CaptPretentious

joined 2 years ago
[–] CaptPretentious 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Wifi is just radio. So, having your access point or wifi enabled router surrounded by things is bad for your wifi experience.

To a certain degree, you can do a "poor-mans" way of figuring out how good your wifi would be by just putting a speaker where the wifi should be coming from, then go someplace else in the building and ask yourself, "Can I hear the music still?". You get an idea of how the wifi is moving about. (Keep in mind, it's not perfect, but if you don't want to use apps or specialized equipment and want to wing it... this will work in a pinch). Sound is better than light because wifi will penetrate walls/floors/etc, where light won't, so you can listen against said surfaces and close doors, etc, to get a general idea of things.

[–] CaptPretentious 2 points 4 hours ago

I don't think he has to care, but I think he might. SpaceX and Tesla are the only 2 brands he regularly promotes as he hopes people forget about all the other stolen, idiotic ideas that have failed.

He has mentioned many times in the past how "owning a Tesla is fiscally responsible". Considering DOGE and falling Tesla sales... it's only a matter of time until he sees if he can push Tesla as "The American Car" subsidised by tax payers and potentially cheaper then other brands (due to tariffs)... I don't put it past him to try to take over all the transportation in the country. He's stopped pretending he isn't just a super villain a while ago, so going out of our way to ensure that the most "affordable" car is his and cripple the nation further by literally controlling the means of transportation.

[–] CaptPretentious 3 points 11 hours ago

That is an incredible list. Did a find for a few things I personally knew about and have always been disappointed in Obama for... and sure enough found them. First one I searched, was extending the Bush tax cuts on the rich. I remember Bill O'Reilly saying "Oh, if I have to pay taxes, I'm going to have to fire people, and that's on Obama, so tax cuts means less jobs!" (so glad Bill got canned) and Obama just fucking caved like a spineless coward.

[–] CaptPretentious 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So, gallows than?

[–] CaptPretentious 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I want to take a wild guess and say that the word was supposed to be jump.

[–] CaptPretentious 1 points 4 days ago

You probably call them nasty people, probably say how he always knew, how you can't trust them. Claim he would never act like that. Then probably put travel restrictions in place to prevent them from coming here and tariffs.

[–] CaptPretentious 4 points 1 week ago

Ok, then a vibrator is a robotic dick.

[–] CaptPretentious 25 points 1 week ago

It wasn't a bad movie, but it had problems.

The big problem, and this is pretty common with Marvel, was a weak villain. The Leader just wasn't a big threat. He spent most of his time in the shadows. He got very little screen time. And his motivation was also really weak. He wanted a pardon... But he was also completely capable of starting world war 3, like that doesn't make sense. Like an iron Man 3, The Mandarin started off the movie as an epic threat... Only to be revealed to be an actor and the actual bad guy was Killian... Who was an awful villain. But you don't even have to have a villain that's super strong or even has great motivation as long as they're well written, like Mysterio. Red Hulk ends up being wasted on this movie, because they had no faith they could write something people would want to see, because post Thanos they've kind of been fumbling the ball. But I think they seem to forget is Thanos wasn't there from the beginning they eventually led into him.

They either needed to really lean into The Leader, or Red Hulk. Not waste both on a 2 decade late Hulk sequel that doesn't have Bruce or the Hulk.

[–] CaptPretentious 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I hear just outside McMurdo, if you dig down a bit, you'll find an ancient outpost.

[–] CaptPretentious 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Ever been in a public bathroom that has that pink soap. Cilantro tastes like that smells.

[–] CaptPretentious 14 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Real change isn't going to happen until a few more get Luigi'd

 

I'll try to keep this short, sweet, and to the point.

I, like so many of you, love this game. Possibly more than we should. But for me, before this game, I had truly lost most of my interest in video games as a whole. Every year, various problems get worse and 2023 was the final straw for me. Ever increasing greed (Blizzard, Unity, EA, just every studio really). To say they came out in a lazy, incomplete, greedy state undersells it I feel. I truly feel we're still on the brink of another video game crash. Because the crash wasn't just one game (E.T.) but was the general greed and terrible quality of the industry back then. Pushing new products (games, consoles, accessories, etc.) just to push new products with crazy turn around time all in the name of profit. And this year, just stacked with all prior years, I had enough.

This game is so good in all the right ways. The writing, the acting, the world feels alive. NPCs respond differently based on who you are and what you've done. Even banter between your party. A truly impressive amount of thought put into things allowing you the player to really play however you want. It's not a mad loot carousel because your character power isn't based on gear directly and is tied to the character which allows for far more interesting items. There's no greed either, no stupid 'sEaSoN pAsS', no excel spreadsheets worth of 'versions', no subscription, no shop using real money for gear/cosmetics, no 'planned DLC' that's obviously content they cut out in order to sell back to the consumer. Heck, this game supports multiplayer... REAL multiplayer in that I don't believe you ever actually need a dedicated server. I believe you can do direct remote, split screen co-op, and LAN play... what other game in the last decade does that?

It reminds me of how games used to be before Bethesda broke the seal with horse armor.

BG3 is just a complete, high quality game, for gamers. It feels like it was made with love, care, and respect. And playing the game brings me joy.

17
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by CaptPretentious to c/baldurs_gate_3
 

Are there any good collections anyone might be aware of, for EA information or datamined information.

I'm curious to see what ideas got scrapped and how things changed. I know of a few things, like a little on Daisy. How certain abilities were actually going to be handed out.

But places like Grymforge really elude to something... there's a bunch of stuff hints that something might be near. From whatever caused some of the destruction you see. Because I refuse to believe it's all a vague reference to Yurgir.

And then there's some MTG pictures I saw, that list someone has potentially the main villain, in the very least a bad guy, and in the current game plays a very different roll.

Edit: Added spoiler tag just in case

3
Only 'complaint' with BG3 (self.baldurs_gate_3)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by CaptPretentious to c/baldurs_gate_3
 

So, after playing many hours and just recently starting Act 3, there's been one thing that's been bugging me and I finally have it sorted out.

The whole "rarity" attached to gear is really dumb and misleading.

It's using the overly used grey/green/blue/'purple' coloring and naming that's common and many other RPGs. But in those games, it's somewhat reflective of rarity... which is what it's described as in BG3, the rarity of an item. But it's a lie.

Example Periapt of Wound Closure is an item that's sold by a vendor. How is it rare? As far as I can tell, there's just one in the game. But every named item I have, there's just one in existence.

I think labeling things as common/uncommon/rare/ etc. is wrong and thus makes people think certain items are better simply based on the 'color' of the gear instead of considering what the gear does. I've already had this conversation with multiple friends who absolutely think they're going to give a "stat stick" to their caster, because they're so used to Blizzard's way of thinking. Or that they 'needed' new gear because they leveled up and now must replace gear asap (even in Act 1). The fact I showed videos of some guy soloing the game, or beating the game as lvl 1s, or a video of some guy causing havoc by chucking potatoes and only potatoes... falls on deaf ears.

I think if the naming was swapped from 'rarity of item' to 'quality of enchantment' it would make more sense, but I still think it's not necessary. Or if it was standardized to like normal gear (nothing special) remains grey, gear that's just slightly enchanted (like +1 Sword) is green, and all unique named items are blue. Since you certainly can get lots of grey, fewer greens, and only one named. But that's just an idea.

view more: next ›