This isn’t right either. Inserting politics into anything serves that that up for discourse, and getting people discussing and thinking critically about a topic is a fantastic achievement for any medium that delves into the subject.

It’s when partisan messages about politics are inserted into a game that poses problems. Instead, video games should explore as many takes on an issue as capable in service to the story being told. Wow, it’s terrible that the horned people are aholes to the perfectly normal looking people, but how did that come to be? Is there any historical precedent where the shoe was on the other foot? I think of Jews and how 70 years ago they were facing extermination at the hands of Germans find themselves now in the position of the exterminator. How did that happen? That’s great material for exploring politics in games, to me.

Games have a large male audience and many of those males are white. When new games focus on protagonists and issues that do not resonate with white males, this aggravates the audience and it only takes a few vocal few to whip the group into toxic online behavior.

Metaphor is set in a fantasy world populated by Japanese. The characters may seem to be of a multiracial society, but it’s understood that this is not a western game but an eastern one through a western lens. It could have the most radical political discourse but as players we quietly accept that this is a foreign story and not one that reflects on western issues and prejudices.

If it’s worth playing, reward them by purchasing not pirating.

I think this person means non partisan, because Metal Gear Solid is filled with political intrigue.

Back then I felt like I’d played everything. Fun to learn about games that passed me by.

It’s also a way to pay for providing a service. We hate it, but short of everyone paying for YouTube, it’s how they make their money.

Now double dipping is where things get questionable. If you pay for a video service AND they run ads. /Ripley flaming eggsacs

I can understand that.

Will this change help your situation?

Perhaps, but my concern is investing time and energy helping customers learn a system and that system becoming financially unsustainable. I welcome change, but my customers don’t. Hearing that it’s only for new customers is a relief.

The company says Office 365 suites with Teams will no longer be sold to new business subscribers, but will continue to be available for existing customers that opt to continue using the bundled products, even upon renewal.

So if your company already has 365 that includes teams, as long as it renews 365 there’s no additional/separate cost for Teams?

Yup. That’s actually a problem when people dog pile on someone with a valid point.

Finishing doesn’t matter. I’ll play something for maybe a few hours and drive on. It fills fulfilling to me. Better than never playing it. 👍

I started playing each game in my library for about 10 min and then moving on. Some games catch me playing longer but otherwise I check them off as played. With recent Steam sales I’d buy 5-6 games, immediately install them all, and play each right away. Feels good man.

I’ve been playing since launch. I played a lot last night. I do not see the problems. I play on hard difficulty. I have a good time whether winning or losing.

There are players that take the game far more seriously than I and honestly they make the game more tense than it needs to be. They make it feel competitive, in that if I’m not doing what they think a “good” player should then I’m unwelcome.

I think the vast majority of complaints stem from these players. I lament that another Call of Duty is not coming out sooner so that the community can diminish into relative obscurity, hopefully populated with like minds that view this as a game and not an e-Sport.

I love the flame thrower.

The design behind the actual Teams portion is so backwards. Take private chat conversation flow, put that into Team channels, make threads the exception not the norm.

Fine. Shut them down.

Why curse or get angry? The author got it wrong. You pointed it out. 👍 You also raised my blood pressure a smidge.

Just use imagination. An AI is programmed for battle and is ordered to hold fire. It shoots instead.

Until there’s legal precedent for prosecution or laws clarified that AI cannot be trained on copyrighted material without the express permission of the author, it needs to be named and shamed. Otherwise it’s piracy on a breathtaking scale being turned into profit for Open AI with most people not knowing what the problem/big deal is.