Vestria

Live A Live on Switch is the example everyone should be pointing to of what a proper 2D-HD remake of FF1-6 could (and should) look like.

It's actually an almost offensive level of laziness, as a consumer, to have a company like Square Enix try to sell me a full-priced remaster collection that only includes partial use of 2D-HD in certain scenes and what essentially amounts to cheap 2D mobile game graphics everywhere else. And the difference is jarring. For the price I'm paying, I expect the full 2D-HD treatment, not...whatever half-assed nonsense this is.

Edit: Also, Octopath doesn't "get away with it" because of filters, it's a game made entirely in 2D-HD, which is why it's consistent. Same with Octopath II and Live A Live.

At the end of a tiring working day, after taking care of my chores, putting the kids to bed, I just can't get back to the computer, especially if I had to use it all day long for work...

Those are the days I Miracast my PC to my TV and curl up on the couch with a wireless controller.

My soon-to-be 7-year-old has a Switch that fits his Minecraft / Pokemon / YouTube needs, and I have my PS5 for exclusives that don't have a PC port yet (I'm currently playing through FFXVI, for example.

Plus, the ultimate question: How much does a PC/a console or a new game cost in your country?

I currently live in the States, so any average price you look up in USD will apply. I built my own PC, I purchased my PS5 on sale, and I will build myself a new PC when my son is old enough to be trusted (under supervision) with my current PC, if any of that matters.

I'd be very interested to explore this idea further with more historical discourse / critiques, if you have any sources, as it's my understanding that modern Stoicism is based primary on Seneca's work, and treats Seneca's ideas of the Stoic Sage as a both a blueprint for modern Stoicism and the evolution of the ideas of prior Stoics.

I appreciate your perspective, and it's clear we've been educated on these topics quite differently. I'd love to learn more!

The conflation of Stoicism, an established and codified philosophy, with the more general idea of bog standard stoicism is precisely my criticism. The author is not using the term differently from me, they are using it incorrectly by conflating it with a more general, and more modern, term--a term without established codification, and vastly different connotations.

Which leads directly to the point I actually made--which you entirely ignored with your reply--that anyone who uses the terms interchangeably, conflates the two, or teaches one as the other fundamentally misunderstands the terms they're using. Thus my statement that the author is laying the connotations of one term at the feet of another, different and distinct, term.

Stoicism (capitalized) and stoicism (the more general, more modern term) are not the same thing, which is why this article, in my opinion, misses the mark.

Single parent chiming in. I might have a unique perspective on this since I live in a conservative suburb of a major Texas metro.

The biggest thing I've noticed is that I'm not allowed to simply be a parent, at least as far as social opinions are concerned. Whenever I take my son out to, say, the park, or for afters, other parents willing to strike up conversations take one of two stances: I am either babysitting my son (i.e. giving mum a break), or I'm suspicious for spending time with him alone (the implication being that men can't be trusted with childcare unsupervised).

I am acquainted with the parents of my son's friends, but outside of major events like school functions or birthday parties, I have to take the initiative on giving him opportunities to socialize with his peers because those parents won't include my son otherwise--because the mums won't text a single man first under any circumstances and the mums are ones who do all the planning. And while I don't believe this slight is intentional or malicious, it's difficult not to take it personally when they've collectively only met his mum once (at an end-of-year school function) and they've only ever known us in the context of me being a single parent.

I have twice in the last year had to explain to the old bill that I am not, in fact, a predator using my child as an excuse to scope out the local park for victims, and that my son is, in fact, my son. That one is impossible not to take personally--his mother, who is a violent, cocaine-addicted terror of a person--would never be accused of such by a stranger. The assumption would simply be that she is his mum. As a dad, I am afforded no such courtesy, and it is astonishing to me the sheer level of impropriety in which conservative white women feel justified because "they're just looking out for the children."

And if that sounds bitter, well, as I said, it's hard not to take the latter personally when it has the potential to forever (negatively) alter my son's future, especially when I'm a single parent primarily to protect him in the first place.

