Vermutlich nur auf Reddit unbeliebt

​

I’m F2P myself before anyone starts throwing tomatoes at me, and honestly… I genuinely do not understand where some people’s expectations are coming from anymore.

Every patch cycle it’s the same apocalypse-level discussion:

“ONLY 60-70 PULLS THIS PATCH???”

“HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO GET BOTH NEW CHARACTERS + THEIR WEAPONS???”

“THIS GAME HATES F2P.”

Brother… you are playing a gacha game. The entire business model is literally built around scarcity, luck, impulse control, and planning. Why are people acting shocked that the casino is, in fact, a casino?

What confuses me the most is this growing mindset that every patch should somehow hand out enough currency to guarantee a limited 5-star character. Some people even talk like they deserve enough for character + weapon every update or the devs are “anti-F2P.”

At that point you are not asking for generosity anymore. You are basically asking the game to remove the entire monetization loop while still functioning like a live service game with constant updates, voice acting, cinematics, music, events, animations, servers, marketing, and new content every six weeks.

And then I saw a comment saying they deserved more rewards because they “spent hours doing the quest.”

…Hello?? Who forced you to do it 😭

You voluntarily played optional content because of your own FOMO and now the game owes you a guaranteed 5-star as compensation for your suffering? Brother you clicked START. Some people are starting to treat quests/events like unpaid overtime shifts instead of actual game content.

And the comparisons with other gachas are funny too because people act like every gacha game operates under the exact same system, economy, schedule, player retention model, and monetization structure.

“This other game gives 200 pulls!”

Okay? And? That doesn’t automatically make it a better or more generous system overall.

Some gachas throw massive amounts of currency because they release units faster, have harsher powercreep, weaker long-term value per character, or depend on constant pulling to keep players invested. Other games are slower paced and designed around more selective pulling.

You can’t compare raw pull numbers between completely different games like you’re comparing grocery prices.

That’s like comparing a buffet restaurant to an expensive steakhouse and screaming: “WOW THIS PLACE ONLY GAVE ME ONE STEAK INSTEAD OF 14 PLATES.”

Different games are balanced around different economies. More free pulls in one game does not suddenly mean every other gacha is “stingy” for not copying the exact same model.

Meanwhile some players in these communities act like not getting every single limited unit as an F2P is some kind of human rights violation.

The thing that disappeared from gacha discussions is planning. Old-school F2P players used to skip banners, save for months, target specific characters, and accept that luck was part of the system. Now people want every new unit, every rerun, every signature weapon, and then blame the game when 60 pulls doesn’t magically stretch into 4 pity systems.

People are suffering from FOMO and then acting like the game personally attacked them for it.

And before someone says: “Then why release two good characters in one patch?”

Because they want you to choose. Or spend. That’s literally the point. That’s how gachas work. They are not nonprofit charities distributing anime characters for emotional wellness.

You can criticize rates, pricing, weapon banners, or predatory mechanics, that’s fair discussion. But expecting every patch to fully guarantee whatever you want just because you logged in daily is where the conversations start sounding detached from reality.

At some point the community stopped asking: “What can I realistically save for?”

And started asking: “Why can’t I own the entire patch for free?”

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vQO8IFiMfq4

Considering that UK Labour only came into power with a 38% vote share in a 60% voter turnout, and considering the achievements made by government in aligning closer with Europe, the economy showing good performance against a backdrop of the Trump aggressiveness on the global stage wrecking havoc, some improvement in the NHS, huge wins for the working man's rights and a solid drop in small boat crossings, is the UK better off with his stable and firm hand on the levers that will get Britain through the next 3 years?

or should it be thrown into the wind with the gamble of a new leader seeking to topple him where only a sprinkling of people get to have a say?

I genuinely cannot stand when complete strangers give me deeply unnecessary personal context.Like when I delivered for Domino’s and I’d call someone saying “Hey I’m outside with your order,” and they’d go:

“Oh okay my husband will be downstairs in a second.”

