Gheist

I'm kinda conflicted on the status bar thing. On one hand I do enjoy glancing at it every now and then to see how far development has come but on the other hand, the people complaining about the bar not moving and slow development are extremely annoying. I might prefer just *POOF* new version out whenever it's done. Especially if it would lessen pressure on you and help you work better. Still, I respect your decision and am glad to see development is that far in already. Also that you have a dev team now, congrats. I assume that ??? bar is the new thing you're going to talk about? I'll keep an eye out for it and good luck!

Can someone just tell whether there's a Scarlet route and what I'm suppose to do to get. I think I got all her points, I gave the stone to Shiv and I saved her from jumping off the roof but it looks like I still got cucked by Connor while Ava is being nice to me. So did I fuck up somewhere or is this just how it's suppose to be? I can only think of giving the stone to Nova and maybe being as mean to Ava as possible? Or maybe not saving Scarlet and seeing where that goes but replaying the game right away would be so tedious since I can't skip forward and have to battle 50.000 trainers. I'm not gonna do it unless I at least know there's a point so can someone just tell so I don't have to search through the 149 pages. Anyway, I love the game but I will say there's way too many trainers everywhere even though all 6 of my Pokemon are at the level cap. Also the grass in pretty much every city is annoying. It's enough dealing with that on routes but right in front of the ranger center? Just why. Leave the grass, just make it so Pokemon don't pop out.

I figured you were taking a break after the Ver 9 release but I didn't know you were dealing with real life issues other than the computer thing. I didn't experience any problems while playing through the new content but if there were bugs, you really shouldn't let that get you down. Just fix them in a patch or the next release if they aren't game breaking. I don't think anybody's holding it against you. As for people complaining about development taking too long, just fuck them. Ignore them, what else can I say. I'd rather you take your time and release a good game than you overworking yourself and getting sick or dropping the whole thing. If it takes another year or another 3 years then so be it. I'll probably still be here. I'm sure others will too. So do whatever you need to do and I'll look forward to the next release.

I said "Safe space". You clearly haven't been following current events in the US very closely. Maybe Google the term. Although it seems funny at first, it's really quite frightening that this is happening to our society. I never said anything of the sort. I said they are most likely hypotheses at best. Mine is a hypothesis at best too. I never made any claims comparing the two nor did I assert any kind of likelyhood on their validity. Creationism for example is also a hypothesis at best. (I say at best, because a hypothesis usually assumes some experiments could potentially be done to confirm or disprove it.) Abiogenesis is also a hypothesis. Obviously these two are worlds apart in terms of how likely they are to be correct. It could very well be the same for whatever you proposed. That would still not stop it from being a hypothesis unless it's already become an established scientific theory. It depends on how you define "Spirituality" I guess. Scientific naturalism assumes everything is subject to scientific inquiry. So that would have to apply to whatever "spiritual" thing you are claiming exists. Certainly if you could confirm it's existence then it would just become a part of nature. I have no doubt that future scientific technology will seem like magic to us, so in that sense the supernatural could exist but it would simply become part of nature when we find it. So yea I'll go look at your posts eventually and I hope you clearly define "spirituality" in it at the beginning. It is a very vague word that has different meanings to different people.

First of all, I don't even know what you consider an argument. Is the problem just my tone or am I not allowed to question people on here at all? Is this a safe space? As for the actual topic, for any belief we hold, there has to be some reason why we hold it. Even in philosophy there should be some reason why we concuted those specific beliefs and not different ones. I think asking somebody why they believe something is the first step to a discussion. "Why do you believe this and why should anyone else believe it?" On this specific case, I wasn't completely sure whether this was role playing, theory crafting or actual beliefs. That is why I asked. My little scenario was just an idea that should be discussed and expanded upon. I certainly do not believe that this is actually true, not do I expect anyone else to believe it either. I am a Darwinist and an atheist. I believe in no Gods and in scientific naturalism. But by all means, tell me why an omnipotent god wouldn't want to erase his memories and power to avoid going insane from boredom. There would be nothing left to learn or experience so I came up with a possible solution. If you have a better one or a reason why mine is bad I'd love to hear it. I didn't post it (although to be fair that was not the whole idea, it was meant to be a teaser or something) because I wanted people NOT to give their honest opinion and expand the topic. Oh and my scenario is not a theory, it is a hypothesis at best. So is the one I replied to and I imagine everything else on here as well. I might go back and read some of your posts or make my actual post eventually but probably not soon as I am very busy with my studies at the moment.

