Friday, April 24, 2026

The best RETRO games of all times list

 Okay, so similar story as before, but I wanna limit myself to Gen 6 games and older. These games can either run on a low end PC or a retro handheld these days, and yeah, I'm literally gonna top out at gen 6 with most titles being from before.

Favorite Game- Doom 2

Yeah I moved my favorite retro game to just being my favorite game. Doom 2, and by extension, its mods, wads, and other campaigns have been one of the best retro experiences I've had. Now, again, it's hard to say "this is the best game of all time", and honestly, MANY games could have gone here, from Super Mario 64, to Sonic 3 & Knuckles, to Pokemon Red/Blue, but over the years, I just keep coming back to Doom 2 and its associated campaigns. 

Best Story- Starfox 64

Not gonna lie, given Halo 3 on my OG chart, I could've put Halo 2 here, BUT I kinda feel like the silly dialogue and story in this one deserve a mention somewhere. Like, the dialogue in this game is LEGENDARY and people my age still quote it all the time.

Favorite Art Style- Sonic CD

Halo got promoted to another slot for this one, so gonna go with Sonic CD because it was a runner up and OOOH PRETTY COLORS! Super Mario 64 also deserves a runner up here. Seriously Super Mario 64 deserves something here but it's hard to figure out what.

Biggest Personal Impact- Pokemon Red/Blue

Again, I dont really consider most games as having a personal impact on me. But if I had to put one down, I'd put Pokemon as it led to a lot of friends/bonding experiences in my elementary and middle school years, including lifelong friendships. So yeah. Here's to you, pokemon. 

Best Combat- Halo Combat Evolved

I mean, it's right in the name. And it really did offer...combat evolved. it helped pave the way for the FPS genre to move away from the old boomer shooter formula to something similar to what it is today. And its enemies, its AI, the weapon variety, all gave us a single player experience that feels YEARS ahead of its time. it truly lives up to its name. 

Overhated- Spec Ops II Omega Squad

This was a hard one. I didn't own many crappy games, or at least I dont remember many crappy games. I mostly got good titles, and a few odd balls that others didnt care for but were low key good. But most games I own never made it on the imfamous crap lists of worst games ever. However, this one did. Was it bad? Not really. Was it good? Also not really. It was a rather mid military FPS at the time. I kinda liked it, I had fun with it, but when looking at old games I've owned, this one made it on a bad list, so I put this one. I really just have nothing else to put here for old games. Most "overhated" games seem to be modern internet phenomenons where the internet just craps on a game that didnt live up to the hype despite being pretty decent otherwise. But this one was hated, and it...didn't deserve it. It wasnt terrible. Wasnt good, wasnt great, it was very forgettable, but it was kinda like "2000s B movie tier" video game wise. Like a no name action movie you forget, like "sniper" or something. ya know? Again, not good, not bad, it just exists.

Underrated- Doom 64

I stand by this one. I understand why it didnt stand out given better FPS at the time and console exclusivity, but this one deserved the come back it got recently in the 2020s.  

Overrated- The Legend of Zelda: Ocarana of Time

 OMG DAE ZELDA OCARANA OF TIME IS THE BEST GAME EVER?! I feel like that's the modern internet. Everyone swears it's the best game ever. It's just mid. I dont really like zelda, and this game feels overhyped to hell and back. people act like it's a 10/10 best game ever and I just cant get past the first hour without getting bored. 

Also, let's face it, by RETRO standard, Counter Strike actually was a pretty good game. if we're purely judging like pre 2005 games mostly, CS was actually quite innovative for its time. I just dont think it deserved the continued popularity and cult following into the modern day. So...yeah. I'll remove CS and allow it to stand by its own legacy there while anti hugboxing the legend of zelda crowd.

Needs a remake- Goldeneye 007

 So it got a remake in 2010, and apparently another one was cancelled, but yeah, this is a very dated game that was very good by the standards of its times, but I'd like to see it modernized somewhat. Again, the 2010 remake was nice, but something a bit closer to this OG game might suffice. 

Criminally Overlooked- The World Is Not Enough 007

Let's talk about the OTHER 007 game on N64. This one was also pretty good but its very underrated and kinda went ignored in favor of perfect dark and the like at the time. 

Favorite Protagonist- Doom

Giving it to doom slayer again. Runner ups involve James Bond from Goldeneye and several other 007 games of the 90s and early 2000s. Master chief from Halo is another one that stands out. Yeah, Im a simple man. Give me an FPS bad### and teenage me would define their own personality around them. 

Favorite Antagonist- Command & Conquer Red Alert 2 (specifically Yuri's Revenge)

C&C games always had excellent dialogue and story to them, with solid antagonists like Kane. However, I really liked Yuri back in the day in C&C Red Alert 2. He was some russian psychic dude who tried to take over the world by using psychic dominators to mass brainwash the population. Kinda cheesy now, but I loved it at the time. heck, I liked the US vs Russia thing at the time even though the cold war was over.

Best Sound Track- Advance Wars 2

 Honestly, this and C&C could be reversed. Sturm was also a really solid antagonist of the old Advance Wars games. he was like this weird darth vader type figure who launched meteors at people. But honestly, yuri was cooler. At the same time, Red Alert 2 also had a banging sound track, but not as strong as red alert 3's more orchestral version. Still, this little GBA game had a lot of pretty solid sound tracks for its time as well. 

Best multiplayer- Quake III Arena

This is one of the only games I COULD play multiplayer back in the day because it was one of the only games that would run. But yeah, between this and Unreal Tournament, those were our options back in the day. I mean, there was counter strike, but I hate that one and didnt play it until later, so....

Not usually by thing, but....- NFL Blitz 2000

I'm still gonna stick with the sports game here.

Turn my brain off- Unreal Tournament

 As I said I liked playing this one against bots and it helped train my reflexes a bit. I play it i just get into a flow state after a while, kinda like ultra instinct from Dragonball super.