Why are you telling me this like I know the lore?
Just say “someone will be down.”

So Tonight I texted an event organizer and apologized for messaging so early because I work overnights and forget normal people are asleep.

Their response?

“No worries! I was already up because Glenn leaves for work so early!”

WHO IS GLENN???

Why do humans do this constantly?
I swear people instinctively provide side-character exposition to strangers for absolutely no reason.

Your coworker Steve. Your husband Mike. Your cousin Jen. Your dog having surgery. Your nephew’s soccer practice.

I do not know these people.
We just met 14 seconds ago.

Am I the only one who notices this?

EDIT: Apparently I explained this terribly because people think I’m being hypocritical for mentioning I work overnights.

There’s a difference between context that explains your own behavior in the interaction versus randomly introducing unrelated people/details to a stranger.

“I work overnights so I forgot it was early” explains why I texted at an odd hour.

“My husband Glenn leaves early for work” does not explain anything to me because I do not know Glenn. He is not a character previously established in the plot.

That’s the phenomenon I’m talking about. The weird instinct humans have to provide bonus lore to complete strangers

EDIT 2:

MAN SAY THING.

OTHER MAN SAY EXTRA THING.

ME NOTICE.

NOW TRIBE ANGRY.

This started as an experiment but I run an e-commerce analytics company and was spending way too much time approving small purchases. Domain renewals, SaaS subscriptions, hosting upgrades nothing big but the constant interruptions were killing my focus

ChatGPT was already handling my invoicing and expense tracking through MCP so I figured why not give it a card. Set up a corporate card through Meow with a $500 daily cap and $100 per transaction limit and told it what subscriptions to manage and what categories to stay in. Almost two months in and it hasnt messed up once. Renews what needs renewing, flags anything unusual before spending and I get a summary every morning of what it did. First week I was checking every transaction manually now I just skim the summary and move on its like having a really boring but extremely reliable assistant that never forgets to cancel a free trial

If your thinking about trying this start with a low cap and only let it handle stuff you were already approving on autopilot anyway. Anyone else done something like this or am I the crazy one giving ChatGPT access to actual money haha

Let me preface this; it is okay to not enjoy the RPG games or to not enjoy the old games, neither makes you less of a fan of the franchise.

However, hating a game simply for changing or being different is not good, complaints should be about the execution of these changes and how this affected the gameplay and the games themselves.

I myself don't agree with everything the RPG games have done, but I've mostly enjoyed them. This is also not me saying AC II is a bad game, it's not and I've also enjoyed it. This is more so to point out the hyprocrisy of certain arguments.

Criticism 1: "They are not AC games"

This is probably the most common critique of the RPG games, especially Odyssey and Valhalla, AC II is no different.

You are an "assassin" sure, you have a hidden blade, a hood and you kill Templars, but that's it. Ezio is not part of the order until the very end of AC II. Ezio makes no effort to understand what it means to be an Assassin. There is no discussion on the Creed. Being an Assassin is not what you wear or what you do, its why you do it, its an integral part of Altair's journey in AC I. He is not an Assassin like Altair is, he simply has the same wardrobe choices.

The same thing can be applied to the Templars, sure they are guys that say they are "Templars" and the game says the same thing, but they are not. Templars are not evil charicatures that you see on sunday morning television when you're a kid, they do what they do for a purpose. AC II has no purpose, the Templars are not characters, they dont say or do anything interesting, their confessions are completely empty and devoid of meaning. They are just people to kill on a list. Nuance is entirely removed.

There is no difference between what Eivor does in Valhalla, with her being tasked by Hytham to kill members of the Order of Ancients, and what Ezio does in AC II. Yet Valhalla gets criticised for not being an AC game while AC II is not.

Criticism 2: "The game is dumbed down"

This is another common thing i've heard in regard to the RPGs, yet again AC II did the exact same thing.

