|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Another thing: I sincerely do not believe banning politics will have the effect people hope. What draws people to participate deeply in a community is that they feel welcome as they are in that community. That they can gather around all sorts of topics that are important to them in that group. See Deep 6 FaWTL for an example. For better or worse, the current world situation makes all our lives political, and finding people you like to discuss them with is a huge plus. My guess is, overall posting will merely go down. I may be wrong.
I find it a very sad thing that politics will now not be discussed on these boards. I can understand the problems with having those discussions, but let's be honest, compared to the rules questions sections, they were a balmy breeze. Still, it is difficult to go through the discussions in my head without seeing precisely the echo chamber described above. Go American-style leftist, or go home, to put it frankly. As a Swede, it is a daunting prospect to learn all the words that nobody is supposed to say. As an old school liberal, I consider it better to know that someone despises you because they tell you, than not to know because those particular words are forbidden. With all due respect to those theories of language-shaping-thoughts and all that, those people aren't going to stop thinking what they think because they get called racists. It doesn't work like that. What works is giving them an alternative, something better to believe in, listening to their concerns, respectfully showing them your position, and, critically, letting them save face when they do try to change.
I am not saying sequels are always bad. Absolutely not. What I am saying is that an industry that focuses only on selling repeat performances and guarding that is unhealthy. Sure, one or two new games make it into the mix, but the huge money gets dumped into sequels. The worst part is that this further solidifies the genre stranglehold we know so well, shutting down possibilities of creative games. There is more, of course, like the "give is over 90% or kiss any review copies in the future goodbye" school of games journalism that gave 100% to the latest round of Sim City, and the despicable maneuverings that gave us Aliens: Colonial Marines.
I do try to keep an open mind, but it's difficult.
I started playing in another era. Single-person projects could be smash hits. Graphics were primitive, so gameplay had to compensate. Most of it was still drek, of course, but some was excellent. And now games cost a hundred million dollars and require a thousand people in three or more companies to make. Which means sequels and remakes are what the companies go for. Which means the brand, not the game, is paramount. Which means we pay top dollars for the marketing, not the game.
It is deeply unhealthy. And E3 is the yearly showcase of exactly what is wrong with the computer game industry.
What would impress me is seeing something more and different from games that were originally released in the 90s. Meh. I have been playing computer games for too long to be impressed often, but E3 does tend toward the extremely predictable. Hopefully a few of those games are really good.
For nostalgia reasons, I would love to see BG&E2, I just don't believe it will a) come out, and b) be well done if it does. Some things are difficult to match.
You said it yourself: The politicians decided your example bill wouldn't pass. A spectacular example of regulation, not capitalism, in action.
Capitalism has faults. Blame it for those.
The core idea of capitalism is that companies that do things you like get more of your business. People seriously need to understand that. Take responsibility for what you buy. And before anyone says it, not everyone is without options. When the Muhammed pictures hit, people in the arab world boycotted Danish butter very effectively. It cost the Danish export sector billions. So... find out who is owned by who. Learn who runs not a perfect company, but a decent one. Stop whining about bad company policy and keep eating those companies' foods. You can't change it yourself... but it has never been so easy to organize things. This, more than anything out of the socialist 70s, will make people take notice.
Orfamay: If what you say is true, the solution is simple enough: Everyone who wants a well-paid, skilled, stable job without a degree needs to start their own company/hire themselves out as a consultant/etc. The reason they do not is that generally speaking, they are unwilling to take the risks inherent in that sort of work. Though, I have to say, presenting it as well-paid, skilled, stable work is strange. It is harsh work, with huge overtime, for several years, before you even begin to see the situation you describe.
thejeff: Complete agreement. Old solutions do not answer today's problems. And the reason they aren't is that people see the system, analyze it, and adapt.
Okay... Well-paid, skilled, stable work that doesn't require a degree is not exactly available anywhere in the West as it is. For that matter, neither is well-paid, skilled, stable work that DOES require a degree. And why is that? I would say that things are moving far faster these days. Now the jobs change, the economy changes, the skills needed change, and everyone is replaceable. Still, a degree is still a powerful argument to get a job, if it's a tough one to get. Ask yourself, if you were a CEO, would you offer well-paid, skilled, stable jobs to people without degrees?
Globalization is not a good process to everyone, that is true. But now, the UK stands to see exactly how much fun it is not to be a part of it. London will likely survive as a financial center by some means. If not, that is a further 10-20 million people to share the jobs stacking shelves at Poundworld. Those who do not want to be part of that will leave... just as large portions of the UK has already done to find jobs in London.
Well... the UK has been there before. Before Thatcher, there was something lovely called the stagflation. No jobs and high inflation. Then the coal mines were shut down, the heavy industry was sent packing, replaced by high-tech and service jobs, but not populated by the coal mine workers. And the economy recovered.
Were the old industry jobs somehow "better" than those that replaced them? What would have happened to the economy if the UK had kept subsidizing the old industry jobs?
And now, there is mr Corbyn, who wants the old days back. Seems like a familiar pattern to me.
Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.