Best with friends- Mario Kart 64

Mario Kart 64 holds this one for reasons previously mentioned

Best Retro game- Super Mario Bros

 So now we need a retro of retros. Which means I'm limiting this to at most gen 4. And it seemed like it just should go to the original super Mario bros. This game basically single handedly resurrected the industry after the 1983 video game crash. So yeah. Definitely deserves a spot if only for historical impact.

Nostalgic Childhood game- Sonic 3 & Knuckles

Yep, sticking with sonic 3 for this one. Although most sonic games could easily fill this spot.

Game everyone should play- Super Mario 64

It didnt fit anywhere else and I feel like it should deserve a spot so I put it here. Honestly, it fits here. It's simple enough that anyone can get into it. Just pick up a controller, wander princess peach's mansion, jump into paintings, collect power stars. Fun. 

And yeah, that's my best RETRO games of all times list. I thought maybe more gen 6 belongs here, but given my formative years were really during gen 4 and gen 5 I seemed to gravitate toward this era of games. like everything else there are a lot of games that probably belong on here too, but I just couldn't fit them, and yeah... 

 

Best years to build a PC, version 2

 So, I already made a post about this, but want to improve on it and emphasize a few things. Ultimately, I wanna focus on the longevity of the build, particularly the CPU and GPU. The ultimate deciding factor is how long a midrange build (with a $200-300ish CPU/GPU) will last. I will, however, offer nuance in some years as cheaper/more expensive builds are economical for various reasons.

2006

 As I said, you CAN get a good combo here that would last for a while in SOME form, but you'd get a MUCH better build if you waited a year. Still, you couldn't have known that at the time and you'd still likely get a console equivalent build that would last a while. Honestly, it was about average for the time.

 Example PC: E6600, 8600 GT

Estimated longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2007

Probably the golden year of the late 2000s. You got high quality components for relatively cheap, leading to an abnormally long build cycle for the time. While not too out of the ordinary by modern standards, it was a very long lasting build for the time. 

Example PC: Q6600, 8800 GT/HD 3850

Estimated Longevity: 5-6 years (CPU could go 6-8 with GPU upgrade)

Tier: S

2008

Like 2007, but everything was cheaper. Some expensive stuff came out, but it wasn't worth buying at the time. Your best bet was getting cheap refreshes here. 

Example PC: Q6600, 9800 GTX+/ HD 4850

Estimate longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2009

2009 was a weird year. You made out good if you bought a Radeon HD 5000 series at the end of the year, but otherwise it was just 2008 again with less longevity. 

Example PC (Q4): i5 750/Phenom II X4 965, HD 5770/5850

Estimated longevity: 5-6 years

Example PC (Q1-3):  i5 750/Phenom II X4 965, HD 4870/GTX 260

Estimated longevity: 3-4 years

Tier: B

2010

Probably a better year at the time. CPUs weren't amazing and didn't age well given what came after, but the GPUs lasted as long as could be expected at the time

 Example PC (Q4): i5 750/Phenom II X4 965, HD 5850/GTX 460

Estimated longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2011

 2011 was a god year for CPUs but a mediocre one for GPUs. Sandy bridge was legendary but the GPUs kinda got the short end of the stick. So it was kinda middling.

 Example PC: i5 2500k, GTX 560 Ti/HD 6950

 Estimated longevity: 3-4 years (CPU was 5-7 arguably with a GPU upgrade)

Tier: B

2012

Example PC: i5 3570k, HD 7850/GTX 660 

Estimated longevity: 5-6 years

Tier: S

2013

Things started to get a big more middling for the midrange in this year. Not the strongest.

Example PC:  i5 4670k, GTX 760/R9 280

Estimated longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2014

This is a year where if you spent a little more, you could get a truly legendary build. Otherwise, it kinda sucked though. 

 Example PC: i5 4690k, GTX 960/R9 280

Estimated longevity: 3-4 years

Upgraded "legendary" PC: i7 4790k,  GTX 970

Estimated longevity: 7-9 years

Tier: B

2015

Really a bad year if you stuck to midrange

Not a bad year if you spent more on a premium build. 

Example PC: i5 6600k, GTX 960/R9 380x 

Estimated longevity- 2-3 years

Upgraded PC: i7 6700k, GTX 970

Estimated longevity- 7-8 years

Tier: C

2016

Legendary year on GPUs, but once again, a bad year unless you upgraded to the expensive i7 model

Example PC: i5 6600k, GTX 1060/RX 480

Estimated longevity: 2-3 years (GPU would be good for around 6-7)

Upgraded PC: i7 6700k,  GTX 1060/RX 480

Estimated longevity: 6-7 years

Tier: B

2017

 Early on was bad because of middling CPU options, but still better than 2016. I'd recommend a Ryzen 1600 for an early year build unless you buy an i7 6700k/7700k. Late year opened up to truly be something special though. The Ryzen 1600x wouldn't last super long, but at least you'd have Zen 4 which can slot much better CPUs in it too. 

Example PC: R5 1600, GTX 1060/RX 580

Estimated longevity: 4-5 years

Example PC (Q4): i5 8600k, GTX 1060/RX 580

Estimated longevity: 5-6 years

Tier: A

2018

 CPU wise was a repeat of late 2017. GPU wise you got the RX series, which had better longevity, but was expensive. You kinda got screwed unless you paid out of the target price range on GPUs. 

Example PC: i5 9600k, GTX 1660 Ti

Estimated Longevity: 4-5 years

Upgraded PC: i5 9600k, RTX 2060

Estimated longevity: 5-6 years

Tier: B

2019

GPU wise, 2019 was a bad time, for CPUs, it was an okay time with the Ryzen 3000 series hitting things. 

Example PC: R5 3600, RX 5600 XT

Estimated Longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2020

 As I said, god help you if your computer broke. Wasn't bad on the CPU side, but COVID and crypto destroyed the GPU market. I didnt mention it here as Ive mostly focused on midrange and reasonably premium builds, but there was also a lower midrange with stuff like "50" cards that was relatively popular for budget buyers and all of that died around here. It was on its way out after Nvidia started getting greedy in 2018, but yeah, here it truly died. 

