Binary Options In 2020: Can You Still Make Money ...

The Problem with Anthem: Part 3

In part 1 of this essay, I outlined 7 game design principles against which I believe games should be measured.
In part 2, I explored Anthem's adherence to these principles and highlighted its successes and failures
In this final section, I put forward a suite of suggestions to address the failures highlighted in part 2, keeping in mind the principles put forward in part 1.

"Resurrecting this turkey"

If you read part 2, you'll discover a long litany of flaws. What on earth can be done to fix this?

To a certain extent, it depends on the amount of effort you want expend upon the title. Most of the issues are not surface-level defects they're core design decisions which are exceptionally detrimental to game-play and require significant effort to correct.

Still, on the presumption you want to correct as much as possible, here's a way forward. And bear in mind, this is a list which focuses on dealing with Anthem's deep flaws. There's no way these could all be corrected, it'd be overkill. However highlighting these flaws and suggesting corrective action can be useful in pointing the way forward. For future games.


Technical
The first issue is what appears to be a lack of resource streaming. Anthem's loading times are insane. Given an NVMe SSD can effectively stream 3.5GIGABYTES per second into ram, you could - even if you need to pull resources from multiple places - load data into 16GB of RAM in under 10 seconds. While there's no doubt much of that data will need to be processed, swizzled and downloaded into the graphics card, there is absolutely no justification for Anthem's appalling loading times. Something is wrong here, whether it be the I/O routines or the resource management system. Put simply, this pipeline is not functioning well. It would make a lot of sense to optimize every single aspect of it until it's working properly.

Second, create a resource management system which allows pre-preemptive asset loading and prioritization. Texture management might consider optimizing for visible textures using a "light-cone" style approach where the resource management system uses a visibility solution and knowledge of the player's maximum traversal speed to calculate how far away "in seconds" each texture or texture group is and preemptively loads and unloads them based on need. (Provided you have some kind of reasonable hierarchical scene graph in place and can quickly perform coarse visibility determination.)

This is the primary technical challenge inherent in creating an open world, so it's mystifying why the development team apparently chose to skip this. Open worlds live and die on their real-time resource management systems. If you can't stream assets dynamically, you just don't have an open world.

Going back to our loop cascade, let's address the failures to adhere to the principles in each loop:

The Traversal Loop
The traversal loop fails on the "choice", "challenge" and "reward" principles. This is because the world architecture is simplistic and the jet-packs devoid of any meaningful restrictions. Introducing challenge into the traversal loop requires a more densely complex world with vastly reduced capabilities for the jet-packs (at least at first). Players need more complex ways of interacting with the environment beyond gazing at it.

What's the reward for keeping your jet-pack cool? You get to keep flying.
What's the penalty for failing to do so? You crash to the ground and have to wait.

Instead of a range of outcomes, you have two. A binary outcome, as it were. No mapping of multiple skill levels to differing outcomes and no real reward or penalty. Traversal carries no risk, contains no reward. It's a milquetoast parody of real game traversal.

As a result, the player is a spectator to the world, not an active participant in it.

You really want to get an idea of how bad this is? Look up some Youtube videos on "Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice". Look at the traversal, how it enables exploration, how it sets up stealth attacks, how it gives the player options when deciding how to navigate through a scenario. Yes, it's a different style of game, but that's not the point. Anthem has none of this, which is why traversal is boring.


So, this is the kind of thing you'd need to do to beef up that traversal loop.

A) The return of fall damage.
No risk, no reward. Fall damage brings risk to the proceedings. Of course this is meaningless without rearchitecting the damage system in general. There are a number of ways this could be approached, but this is another topic addressed further down.

Fall damage allows the world to become more dangerous and provides the players with incentive to look for safe pathways through the world.
Of course to make this meaningful you need...

