Thursday Next

Just realised that life is parodying South Park.

A bit more gameplay and such.

Gotcha, I agree as it goes, that gameplay snippet was very linear. The open/explory bits of the game were (for me) much better. Just wanted to check what the "bad parts" were in others' opinions.

Now I think more about this, I've got Turkish Cypriot, Italian, English and Candian grandparents (one of each). I tick the "White (British)" box rather than the "White (European)" or "White (Other)". Not sure if this makes me transracial or not.

Trainers were banned (in my experience) because they left dirty black streaks on the polished wooden floors. I believe we used to refer to them as "green flash trainers" due to their similarity to the dunlop shoe of the same name. Edit: The bleep test was sadistic. It was more about not being in the bottom 5 than winning. First person to drop out was always marked as a bit of a Sam Tarly.

I think where it breaks down for me is that your gender is determined on a coin toss. Parents will give birth to a boy or a girl. Pre-conception you can't determine whether it will be one or the other. But you know that (certain genetic issues aside) it'll be a boy or a girl. Race on the other hand is determined pre-conception. You'll definitely be black, white, asian, mixed race, etc. if your parents are. No amount of genetic dice rolling is going to chuck in some asian genes to a baby born to a couple that only have black and white ancestry. Transgender, to me is moving away from something you are not. You know you are not female, so you change to male gender. Transracialism doesn't feel the same. It seems like this person is moving towards something you prefer, rather than moving away from white culture because she knows that is not what she is, she's moving toward black culture for, reasons. In essence, if you had a transgender person in a box with only people of the same genetic gender, they would say "I am not the same gender as these people", if you put a transracial person in a box with only people of their genetic race, I don't think they would say the same.

Which bits?

Ours are still more photogenic. Though yours do explain why someone would not be averse to taking it up as a moniker.

Hellblade looks cool.

Just want to be clear that there is (I hope obviously) a degree of devil's advocacy here. The industry sees games as being more servicey, consumers (by and large and outside of multiplayer) see them as goodsy. Legal constructs at the moment put them in the more servicey end of things, but there is a steady shift towards the goodsy. As a consumer, I tend to consume games in a goodsy fashion. However, I do see the argument from the industry side as well. I think it is right that games (and films and music and books) are treated differently to say spoons. People don't get excited when a new spoon comes out, use it for every meal for a few weeks, then stick it in a draw, start using a new spoon and forget about the old spoon, maybe going back to it now and then for nostalgic reasons. Similarly, the appeal of the spoon is not to experience eating with it once (after which you have seen most of what the spoon can do) after which you will only really go back to it if it is an exceptional spoon. This doesn't mean I'm against refunds. Quite the opposite. I completely agree that publishers should stand by their products. It just means that I think that game refunds need different restrictions to other, more mundane goods. Both EA and Valve have tried to address this, EA with a 24hr from boot and Valve with a 2 hour playtime limit. Both have their merits and weaknesses. The major issue with them both is that they do not scale with the game, which is why makers of shorter games feel aggrieved, and I think, justifiably so. I would much rather see a % completion system adopted rather than "playtime" (who's to say that you didn't boot the game, then have to run down the shops or whatever.) and see refunds scale as well if for example you reach 50% you get an 80% refund etc.

Makes sense, I mean they get all the money. It's only sensible that they share that by giving some to the state. It'll then trickle down to the state and everyone wins.

It'll be even more delayed. And even more ladylike.

That's exactly what it makes them, if it was a good and not a service, then ongoing terms would be impossible as you exhaust your rights to goods when you sell them to a consumer (nobody can tell you what to put in a bowl, not to break it down, or not to sell it on). Practically speaking almost all games these days are treated as a service in any event with software updates and what not. The disc is the medium through which the service of delivering an experience if provided. You can't return the experience of playing the game, any more than you can return the meal you ate, or the ride you went on at the theme park, so handing back the disc, or the 1s and 0s, or what have you, is meaningless, you've had the experience. (I'm not advocating whether that is right or wrong, I'm just saying that is the position of publishers. It's the justification for EULAs as a license to continued enjoyment of a service. It's the model the entire industry is built on.) I'm actually in favour of refunds on games. EA has the Great Game Guarantee which is a brilliant service, it's good that Steam is catching up. I happen to think that EA's policy (within 7 days of purchase and 24 hours after first boot) is superior as many games, RPGs for example, have barely gotten past the tutorial after two hours. This puts AAA and indie games on the same playing field as most games can be ground through in a day (judging by how quickly people seem to get to the end of them on YouTube). The cinema comparison is valid. If you walk out 90 minutes into Lord of the Rings (half way through), then you are more likely to get your money back than if you leave 90 minutes in to say... Airplane (2 minutes after the film is done). @Dean: Yes, the law is catching up with this in some respects, but it's more in line with refunds for broken services, the concept that you can't sell your stuff on is still going strong, even in the EU. Though I doubt that will last forever (however, by the time the law catches up with us we're going to be streaming everything anyway).

