Yeah, you don't actually commit any atrocities to civilians in Dungeon Keeper.
You do in Overlord though, but that game still goes down that old "you're bad, but still better than what you're fighting against" story path.

Iratus also does that for most of the game, but the end gets real bleak real fast.

Ok bro. Despite the evidence from scientists back in the 80s and even oil corporations to this day.

While I do think things like representation and raising awareness are important, I do think they should not be forced into media if they do not fit. I do think this is a weakness of video games compared to something like movies where sometimes an actor is cast for a role because they are a great fit even though they may not fit the expected attributes (gender, race, height, etc.) and that both adds representation and possibly even added social commentary or character interpretation that might otherwise have not been intended. Since video game characters are controllable and can be made any color or shape based on programming, a more intentional act of representation may be necessary.

However, current "woke" writers are really bad at messaging and very frequently put in double standards that show a lack of understanding of the characters they are meant to represent (Lex Luthor praising and simping over Wonder Woman despite Luthor being a villain and anti-demi-humans, hence his disdain for Superman. If anything, Lex should hate Wonder Woman second and only have an inkling of respect for Batman being a "normal" human among superhumans).

There is no "evidence" on climate change. Show me one peer reviewed paper not owned by Blackrock/Vanguard or a corporation. It's a money laundering scheme. Follow the money trail, who funds them. Use your head not your emotions.

https://unfccc.int/annualreport

UNFCC is an independent government funded US organization that has identified the causes and expected effects of climate change and won a nobel prize for their efforts.

Im not here to debate and convince you on the reality of climate change because it seems like you have already made up your mind anyway. But the fact that nations all over the world including China, Middle East, Japan, and the EU all recognize that climate change is a thing and are taking action for a post-fossil fuel world shows its validity, nevermind the increase in extreme weather events that was predicted by the UNFCC reports several years ago now occurring today (heat waves with people dying as a result, stronger tornadoes and tsunamis).

Blackrock and Vanguard are rich corporations but they cant buy China (which is owned by the Communist party. They are the ones doing the buying) or the Middle East (again, these guys are the ones doing the buying and even in the game industry). The fact that the Middle East is purposefully shifting from fossil fuels which was their lifeblood to renewables and China is working on building the largest solar panel farm in the world tells you something. The US is just really behind in this regard.

How can it be independent if it's government funded. Anything government funded is an automatic red flag.

Propaganda 101.

So, if there's no evidence on climate change, then in the past however many years:
* Record highs and record lows are occurring at the same frequency.
* The average temperature is staying relatively constant. (I'm using the word "average" here in order to account for the fact that, even without long-term climate change, some years might be colder or warmer than others.)
* Severe weather is happening at about the same frequency as it was previously, and of the same types.

You can find this sort of data on the internet, and do your own statistical analysis to confirm or deny whether there actually is global warming.

(By the way, some oil company funded studies apparently showed evidence of climate change, but then the companies hid those studies because it went against their narrative.)

Do you have any evidence that climate change is not real? How do you explain the increase in temperature extremes all over the world, shifts in climate cycles like earlier or later bloom seasons, and generally more extreme events than before?

Or as dtgreene stated, about oil companies that also did their own INDEPENDENT research on climate change, proved it to be true, and then buried the evidence.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/12/1148376084/exxon-climate-predictions-were-accurate-decades-ago-still-it-sowed-doubt

You also dont give a decent explanation for why countries in the Middle East are building solar panel farms. If climate change is a hoax, why bother spending money on renewable resource alternatives and not continue to burn oil and coal?

https://www.hsedubai.com/blog/our-blogs-1/unveiling-the-top-5-largest-solar-pv-farms-in-the-middle-east-39
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231126-worlds-largest-single-site-solar-farm-completed-in-uae-ahead-of-cop28/
https://www.energymonitor.ai/renewables/saudi-arabia-will-host-the-middle-easts-largest-solar-facility/

You also say use your head and follow the money but dont give any evidence to support your claims. Its easy to just say facts are wrong but you need evidence to back up your claims.

Even deniers of climate change agree that climate change is occurring, just that they dont believe it is a doomsday level event and that "humans will find a way" or the "climate will auto adjust itself" if you are a Peterson fan. For the first, climate change is a multi-national endeavor and all nations, especially the top 3 emitters, need to start curbing to make a difference like we did for HFCs with the ozone layer. The top emitters are China, India, and the US and if these 3 dont curb their emissions, everyone else doing so wont make a dent. India is really sucking in this department and the US is questionable because of Trump. China is doing a good job, building huge solar panels with the intent to move toward renewable energy after using fossil fuels to develop the infrastructure.

For the Peterson argument, thats a big maybe voiced by one ex-member of the UNFCC compared to the hundreds of other scientists that dont. You want to believe the ONE rogue scientist with an alternative theory which is "we can mess around and find out its not that bad" with other scientists saying "stop messing around and finding out"?

I'm not going to do the legwork for you. Learn to do things for yourself instead of being so gullible.

you chat shit and hang around this thread like a haunted tree.

I think you're confusing things here; climate change is cyclical changes that happens to all live planets, especially those that has an atmosphere, and is also influenced by the planets tilt, precision, and orbit around the Sun.

If you don't believe that then you might as well believe in the flat earth and the santa clause hypothesis'.