B) Risk/reward based traversal.
The main problem with Anthem's world is that it's dead. Dead in the sense that it's a picturesque painting which reduces the player to the role of spectator. This elimination of the player's agency is surprisingly consistent. The world has no institutional memory and as a consequence, the player has no lasting impact upon it. The player's jet=pack ruffles the water, but for all his efforts, the world is indifferent to his traversal abilities, his firepower and - most of all - his intent.

Traversal should provide opportunities to explore. To pursue reward while risking much. Dark Souls epitomizes the tension between risk and reward and Anthem would do well to add some of its own. Achieving this without rearchitecting the majority of the world would be practically impossible but Anthem is a crystal clear example of the need for your traversal loop to contain challenge and reward.

Anthem has none and as a consequence has managed to make flying Iron-man style suits boring. Chew over that for a bit.

Classic risk/reward schemes involve the player exploring for rewards and having to take risks in order to chase after the really big ones.

The Jet-pack needs to be significantly nerfed and the player needs to be given the opportunity to cling to the environment and plan their next move. An environment which banishes most of the wide open spaces except for vistas which open up when you strive to reach the high points of the map. High points which require risk and reward the player with stunning views and cool loot. Yes - remember earning loot through exploration and skill-based effort? That.

All of this requires the world to become a lot more dense. Those wide open spaces are supposed to be vistas, not empty areas you traverse by holding down a button. They'd have to go.

C) Choice
In terms of traversal, Anthem willfully deprives the player of options. Get a navigation market and blast toward it at maximum speed. Even worse, since Anthem is a cooperative shooter which is absolutely obsessed with tethering players to each other, traversal occurs at the speed of the fastest and most impatient player in the group. Those who might want to appreciate the beauty of the world or try something out are unable to do so because Anthem drags them along to the next objective regardless of their wishes. This is yet another in the long list of bewildering design decisions which reflect a complete unfamiliarity with the essentials of good game-play.

Options go hand in hand with risk/reward based traversal, but providing multiple routes to a goal allows the player the opportunity to tailor their approach. This feeds into the scenario loop where the player evaluates the challenge before them and decides how they'll approach it.

Unfortunately, Anthem has no scenario loop, so choosing a route to a target (high/low/underwater) is irrelevant. You land. Shoot. Dodge. Hide behind the environment. How you got there is irrelevant. This is because Anthem doesn't want to be anything other than a looter-shooter, so the option for stealth or tactics is completely absent. Shoot the thing. Trigger combos when you can. Rinse. Repeat. It's about as close to pulling a slot-machine handle as it's possible for a 3d game to get - the only difference is that slot machines give you gratification much more quickly.

Anthem needs to stop forcing players together. The benefit is questionable and casual matchmaking really is a crap shoot. Sure you can lock other players out of your session, but this isn't the default and the player is penalized for doing so (with lower xp).


The Combat Loop
Traversal plays almost no role in combat, so combat is pretty boring. The limitless possibility of the Javelin suit often needs to be artificially restricted (with no fly zones) as the designers realize their mistake and try and bring the player back down to earth.

Combat is run and gun with a limited suite of options. There's no opportunity to herd enemies and effectively utilize area-of-effect, no way for players to distinguish themselves with smart play, it's mostly just combo-triggering and a war of attrition between your gun's numbers and the shield/health numbers of the enemies.

Titans are cheesy as hell. Not only can they fling homing fireballs at you, they can materialize them on top of you. This makes Titans tedious to kill, rather than challenging and entertaining.

The environment is practically irrelevant to the combat. It acts as an obstacle and shield, but provides no other possible interactions.

A) Damage - combat and otherwise must persist.
Without persistent damage, the Javelin is a monster which only fails when temporarily overwhelmed. This partitions each combat encounter into a separate event with no lasting implications and the Javelin is essentially immortal outside combat. Consider the possibilities when persistent damage requires the player to reach specific zones and may require resources to repair. All of a sudden, the world of Anthem becomes more dangerous and has far greater potential for risk/reward scenarios to play out.
Consider also a scenario in which the player fights to the top of a mountain through a succession of difficult encounters with damage persistence a factor. Consider further the possibility that the player can lose the valuable items he's carrying if he can't get them back to the fort or to a storehouse.