Example PC: i5 10600k/R5 3600, GTX 1050 ti/1650

Estimated Longevity: 2-3 years (CPU could go 4-6)

Tier: F 

2021

The crapshow continues. RX 6000 and RTX 3000 series cards launched but good luck affording them. Btw, those 1050 tis and 1650s I'm recommending cost like $400-500 in this era, so you were paying premium prices for what used to be sub $200 budget cards.

Example PC: i5 12400/R5 5600, GTX 1050 Ti/1650

Estimated longevity: 1-2 years (CPUs still viable in 2026 as of writing this)

 Tier: F

2022

 For most of the year it was the same as 2021, but late year prices improved, especially on RX 6000 series cards. 

Example PC (Q4): R7 5700x/i5 12600k, RX 6650 XT

Estimated Longevity: 5-6 years

Example PC (Q1-3): R7 5700x/i5 12600k, GTX 1050 ti/1650

Estimated longevity: 1-2 years (GPU), 5-6 years (CPU) 

Tier: B

2023

Again, the best it was gonna get post pandemic. The new normal.

Example PC: R7 5700x/i7 12700k, GTX 4060/RX 7600

Estimated longevity: 4-5 years

Tier: B

2024

Lots of good deals but not a ton of changes. I think 8 GB VRAM is gonna bite people in the ### here. 

 Example PC: R7 7700x/i7 12700k, GTX 4060/RX 7600

Estimated longevity: 3-4 years (GPU), 5-6 years (CPU)

Tier: C

2025

Very mid year tbqh unless you buy up on GPU. Q4 sucked because RAMpocalypse began. I really think if you buy 8 GB RAM in 2025, its like buying 2 GB in 2015. It might be all you can afford, but yeah, good luck once games start wanting more. 

Example PC: R7 7700x/Core Ultra 7 265k, GTX 5060/RX 9060 XT 8 GB

Estimated longevity: 2-3 years (GPU), 4-6 years (CPU)

 Upgraded PC:  R7 7700x/Core Ultra 7 265k, RX 9060 XT 16 GB

Estimated longevity: 4-6 years

 Tier: C

2026

RAMpocalypse is the worst thing to happen to the GPU market since COVID. 

Example PC: R7 7700x/Core Ultra 5 250k, GTX 5050/RX 6650 XT

Estimated Longevity: 1-2 years (GPU), 3-6 years (CPU) 

I ain't even gonna do an upgraded PC since a decent GPU would cost north of $400 these days. 

Tier: F

So, with that said, let's update the tier list. I'll focus 75% on the worse build if I include 2, since the other build was only available for one quarter of the year, or required an upsell of $100 or so ($200 if both CPU/GPU) in order to make it work.

Results

S Tier: 2007, 2012

A Tier: 2017

B Tier: 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2022, 2023

C Tier: 2015, 2024, 2025

D Tier:  None

F Tier: 2020, 2021, 2026

With that said, what can we deduce?

Well, in retrospect, most years are pretty average. Even if there are years with the golden CPU, the golden GPU, for the most part, very few years do everything align and be perfect. Either the CPUs are bad, the GPUs are bad, part of the year is good, part of the year is bad, or it requires an upsell to an i7 or 70 tier (now "60" tier, because nvidia greedy) to make it a good year. Still, there is a year once every 5 years or so where things align.

Another thing I found interesting is at the midrange the best years often have 5-6 year PCs, whereas on average, you're talking 4-5 years. Anything less than 4 is bad. Some years got made worse due to the midrange being crap. 2014-2015 were both pretty bad. But again, the upsell was important.

Sometimes for best longevity, going up a tier can be as important as timing it right. Sometimes an "i7" or similar CPU is SIGNIFICANTLY more important than an i5, since, since sandy bridge, a good "i7" tier build can last upwards to 8-10 years. GPUs have a bit less longevity, but the same principle applies, especially when VRAM or tech like ray tracing (see: 2018) comes into consideration. A 1660 ti sucked, a 2060 was better, and even better, 2070s are still viable today. 1070s on up were viable for longer than a 1060. But the biggest difference came between say, a 2 GB 960 and a 4 GB 970. The 970 was viable until like 2023 for mainstream gaming, whereas the 960 ran out of steam by 2017-2018. Buying a quad core i7 helped in the long term vs an i5, which lacked hyperthreading. The 6 core i7 8700k, which i didnt include as it was almost $400 and the 8600k was a decent CPU, is still viable today.

And in the modern age, we're at a point where it's better to buy a slightly older CPU that's a higher tier than a newer one. The 12th gen intel and 5th gen ryzens are like this. Rather than buy a newer i3 or i5, you could buy an older i7 or r7 and use that. Also, to be fair, i intentionally excluded the 13th and 14th gen because of their...issues. But yeah. Like, I bought an older i9. It was like $600 at the time but I got it for $200. it's kinda like what happened with the Q6600s. Was $600ish in 2006, but by 2007, dropped to like $240 or something, and thus became viable. Buying a 7700k gave me 8600k level performance back in 2017. So yeah, sometimes strategically buying upward is as important as timing it correctly, if not more important.

If anything, this just vindicates my current strategy of buying my PCs piece by piece. Because I CAN just wait for a "golden year" CPU/GPU. Like Im good because I bought my GPU at the end of 2022 when the iron was hot, and then in 2023 bought a CPU which ended up being the right time for that. In 2017, I bought my 7700k as a late 2016 christmas gift as I wanted to hold out for zen 1, and then was disappointed by the 1600/1700 so much I went all 7700k instead. Then at the end of the year my 760 died so I went for a 1060, which ended up being a golden GPU so to speak. So....yeah. That's one thing I'm gonna say. Buying a whole build all at once might sound good on paper, but outside of specific time intervals, it can also backfire as most years always have SOMETHING wrong with them. 

And of course, dont buy when prices are nuts. COVID bad, crypto bad, AI bubble bad. 

