Itty53

"Warnings about explicit content work" is a new take to me. The history of such direct warnings tells us otherwise. At one point there were bands dropping F-bombs on albums just to get that sticker. Because it increased their sales and visibility.

The Streisand Effect is real, in big ways and also in these small ones. I'm not saying don't try, but I'm telling you it won't ever work the way you think it will.

What's interesting is that the MPAA Rating system itself was a compromise from the industry with the government to avoid the government stepping in to control content. That's where it started. Seems eerily similar no? It's not coincidence. But that's just another example of the point I'm making too: originally they rated porn movies "X" and agreed these wouldn't be in the industry- controlled theaters. Porn movie producers took it as a badge and began labeling their movies "XXX" and leaned into it so hard, the MPAA had to change the distinction to something more innocuous, "NC-17." But the cats out of the bag, even today every 11 year old kid knows what XXX means. The warning became a siren call.

Warnings are just the Streisand Effect, so don't expect much of them.

They are absolutely no where close to a virtual monopoly. Anyone can upload and stream content online, and probably millions of websites allow it now, without exaggeration. What they have is a prefab audience. There are no considerations needed for free speech whatsoever.

If you want to influence their moderation habits, you need to be their customer or better yet, their shareholder. As just another leeching user, your voice means nothing to them and frankly that isn't problematic. 10,000 leeches won't influence them the same as one paying customer. I can guarantee that. And again, if you're just a leech then it really is no wonder why they wouldn't listen as a for-profit business.

There are troubling bits about lots of platforms and media outlets and companies, but that's not an excuse to twist up legal terminologies like monopoly or free speech in order to make weak criticisms. Doing so weakens the framework of law more than it does influence YouTube at all. Because that framework of law is only as valid as we use it. Countless examples of that problem abound - virtually the entirety of the Trump presidency is an example of why misuse of the law in common discussions among people is actually very dangerous. That's been a sticking point for me for a long time, and it's more important as years go by. So I'm gonna call it out, especially when it's happening on "my" team.

If you're gonna make accusations where we actually have legal recourse (like monopolies) then you need to understand them. There is no where close to a real monopoly in YouTube.

But it's silly crap like that that matters to advertisers. NSFW actually is the word "fuck", "asshole", etc. You might be able to say that at work, not everyone can without repercussion.

And that's not a stretch at all, it's why network television won't let you say either of those words either. Not next to their Ford and Samsung advertisements.

The entire premise of NSFW is silly to me. Like no one has an obligation to make sure YOU are safely browsing at work. Get back to work.

Still not free speech at all. You're pointing out the difference between being able to speak freely and being provided an audience. There are no nations in history or philosophers in humanity which supposed the existence of a human right to provide an audience to everyone.

But again, YouTube isn't a free speech platform. The public sidewalk is, YouTube isn't. They have no obligation to provide you anything at all.

Alcohol solvent can make this worse depending on the adhesive. It can just spread the stuff and thin it out. Someone else suggested oil, that's the ticket. Bit of olive oil on a rough cloth brings it right up. Wd40 was also suggested, same idea. You want it to move easily, not dissolve.

I can speak to exactly the issue you're having, you've got a family hanging out, you don't want to be all cooped in the office.

Get a steam deck dude. Do it. I work from home, my wife does too. We have an 8 year old. Not only do I get more gaming time in with my deck than I ever could previously, they're both happier about it. I can suspend power and do whatever, etc, it isn't an anchor at a desk.

And it can play the games. Keep in mind that steam themselves is very picky about their "this is great on the deck" blessing. There's a ton of games they only say will run, and even more they say won't run at all, that operate perfectly fine. More every month too, as Proton continues development.

You can also load all your GoG and Epic games easily, heroic launcher.

Seriously, get one. The mid or basic version is fine, sd cards are fine.

Right but more than OP are reading for ideas. If a random user thinks they need a hotas, they don't.

I'm gonna chime in and say you don't need a HOTAS setup, I played quite well on just a steam controller, and that translated exactly into the steam deck.

"Don't wrestle with pigs. You just end up covered in shit and the pig enjoys it."

Not every open world game needs to be infinite, right? There was no base building mechanic... but why would it need one? There was one in Fallout 4, but it was pretty much entirely ignorable and only offered annoyance. A subset of people wanted to play the sims. There was no base building in GTA games either. Most open worlds don't have such a mechanic.

What I found it has is replay value. You can play that game multiple ways and it is markedly different. Same thing with Witcher 3, there's no infinite game mechanic. You start over and try different things. People loved that game and frankly CP2077 followed exactly the same framework, just "with guns". Why is it a problem with CP2077? Couldn't possibly be because there's a prominent trans character, or a pretty girl who won't sleep with your male character ...

I think the near clone that Cp2077 is of Witcher 3 really drives home the point. People didn't have a problem with the game, but certain groups have made it cool to nitpick one and not the other.

I named two outstanding open world games recognized as being in the top 5 games of all time that utilize the exact same plot mechanic, either the criticism applies to them (and you aren't) or its invalid criticism.

You bring up immersion... rdr2 is considered the most immersive game ever. Rightly so. You still have imperatives you can ignore.

I think there's definitely some room for interpretation here, some games suffer from basically being brigaded, and this OP actually points that out. Some games are cool to hate. CP2077 was one of those. Skyrim wasn't. People forgave it for a lot because it wasn't cool to hate.

Look at Horizon Zero Dawn. Same story. That game has incredible game play, some of the most creative and new ways to do it. But certain people - ahem - brigaded reviews and made it cool to hate. Which sucks because that game has an amazingly unique combat system. Really nailed an action based trapping and hunting instead of just overwhelming force or stealth.

Conversely people adored MGS5 and to be completely honest it was generic at best. Go figure it featured a hot naked woman with jiggle physics who couldn't speak and would die if she put clothes on.