This would help Anthem with its lack of risk and reward.

B) Bring tactics into combat.
Doing this requires the players to have a more varied suite of abilities. Allowing players to consider tradeoffs and develop a Javelin to suit their own personal style. Shoot, melee, combo setup and combo trigger are not an inspiring suite of options.

C) Bring the environment into combat
Part of the problem here is that environmental interaction is minimal. Given the opportunity to manipulate the environment, the suite of available tactical options available to players would be expanded, thus increasing their ability to use the environment tactically.

EG: Diverting water, tipping rocks, creating pits or utilising the wind.

D) Create unique, interesting and challenging enemies.
Anthem's enemies are boring and vary between irrelevant fodder and cheesy bosses. The giant spider is the most interesting enemy to fight and this was in the demo. That this represents the high point of the game rather than an indicator of the game's quality is a savage indictment of the combat encounter design.


E) Allow the player to employ high-risk/high-reward strategies.
One of the key aspects of Dark Souls style games is that the reward justifies the risk. Boss fights results in considerable rewards and the fight itself is often an exercise in choosing between small, safe incremental damage and high-risk/high reward strategies which offer the lure of closing the right out quickly.

Balancing risk vs reward is another aspect of player choice - and thus personalization. Anthem's narrow range of combat expression limits the possibility for such strategies, but redesigning the enemies and opening up the player's capabilities would enable this kind of tactical choice on a moment by moment basis.

EG: Do I try a risky, high-damaging move and shut an enemy down before he can trigger reinforcements or do I find a good defensive position and chip away at health until everyone - including reinforcements - are dead? (Note that this kind of consideration is not an option in Anthem).

F) Increase the player's range of expression in combat
One thing about Diablo 3 - the player has a plethora of options in terms of how he'll build his character and optimize the use of high-level loot to cope with the challenges of significantly tougher encounters.

Anthem needs to allow the player to do more than shoot and trigger combos. For example - and really just off the top of my head - consider the following possibilities:

- Slow time/stasis
- Area effect
- Mind control
- Cloak
- Stealth/Backstab
- Environmental destruction
- Artillery strike
- Decoys

What's important to realize is that these options must be exercised against challenging enemies. Anthem has too much useless fodder whose only purpose is to die and drop armor and ammunition. (Speaking of which - the ammunition inventory mechanic is the absolute pits.)


The Resource Loop
The fundamental idea behind the resource loop is to allow the player to accumulate a kind of virtual currency which can then be traded for expanded capabilities, thus allowing the player to customise the game in a way which appeals to them most. This is often experience points, levels, praxis points or some other accumulation. This allows the player to exercise choice over the medium to long term and customise the game to suit his predilections and skill-set.

To do so, the player needs a tech tree. And consider the other possibilities:
- Discovering an ancient blueprint and going on a quest to retrieve the other blueprints and to find the necessary items to build a new Javelin platform.
- Discovering new technologies which can be used to develop a whole new class of abilities
- Gaining rare resources which can only be found through skilled exploration of the landscape



The Loot Loop
This is the most objectionable and least fun aspect of the whole exercise. Destiny and Anthem want to draw the player into an operant conditioning (gambling) loop where pretty colors addict players into repeating a joyless grind as often as humanly possible.

It's a cynical exercise to begin with, but if you want to actually make this work, you need to first expand the capabilities of your mechs, throw in a tech tree and then provide a wide range of possible buffs which extend far beyond the classic "more shields/more armobigger guns" paradigm. Anthem's loot sucks because there's not many ways it can buff the mechs, not because the drop rates are rubbish. (Oh, and is there a screen somewhere which shows the accumulated results of all your buffs? Because if there is I can't find the damn thing.)



