that as a vote against does not make the reverse true (although I'm sure some dickheads will buy it just to prove a point).



    I think Harry Potter is a pile of turgid shite, so fortunately I personally have no decision to make.  However, if my son chooses to buy it, and then plays it using my console, the Resetera attitude seems to suggest that I could be branded a bigot just for not enforcing a household-wide extension of their boycott?


    You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. My whole point is that there's no nuance involved in making a purchase. There's no tick box when you place the order to say whether you agree with Rowling's views, but the implication remains. A purchase of the game shows support for Rowling's views whether you actually support them or not.


    I don't think anyone on this forum would agree with the hate spewed by Rowling. At least I certainly hope so! 

  17. I'd also add that buying games, tech or whatever else produced in any part from exploitation of workers (that is, most stuff) is generally not perceived as showing support for those practices. Businesses know they're being awful, or at least know they'll be perceived as such and try and hide this fact as much as possible.


    Buying this game however is basically giving Rowling a thumbs up to keep doing what she's doing. She thinks she's in the right, and is being bolstered by her own, ever growing echo chamber of people who now feel similarly empowered.


    6 minutes ago, Strafe said:

    It is not ‘simply’ that matter though unless you’re going to - insanely - apply that same logic to every single thing you buy. Which of course you wouldn’t, because that would be insane.

    Did you read the rest of my post? Once again; "Ultimately, it's never a bad thing to show support to marginalised people who deserve it. It's better to support a single cause than it is to support nothing, and it's never a good argument to suggest people must either boycott everything or nothing at all."

  18. Spreading and normalising bigotry > screwing over workers in my book. That's not to say that the latter isn't terrible, it's also a fundamental part of capitalism. Companies will always do everything they can get away with to exploit workers and minimise costs while benefitting execs and shareholders, and it seems nothing short of a full blown revolution is going to change this. I am absolutely not defending this, but I'm not about to stop buying stuff because capitalism, because that simply isn't practical.


    Rowling is an absolute arsehole who is obsessed with demonising trans people because of her bigotry. It's a particular brand of bigotry which seems to be becoming more and more acceptable in the UK, due in no small part to Rowling and people like her, and it's making life increasingly horrible for trans people. 


    Ultimately, it's never a bad thing to show support to marginalised people who deserve it. It's better to support a single cause than it is to support nothing, and it's never a good argument to suggest people must either boycott everything or nothing at all.


    7 minutes ago, Strafe said:

    To clarify; I just don’t think the money she gets from Hogwarts Legacy will make much difference to her. She has more than enough money already. That is common sense based on how much money she already has and entirely independent of any purchasing plans.

    You're probably right, but I don't think anyone here is suggesting we're going to bankrupt Rowling by not buying a game. It's simply a matter of whether you want to show support for her and her views.

  19. As a new parent myself, the Steam Deck has been very handy to have around. Portability is obviously a big help, but quick resume is also a godsend.


    As for quick tactics games, I haven't played it but Into The Breach is meant to have quick, small scale (well, large scale but low unit count) battles. It's maybe more puzzely than Xcom but might scratch that itch.


    This is completely not what you're asking for, but I've been enjoying the odd visual novel recently and Coffee Talk is the perfect visual novel for the short of time. It's only about four hours long, according to HLTB, and so far each chapter has only lasted a few minutes. It's short and snappy with interesting, well written characters, and mixing drinks for them all is oddly engaging.

  20. 22 hours ago, Benny said:
      Reveal hidden contents

    And Mike's little segment on Strange New Worlds is enough for me to conclude I am never going to even attempt to watch that show. He might have some weird opinions, but that man knows his Star Trek.


    You could decide that based on "a man with some weird opinions", or check out the opinion of everybody here. Up to you. ;)

  21. 20 minutes ago, K said:

    I think that "sex" scene with Ivanova is one of my abiding memories of watching Babylon 5 when Channel 4 first screened it, in that it was so embarrassing I had to briefly turn the TV off.

    Boom shakalakalaka! Boom shakalakalaka! Hey there! Hey there! Three bags full! :D


    Weirdly that's one of my strongest memories of the show. It's not a good scene, but it's certainly memorable.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.