• 0 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle

  • I played these games for the story. The campaigns used to be pretty solid, with good action and a lot of good moments. I’m not saying they’re excellent still, but Modern Warfare had both the nuke and “All Ghillied Up” sequences, Modern Warfare 2 had the up-until-then relatively unexplored front of the United States and the “No Russian” missions, I was genuinely interested in Advanced Warfare’s story, and if you want to go really far back, CoD 2 had some excellent missions that really nailed the scope of battles in WWII. A big part of the reason that Titanfall 2’s campaign was so highly praised was because they had the talent behind Call of Duty’s campaigns working on it. I’m not saying the multiplayer is any small part of the game, but there’s at least some subset of people who played it for the campaign.


  • I genuinely enjoyed Arkham Knight, but those mandatory Batmobile sections are easily the most miserable part of the game. If we had those for an entire game, it might not be too bad, but most of the time you just end up using it to get from point A to point B. If you can put up with being stuck for a bit on those sections, you might enjoy it.

    Its big issue is that it has to follow up on Arkham City. It’s not a bad game by any stretch, but it’s following up to one of the best superhero games out there. If you’re not invested in the story, there’s no harm in dropping it. Play something you’ll have fun with.




  • Even with the added costs of owning the home and upkeep, it’s only equivalent or just above rent, and that’s with the condo association fees and insurance. Even while renting I was stuck paying for utilities. And I’m highly aware that the roof needs replacing, given that we’ve got to replace ours within 5 years.

    But if your point is “owning a home is more expensive than renting when you factor in all extra costs,” I want to again point out that most people are barely able to stay afloat. His point was that anyone can buy a house. Mine is that the money he thinks grows on trees literally does not exist for the majority of people.


  • I’m lucky enough to have been financially able to buy a home. I had help making the down payment, but we’ve now got a 30 year mortgage. My monthly payments are less than what I was paying for rent, less than the average rent in the city by almost a third. I got this place with two above-average incomes, and had the good fortune to get it during the COVID housing and interest rate dip, and I still needed extra help.

    If someone is stuck with renting, they’re likely paying more than they would for a mortgage. They can’t save up the money because they’re already lagging behind, and the housing market isn’t coming down in price, and wages absolutely aren’t keeping pace. No one is saying a house would “lock them down,” they’re pointing out they can never afford it because they can’t even come up with the money to show the bank they can save because they’re already paying above the potential mortgage payments every month.

    But you’re saying they won’t, not can’t, so what should they do to come up with the money? Start selling kidneys? 78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, and that same link shows 71% have less than $2000 in their savings. So where exactly are people supposed to shit out your hypothetical $30,000?











  • I’ve heard that and decided to look myself. According to their fundraising report for fiscal year 2021/22, they received $165.2m from 13m people. Removing “major gifts,” $20.8m (only 18,000 people), it comes out to a bit over $11 per person. Additionally, they got $13.5m to their trust, the Wikimedia Endowment (average donation of $13.91/person). So definitely, most of their income comes from small donations.

    As to whether they need it, according to their FY 21/22 financials statement, they’re sitting on $198m in assets ($51m of which is cash), with an additional $52m they can’t touch because they’re long-term investments. However, their expenditures made up $154m. In total, they’re reporting they netted $8m last year for additional assets, but assuming that everyone stopped donating, Wikipedia would probably die in a year, even with liquidation of short-term assets.