Conclusion
To wrap this up: I had high hopes for Anthem and was incredibly disappointed by the result. And this is not an isolated example. I really am increasingly bewildered by an increasing lack of game design chops in some AAA studios. Some people are doing it well, but a fair amount are doing it pretty badly. I don't know what happened with this title, but it feels like Bioware lacks anyone who really understands game-play. A significant correction is needed and the importance of challenge, reward and multi-axial player choice really does need to be reiterated as these founding principles really do seem to have become lost along the way.

So if there's three things which I hope this essay is pounding into some people's heads, it's this: Choice! Challenge! Reward! These are the essentials people. (And it's why "Gone Home", "Dear Esther" and "What remains of Edith Finch" are not games.)

If Bioware implements even half of what I've outlined here, they've got half a chance of resurrecting this turkey. If they keep tinkering with drop rates and promising minuscule content drops every 3 months, then stick a fork in it - Anthem is done.


TL;DR - Anthem is boring. Hey maybe make it fun?

submitted by PJ_Heywood to AnthemTheGame [link] [comments]

CMV: Hollywood rom-coms, chick flicks and mainstream romance movies all serve to pacify women’s demands of a plugged-in Alpha (in practice, a Better Beta or Beta Bux)

I’ll try and keep this one a bit shorter (!) than my last life story essay…ah shit it’s already on 3000 words. Look I put effort into my posts
I’m quite often seeing this trend on PPD:
Young TRPer: WE WERE LIED TO! Everyone said Just Be Yourself! Looks Don’t Matter! Confidence is Everything! Good Guy gets the Girl! Don’t Change!
Blue Pill: LOL who the fuck told you this?
YT: EVERYONE! Our parents, our family, the media, our church, our teachers, hell even our friends from what they’d heard on the Internet and seen in movies…
BP: Why the fuck would you believe them? Why are you so literal minded? Are you an idiot? Are you a ‘sperg? You’re a moron I’m done #terpherpderp
I haven’t decided how I feel about these, but I can admit that it must be frustrating for both parties.
I’m going to admit that I never bought into the whole Looks Don't Count thing. I don’t get that part of TRP’s complaints; it should be quite obvious from niceguys and justneckbeardthings among just about everywhere else that girls do not generally go for fat guys. Especially now that women are talking so, so much about who’s hot or who’s not.
My family did try and encourage me that ‘looks don’t matter’ or rather ‘good women don’t care so much about looks.’ This is slightly different, but actually feeds into the Myth of the Quality Woman, something which Rollo debunked here and I’ll expand upon below:
http://therationalmale.com/2011/09/14/afc-social-conventions/
I think the term ‘Quality’ woman is a misnomer. Guys tend to apply this term at their leisure not so much to define what they’d like in a woman (which is actually an idealization), but rather to exclude women with whom they’d really had no chance with in the first place, or mistakenly applied too much effort and too much focus only to be rebuffed.** This isn’t to say that there aren’t women who will behave maliciously or indiscriminately, nor am I implying that they ought to be excused out of hand for such. What I am saying is that it’s a very AFC predilection to hold women up to preconceived idealizations and conveniently discount them as being less than “Quality” when you’re unable to predict, much less control their behaviors.
The dangers inherent in this convention is that the AFC (or the even the ‘enlightened man’ subscribing to the convention) then limits himself to only what he perceives as a Quality woman, based on a sour-grapes conditioning. Ergo, they’ll end up with a “Quality” woman by default because she’s the only candidate who would accept him for her intimacy. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy by process of elimination.** Taken to its logical conclusion, they shoot the arrow, paint the target around it and call it a bullseye, and after which they feel good for having held to a (misguided) conviction.
So why is this a social convention then? Because it is socially unassailable. Since this convention is rooted to a binary premise, no one would likely challenge it. It would be foolish for me to say “Yes Mr. Chump I think you ought to avoid what you think of as Quality women.” Not only this, but we all get a certain satisfaction from the affirmation that comes from other men confirming our assessment of what category a woman should fit into. Thus it becomes socially reinforced.