If I had to guess, based on current and previous market trends, not only is buying now a bad time to buy, but if you did buy, at least on the GPU side, you'd want to buy up to like a 9060 XT 16 GB or 5060 Ti 16 GB. Which is like $400-500. So dont bother. 8 GB GPUs remind me of the 2 GB period going into 2014-2015. Like youre gonna get burned on that. CPU wise, things were good until rammageddon. Now they're less good.

If I had to guess, the next set of "golden years" will probably come around 2027-2029. I'm leaning toward 2028ish. We need the AI bubble to pop, and we'll need the next gen of CPUs/GPUs, and consoles to hit the market. We need quite a bit of progress for there to be a worthwhile boost over current CPUs. The market has been stagnant in recent years, and it's looking like we'll need zen 6 and nova lake bringing like 12 core X3D CPUs and the like to the forefront. And then we'll need to wait a few more years for prices to drop and normalize, since nowadays it seems like budget CPUs are just last year's premium ones...literally. We'll need there to be a sub $300 GPU with 12 GB or more of VRAM thats 2x as powerful as a 6650 XT or 4060. That aint gonna happen until at least 2027-2028. And once PS6 specs become finalized and we see roll outs, we'll know what the target specs for PCs will be to get something that'll last until like...2035. So yeah. Right now, unless youre desperate, hold everything you got, wait for current crisis to blow over, and buy low around 2028ish if possible. That's my plan at least, given I hit the 2022-2023 window where I got golden hardware for now.  

 

The best games of all time list

 So..I've been seeing this list going around various youtube channels and online communities I follow, and I wanted to fill it out myself and figured it would make a good article, since I've been doing more gaming discourse as of late on here. The list is somewhat flawed as I'll get to, but I did try to fill it out and I'll attempt to justify my choices. 

 Here's the final graphic, btw:

Favorite Game- Fallout 4

So, this is a very hard decision to make. There are so many games in so many genres and it's hard to say, "out of all of these games I've ever played, this one is the best." I mean, I would struggle to narrow this to a top 10, let alone just pick one, but I went with this one. 

The fact is, I wanted to choose a primarily single player title for this one. Multiplayer games come and go with the player base, but single player games are eternal. Candidates over the years would be: Sonic 3 & Knuckles, Mario 64, Doom/Doom 2, the Halo trilogy, etc. But honestly? I think that the bethesda RPGs are the most impactful. They're long lasting, keep me engrossed for hundreds of hours, and make me obsessed with them. From there, I had to decide which one? A lot of people love skyrim, but i kinda found it shallow and i aint a huge fan of high fantasy. I gravitate more toward Fallout. Fallout 3 was the first title I played, it had a great world, but the story sucked. New Vegas had a great story, but other elements were more mediocre. Fallout 4 was a massive improvement on both, even if it's not the best at anything. Fallout 76 was an MMO and definitely not the best the franchise has to offer. Starfield wasn't bad, and ended up making another category, but it's not the best game of all time, not by a long shot. So I went with Fallout 4. It's a solid game, it sucked me in for a good 500 hours through multiple play throughs, had solid game play, and yeah, when I REALLY think about it, if any game deserves the coveted "GOAT" status from me, it's probably this. 

Best Story- Halo 3 (Halo Trilogy, really...)

 I couldnt just choose Halo: The Master Chief collection, but yeah, Halos 1-3 are a huge trilogy and one of the best I've ever seen. Halo CE was kinda mediocre in and of itself. It felt like sci fi B movie ripping off aliens, predatory, etc. But the corresponding books kind of opened up the world a bit which really sucked me in. Halo 2 expanded on the lore and the story greatly, and while it was great in its own right, it ended on a cliffhanger which was infuriating at the time. That said, when Halo 3 came out and we had to finish the fight, it was quasi religious for a lot of us. Seriously, the hype this game had in 2007 was astounding. It tied up all the loose ends, it was the perfect ending to the trilogy. it was so perfect Halo struggled to regain its footing since, and I think halo 3 just set the bar too high where it set up the future of the franchise for failure. 

 Favorite Art Style- Halo Combat Evolved

 Art style is subjective. But one thing I've always been attracted to in video games is OOOH PRETTY COLORS. Sonic CD was an original choice I scrapped. I loved the colors back in the 90s and thought it looked amazing at the time. Arguably, lots of mario games have good art styles, and despite inferior graphics with newer consoles, Mario games always hold up EXTREMELY well. But honestly, I'm just gonna go with Halo CE as that was the advantage of the first halo. It had cutting edge graphics for its time, and everything was OOOH SUPER PRETTY COLORS. I mean, you got the purple alien ships. The environments range from beaches to icy canyons to alien ships. The aliens themselves are colorful and you can literally just paint rooms with their multicolored blood. 

Biggest Personal Impact- Bioshock Infinite

This was perhaps the hardest choice to make. Despite being deeply invested in video games, I dont feel like they make a personal impact on my life, at least not the way some other media does. Most games I like are actiony, and the stories often aren't amazing. 

I started thinking about games that helped me connect to other people, whether they be Doom or MarioKart 64, which I would sometimes play with my parents. Pokemon, which I played with my friends. Chess, which isnt a video game but I played it as one online and met an online girlfriend through that back when I was a teenager. But none of them really felt...right.

But then I just thought about what had the biggest impact on me. And given my obsessive anti work focus, I'll go with Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock infinite was intended to fit this early 1900s aesthetic of america at the time, but it still feels relevant today, between the enemies all being religious psychos, and let's face it, modern society's work ethic feels like it's straight out of Fink Industries with its propaganda. If anything, seeing this propaganda really helped drive home how wicked modern work culture is. When I see people talk about hustle culture and work ethic, I can't help but think of this game.  Be the bee!

 This one is also arguably a runner up for best story, but yeah. Halo has that covered. 

