Sheikah

It's not difficult to grasp what he's saying, rather than actually address the points they're making you are systematically trying to discredit the source based on other reasons. The same way you're trying to do it with Rummy here - what's it matter how often Rummy posts? This is a bad way to debate and very transparent, and not really a clever thing to do.

I'll ask again, do you have any medical background to make the assertion that people under 40 shouldn't be getting the vaccine? Next time I'm prescribed some medication perhaps I should just check with you first rather than read the dosage instructions? Also, you're wrong in your assumptions about me and how I come by information. I have a PhD in Biomedical Science and can understand the limitations of data and databases, and where best to look (hint: not Facebook). The BBC quote was because they had already done the work of explaining why you were wrong and saved me the trouble. If all you can do is criticise the BBC without actually challenging their debunk then that says everything.

Ah, fair enough. BBC fucked up with Jimmy Saville and therefore the opposite of everything they say must be true. Honestly though, what on Earth makes you think you're qualified to state those under 40 shouldn't be getting vaccinated? I'd bet anything you have no medical background whatsoever.

Just wanted to note as well that this very point popped up on BBC's fact check segment today: It just shows that you need to be very critical of any claims and understand how to interpret sources, as well as the limitations of any databases. I honestly think that critical thinking needs to be taught more heavily in schools as people simply see these videos circulating online and take them at face value.

It's painful to read false assertions like this yet not unexpected from someone who said there is no institutional racism in the UK... Your post reads like that of a conspiracy theorist. There are scientists far, far smarter than you that have recommended these age groups be vaccinated based on many reasons, and not just the death count. But I'm sure you know better, right?

As with every year I whip out the air con machine when it gets hot like this, making it all perfectly fine. Even though it only gets used 1 or 2 weeks a year I've had it for about 10 years now so it's really paid for itself. Anything to not be boiling hot!

And it's done! Definitely the hardest plat I've ever earned. Getting the chandelier kills was the last trophy I had to unlock, as well as finishing Frifle's challenges. While hunting 5 dragun I actually had an utterly insane run. On the first floor I found a rainbow chest that had wax wings (flight), an AKEY-47 (a gun which fires keys so you can unlock all chests/doors for free), a gungine (powerful weapon), a bunch of other powerful weapons and health upgrades. I also got cigarettes and ended up using them to boost coolness probably about 70 times, so I was getting a reward after pretty much every room clear. I eventually switched it for an elder blank and was able to blank almost constantly due to the very short cooldown due to my coolness level. To top it off, on the same run I found Clone in a black chest. Basically, this means that whenever you die you respawn on floor 1 with all (you read that right), all of your stuff, including all the extra hearts you accumulated and weapons/money etc. So as I was hunting 5 high dragun, I deliberately killed myself after killing dragun in chamber 5 to have another shot at killing him again but will all my stuff. This was the most overpowered run you can imagine. I made sure to do everything along the way; every hidden floor, the rat boss, etc. By the time I killed the dragun again I had thirteen hearts and about 35 keys (since I wasn't using them), 5 armour and probably in the region of 30 guns. It was taking forever to cycle through my guns to find my AKEY-47 every time!

The entry level costs £350, only 40 quid more than the Switch. Meanwhile Steam games are generally much cheaper than Nintendo games. If they didn't have an entry price model then I might agree with you, but as it stands they clearly want it to sell to a broad range of gamers. They've no doubt looked at PS5s and Series X consoles flying off the shelves and see no problem with the pricing in terms of appeal. What I doubt though is that this system will do as well as they might want it to. Also comparing it to VR is not right, VR is much more niche in terms of appeal and always has been, but handheld gaming has always been massive in terms of broad appeal.

But why? They're no doubt looking at the Switch and thinking they can do better to produce what is more or less a Switch Pro but for PC games.

I expect they'll want it to sell pretty well, otherwise there's not much point of them making it. It's clear that they were going for a form similar to a Switch so comparisons with it are fair.

And it weighs 669 grams! 70% heavier than the Switch. I don't know, I just can't quite see this having anywhere near the uptake of the Switch. It doesn't have exclusive games and I get the impression that people generally prefer to play full fat AAA games on their PC monitor or TV using their main system. And it's really expensive.

Because Mass Effect 2 is so good. That's basically why - no disrespect to Mass Effect 3. Mass Effect 3 also had a disappointing ending, whereas the ending to Mass Effect 2 is routinely cited as one of the best missions ever in a game.

But what tension is that? In the original you always have the Ocarina in your pocket which will save your game and reset the cycle. There is no danger that you will run out of time and lose everything you did since the start of Day 1 since you always have the means to reset/save on you. The real tension is in running out of time to do the things you want to do, like if you're partway through a dungeon and feel you won't complete it in time and will lose your progress. That same tension still exists with auto save, with no changes! In fact the most tension ever in this game was playing with the original save system on the Gamecube disc port of the game which regularly locked up, meaning you could lose hours of play. Again, auto save solves this problem!

But permanent saves themselves are not the problem. The problem you noted above was save scumming - the act of loading up prior saves to undo a negative consequence or replay a segment with the foresight you learned. That is no different to how entering cheats is an action you have to willingly perform. I don't follow your point about the Kafei quest, how does this play out any differently with autosaves in effect, if you don't save scum (actively choose to cheat)? How is not save scumming any different from not entering cheats? It feels like your argument is the same one that elitists present as a reason why there shouldn't be easy modes in certain games to broaden accessibility, even though such a mode could be entirely ignored by said people if they choose. I don't really understand the fixation on how other people want to play their own single player games?

But you just said to Glen-i that you were ok with the owl statues but not auto save because of the potential for save scumming. Save scumming though is something people have to actively do to cheat, just like entering cheats onto a sandcastle floor, so why do you only approve of cheats? If not save scumming then there is no disadvantage to auto save whatsoever, it is purely a QoL improvement.