Beware of making your necessity a virtue in making a Quality woman your substitute for a ONEitis idealization.**
My family also basically helped to de-sexualise me. No sex talk in a Christian household, and so I grew up with little interest in it despite per pressure to do so. Hmph. Moving on
I had my wake-up call young. Due to being bullied re: Dyspraxia and poor social skills/integration, and my family being overweight, I too started to love to eat, and comfort eat. And I piled on the weight. A hot girl called me a fat spaz when rejecting me when I was 11, still bitter at her but in some ways she helped me, I've since then not once been obese. I have since then flipped all over the physical SMV spectrum from SMV3-SMV8, having had my most major confidence boosts when I started lifting and really getting into the whole athletics department at about 15. I’ve got complacent lately and, after staying quite slim from walking to and from campus every day, am starting to get skinny fat right now ugh...but I've never truly been medically, problematically overweight since then. I knew for a FACT that it’d kill my chances with women.
But I definitely did buy into Be Nice as in Be Good Looking and Nice. As in "you should be a handsome, really sweet guy who's head over heels for her; in fact, **being sweet makes you seem MORE handsome". Like Harvey in Sabrina the Teenage Witch (my sister made me watch a lot of Nickelodeon, I also wanted Cartoon network or Fox Kids!) This is also, as I'll demonstrate, a standard Disney Renaissance trope, and I absolutely adored that shit growing up, my secret love (can't think of better phrase for hat fuck). Once you're over 16 that sort of behaviour has you called pussy-whipped by guys, and friend zoned by women. Behaviour becomes a massive part of attraction once a boy becomes a man, and it's the behaviour popular dating advice for men recommends which is such a turn-off.
That was a slight digression for context, but it leads onto my main point: The feminine imperative, i.e. the collective social consciousness of our society, has used media (not in a conspiracy fashion, bit in a ‘it’s just the done thing’ fashion) such as Hollywood to remove men’s masculine side and mould them into Beta Buxes. The fashion of which is determined by the audience and media subjects in question.
I have a theory that any romance story since the 90s from Disney to rom-coms is fem-centric and used to mould men into Beta Buxes with Oneitis. These fall into 2 types, broadly: • Loser gets the Hot Girl.
Example: Every film for geeks and guys ever, Adam Sandler, aw hell see this list by u/whitepoison
Knocked Up, Super bad, American Pie. Hollywood loves stories about betas getting girls. It sells and gives false hope. Growing up with Disney and nick kid shows I saw they loved to give that beta some attention as well. Its not just in movies as well. All the advice I ever got was be as nice as possible and wait for that good girl.
Extending the definition of ‘Loser’ a little to ‘unconventionally attractive, childish goof’ for u/TheKickboxingGuy
Any Kevin James movie. Any Michael Cera movie. Any movie with a goofy, silly, or unconventionally "hot" character who winds up getting the girl like Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen, Andy Samberg, Danny Trejo, Bill Murray, Robin Williams, Adrien Brody, Mike Myers, Jack Nicholson, Will Ferrell, etc, etc. Most comedic movies have main characters winding up with incredibly hot women by the end of the program. In fact feminism even recognizes this trend and passes it off as valuing men for their personalities and valuing women for their looks.
https://www.reddit.com/PurplePillDebate/comments/3klx8g/if_you_saw_this_thread_except_with_the_genders/cuyjqn9
Average Girl/Plain Jane gets the Hot Guy. Example: Many ‘chick-flicks’ (especially common in British soaps at the moment) e.g. Bridget Jones.
The difference is that
  1. The Loser ‘Mans Up’ to become a good responsible self-sacrificing BB, no longer shallow-and then the Quality Woman learns to love him 'for who he is' despite his (actually respectable) looks
  2. The Hot Guy gets over himself to see what a great catch the average girl is, and thus 'dates down' to the protagonist
In both cases Hypergamy is satisfied by fem-centric frame.
Let’s actually elaborate on this.