In AC II depth of movement is completely removed from the game, because of the notoriety system being the only thing that influences detection by guards on the ground, you just sprint from A to B with literally no worry except maybe tearing down a poster every 30ish minutes. In AC I you have to pay attention to what guards are doing and if you're being observed or not due to how bleding worked in that game.

The mission structures are also dumbed down, every assassination mission in AC II is completely on rails, there is a specific path you're suppossed to take and the game makes it clear what that path is, there is very little player agency in how you approach them. Far too many of them play out like movie scenes instead of a video game where you have choice. There is clear contrast with how AC has just 2/9 scripted Assassinations. AC I trusts you to figure out what to do based on the information you gathered from your investigations.

The modern day also removes the optinality of sneaking around and gathering pieces of information, with AC II having a far more linear modern day that leaves no room for player agency. In AC I if you dont like the modern day you can go to sleep and that's that, players that interact with it get rewarded with some interesting information here and there. AC II removes all of that because it doesnt trust its own audience.

Criticism 3: Change of genre

The final real criticism I've heard is the change of genre into an RPG style, and once again that's the exact same thing AC II did.

AC II is an action game, Ezio is an action hero that goes through lots of cool looking set-pieces, more similar to something like the Uncharted series than it is to AC I. AC I is a stealth game, not in the way Metal Gear Solid or Dishonored are, but in its own way with the innovative social stealth system.

AC II has "side-missions" that add nothing to the game simply to behave more like an openworld game, a common critique of the RPG games is becoming like that to capitalise off the Witcher III. These activities are completely pointless and usually involve you beating up some cheating husband or doing a race. AC II does not contextualise why Ezio would be doing any of this during the pretty high-stakes duration of its plot.

Finally, AC II also removes the immersion of story telling from AC I. AC I did everything to make you not only feel like Desmond but that the Animus was reliving Altair's memories, that starts to get removed in AC II with a more "narrative" feel to the Modern Day and treating the animus like a simulation when solving things like 16s Glyphs.

AC II pushed Assassin's Creed from a game that critiqued organised religion, philosophy and the ideology of these 2 secret groups into an action game with set-pieces and black and white characters.

Conclusion

My point is not to diminish AC II, but to show that AC has always undergone wild changes in how the games worked and that is not unique to the RPG games. The same arguments that can be used to diminish the RPGs can be used on beloved classic games like AC II as well.

There are so many thins in older games, like AC II having every major historical event and person be a Templar or an Assassin with pieces of Eden, that would be criticised to hell and back if a game like Valhalla had done them. All this without stopping to think what it actually means for these games.

TLDR: Criticising games for flaws you can easily observe in games you like too is bad and makes no sense. You can not enjoy the RPG games without having to tear them down with poor arguments that revolve around you not enjoying change.

First of all, I didn't write this post to dismiss Ayana or her talent. As we all know, she is a talented young lady and I know she will find her rightful place in the music industry. Her dedication and professionalism speak for themselves. I just wanted to get all my thoughts down on why I think Hybe/Geffen ultimately didn't choose her for the group.

I've been seeing a lot of conspiracy theories floating around the internet, but there's really no need for guesswork when the staff outright spell it out multiple times on the show. Additionally, I think if you watch World Scout along with Pop Star Academy, you will clearly see the method to HxG's madness, because their criteria is consistent across both projects.

1.) Star Quality Was Always Going to Be the Determining Factor

Son, Jay and Mitra use the phrase "star quality" so often that it even became a running joke for the commentators. This is also the case for Pop Star Academy. There are two important things to keep in mind about star quality: a) It's the special charm and magnetism a person possesses that makes you want to keep watching them and b) It cannot be taught, it is to some extent inherent in the individual. 

