BlinkAndItsGone

No, you can fly it. The thing is, manually piloting your ship sounds like it's not used for transportation, only for combat and docking/boarding other ships and space stations. But those things are apparently pretty fun.

This looks amazing. It's time for psychedelic and dream imagery in video games to come back.

Also the article is an iPhone ad.

The ones that I find myself going back to the most in the last decade are indie classics. Hyper Light Drifter, Kerbal Space Program, FTL: Faster Than Light (I just realized all these titles sound similar, but they're a 2D character action game, a spaceflight simulator/shipbuilder, and a very unique strategy game, respectively, and they're all among the best in their genres). Also, as a horror game fan and a Resident Evil fan in particular, I keep replaying the Resident Evil 2 remake from 4 years ago; easily one of the best horror games ever made.

I don't know if scandals can really discredit a religion, this is mostly not how cult beliefs work; they seem to gain adherents largely through manipulation and force, which are not holds that a scandal is very effective at breaking. I'd suggest the results that Madison is citing are not the results of scandals but instead of rising levels of education and living standards, which do in fact break the hold of cults (by decreasing general ignorance and increasing emotional well-being, and thereby reducing the desperation that makes people vulnerable to dependence on authoritarianism and other comforting lies in the first place).

However, he does bring up a point against Christianity that I like at the beginning. I've heard Christians say that clergy are less likely than laymen to go to heaven, an admission that they observe corruption in those who are supposed to be closest to God. So where is the ennobling influence of the Holy Spirit? Where is God's discernment in picking the virtuous to represent him? The corruption of the clergy is a pretty solid bit of evidence against religion.

I’ll bet that any TOS fans who were furious at the time probably did not go on to like the show.

As a TOS fan who wasn't too happy with what I had heard before TNG came out, I would bet against you. Most of them probably became TNG fans eventually, because the most impactful thing a show can do is simply to be great. Canon complaints and complaints about characters not returning are mostly about nostalgia, and if the show is compelling (especially if it's compelling in a similar way to the old show), nostalgia can't compete. If anything I'd guess that the people in this article were more likely to become fans of TNG, because it would have exceeded their expectations, which can make things seem better than they would otherwise.

Were you really a Trekkie if you thought TNG was going to be good in 1987?

Kidding, sort of. I remember thinking it was going to be a cash grab, and I still think I was right to think so at the time. Keep in mind, you couldn't go on the Web and instantly know everything about an upcoming TV show. I think I learned it was in production from the back of a cereal box. I didn't even know Gene Roddenberry was involved. The Enterprise-D design was pretty weird, and the cast of characters was more than a bit out there--a Klingon? On the Enterprise crew? Come on.

Didn't Mercury Steam do a Metroid 2 remake for 3DS? Maybe they're porting that to Switch to follow up on Dread's success. I never owned a 3DS but I would love to play that.

It isn't a given that a game company will always get to work on a new game right after they release one, much less two new games.

Counterpoint, it won't "hang over" Joe's reelection bid because he's not the one on trial. The article even quotes someone pointing out that voters don't care about guilt by association in a situation like this.

The screenshot on the right is from "Parallels", where Worf is shifting dimensions uncontrollably. I think it's the scene where he's trying to prove to Crusher that his memory isn't faulty by showing her his personal logs.

It's making search engines useless, for one thing.