But what is still heavily debated on is how much the current one is caused by or (influenced by) humans, because core samples tells us that the Earth have been warmed and cooled naturally throughout history. The Pleistocene event that happened not too long ago was also abrupt and dramatic. Higher temperatures is usually followed by rapid (in relative term of course) falling in temperatures again and into the beginning of a new ice period.

Movies has always twisted realities, but the idea usually stems from research or rumors, f. ex. movies like The Day After Tomorrow or the Close encounters of the Third Kind. And then you have politicians trying to "cash" in points by being the most popular one with words like "global warming" and "extinction level event" through fear. Co2 is actually not the worst one, it's methane, which is why some science illiterates (again, politicians with only a degree in leadership and economy) got panicky and started telling people we can't have cows or fart naturally (it goes without saying that the worst/biggest countries out there couldn't care less about this any of this, with deforesting being the worst offender).

How these "gases" actually trap "heat" is very fascinating as methane releases this heat again far faster than CO2;
https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/how-climate-works/greenhouse-effect
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-023-01144-z

EDIT: Naturally game developers (especially AAA/AAAA/AAAAA games!) is also 'trapped' in this cycle - ever trying to create a product that appeals (read: cater/pander) to as many as possible without clear direction and often fails.

The indie scene is literally all there is left, and even they don't exactly flock to GOG.

The rest is digging the industry's grave over at Valve's villa, and they can fuck themselves.

So you have no evidence and just talk shit, got it.

Just FYI for other topics, if you actually want to convey your point and help others, you can start by providing some introductory resources as a starting point and offer suggestions. How the hell do you expect someone to learn about a subject and provide no starting point?

I also gave you links and evidence backing up my claim. Its only fair and cordial to do the same instead of just insulting others as being gullible.

Anyway, regarding this subject you obviously dont walk the walk. You can talk but offer nothing of substance, just sprouting how everyone is sheep because they follow scientists and majority opinion.

Back to the topic at hand, yeah alot of publishers have veered from GOG because DRM is good for them. The sad thing is gamers are buying into what devs want. Apparently 83% of Playstation sales for 2023 are digital which is ofcourse tied to playstation accounts and their DRM. You cant trade or sell your digital games but people are going full force with it.

The only advantage consoles have over PC is physical copies of games imo which GOG mitigates a bit. If consoles go full dgital, its over for them imo. There will still be gullible customers buying games for console but it will strictly be inferior on all fronts.

You're full of shit.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1112950/

https://www.lootpress.com/10-reasons-to-prove-that-climate-change-is-a-hoax/

https://www.lobservateur.com/2023/08/20/experts-say-climate-change-is-a-hoax/

You are a tool Tokyo Lemming.

Thanks for actually providing some links and info to backup your claims although you can keep the insults.

The 3 links you share are not all scientists believe in human-driven climate change, 10 observations citing NASA as a source, and quotes from some science skeptics (although they are prominent scientists so I give them credit). Kind of ironic how you basically cite similar sources to mine and yet still call me a sheep.

But anyway, since you responded.

I agree that the number cited 97% scientists believe in human-driven climate change is BS. However, its still clear that the vast majority do believe in climate change at around 80%.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2016/12/14/fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-change/?sh=35cdeeb11576

While you cite that there are 50 members from the American Meteorological Society are concerned with the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups, the society itself also seems to believe in man-made climate change.
[url=https://www.ametsoc.org/index.cfm/ams/policy/policy-memos/climate-change-the-basics/#:~:text=As%20a%20public%20issue%2C%20climate,Climate%20is%20changing]https://www.ametsoc.org/index.cfm/ams/policy/policy-memos/climate-change-the-basics/#:~:text=As%20a%20public%20issue%2C%20climate,Climate%20is%20changing[/url].

https://www.ametsoc.org/index.cfm/ams/about-ams/ams-and-climate-change/

The 10 reasons disproving climate change list has some flaws. Regarding ice levels, we seem to have hit a record low rather than a record high.
[url=https://www.climate.gov/news-features/event-tracker/2023-antarctic-sea-ice-winter-maximum-lowest-record-wide-margin#:~:text=On%20September%2010%2C%202023%2C%20sea,record%20that%20began%20in%201979]https://www.climate.gov/news-features/event-tracker/2023-antarctic-sea-ice-winter-maximum-lowest-record-wide-margin#:~:text=On%20September%2010%2C%202023%2C%20sea,record%20that%20began%20in%201979[/url].

We also seem to see steadily rising sea levels over time. Maybe we didnt hit Al Gore's predicted 20ft which is the article's gotta but NASA has also proven consistent sea level rise.
[url=https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level#:~:text=The%20rising%20water%20level%20is,record%20(1993%2Dpresent]https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level#:~:text=The%20rising%20water%20level%20is,record%20(1993%2Dpresent[/url]).
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

The article also states Al Gore is wrong because NASA says so but NASA also believes in climate change so dont really understand that point to be honest.
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Also regarding Judith Curry, she isnt denying the impact of carbon emissions causing warming but that the worst-case scenario may not come to pass and that climate change mitigation may be too expensive for something that we arnt 100% certain about. This seems to be a point alot of her supporters seem to miss. She doesnt deny its happening, just thinks the worst case may not be as bad as we think and we are powerless to stop it anyway.

But again, sorry to everyone for derailing the thread and back to discussing the gaming industry.