Pure speculation, but I could also easily see it just being kids from other nearby schools that heard about a protest at Columbia and rode the subway up from NYU, or CUNY, or any number of schools in the area. Technically outsiders at that point, but I wouldn't really consider them as such.
Is there any knowledge as to whether Sony made this call, or Valve? If Sony, clearly a sign that they're not gonna change their mind about the PSN requirement, but where will that leave the people in those countries that already own the game.
Could see Valve doing it preemptively as well because why would they allow Sony to sell this game on their platform in countries if they're just gonna take the game away from the people who bought it.
It's almost like I was pointing out the age of the account to infer that dude made another account to agree with himself. The usernames alone are kind of a giveaway.
Sure, they like money. Who doesn't? But you have to admit there's a big difference between what Larian gave us for $60 with Baldur's Gate, and shit like $65 mounts in Diablo and $80 melee weapons in CoD and the various other chicanery ActiBlizz and other truly greedy companies have been pulling.
As such, in addition to liking money, I would argue the people at Larian genuinely care about making a good game that people enjoy. Cuz if it was ONLY about the money, they would've made a much different game. I imagine it helps not being a publicly traded company.
I've never heard of this type of scam, but out of curiosity, what if I were to take their real looking fake check to one of those many terrible check cashing places? Would it end up being the scammers trying to claw back money from the check cashing place and those 2 groups fighting while I walk away with some cash? Cuz I'd be OK with that.
Yeah, I thought I might be getting whooshed there, but I also thought there might be people that saw the shit they were selling for real money and just assumed it was a free to play game, cuz clearly this sort of monetization has no place in $70 games, but well...here we are.
While I'm not familiar with all the books on this list they're banning, the ones I am familiar with is enough to convince me they aren't banning them because of "depications of sex". (Not that that's a reason to ban books in the first place.)
The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
Beloved by Toni Morrison
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
The Color Purple by Alice Walker
Sure. You're banning these for "depictions of sex." Right.
The fact that A Court of Mist and Fury by Sarah Maas is on the list but not A Court of Thorns and Roses especially cracks me up. Mist and Fury is the sequel to Thorns and Roses and both do indeed contain depictions of sex. A number of them! But in the one they banned, the protagonist learns that the dude she fell for in the first book had been gaslighting her the entire time and essentially holding her hostage. And then she forms a much healthier relationship with a different guy in the second book, but I guess that's not a good thing for young women to learn about.
Did you just read the quote of what he said or did you actually listen to it? By the way he says it, it's clear he's using it as a name.
I would say the article even printed the quote wrong. They wrote, "Oh look at that Mercedes, that's pretty good."
They dropped a word and in my opinion got the punctuation wrong. I would quote it as, "Oh look at that, wow. Mercedes, that's pretty good."
While it does seem like something he would do, watch the clip, listen to his cadence. He is not comparing her to a car, he is using Mercedes as a name.
powells.com. Largest independent bookstore in the world, they ship to Canada, but it ain't gonna be particularly cheap i'm guessing.
Anyone know what book this is from? I'm guessing from Zdarsky's run of Batman? Feels like a gag he'd write at least.
Stupidity is morally wrong and should be illegal in my opinion
this changed
Pure speculation, but I could also easily see it just being kids from other nearby schools that heard about a protest at Columbia and rode the subway up from NYU, or CUNY, or any number of schools in the area. Technically outsiders at that point, but I wouldn't really consider them as such.
Is there any knowledge as to whether Sony made this call, or Valve? If Sony, clearly a sign that they're not gonna change their mind about the PSN requirement, but where will that leave the people in those countries that already own the game.
Could see Valve doing it preemptively as well because why would they allow Sony to sell this game on their platform in countries if they're just gonna take the game away from the people who bought it.
It's almost like I was pointing out the age of the account to infer that dude made another account to agree with himself. The usernames alone are kind of a giveaway.
Your account is 11 hours old, yet you know what everyone here is annoyed with? Sure.
Sure, they like money. Who doesn't? But you have to admit there's a big difference between what Larian gave us for $60 with Baldur's Gate, and shit like $65 mounts in Diablo and $80 melee weapons in CoD and the various other chicanery ActiBlizz and other truly greedy companies have been pulling.
As such, in addition to liking money, I would argue the people at Larian genuinely care about making a good game that people enjoy. Cuz if it was ONLY about the money, they would've made a much different game. I imagine it helps not being a publicly traded company.
The layoffs were after Microsoft bought em.
Dude, London Calling (the Clash album this song is from) sold over 5 million copies. They are in no way obscure.
I've never heard of this type of scam, but out of curiosity, what if I were to take their real looking fake check to one of those many terrible check cashing places? Would it end up being the scammers trying to claw back money from the check cashing place and those 2 groups fighting while I walk away with some cash? Cuz I'd be OK with that.
Nah, fuck that. If she had sick days they are hers to decide how to use em.
Damn I want that Gravity Falls box set, stupid out of print prices!
Yeah, I thought I might be getting whooshed there, but I also thought there might be people that saw the shit they were selling for real money and just assumed it was a free to play game, cuz clearly this sort of monetization has no place in $70 games, but well...here we are.
Uh...it's not free to play it's $70. So ostensibly it can make its money off its upfront $70 entry fee.
While I'm not familiar with all the books on this list they're banning, the ones I am familiar with is enough to convince me they aren't banning them because of "depications of sex". (Not that that's a reason to ban books in the first place.)
The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
Beloved by Toni Morrison
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
The Color Purple by Alice Walker
Sure. You're banning these for "depictions of sex." Right.
The fact that A Court of Mist and Fury by Sarah Maas is on the list but not A Court of Thorns and Roses especially cracks me up. Mist and Fury is the sequel to Thorns and Roses and both do indeed contain depictions of sex. A number of them! But in the one they banned, the protagonist learns that the dude she fell for in the first book had been gaslighting her the entire time and essentially holding her hostage. And then she forms a much healthier relationship with a different guy in the second book, but I guess that's not a good thing for young women to learn about.
Did you just read the quote of what he said or did you actually listen to it? By the way he says it, it's clear he's using it as a name.
I would say the article even printed the quote wrong. They wrote, "Oh look at that Mercedes, that's pretty good."
They dropped a word and in my opinion got the punctuation wrong. I would quote it as, "Oh look at that, wow. Mercedes, that's pretty good."
While it does seem like something he would do, watch the clip, listen to his cadence. He is not comparing her to a car, he is using Mercedes as a name.
Take em off the glass! Take em off the glass!