 Best Combat- Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

 People are gonna think I'm basic AF for this one, but hear me out. COD greatly modernized the FPS genre in the 2000s and is responsible for shaping much of the industry today. Given my most overrated title (Counter Strike) and its awful game play, I feel like COD did the opposite to the FPS genre. It kinda standardized modern military shooters, making ADS common, having regenerating health, and having 2 weapons. These design choices impacted gaming to the modern day.

A runner up though is, arguably, Halo though. For campaigns at least, the combat was also great. COD arguably got regenerating health from Halo, and Halo had great combat between the covenant being susceptible to energy weapons and resistant to bullet based weapons, the flood being weak to bullet based weapons and resistant against energy weapons, etc. Every encounter felt strategic. But at the same time, Halo's multiplayer just doesnt hold up, while COD's does. So I feel like COD is more impactful, and I already chose Halo for a few other categories.

Alternatively, Doom also deserves an honorable mention, both classic doom and 2016. Classic doom invented FPS combat in the first place in many ways, although without mods like GZdoom it does feel dated. Doom 2016 also arguably deserves to be here because of it being a rather fast paced single player game with great combat including glory kills, but given the direction the franchise went past that, I'm reluctant to include it, and also, I'm putting enough doom on this list elsewhere. 

Idk. There's a lot of titles that COULD go here, but I feel like COD has been most impactful on modern shooters for better or for worse, and serves as a perfect foil to counter strike (which I hate, more on that later). 

 Overhated- Starfield

 The internet hype machine and the internet hate machine are weird sometimes. They'll take a flawed game, they'll just dunk on it until people think it's the worst POS ever. They'll take a moderately good game and hype it up to levels of delusion that no game can live up to or deserves. There's been a lot of overhated games over the years. First, some honorable mentions. Mass Effect 3. Solid game, just with a let down ending, but the hate back at launch was INSANE. Fallout 76 was another one that was overhated, given the sheer amount of bugs and mediocre lack of story. It deserved some hate, but due to improving over time, has made a huge come back. Battlefield 2042 is another one of these games to some degree. It deserved SOME hate due to releasing in, quite frankly, an unacceptable state, but the battlefield boomers as I called them glommed onto specialists for some reason, which was the least of the game's problems. But honestly, a game that people still hate to this day seems to be starfield. Another one is also Halo 4, which, given the success of 3, was NEVER gonna live up to its hype, and it didn't, and I feel like it was overhated at the time for it. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't perfect and even I had issues with it, but yeah, I feel like it was judged too harshly for what it was. 

I'm not gonna lie. I LIKED starfield. It wasnt the best bethesda game. I understand it has some shortcomings between bugs, the repetitiveness of the planets, the loading screens, but to be fair, I have to ask, have these guys ever played a bethesda game before? I feel like this game's ambitions were set too high and the expectations were too high. All in all, it was a decent 8/10 title. Which is low for a bethesda game, but it IS still an adequate bethesda game. Quite frankly, I think people are just mad it distracted from TES 6 or fallout 5. And even now, people struggle to recommend it, acting like its garbage when I'm like 150 hours, would play again at some point. 

 Underrated- Doom 64

 There are a lot of underrated games out there IMO. Some of them are the overhated ones mentioned above. Some aren't bad, they just got overshadowed. There's a lot of games that could fit here. I chose Doom 64. Honestly, it was either Doom 64 or Doom 3, both are underrated. Doom 3 had a 2000s era survival horror vibe that didnt age well and feels awkwardly placed between the classic dooms of the 90s and the modern dooms of 2016 onward. But honestly, what I think has been more underrated is doom 64. Doom 64 is the REAL doom 3. It was the doom 3 they werent allowed to call Doom 3. It was a N64 exclusive Doom, and it just never stood out. There were better games on the system. The controls were awkward AF. It was largely forgotten until a PC re-release with Doom Eternal, and going back in playing it, while it wasnt perfect, it really didnt deserve its relatively negative treatment. And in retrospect, played with modern controls, it feels very good to play. 

 Overrated- Counter Strike 2

 Remember what I said about the internet hype machine. And remember what I said about COD modernizing FPS combat. 

Counter strike is the ultimate anti-COD FPS game. It released in another time. It was one of the first tactical multiplayer FPSes, it actually started off as a Half Life mod. It had awkward mechanics. For the time, they felt okay, but in my view, they aged VERY BADLY. And by the time I played CS Source in 2008 for the first time, the game felt dated. This was always hyped up to be like the ultimate PC FPS. But instead, i got this mediocre 7/10 game with crappy recoil mechanics from the 90s. And dont you DARE say anything about it online. HURR DURR SKILL, HURR DURR YOU JUST SUCK. I mean, i do suck at CS, but my criticism goes beyond sucking, it's the fact that I genuinely don't see the appeal of mastering crappy recoil mechanics from an old 90s game. There are better games out there. But it's like "but but if you only play a few hundred more hours it might eventually click." I DON'T WANT TO PLAY HUNDREDS OF HOURS JUST TO BE ABLE TO PLAY THE GAME, WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE. "Hurr durr you just suck." It's not that I suck, it's that I literally lack the drive to learn this crappy ### game. I play games for fun. I like more casual shooters...like COD....which revolutionized FPS games in its own way by making the mechanics simple and streamlined You ADS, bullets go where they're supposed to go, you dont have to fight your gun. These guys LIKE that recoil, because to them it means "skill." 

Now, for a while these guys just F-ed off to their own corners of the internet and did their own thing. But then, starting around 2017, they started infesting other FPS games, pushing their game play philosophy on more and more games, making them more "competitive." And again, the most obnoxious thing is the recoil. I dont want to have to fight my gun too much just to fricking land shots. I dont have the reflexes, I dont have the mouse pad space, and it just isn't fun. But for them it's what separates 'good" players from "bad" players. You see, "good" players can learn to control the recoil and thus dunk on the "bad" players, leading to insane skill gaps that pretty much wreck the game for the "bad" players. Whereas in a "low skill ceiling" game, anyone can log in, get a few kills, and enjoy themselves, "high skill" players dont like that, because they have to be the best, they have to lord their insane KDRs over the rest of us, and honestly, Im gonna be blunt. While there is always going to be some element of merit in FPS games, I like low skill games the same way I like low income inequality social democracies. It's more inclusive for everyone. It's more fun. It's less effort. It's just better. But because our society is run by type A ###holes who have to not just be the best the impose their BS social hierarchies on the rest of us, no, the rest of us have to suffer so THEY can look good. 

