I think of 'pretty' as a decimal multiplier, like .7.

If I say something is pretty funny, it's 70% (or whatever) as funny as if I had just said it's funny.

water

>alcohol
>ever

I'm out of water so logically I switched to scotch.

Quote from: Naoto on June 06, 2015, 07:24:03 PM

Seems like that ending is real hit or miss. Either it blows people's minds or they just go eh.

I was pretty eh. Maybe it was the feelings of incest. 

What incest

What

Elizabeth is Booker's daughter.


But yeah, amazing game. Gunplay could've been polished and the level design wasn't very inspired, but I'm a sucker for a story that knows it's a mindfuck and just rolls with it.

This thread sucks.

Psychology is the science of the devil.

Diversity is fine, but the great thing about BB's equipment is that very little of the armor is useless (and pieces that are useless are for cosmetic use), and all weapons are viable throughout the whole game.

I generally only use a keyboard for MMOs, strategy games, or top-down stuff. A gamepad is just fine for KOTOR.

I'm not excited in the slightest.  I'm concerned more than anything. The series will probably end up like Mass Effect and Dead Space at this point.

If anything, they proved with Bloodborne that they can add diversity to their games while still maintaining the highly polished gameplay and atmosphere that fans expect.

He was told that spotted sheep were more valuable, so earlier he crossed heterozygous sheep to make more with different markings. Here he's just being dumb and relying on local superstition that that is how one makes different colored sheep.

Jacob was kind of a conniving prick like that. For future reference, my go-to source for bible commentary is Dr. Constable. Just Google "(verse #) dr constable"

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on June 05, 2015, 05:04:36 PM

Quote from: Nick McIntyre on June 05, 2015, 10:53:47 AM

Because niggers were a thing in medieval Nordic territories.

This is just some Tumblr SJW shit here.

Pretty sure dwarves and elves weren't a thing then either.

They are a part of Germanic folklore that the Witcher is derived from.

[snip because it's completely irrelevant to anything I said]

Of course they are, but the comment I responded to was talking about medieval Nordic territories. I have no idea how you construed my simple response into some sort of SJW crusade.

And they could very easily have included them as foreigners or traders, but frankly I don't give a shit whether there are black characters or not.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on June 05, 2015, 06:03:00 PM

Well I respect his work and think he's got interesting and compelling arguments, but it seems impossible to apply.

It just looks insane on the face of it, to me. Like his metaphysics.

There's no such thing as an action in itself; all actions are just a collection of motivations and consequences. It makes zero sense to not judge actions by those metrics. A categorical imperative would only make sense if it were consequentially tolerable.

It's not that he doesn't judge actions by their set of motivations and consequences, but that there is a supreme standard to which you can compare them. I think there's a strong argument for an action being universally immoral because it inherently leverages a person as a means to an end, or usurps their consent or autonomy.

Of course none of this really has any consequences. Whether Kant is right and lying is always wrong regardless of the intentions or consequences really holds no meaning, and that's why I previously relegated all philosophy to the metaphysical.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on June 05, 2015, 05:57:24 PM

I don't take Kant's hard and fast view that an action is itself immoral without consideration of the motivation behind that action, or its consequences.

Thank God.

Kantian ethics make me want to tear my hair out.

Well I respect his work and think he's got interesting and compelling arguments, but it seems impossible to apply.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on June 05, 2015, 05:46:09 PM

Not if the patient won't recover.

Can't say I've ever heard of life support being removed from a non-terminal patient.

Okay, what if the person themselves makes the choice to have no life support? Does it change with age, such as with elderly people who take out "Do not resuscitate" orders?

Is suicide immoral?

I'm not going to make sweeping declarations of morality, and the same arguments people use to justify refusing transfusions is the same you're using now. I think you've entirely missed what I was trying to say.

Yharnam Souls.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on June 05, 2015, 04:53:10 PM

Quote from: Sandtrap on June 05, 2015, 12:32:39 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on June 05, 2015, 12:20:27 PM

Yup.

Econ 101: scarcity = value.

So here's an interesting question. Why do religious people not pick up on that? They just pass it over. It's pretty easy to spot, I think.

Does living until 90 rather than 30 devalue life? Does having access to unlimited clean water make your water worthless? It's a flawed premise.

economically, it follows. if you have unlimited clean water, where you aren't hauling a bucket 10 miles for your family to share, you don't think about it or how much you're using. so, yes, it is less valuable.

Having access to water doesn't make it any less necessary to survive.  It's pretty silly to apply economics to the value of life.