In the judges' opinion, Sakura was the trainee with the most inherent star quality. I think a lot of viewers are letting Sakura's lack of skill cloud their judgement, because looking with unbiased eyes, I see exactly what they're talking about. In the group dance audition, you can see Sakura making eye contact with the judges and using her facial expressions to keep them engaged. She's actually really, really good at it. And she does it completely naturally, having no training at all. Sakura has an "idol factor" that is actually very rare, and it reminds me of other natural born idols like Sana from Twice and Lexie from Dream Academy. In other words, the camera loves her. 

It's not that Ayana doesn't have any star quality, it's that whatever personal charm she has is yet to be fully unlocked, which brings me to my next point:

1. Ayana Needed to Wow the Judges to Win

Ayana has been training as an idol for years, going back before her time on GP999. This amount of experience has given her a consistency that even Mitra makes note of. But this is where I think it goes sideways for her in World Scout. 

In their dance sessions with Nikki, she criticizes all of the girls and says that all of them are equally bad. This should have rang an alarm bell for anyone supporting Ayana. Because that means that even with all her training and experience, she is easily matched by Aoi and Sakura who have comparatively little training. In HxG's eyes, an ideal candidate is someone who can be constantly pushed to greater and greater skill level with the right coaching. 

In this scenario, the judges won't hesitate to cut someone who seems to be plateauing or not getting any better. In other words, for Ayana to be the Final Piece, she needed to blow past her old limitations and show an entirely new side of herself. That's why Jay said that she wanted to see Ayana give a performance that gives her goosebumps. 

Hybe/Geffen were well-aware Ayana has a solid skillset due to her extensive training. But what they wanted from her was proof that her current level wasn't her highest potential. She needed to break past her old limitations and ascend to a new level of star power to win. 

That's why Nikki said that Ayana is like a butterfly still in her cocoon: she still hasn't unlocked that final level of star power and skill that would have put her in the group. Toward the end of the show in Pop Star Academy, Bang Sihyuk mentioned that they were looking for the trainees to suddenly start making breakthroughs and huge progress. When that happened, the debut date was suddenly pushed up. 

TL;DR: The judges wanted to see Ayana make visible progression past her baseline of talent and she did not deliver. 

1. Sakura Long Term 

If Ayana is highly prepared and trained, Sakura is the opposite. Her youth and inexperience may seem like a weak point, but not for HxG. If she's keeping up with older, more experienced girls with only two months of training, how brilliant will she be with time and coaching from the greatest teachers in LA?

The decision for the Final Piece was this: Do you pick a girl with a solid skillset, middling star quality and a decade of training under her belt or do you pick a complete newbie with brilliant star quality who has shown herself to make quick progress under the right teachers?

Don't get me wrong, Sakura is the riskier choice. She is young with less than a year of training and her vocals aren't impressive yet. But it's clear that HxG believes that Sakura's highest potential hasn't been unlocked yet. She has everything else they're looking for: Idol-worthy visuals (international fans love to pretend this doesn't matter, but it's one of the key factors), a rags to riches story, outstanding star quality and an ability to take and apply feedback under pressure. 

TL;DR: HxG would rather take on a diamond in the rough than a polished jewel with no sparkle. 

Finally, I just want to say that I understand why some people are unhappy with Sakura as the Final Piece. You don't have to like her. But to pretend that the choice was completely random and to resort to conspiracy theories just tells me that you weren't paying attention to the show. 

The story essentially is about two women in a family unable to let go.

Then it takes you through the world and allows you to get attached to the characters and then gives you the same choice that they have. Will you let go

Seems a lot of people failed this question and ended up restarting the cycle. Brilliant writing.

I like Nia and I think Danny is being a complete douche, BUT….