1) Loser Gets the Girl. R-coms and low-brow chick-flicks typically involve a Loser getting the Girl by Just Being Himself and being a genuinely Nice, Great Guy. This is one of former Nice Guy beta’s in TRP’s major compaints; this isn’t how reality works. Girls go for hot, successful, charismatic guys with their shit together (and often wealthy, but never destitute).
But what's interesting is that it's a double-edged sword of fem-centrism! You see, there is an explicit way that this man's true self and nice-ness/ future greatness is demonstrated-it's Beta Game by becoming a plugged-in Beta Bux.
Let’s assume Loser means precisely that; at the start, he's a loser by mainstream social standards. He's going nowhere with his job/career, he’s often a college drop-out, he’s somewhat out of shape (ranging from decisively fat to ‘beer belly’ or ‘the college fifteen’) he's hooked on beer, pizza and videogames/porn to hide from the realities of being an adult, as such his relationships suck. He’s also usually shallow as fuck-wants hot girls, leading female actress is the love of his life but 'out of his league'. He presents himself as this big lovable goof, who’d be awesome if he was your son-but is just too much to handle for a relationship.
The girls hate him for it, he's a man-child to them. By ‘hate’ I don’t mean explicit hatred, that’s not great material for a light-hearted movie, but obviously the guy isn’t successful with women. Even if he gets a date, he can’t hold down a relationship. The female protagonist also often hates that he values her looks so much, or otherwise shows evidence of ‘toxic masculinity’ such as emotional outbursts to sports or hyper-sexuality (see: shallow, obsessed with porn and hot girls out of his league like he’s still in high school) So she rejects him, initially. She also does this to Jocks-there is always a hot, popular, but stupid, sexist jock who comes onto her that this girl, the Quality Woman, rejects. This is really important; yes girls in the film like the Jock or Alpha, because looks are sexy-to Girls. Stupid Shallow Girls. But the Quality Woman, the female actress, does not.
This is the basic feminist model applied in the Disney Renaissance, btw. Like, this is literally the message of Beauty and the Beast: Gaston is a narcissistic douche, and despite hordes of other women flocking to him, that makes him ugly to the intelligent Belle, considered the most beautiful girl in town. Quality Women pick men who are not shallow and humble or entitled. The Beast used to be a Gaston, but then he became humble, lost his ego and bitterness, and sacrificed himself for Belle. I ate that shit up when I was a kid, and shall expand upon that shaming mechanism of the feminine imperative in part 2.
So even in high school dude-bro movies and sit-coms such as The Simpsons; as the film progresses, our lovable goof 'mans up' and show his 'real depth’, going out of his way to show how much he loves her, overcoming his base sexuality and boyish needs in favour of the responsibilities of man. This was covered in Aristotle’s Poetics ugh wish I could remember the term anyway this is the typical ordeal that the man must face, overcoming his harmartia to be a man-child and becoming a good self-sacrificing Beta Bux for society, as a Real Man does. From this boys and young men struggling with women learn that girls value Beta traits, Oneitis, Masculine HonouResponsibility and commitment over anything else. Even hot girls with options. This leads to absolute hell for average 16 year old guys, who can't understand why girls go for good looking, often moderately narcissistic jocks who are (allegedly) sexist, shallow, sex-obsessed and irresponsible, and often treat them as shit.
The trope may be slightly adjusted for unconventionally attractive and childish but otherwise responsible male protagonists proving their value by heavy beta Game and showing that they may be a child at heart, but they do have a serious, responsible side, and a sense of duty to a higher cause. E.g. Jack Black, Robin Williams, Will Ferrell
2) Average Girl gets the Hot Guy: The subject of much chick lit and chick flicks, it’s another exercise in Hypergamy and Solipsism. For a rudimentary example of female Hypergamy with little back-story, you may all be familiar with this joke from Inside Out, where the kid’s wife is getting fed up with Dad sucking as a parent, and her Emotions ‘change the channel’ to a fantasy about a Brazilian helicopter pilot (basically Chad) wooing her on a beach-to their delight, of course.