Firstly, from my point of view games are not a product, they are a service. That sounds pretty arbitrary. What do you base that on? A single-player game is not something that someone needs to labor to provide you. You buy it and the machine does the rest. Source: Every EULA ever... e.g. https://account.mojang.com/documents/minecraft_eula "When you buy our Game, we give you permission to install the Game on your own personal computer and use and play it on that computer as set out in this EULA." You are buying permission to use something. Not buying a thing. The physical disc belongs to you. But you don't own and cannot share the permission to use it. As Tenshi says. You are kind of leasing games. @Ethan: My mistake, some DLC refunds are up to developers.

Firstly, from my point of view games are not a product, they are a service. Like a theme park or a restaurant. You don't so much "buy a game" as buy a lifetime ticket to access a game. Secondly, what's the "right" price for a short game? That's like assessing how much to pay for a meal based on weight. A small plate can only cost $5 or else you must offer a full refund even if someone ate and enjoyed all of it? If you look at it from that point of view, then while a restaurant will give you your money back if you say your food is bad, they might be less inclined to do so if you have licked the plate clean. A theme park ticket might (but probably won't) be refundable if you've only been there a short time and found that some rides are broken, but it is much less likely if you everything is working and you have jumped on the three biggest rides and then split. Similarly, if you've played a game to completion picking clean all the content then I can see why it might not be fair to claim a full refund. All that said, it is up to the developer if they want to offer refunds or not. Valve aren't mandating this. If you think that you have a good reason for not offering "no quibble" refunds, then I say go for it. I think that most people won't exploit this system, plenty of people on steam pay for games and never play them, so the idea of paying, playing and refunding is probably not going to occur to most. There will be a few who exploit the system but they will soon be caught on to and stopped. A lot of the reaction is just that, a reaction. There hasn't been enough time to fully prove out the system, and as we saw with paid mods, if it is as broken as some think, Valve will switch it off. I wonder if a scaleable refund would be workable? It would effectively make all games "pay what you want". Perhaps you could top that back up to the current price in the event that you want to access the game again..? Thanks for the correction Ethan.

I've got cardboard. It's pretty cool for £3 of junk + a phone. Excluding EA announcements. For obvious reasons. Though there is some cool stuff coming. Sony: Crow about 25mil sold through Morpheus release date and price. PS Now release schedule for Europe. A bunch of new indie titles for Vita. Bloodborne DLC details. MS: Weasel worded "most successful xbox since xbox" statement. Weasel worded exclusivity announcements. Halo, yawn. TV, lol. 360 games on Live for Xbone. Nintendo: Chat about how great Splatoon is. Another DS variant since it's been around 5 minutes since the last one. Zelda delayed. Some Amiibos or something launched. Others: Konami reveal that the whole PT Silent Hills thing was just a gag and it is totally still on. Metal Gear Solid Match 3 game for Android and iOS. Silent Hills Saga announced as IP is licensed exclusively to King. Ubisoft announce that you will be able to choose a lady assassin to play as in Ass Syndicate. Watch_Dogs 2 announced. Activision, CoD stuff. Yawn. MOBA thing delayed. A racing game gets announced. That'll do pig. That'll do.

Spelunky HD coming to WiiU.

Biggest thing is that you can develoop for them without membership any more. https://developer.apple.com/xcode/ Not exactly going open source, but certainly more open than ever before.

This serves mostly to make me miss Tomorrow's World.

Having watched a few videos now of people fighting Ebrietas, it has occured to me that a Vitality stat of 9 may be something of a hinderance. :/

Oh man, you actually gave them your money? Hook, line, sinker.

Grip buttons are a cool idea. The rest of it, I'm on the fence on. Incidentally, the below is why they will never take over the living room. Not going to buy a $750 machine for the living room when I can have a PS4. Also not going to buy the crappy i3 version that I know is crappy because there are more expensive (and therefore objectively better) i7 version. Just my opinion here, but if you're going to "take over" living rooms then I think you need to be cheap, uniform and future proof. This is expensive, complicated and the entry level model is already seems obsolete by the existence of the top tier model. They'll sell a few I'm sure, but they won't be doing 20 million in a year. https://goo.gl/photos/NCkXVXyRiZpUZcM27

I finally got to the second lamp. Respawning enemies is a dick move. The game has spent all this time teaching me to take my time, kite enemies, etc. and now it's telling me I've got to try and blow through as quick as possible. Very frustrating. The first section, where you have to run down the stairs is so tight the number of times I got ganked because I got stuck on a piece of rubble, or couldn't roll between enemies! Ugh!

Depends on the character arc. Tyrion and Jorah just overtook the books. Jon is rapidly catching them. Stannis is there or thereabouts. Arya is a way off.