Honestly, people keep acting like if only i played hundreds of hours I'd grow to like it, but that just sounds like alcohol where you're drinking hand sanitizer, it's literally poisoning your body, but the people are just like "it's an acquired taste, bro!"

Now, before I continue, I do want some honorable mentions here too. 

League of Legends- I never seen such a toxic and try hardy unfun game that people seem to glaze for some reason. 

Final fantasy- I aint really a hardcore RPG person, and the cinematography ain't my thing. 

WoW (and other MMORPGs)- MMOs feel like the polar opposite of CS in a way. Rather than have SOME level of reflexes and skill, it's mostly just levelling up and choosing builds and your numbers being better than your opponents. Maybe there's more skill end game, but I'd never play one long enough to reach the end game, and I'd rather just play FPS.

 GTA (and rockstar games in general)- Always came off as an edgy teen thing. Like "look at me, Im 13 and I'm watching this really adult R rated movie." This is that but for video games. The game play is kinda crap. And no, I'm not looking forward to GTA 6. I dont care about GTA 6. GTA 5 was mediocre AF and GTA 6 is just gonna be more of the same.  

Of course, all of these franchises really come down to taste, to some degree. I feel especially qualified to rip CS because I'm literally an FPS gamer and I hate it and what it's done to gamer culture. And it baffled me the series still had a following in 2008, and it baffles me it's still popular now.  

Needs a remake- Fallout New Vegas (and 3)

Okay, so....arguably a lot of games deserve remakes. The problem is I feel like most remakes would completely F up the original game. Still, Fallout New Vegas gets my recommendation. In part because of the Fallout TV show, but in part because Fallout 3 and New Vegas are great games, but they're very VERY dated. And I can just imagine them being remade on FO4/76's engine and being FAR better for it. Like, the tech is there, the demand is there, Todd Howard, plz. 

 Criminally Overlooked: Titanfall 2

Look, I know I glazed COD above, but since the OG 360/PS3 COD games, they've done F all with the franchise. I mean, okay, MW19 DID modernize the franchise a bit. But most of those PS4/XB1 era games were complete and utter crap. And a lot of the space themed ones were especially crap. Advanced Warfare, Infinite Warfare, some of the lowest points of the whole series. But wanna know who did it RIGHT? Titanfall. Titanfall and Titanfall 2 were like COD advanced/infinite warfare with GOOD mechanics and mech fighting. ANd yet, they barely got any success, and they fell off quickly. While the franchise eventually found its footing with Apex legends, a Titanfall inspired battle royale, yeah, this franchise should've popped off a lot earlier, and it should've been more popular. It's a shame it died like it did.

 Favorite Protagonist- Doom 2016

 I don't like protagonists in video games often. But if I had to give it to one, I'd give it to the doom slayer. he's just so bad### and commands so much respect. In 2016, you hear the demons reading stories of his accomplishments, and it's just like....yeah, this is one guy you DONT wanna mess with.

 Favorite Antagonist- Far Cry 3

 While he's not the MAIN antagonist of the game, Far Cry 3's Vaas is just...well...insane. In a good way. he's just so evil. You wanna hate him so bad, you wanna kill him. They even made like 30 minutes of promotional material for the game mostly centered around him. He's the best I could think of.

I know someone else's video I watched went the Portal route and said Glados. I'd one up that and say my runner up is Wheatley. Because Wheatley is just so stupid, incompetent, and insane that it makes you WANT to put glados back in charge. Glados is great, dont get me wrong, but she's Hillary Clinton, while Wheatley is donald Trump. 

 Best Soundtrack- Red Alert 3

 C&C games always have banging sound tracks, but Red Alert 3 really outdid itself, between the main theme, hell march 3, red rock, grinder 2, etc. Honestly, all the C&Cs have good music, but this one just outdid the others, despite being a relatively mediocre entry in the franchise. 

Runner ups include stuff like Advance Wars, Doom, Black (2006 title), and Halo. But nothing really touches Red Alert 3. 

 Best Multiplayer- Battlefield 6

 There's a reason I wanted to focus on single player games to some degree. Multiplayers come and go. I could say Battlefield 4 or Bad Company 2 are the best multiplayer games ever made. But BC2 is shut down, and BF4 only has a few servers active. Those games were great, don't get me wrong, but right now, BF6 is the hottest thing. The best multiplayer game was gonna be a battlefield game. battlefield offers a combination of good gun play, large maps, chaotic battles, and large scale warfare. They are known for their "battlefield moments" like the "rendezook" when someone basically is being chased in a jet, ejects, snipes the pilot of the plane that shot them down out of their cockpit, and then gets back in their jet. it's insane. No series has ever given me the high that battlefield typically has. Except maybe Planetside 2, another runner up. but that game is less active today, and feels dated, so I wouldnt recommend it either, even if I was addicted to it at the time.

Honestly, you wanna get into these kinds of games today, battlefield 6. Battlefield's back, baby, in all its past glory. 

 Not usually my thing, but....- NFL Blitz 2000

 So, I'm not a sports guy, but there was a sports game I loved back in the day and it was NFL Blitz 2000. Basically, it's like simplified football, except the violence is the point. You just stomp the guy with the ball, throw them around, jump on them after they're already down, and be an unsportsmanlike ###. it was fun AF back in the day. I dont play sports games otherwise, but I liked this one.

 Turn my brain off- Unreal Tournament

 Yeah, for a while, if I just wanted to "play something" but not think about it too hard, Unreal Tournament with bots is my game of choice. You can just throw bots in a game while shooting things to your heart's content. Even more so, UT is a super fast paced multiplayer game, so the more you turn your brain off and go by instinct, reflex, etc, the better you do in my experience. Kinda like ultra instinct from DBZ but for video games. So yeah. It's my ultimate "don't think about it, just shoot it" kind of game.

