plaintomato

@Alexandru said:

@Freshbandito said:

Each person is so incredibly different

They are not that different. There are a handful of personality types. There are variations on each, but not enough.

Says the guy who has never actually gotten to know anybody. Of course nobody is unique but you. But I gots news for you - you are happy. You like being an ignorant hate filled drama queen playing at being a sociopath. You like thinking being 'deviant' makes you unique so you try harder to be more devianter. Maybe you haven't noticed, but being a 'deviant' is pretty common these days. You wouldn't try so hard at not caring about other people and what they think if you didn't care so much about what they think. If you are sick in the head it is ignorance, not sociopathy, if you break it down you're basically a bigot you know; maybe you hate everyone equally but it's the same brand of stupid.

Suck it up bro. You were an ugly dork in high school, you got picked on, you hated everyone for it, and now that's how you define yourself. Do yourself a favor realize that children (and adults with the intelligence of a child) are cruel because they are ignorant; you hated that experience but now you've defined yourself by it, and you imitate that very same ignorance just like a child molester that grows up to be a child molester. You've allowed the very ignorance you despise to dictate how you live your life. You are still mentally in high school just as much as the forty year old jock who still thinks it's cool to make fun of nerds.

You pretend you are a deviant because it makes you feel special, but it just makes you common. You're so common that there is a song about you. Take the blinders off and get over yourself. Or not, after all the title of your post essentially states that you are satisfied, aka happy, so why change happiness?

Check today's Penny Arcade Report. All your question are answered! Wonder no more! Embargo serves purposes!

The gabe post on PA makes it sound awesome:

"Zombie U

This game is hard as fuck and I’m not sure if I like it yet. The idea is to push through this survival horror game as far as you can. When you die (and you will die) the game doesn’t end. You just wake up in the “safe” house as a different survivor. If you want all your gear back you need to go out and find the zombie version of the character you were just playing, kill them and loot their corpse. My first survivor died almost immediately. My second one lived for about thirty minutes. Long enough to make a run to a nearby grocery store, pick up some food, ammo and hammer. Then she bit it (or got bitten I guess) and I started a new guy. Now I needed all that shit I had scavenged so I had to hunt down my previous self. When I found her she had a red number above her head that showed her score and how long she had survived. I put two bullets in her head and got my candy bars back.

In the space of a couple hours last night I burned through five survivors. I will not lie to you, I was cursing at the TV by the end of the night. Like I said, this game is hard as fuck."

But everything else I read makes it sound shallow and like they relied on poor controls to create tension. Bummer.

Dude. I want Condemned 3 already.

@laserbolts said:

The whole Deb and Dexter thing was so awkward. I wish she didn't do that.

dang though she's an incredibly talented actress. here carpenter, you take this complex emotional breakdown scene and make it believable; hall you lucky sociopath, just sit there looking blank and collect the best actor noms okay?

@Grimmrobe said:

@plaintomato: Lol, what? I didn't say he voted against it, I said he was against it in general. And I think it's ironic that you call me naive and "common" when you think a man who is a "voice of reason" doesn't believe that global warming is a threat to humanity when there's clearly enough evidence to prove it exists. Are there issues where him and I have common ground? Yes, but very few. He is not a horrible politician, but, again, would hardly can him a voice of reason.

And by the way, if you want to be taken seriously in any debate, resorting to name-calling won't really help you.

Yeah...going from zero to rabid in one post probably isn't the best way to be taken seriously. Anyway, I disagree with Paul on many issues, but find him to be, policy position for policy position, much higher ranked in the realm of reason than anyone else I can think of with the political success he's seen...if you call getting and staying elected while maintaining a shred of integrity political success anyway.

Test Drive Unlimited 1 & 2 - but really I'm just always bummed if I think what they could have been with AAA budgets.

What qualifies here anyway? Anything without a monster budget? Atari published these, I'm pretty sure anything Atari would qualify.

@Grimmrobe said:

This is the same man who was against the Civil Rights Act of '64 as well as being opposed to affirmative action. I wouldn't consider him a reasonable person.

Wow your comment is naive for so many reasons. Ignoring the fact that he got into politics in the '70s, which you might notice is kind of after 1964 - if you have a clue as to why he criticized it in 2011 you wouldn't sound so uninformed. I'm not saying I agree with him on that one, or on many other issues, but his position was intelligent, well reasoned and the polar opposite of the kind of racism your simplified statement might suggest to other simple minds. That doesn't always equate to being "right", but a principled politician with higher goals than personal power is a rare thing, while a voter who is easily swayed by a skewed and narrow selection of social issues and political spin is a common thing. Congrats on being common.

@TekZero said:

Vagina Souls.

Made me laugh. 'Cause, you know, humanity. Every undead's fantasy? Twin Humanities.

@BeachThunder said:

Curiosity with 'permadeath' - any time someone chisels out a penis, the entire cube resets.

For the win.