If custody agreements in Texas didn't come bog-standard with geographic restrictions that carried multiple felony penalties for breaking, I'd have left the States a long time ago. But I absolutely refuse to jeopardize my son's future or my custody of him, so here we are.

I don't think it's hardware. It's a differentiator. Tell me why I (or whoever) should pick an Xbox over a PlayStation?

What else differentiates it from the PS5 in a positive way?

The thing is, it's not even Games Pass or the hardware. For me, as a PC gamer, having an Xbox would be redundant. Anything an Xbox can do, my PC just does strictly better without a cumbersome UI and additional online subscription.

I own a PS5 for access to Sony exclusives when they launch, instead of waiting 1-5 years for the PC ports. I also get access to PS Plus' extensive classic collection and indie collections, which, regardless of the price of the subscription, broadens my gaming library extensively--something Xbox simply doesn't do.

Why would I purchase a console that only gives me access to the same games on a worse system vs a console that expands my library considerably?

It's all good! I chose Beehaw for a reason, I will always engage in good faith and give you the same benefit of the doubt!

It honestly wasn't my intention to call anyone out, I just had some concerns based on what I saw. I'm glad we get to continue the conversation 😀

I agree with your comment that the history, and how that history has affected marginalized groups, specifically, is important to learn and recognize--and I think this is true of most of western culture.

Like [email protected] said, this article doesn't feel like that. It cherry picks its sources and the author seems to fundamentally misunderstand Stoicism. In fact, it seems to me that the author is misattributing the failings and misunderstandings of some of Stoicism's bad actors to the philosophy itself.

I have personally found Practical Stocism to be a useful tool in my own mental health journey, especially where it relates to recognizing and controlling my responses to things other people do or say in my relationships, why my responses are what they are and what I can do about those responses. It has never been taught to me as a tool of suppression, but of experience, acceptance, and, ultimately, control. If I am able to recognize what I am feeling and why, I am better able to decide for myself whether or not it would be valid to respond out of that emotion, or if doing so would perpetuate a cycle it would healthier to break. It's not about not feeling, it's about giving me the tools I need to decide how best to respond to what I'm feeling.

That being said, I fully recognize that language evolves and changes and that the word stoicism without the illumination now has negative connotations for mental health, and is mostly associated with unhealthy coping mechanisms and behaviors. Perhaps it would be more useful to ask where the disconnect between Stoicism and stoicism truly lies, and how we, as men (or as humans, since a lot of this ties into basic concepts of emotional maturity) can display different and better behaviors to change the association (if, indeed, we're even interesting in doing so?).

/r/menslib was actively curated to be a safe place for men to discuss men's issues and allyship without toxicity, and we had a good balance of men, women, and nonbinary posters. Its most active mod was an LGBTQ+ trans individual who was very aggressive about purging trolls and bad actors, and I found it to be a supportive and reasonable place.

Now that I'm looking back, there may have been a /r/mensliberation once upon a time that unfortunately was a copy space of MRA, MGTOW, and Red Pill, but if it did actually exist, I never subbed or participated and it likely would have been quarantined / purged when the others were.

Well, that'll teach me to read an article and then not engage in the conversation that follows. I'm not a Stoicism stan, as you say, but I have found Practical Stoicism a useful tool in my life, especially when it comes to recognizing and owning my own contributions (positive and negative) to my relationships.

I'll go back and reply to you in the other thread so we don't derail this one.

There's a link in the top 5 posts to a "philosophy" article that cherry picks limited sources in order to misrepresent Stoicism as a philosophy as mere garden variety stoicism in the more modern vernacular, and then uncritically blames it as the source of all toxic masculinity.

Perhaps "misinformation" was a strong accusation, but articles like that are certainly not written in good faith, regardless of the intent in sharing them.

Perhaps I should edit my post to use less inflammatory language. Sorry.

Reddit as a whole was an absolute cesspool, I don't deny that. But some of us were lucky enough, through lots and lots of searching and trial and error and weeding out of bad eggs, to find a few places where we felt welcomed and accepted without judgment.

I'm sorry that you never did!

Luckily, I think Beehaw and Blahaj are doing an admirable job, and I'm happy to be a part of it!