Christ. . . I actually read that whole thing. Let me just ask what i the purpose of Earth again in your scenario? Why would you care about helping anyone on Earth if it's all virtual? Shouldn't we all just kill ourselves and go to Cerri ASAP? The laws of physics clearly don't apply up there either so what laws do apply and where did people/life come from. Now for the more serious questions. Do you actually believe this? If yes, how did you determine any of this to be true and what method can we use to independently confirm what you're saying? And the more philosophical question. Why would anybody want an afterlife that you are forced to live in forever with no hope of ever dying? I certainly don't feel like dying just yet but can you imagine hundreds, thousands, millions, billions, trillions of years have past and you are still alive, no closer to dying than you were at the start. Infinity is a long time. Anyone would get bored eventually and probably wish to die. I guess your coma thing works as some kind of break from living and I have considered things such as erasing oneself from existence for a while (simulating death) and coming back eventually. The ONLY way I would accept any kind of eternal life is one where I have to option to die whenever I choose to. I understand the fear of death is what drives these religions to promise eternal life but the second you start to think about it, the idea becomes abhorrent. Anyway, this thread looks interesting. I might post a scenario of my own about what an all powerful, all knowing God would do (or at least what I think he would do having all that knowledge). It involves relinquishing his knowledge and power so he can experience all sorts of emotions (including negative ones like pain and simple boredom) in preset worlds. So no knowledge of being God. No powers either depending on the world. Obviously he would do this since otherwise he'd just sit alone in the void with nothing to do, learn or experience for all eternity. Only other option would be erasing himself from existence as mentioned earlier. An infinite amount of worlds to explore and he could even do the same one over and over since he'd have no memories each time he started it.

Thanks, I have a good idea where the next one goes so I'll try and find it myself.

So anyone figure out where the R key goes? I got it after the Crystal ball sidequest thing.

You said "It's one thing to protest against genetic manipulation by drawing an analogy with pets in the real world" and in the beginning you said it ethically immoral or at least could be argued as such. I'm saying we manipulate the genes of animals all the time especially when dealing with pets. Perhaps not always in a lab but breeding animals for specific traits has been around for thousands of years. "And No. Genetically manipulating human genes is unacceptable." Says you. Have you played Bioshock? I guarantee if gene modification becomes a thing normal people can do and afford we will have people flocking to it like birds, myself included. We also have people against installing robotic arms or eyes on people but that's already being worked on. A few people calling it unacceptable won't stump scientific advancement (or at least I hope it won't). We will also have people saying it's unethical NOT to give people gene modification to do stuff like treat genetic diseases. And while you're at it might as well make the baby smarter and stronger and have good teeth, good eyesight and whatever else you can afford. Keep in mind I am fully aware this is a long way away and that we can't do this yet, but I am talking in terms of whenever we can do this reliably. As for the game and IV changing post encounter/hatching Ame said it's not planned so that's good enough for me. I'm more than happy with the 31 IV mons I have now and if I want more I'll breed them the old fashioned way. What I really need is a knock off TM or a move tutor or something for my Sneasel/soon to be Weavile. (And yes I bred icicle crash onto it)

Ethically immoral to selectively breed animals to make them stronger/better at something. . .Do you realize we have many dog breeds who have been selectively bred to have whichever traits they have? Also the pigs you're eating are more than likely new crossbreeds made by humans. There's other examples but I see no problem with stimulating desirable traits in animals (or even humans for that matter) but that's besides the point. My first objection to IV altering systems is that when an animal/pokemon is born, it's genes are set. You can't just go back and change them in a living organism. If you made the mad scientist take an egg or something and make it have 31 IVs in a certain stat, that would be a different story. We already have items that do the same thing and if this only impacted 1 extra IV I'd have no problem with it.

Please don't implement an IV altering system. Not only would it be ridiculous since IVs are suppose to represent the Pokemons genes. It should be unchangeable after the Pokemon is hatched/encountered. Also I spent like 2 days breeding my 31 IV Milotic. . .and less time breeding my Gengar, Alakazam and Sneasel with 31 in important stats. It would just suck having all that be for nothing. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who took the time and effort to breed for IVs either.