Link: https://38.media.tumblr.com/bd4c9cd84eb109a3b8ede0019c7a6422/tumblr_nrre1eosOk1qbsko9o1_500.gif
Even higher value men themselves have, in these movies and outside in some cases, been brainwashed by the feminine imperative. I’m taking the basic plot of Bridget Jones as my example for these.
In these films, the man is often already Alpha in the way that the Loser was not. He’s got his shit together; he’s quite rich, or stinking rich, (apparently) handsome, successful, and charismatic-but secretly bumbles, especially around women he’s attracted to. E.g. Hugh Grant, Colin Firth. Basically anything with these chumps in it. The over-riding factor is getting these guys to 'lose their ego'. Feminism has always been obsessed with the notion of the over-blown male ego.
It’s not so much that they are repulsed by her-she’s not ugly per se, she’s a plain Jane-but ‘circumstances’ prevent them being together. She’s ‘not my type’. He’s ‘a busy man’ and has more important things to attend to. He’s highly desirable, both socially and he has other women on the grapevine. It’s often sold as a class/status divide (which also fits into the Hypergamy of the target demographic, mid 20something to middle-aged women). Nobody’s going to outright say she’s not in his league, because that would kill the fantasy, break the illusion. And if someone DOES say it? See below.
But what invariably happens? He falls for her. (Well actually, in Bridget Jones 2 high value guys fall for her, and fight over her in public, falling into a fountain…yeah I’ve seen it) He starts to question whether he’s truly ‘following his dreams’. He can’t stop thinking about her in his workplace, while he’s about to have the company take off, he’s giving the Downing Street address or whatever. (UK Prime Minister’s residence for the unaware)
And at some point, the turning point of the film, the Alpha says/does something particularly arrogant, perhaps sleeps with another woman or makes a taboo by calling her ‘Chunky’ ‘Homely’ etc. (A man instantly becomes a misogynist after calling a woman Fat, after all) Of course this pisses off our protagonist no end; she makes a scathing remark about him, possibly publicly humiliates him, and he’s left kicking himself in the foot with shame. “What was I thinking? I’m such an idiot. Why did I say that?” He then has a reformation of character; stops being a player, or so egotistical or shallow, makes even more ostentatious advances to demonstrate his affection-and she doesn’t actually FALL for him, she merely forgives him. But they kiss and make up and get married so happily ever after for (her) them.
Obviously we have 50 Shades of GreyGrey as another example of this, Mr Grey being the impossibly Alpha yet troubled man who seeks solace from his hidden complex in the affections of a plain Jane. It is quite obvious that the likes of Christian Grey would be able to date wealthy, upper-class models (um, if he got rid of his abusive streak). But invariably, men like Grey settle (if we base matters off raw SMV). And this is the porno lesson young women learn, and even some older women have internalized thanks to joking-OK-maybe-not mixing it up with actual feminist rhetoric. That Real Men will get over themselves and their big fat ego, committing to/marrying a Real Woman. There is a reason that the ravishment fantasy is so damn popular; a high value man uncontrollable desiring you and wanting to commit to you.
Yo Radical One said to me earlier [sic] “what kind of love is it to settle? Love should be intense and passionate” to which my response was:
Well obviously nobody who wants to make a buck sells it like that, mate.
It's always "I realised how beautiful and amazing you really are, and what a fool I was to take you for granted", isn't it?
with a big snog.
Rarely do we see the post-honeymoon sex or attraction, unless it's a flash-forward to the happily-ever-after-house-kids-and-white-picket-fence.
And that's what's rammed into both men's and women's heads. He got over himself and realised what a catch she really was.
Solipsism and hypergamy fully satisfied for all the women watching.
Lessons for the high value man here: Ego is obnoxious. Shy girls deserve a date. Frumpy girls deserve a date. ‘Downtown girls’ deserve a date. [Billy Joel playing in my head at the moment and when she knooows what she wants, from her ti-ii-iiime] In any case, Good men date down.
Conclusions for the tl;dr lurkers:
Thoughts?
submitted by Xemnas81 to PurplePillDebate [link] [comments]