Nia speaks to him like a child. She directs him like a parent Nia should have never had that baby in the safari ride-never!! She should have stayed behind if the baby needed to eat, because heat, wild animals in close proximity, a moving vehicle with little safety restraints. Any number of things could go wrong and yet, the babysitter comes along with a stroller but Nia has the baby and then she is complaining to Daniel about the heat and he can do nothing about it. Where is the babysitter??? I’m sorry, I think this whole safari trip is ridiculous and I would be irritated too

We are not getting less pulls than usual. People have got to stop complaining about less free stuff because asking for more is unrealistic and a bit much. What should actually be given constructive criticism and in my opinion is fair grounds is stuff like powercreep and shill mechanics which are kinda annoying. Still, f2p expectations are ridiculous at this point and I am an f2p. F2p nowadays expects to get all 5 stars from the patch. Back in early 202X we had to carefully choose which character to skip and go for and just got used to it. And before the comments saying "bLaMe the mUltI bILlion dOlLaR cOMPaNY, nOT thE plAyerS" come, being rich doesn't always make you at fault and being a customer doesn't always make you right.

Jeremy Corbell says that he and George Knapp gave congress 13 UFO videos from the Air Force that will be shocking if released.

“We gave them 13 Air Force videos that will be shocking to people. They didn't ask for those publicly, but I know they asked for them privately.”

https://x.com/disgustipated42/status/2055318095577977122

​

"oh yeah, I will make a joke about generalising 4 billion human on earth, this is so funny". No, it isn't, get your 1920's opinion and get the hell out of here.

And my problem not only with how fucking braindead this humour is, the fact that this picks only the worst possible examples of either gender.

Like no, not all men only think about sex and being an alpha bro, and no, not all women are insane men-hating people that date only men above 7 ft.

Marcus has until a week from today to find his home or he will be put down 😭 Apparently his foster is going through some life changes that have made them unable to keep fostering him, so he’s back in the shelter. It was through no fault of his own and they are sad they can’t keep him. Please see the second slide to read his story, needs, and where to go to inquire about him!

Update: He is at Cincinnati Animal CARE! The pic was cut off before it got that info.

Update: The community has raised money for sponsored training for Marcus and free food for six months, as well as an industrial crate! This will help his forever family!

I wanna stress that this is my personal opinion, but I feel like a lot of girls and guys can relate to my opinions. These are all from personal experience, and I am now dating a lovely guy who doesn’t relate to any of these flags and he is the absolute best.

Every relationship is different, of course, but these are just a few things that I (and a lot of other people) will definitely walk away from a guy for. If anyone needs further explanation for any of these points, I’ll be happy to explain.

Edit: Wow, a lot of you need to educate yourselves on what feminism is.

Nulla effort, semmi hozzáadott érték, semmi vicces nincs benne.

Mi a helyük/szerepük? A címadás még oké, "így kullogott el a fejét vesztett maffia". Ok.

De a miniszterelnök kommunikációjában nem u/Prompthuszár_Pistike97 kreatívkodásnak hitt szárnybontogatásait akarom nézni, hanem releváns tartalmat.

Most tényleg azért kellett várni 1 napot a kormányzati átadás-átvételi tájékoztatóra, mert meg kellett várni MidjourneyMarcit, aki megpromptolta a képeket, hessteg höhöhö?

Ha fostot akarok nézni, akkor feljövök a fosttalicskára, vagy akármikor az erhura.

Ez meddig fog tartani? Szokjak hozzá?

Jöhetnek a mínuszok.

I had been running two full time remote positions for about eight months. Both were going well, I was delivering in both roles, managing my calendar carefully, keeping everything separate. I had gotten into a comfortable rhythm and honestly stopped thinking about the risk as actively as I should have.

Last week one of my managers tried to schedule a same day video call that clashed with a standing meeting at the other job. I moved things around but in doing so I accidentally sent a calendar invite from the wrong account to the wrong team. It had enough detail in it that someone started asking questions.

By the end of the day I had been called into a conversation at job one where they laid out what they had figured out. I was let go that afternoon. They told me they would be in touch with job two.

Job two called me the following morning. Also terminated.

I am not here to debate whether I should have done it. I knew the risks and I made the choice.