Best with friends- Mario Kart 64

 So, this was the ultimate "play games with friends" game as a kid. I played it split screen, it was fun. Nothing matches the experience. I could also go with pokemon trading card game, but that's also like...a card game, you didnt play the video game ones back in the day, you played with real cards. Various FPS games could apply but they either didnt age well or its hard to get the guys all online as you get older. I kinda wanted to go with the in person touch, since games used to be made for split screen.

For a newer more PC oriented vibe, another runner up is sonic all stars racing transformed. Had some fun with online friends with that one back in the day.

Best Retro game- Doom 2

 The OG dooms, with the right game engines, still hold up today. They're over 30 years old, but still feel quite modern and timeless all things considered. I honestly think they deserve the spot for best retro game. 

Older Sonic and Mario titles also arguably deserve this spot. I know one guy i watched put super mario world, that's a strong contender here. Likewise, being the sega kid I was, sonic 3 & knuckles and sonic 2 also belong on here. But I went with sonic 3 for the next one. 

Nostalgic childhood game- Sonic 3 & Knuckles

 So, you know Sega used to have a magazine? And I remember getting a couple free ones from them hyping up genesis games at the time. Sonic 1 and 2 were some of my first, and favorite games, but I dont think anything ever touched Sonic 3 & Knuckles. It was just perfection as a sonic title. It was super hyped, and MAN it lived up to said hype. For nintendo kids, mario might get it, but for me, it's sonic, always. 

The only game since that even scraped the floor of these heights for the series was sonic mania tbqh. 

 Game everyone should play- Portal 2

 Honestly, it's portal AND portal 2, but I wanted to end this with a wildcard recommendation. A lot of people like different games in different genres, but by this point, the portal games are cheap, they're different, they're accessible, and have hilarious dialogue. So, I'm gonna go with the portal games for this one. 

And yeah, that's my list. Some people can agree or disagree with specific entries, but yeah. 

Wednesday, April 22, 2026

Democrats didn't start this redistricting war, but they are finishing it

 So....the republicans opened pandora's box by redistricting texas. They started a war. And since, California, and tonight, Virginia, have decided to vote on redistricting their own states to deny republicans power there. Normally, i would disapprove of such actions, but as previously stated the last time this subject came up, I have to support it. The republicans are literally trying to erode our democracy. We gotta use whatever means necessary to stop them. Ideally, we would have no gerrymandering, but as long as they so shamelessly weaponize it, I'm fine with dems doing the same. It's the only way to fight back and keep things fair. If republicans dont like it, they should sign onto bipartisan legislation to end the practice so we can have fair districts nationwide. Ya know? But expecting one side to unilaterally disarm while the other is doing this stuff is just...lol, ain't gonna happen.

Monday, April 20, 2026

More Michigan campaign thoughts

 So...I'm like addicted to this race now. It's stupid. I can't even vote in it. I'm not from Michigan, and honestly, the primary is like FOUR MONTHS AWAY. Seriously, why, in the everloving fudge, would you schedule a primary for AUGUST?! I thought this stuff wrapped up in June so people can focus on the general. If anything is gonna divide the party, it's this contentious primary going late into what I consider "general election territory" (I normally shift to that mode around July). But apparently someone thought it was a good idea to do this, and here we are. Messes with my models, and given how nasty this one is getting, it COULD lead to bitterness and infighting well into the final stretch of 2026. And given we need that senate seat, yeah...not good.

But, if anything, that bitterness and infighting is why I'm addicted to it. Because it's spilling out online in my online spaces, and it's your typical establishment vs progressive slugfest. And ironically, the main slugfest doesnt involve Stevens. It's actually all McMorrow vs El Sayed. A lot of the negative campaigning around El Sayed actually seems to be coming from the McMorrow camp. She's the one claiming that Hasan Piker is like the equivalent of Nick Fuentes and charging El Sayed of guilt by association. And most of the people expressing Hasan derangement syndrome seem to be McMorrow supporters. Normally I would attribute that to the Stevens type camp but she seems to largely be staying out of it. I think even the insiders know Stevens is toast so they're trying to back McMorrow.

But here's the thing. A lot of this negativity is making me sour on McMorrow. I'm hearing so much unhinged crazy crap coming out of the McMorrow supporters that it's alienating me big time. I mean, they say El Sayed supporters are obnoxious, I'm not seeing it. Sure, leftists can be obnoxious purity testy POSes at times, but I'm gonna be blunt, 90% of the negativity I see is coming from McMorrow supporters blasting him for NO REASON. Seriously, El Sayed is NOT a radical extremist, he's NOT nick fuentes, and Hasan Piker isn't Abdul El Sayed. Even if it were Hasan running the amount of character assassination is disproportionate to his actual character. Yeah, Hasan says crappy things online. Some of them are taken out of context. But you got this shrill OMG LOOK AT HOW OFFENSIVE THIS IS vibe to it and it's just...no. Over the top.

But then if El Sayed supporters say like 2 things questioning McMorrow's association to certain donors like AIPAC, they lose their their crap. Again, I know, leftists are annoying with it. McMorrow hasnt taken any money from them in 2026 to my knowledge, although has in the past, leftists are tearing her apart for past contributions though. And I'll actually defend McMorrow here. If you look at my blog, I was quite defensive of Israel in the 2024 election cycle. Mainly because I didn't care and my worldview on it was more neutral and nuanced, but I have evolved to take a harder line against them since. If I ran for office, leftists would be blasting me for it, just like her. And I'll say it. Grow tf up. Not everyone is gonna put your one single issue purity test first. But...sadly because of the nature of politics in the modern era, support for Israel is more of an issue. Just like with this, we're all dragged into it, and forced to take a side, and I side with the progressives. Take the W for what it is, FFS. And same with McMorrow. 