Binary Options Trading - Binary Options - The Best Binary Options Trading Guide for 2017 Binary options trading  How to trade binary options? BINARY OPTIONS STRATEGY- Binary Options Newest Method 2020 Binary options strategy 2020  Binary trading Best binary options strategy 2020  Binary trading How to trade binary options?  Binary options trading strategy

Predilection for all things binary options November 01, 2017 With binaries things are the same. Some binary options would be more preferable in a certain market, however, others will not be suitable for trading when the same event takes place. Improving your education and skills – Practice is everything, and the deeper experience you have, the more advanced you will become as a trader with binary options. However, there is no way for you to advance ... Plans & Pricing. Simply choose plan Predilection For All Things Binary Options and buy it. After purchase, you will get in member area complete Predilection For All Things Binary Options installation video tutorials, license Predilection For All Things Binary Options key, instructions, best trading timeframe and more with Pro signal robot. Binary options betting tips. Geschrieben von am 7. Oktober 2020. Veröffentlicht in Allgemein. Schreibe einen Kommentar. Binary Options Betting Tips ... Friday, 22 June 2018. Predilection for all things binário opções The outcome of this is always a yes or no, meaning you win it all or lose it all, hence the name binary option. The major attraction is that the risk and reward are known to you in advance. Option types. There are other different types of options available. All their outcomes have a binary result that is “yes or no”. 1. High/low or up/down Monday, 5 December 2016. Predilection For All Things Binary Options Binary options get their name from their all-or-nothing payouts. Either you win or lose—there is no in-between. The payout could be a fixed amount of cash, a specific amount of stock, or some other underlying asset. Binary options are attractive because you know the risks and rewards in advance. There is a fixed payout for a fixed risk. Most binary options are triggered by small moves ... All these advancements make binary options trading easier (for people willing to put in the time to learn the system inside and out). Still Legit? Yes, binary options is legit, and growing. But you will still have to jump through lots of hoops to make it in the industry as a beginner. There are also plenty of scams to take advantage of helpless new binary options traders who don’t know how ... Learn the most common types of binary options you can choose from: up/down, high/low, touch/no touch, in/out, higher/lower or above/below. As you probably already know, all binary options involve the prediction of the monetary value of a certain underlying asset at some point in the future as compared to the present moment(the point is called “expiration date” or “expiration time”). You

[index] [24098] [29857] [20486] [22436] [26603] [19568] [17499] [27383] [26783] [15018]

Binary Options Trading - Binary Options - The Best Binary Options Trading Guide for 2017

With binary options, besides options trading and enjoying yields of up to 92% binary options trading - Conservative binary options trading strategy introduction to binary options trading. Freedom ... Binary options strategy 2020 Binary trading Hi there! I'm Lady Trader and today I'm gonna show you the binary options trading strategy that I use in binary... We are all about Binary Options trading. Our reviews will look at binary options signals, binary options robots, binary options courses and all things relate... And you’re on my YouTube channel where we speak about things like: - Binary option strategy - How to make money online - Travelling - Motivation and self-development. If you want to start to ... I'm Lady Trader and today I'll show you my binary options trading strategy in binary options trading. More binary options tutorials and binary options reviews you can watch in trading playlist ... Binary options is arguably the speediest increasing fiscal trade. A lot of here men and women how to trade binary options all over the globe are actually being attentive to the trade, when ... And you’re on my YouTube channel where we speak about things like: - Binary option strategy - How to make money online - Travelling - Motivation and self-development. If you want to start to ...

http://arab-binary-option.tunawamodfe.tk