Or adding microtransactions to a single player game.

Or considering any franchise with an entry that has lost money dead and gone, as if it didn’t still sell millions. Like, just budget the next one to fit the demand?

Or their total allergy to doing anything actually new. They keep shedding IPs yet only ever back existing franchises.

Or spending almost as much on marketing as development, as if you can just force people to be interested in a sequel for a game they didn’t play or a genre they don’t enjoy.

I don’t know how Squenix games can be so full of developer passion with execs this braindead.

And what the fuck does 3D Investment mean their publishing is a loss? NO SHIT. THAT’S HOW YOU FIND THE NEW FRANCHISES.

VCs, as shitty as they are, at least get that backing 30 small projects makes sense because that improves your chances of being on board with the one that blows up big enough to pay for the rest.

3D Investment blames this on the underperformance of Square Enix’s console and mobile game sectors

No.

as well as exceptionally large write-downs related to cancelled games.

Yes.

Interestingly, they also consider the company’s arcade and publishing sectors to be “non-synergistic” businesses that are ultimately pulling down the company’s value with lackluster performance.

Fuck no.

Squenix’s problem is that they keep going too big. They are trying to be a Sony or Nintendo, when they’re really more of a Devolver. They have franchises with big fanbases, but they’re trying to force their games to become COD levels of HUGE by just increasing the budget. And when the return doesn’t keep up with investment, they keep missing the point.

It happened with Tomb Raider. It happened with Deus Ex. And it’s happening with Final Fantasy. The games do have passionate fans, but they simply aren’t for everyone. And that’s not a bad thing.

What Squenix refuses to accept, is that they’ve hit a growth ceiling they can’t break through by spending more. But instead of growing wider by diversifying with new IPs or more titles at more reasonable budgets, they keep trying to focus on their latest big thing and grow it taller and heavier than it can support.

It’s a churchhill variant that mounts an AVRE 230mm Petard Mortar.

The maid atop the tread is lifting up some rounds for it, and the thing in front of the turret is the launcher. (Though it’s not mounted)

It really has that many periscopes.

IIRC the excuse he used in the TV show was that he was following a trail of ants.

Bionicle?

Then you are guilty of the same thing. The above is a retort to the idea that my side has any relation to authoritarian thinking. It’s not based on my assumptions around your reasoning, but literally a point you just tried to make.

There are legitimate reasons to give a creature the opportunity to learn to fend for itself and as such expose it to the risks of doing so. Children who must one day become independent adults. Animals to be re-wilded and released back into nature.

Neither, nor any other that I’m aware of, apply to domestic pets.

I am perfectly willing to consider your mindset. My very first sentence is a question requesting you elaborate on what exactly it is you gain by trading in the safety of your cat. Because you don’t actually mention what that is.

The TV show borrowed from everything, and made up a bunch of new stuff. They would have run out of material otherwise.

Listing five preventably dead cats I personally knew is over the top?

Why is taking the risk important?

You are not re-wilding an animal that’s gotten used to being in a zoo, in order to restore an endangered species.

You are releasing a domestic pet into an uncontrolled environment.

Why is it important to do that? And why does this importance only apply to cats?

Worth it to gain what?

You are not re-wilding an animal that’s gotten used to being in a zoo.

Your logic is like overfeeding a pet because it likes the food enough to keep eating it.

Your cat is not a toddler that will one day need to be a functioning member of society. You can and should make decisions that ensure its safety in exchange for its freedoms.

It’s the same reasoning behind why you don’t let a child hit the town until they’re old enough. The difference, is that a cat is never “old enough”. It’s a pet.

Parasites. Disease. Pest traps. Poisons. Traffic. Dangerous climbs. Other cats. People.

I know someone who had three cats get run over before they learned to keep them inside. They live on an island in the finnish archipelago that barely even has roads let alone traffic.

Another friend lost two cats to a neighbour who fed them poisoned chicken.

Go on. Tell me there’s zero risk.

Like the other guy said.

How can your conscience be clear, if the one in danger is Miez?

You can ignore this comment, OP. I’m sure you’ve heard all this before and already have practice.

This is for everyone else.

A cat can live a perfectly happy life without danger. Do not let them outside without a leash.

“Outdoor” cats die earlier and are at greater risk of parasites and disease. That is a fact. Most animal shelters include a contractual obligation not to do what OP does in their adoption agreements. Violating this requirement would be considered animal abuse, and grounds for them to take the animal back for re-adoption.

Transitioning an outdoor cat to indoor life can be difficult, but what OP does is not normal and should not be. No-one should let a pet outside unattended. And most people wouldn’t. But for some reson some people make an exception for cats. And only cats. This is a logical error.

Animals are either wild or domestic. Not both.

I’m pretty sure OP wouldn’t let a dog roam free, yet all the same logic for why that is so, applies to cats.

The needs of a cat that are fulfilled by the outdoors, can be fulfilled indoors. Places to hide, surfaces to scratch, toys to play with, etc. If your cat is miserable indoors, that’s on you, not the nature of the animal.

And then immediately cancel them.

I don’t trust anything Netflix makes. It doesn’t matter how good it is or how much the fans love it, if it doesn’t immediately blow up and eclipse Stranger Things, then it’s not big enough for them and gets axed.

Noo! That’s bait! Gura is fishing for you!

Happy Mymble.

Huh, doesn’t load for me either at the moment.

My posting script does do a health-check on the catbox image url before posting, so the thumbnail for this post is visible for a lot of people, since it must have been working at least by that much at the time of posting.

Yes.

Actually.

I use Bottles for windows games that I don’t have on steam or GOG.

In that case, something is invalidating the login. Are you sure that it is happening due to leaving your LAN, and not just coinciding with that?

Does restarting the laptop log you out, or temporarily disconnecting from the internet? Could you test by switching to a wifi hotspot on your phone, and switching back, for example?

The client stores your session token in the OS credentials manager (kwallet for linux kde, for example) and the issue can lie there, as well.

That’s definitely not how it should work. Leaving your LAN should not invalidate a session.

Is this in your browser, or are you talking about the desktop client?