First of all, just because a game gets made doesn’t mean its a viable game.

League of Legends and TF 2 are free to play, Call of Duty has a single player campaign and so have the last few Battlefield games. Yeah, those games sell well and they perform significantly better than those multiplayer only 60 dollars games with season passes like Evolve, Titanfall or Rainbow Six Siege.

Eh, in cases like Civ I don’t really need a story driven scripted campaign. Its only in shooters that I would like that to be the case.

And that species can die out just as quickly. Maintaining a colonial empire is difficult, the biggest empire on earth only lasted a couple of centuries before collapsing. I imagine an interstellar empire has it even more difficult.

Why? The only reason people assume that is because of the idea that an advanced civilization somehow wants to use the energy of a star to such an extend that they would build huge installations around it to capture that energy. I think that is flawed assumption at best.

If success is a sign of salvation, then failure is a sign that you’re not one of the chosen. Hence Calvinists would have to accept that while a few of them might have success, the majority, despite their best efforts, will be unable to pull themselves up because they aren’t part of the chosen few. Which kinda seems…

Strange that Calvinism would teach you that, given that Calvinist doctrine regarding salvation and sin are essentially fatalistic. Salvation is predetermined, so no matter what you do, you are either already saved or doomed for eternity, and sin is part of the human condition, it is impossible for people to not be…

Hardly. Religion is not the reason why the US doesn’t have standardized maternity leave for every women, its not the reason why healthcare for poor people and immigrants sucks, its not why there is still so much violence against women nor is it the reason why women are so underrepresented in the government. Religion…

Having a passionate community voting for a game is not having ‘an unfair advantage’. Thats exactly what a popularity contest is about. You are whining because the game you like a bit more just doesn’t have the same amount of passion behind it like it did 10 years ago. Well, 10 years ago it did and back then it…

Not sure but I think the Adeptus Custodes walking around almost naked is a relatively new addition to the 40k fluff. At least in the older editions of the rule book pictures always showed them in their traditional armor.

How is Civ V a game that most people play only for the multiplayer? Am I missing something there?

Yeah but most people are ok with animal testing exactly because they are animals and not humans. And with animal testing there are strict protocols for when and how it should be done. Cutting people up just for ‘science’ would never be acceptable.

If I take the average amount of time I spend on an average CoD game I come in at around 70-80 hours, of which about 5-10 hours were in MP, the rest comes from replaying the sp campaign multiple times. And thats CoD, which is one of the few games I do occasionally play online. The amount of time I spend online with…

Well thats your opinion. I can safely say that I spend more time in the sp campaigns of games than in the multiplayer. Usually the multi player of a game bores me after 5-10 hours. In cases like CoD thats because I’m not the best player and I don’t spend hours upon hours every day grinding my way through the…

Yeah, remembering those episodes I always find it refreshing when an anime sets up a villain trying to talk about how awesome he is as a villain only to get punched in the face by the hero who doesn’t have time for that shit.

I never said Feminism was a club but the way you defined feminism sure does make it sound like you are talking about some club with exclusive membership.

Why the fuck would you even agree to a private meeting with this man?

It seems odd that a movement with the express aim of creating a society where men and women are equal would deny membership to 50% of humanity on the basis of their gender.

I think that would be sort of like overcompensating. Yeah he totally did some very shitty racists things, and certainly we should pay a lot more attention to that when we are talking about the presidency of Wilson. But at the same time, does that mean we should completely ignore the fact that he also did some good? It…

True, but thats why I think its a good thing that people are bringing up Wilson’s racist side.