Somewhere in the vast chasm between "these are the best gameplay element ever conceived" and "this crap cannot be enjoyable with these left in" lies the actual description of their impact for a normal person.
They are perhaps marginally tedious. It bothered one modder enough that he modded them out with a mod that has about 7600 unique downloads. It bothered millions of others so little that they...just played the game anyway.
It's also frustrating because it directly undermines the cause. There is absolutely more reliance on cars than there should be. There absolutely are more people buying big trucks than need them. There are so many valid arguments to make, so many thoughtful points to bring up.
But if the arguments and content being presented are factually incorrect, if they contain erroneous arguments or irrelevant comparisons, then it's easy for people who don't agree with the entire premise to just dismiss it as nonsense. This convinces no one, and worse, it may actively convince people that people who want to reduce usage of vehicles are stupid.
Yes. There was mold and a lot of the carpet pad was disintegrated.
Thankfully there was only about a 12x12" section of subfloor that was rotted, so that was easy enough to replace.
The smell of the entire cottage has improved, though. Pretty nasty.
I just pulled carpet in a cottage bathroom over this past summer so we could replace it with vinyl.
It is exactly as gross as you think it is under there.
The Typing of the Dead
First, sure. It could be that. My opinion is that it's awfully likely that a photo in this format was a paparazzo. And if it was a random neighbor it's pretty rude of them, too.
Second, the title of the post had zero indication that this would be a photo taken from the bushes of a celebrity and his child. Comments here in the form of "engagement" are doing absolutely nothing for the person who took the picture. I'm certain the person who made the meme didn't pay for the shot. We don't need to feel guilty because we accidentally viewed it for free on a website that generates no revenue. The people taking the picture are the ones who are wrong.
There are lots of groups out there who could use random people on the internet defending them. Paparazzi are absolutely not in that category. They are terrible people.
I found this hilarious to read.
Take it from another would-be English major who found a career in IT infrastructure. We are the ones with the problem over-explaining things because we value having a full information set over being concise. The thing is I agree with you that people are overly terse, or maybe more directly people are unable to process long blocks of information. It's frustrating, because I would rather have it all in one place to reference back to.
But I've found the flip side of that is that in my efforts to ensure there is no possible way to misconstrue my communication, I lose everyone in its length. Yes it would be nice if everyone was able to digest what amounts to a technical manual-cum-email so they have a full understanding. But the reality is that the vast majority of people cannot. They simply shut down and stop reading. Therefore it is my responsibility to adjust my delivery to be most effective for the intended audience. This includes fewer words, more direct points, and less supporting details unless asked for more.
I guess my point is, I see myself in your comment. And I wanted to share that I used to feel that way but time has softened my outlook and opened me to the idea that I'm definitely complicit in the overall lack of understanding by failing to account for my audience.
Look at that, there I go rambling again!
Seriously, this.
All I could think of was wow, this poor little girl can't even have a normal childhood experience trick or treating with her dad because some fuck head paparazzo is chasing them around snapping pictures of them. That's so sleazy and shitty. She didn't ask for this. She just wants to be with her dad.
Mathematicians and racists hate this one trick!
So not with my hands like a neanderthal? Hmm...
I highly doubt Nintendo is attempting any kind of gap closure with the deck, because how could they and why?
The only thing they share is a form factor. Nintendo is well aware that the reason they sell consoles is as a dedicated platform for their own games. I truly believe that is their bread and butter and all they really care about. If the system gets popular enough, then it will get some third party support which means it will have some very limited library crossover with PC/PS/Xbox, but I think we are past the point where Nintendo intends to rely on that as a selling point for this or any future generation of consoles. Ports of games that come to switch are pretty uniformly the worst version of the game to play, and it's pretty clear that doesn't bother Nintendo at all.
Which is all to say, I don't think Nintendo and Valve think of each other as direct competitors, because they serve entirely different markets. I have both a switch and a deck. I love them both. I use my switch to play Nintendo games, I use my deck to play pretty much anything else. I don't think I'm unique at all in that regard, and frankly it never would occur to me that these devices have anything to do with one another.
You keep asking this in this thread. What answer do you want? The game has a shitload of content in it. I'm 35ish hours in and I have so many random quests and things to do. I've spent hours wandering around planets. Around cities. In space stations. Scanning things, reading stuff.
It's completely fine if what the game has to offer doesn't appeal to you, but if you truly cannot comprehend how anyone could enjoy it, then I'm afraid you just don't have much perspective.
This is, objectively speaking, a large scale open world game with hundreds of hours of content. It should be self evident that what it has to offer will appeal to some and not to others. How can you think that because it doesn't appeal to you, it shouldn't appeal to anyone? That makes no sense.