So, I will SOMEWHAT concede that point. But I'll be honest if I had to choose between the palestine purity testers and the centrists who are giving me massive Hillary vibes, I choose the leftists. 

And that's what's alienating me so much from McMorrow's campaign. Her campaign has MASSIVE Clinton 2016 vibes. Screaming El Sayed is an extremist for the crimes of wanting to give people healthcare and wanting to end a genocide in palestine. Screaming his supporters are so obnoxious, when from my angle its the McMorrow supporters who wont stfu going on about the most deranged unhinged #### for 5 seconds. Seriously, one sub I'm in literally has like 5 topics on this. And it's all establishment centrists tilting at fricking windmills. And then the second the left punches back at all, all of the sudden they're all screaming about how obnoxious El Sayed supporters are. 

And you know what? It's literally reminding me of 2016 again. It's the bernie bro strategy. Paint not just El Sayed but focus on how annoying his supporters are. But again, the mcmorrow people are literally worse. Oh, and there's even a lot of accusations of sexism. Like, they'll literally claim people are sexist against McMorrow. Uh...no? But...again thats an annoying thing dems do, they take their candidate's identity and make bad faith accusations of sexism to turn it into this obnoxious tribalistic thing. And it's not true. At least personally, I've been nothing but fair toward McMorrow. I originally gravitated toward her based on her platform. I thought her debate performance was reasonably solid. And...if we're gonna do INTERNAL biases, I'll be blunt. She's a cute girl in my age range. That actually makes me more POSITIVE toward her. Not that I'll simp for a female candidate because I think she's cute, that's weird, I mean, I am trying to be objective here. But if anything the gender dynamics go more positive for me. Consider it "beneviolent sexism", what have you, but yeah, to be blunt...yeah. 

But again, I dont make political decisions based off of that kind of attraction, that's stupid, so yeah. Objectivity. 

ANyway, if anything sours me on mcmorrow and her campaign, it IS all these bad faith tactics. Especially when I explore the el sayed side of things and it's just "I wanna do nice things for you and get money out of politics, and they want to stop me." Like, really, that's the real message el sayed is giving off, and that's positive. And, if anything, seeing the deranged  crap coming from McMorrow and her campaign makes me think less of her. It's a character issue. El Sayed, say what else you have  about him, he has unimpeachable character. However, if you're an establishment candidate letting these establishment ghouls run a cringey 90s style campaign that I find offputting and alienating, I do have to wonder....who is actually behind this, and what is their incentive here? Like, my own take on politics the past 10 years has been closer to el sayed's take. The good people who want to actually make things happen are relentlessly attacked by those who DONT want those things to happen. And when those guys run out of valid excuses, they turn to bad faith character assassination like this. We saw it with clinton 2016, and we're seeing it again here. The political establishment, the donors, the money people, I mean, McMorrow might reject their help directly, her donor record seems pretty decent from what I can see, but I really gotta ask....if all of these groups are helping her do all this mudslinging.....how is she going to actually govern? Like, push comes to shove, will she have the moral courage to do the right thing? Will she help pass universal healthcare? Get money out of politics? Defund Israel? Or will she just become another establishment democrat who makes more excuses about why they cant do things, than actually trying? 

Seriously, the democrats in office sometimes seem like the people who are sitting in front of a red button that will solve all of our problems, and then they go on and on about why they cant just push it. Will McMorrow become another one of THOSE? She has a nice platform, BUT....if she answers to donors and establishment pressure, well, that's not gonna help, right? Because those people dont want candidates who actually do the right thing. Hell, the reason they spend so much money in politics is to ensure that the candidates who get in, they can control. They wont step out of line and push the button. Again, it's like democrats in congress are sitting in front of a red button to solve our issues and they wont push it. But when you think about why they won't, it's because behind them is an entire political infrastructure ensuring that they don't. 

And that's why all this stuff is happening, and why there's so much character assassination coming from McMorrow's campaign. It's the political establishment weighing in, and trying to use their might to ensure the candidate who they CANT control el sayed, can't win. And they'll use every dirty trick in the book. It doesnt work on me. 

And, the more I reason about this, the more I drifted toward El Sayed. Again, ironically, if the establishment dems just stfued or went off and idk, supported stevens more outright, I would probably think higher of mcmorrow. My first instinct, looking at political platforms, was to back mcmorrow. I'm not someone who always agrees with progressives on exact policies. I'm not die hard pro palestine, I'm not for a green new  deal, I'm not for full blown single payer at this point. I actually fit more into that more liberal lane of politics mcmorrow speaks to in some ways. I mean, my big priority is UBI. The leftist lane of the party has priorities mutually exclusive with my ideal approach. By that I mean, their stuff cant really coexist with UBI as its very expensive. BUT....let's be frank. THe moderate lanes just exist to ensure that any of us more left than them can't do ANYTHING. Like, again, that's their whole point. To talk us down, make us accept more moderate solutions, and then walk THOSE back in office. And...if Mcmorrow is gonna allow that moderate establishment stink to permeate her campaign, I want nothing to do with it. I'm progressive at heart, I just have differences in how my progressivism manifests in terms of policy. So yeah. 

Frankly, I like McMorrow enough where I wont be that disappointed if she wins. And honestly, this aint even my state to begin with. But yeah. I just wanted to get some thoughts out here. 

Sunday, April 19, 2026

Yeah, McMorrow's "marching band" was cringe, and centrists are freaking out over nothing

 So, Mallory McMorrow was apparently video taped dancing with a marching band as part of her campaign at the democratic convention in michigan. And some have called it cringe. And apparently El Sayed said something like "that's what you do when you don't have a message", which....*cue centrist crocodile tears*

"OMG, HOW COULD EL SAYED BE SO MEAN?! WHAT BROUGHT THIS ON? I'M SO OUTRAGED, BLAH BLAH BLAH!"

Okay, after like weeks of screaming because hasan piker campaigned with him. It's so pathetic. These guys punch el sayed all day, the second he punches back, OMG HOW COULD YOU BE SO MEAN?! I mean, F off. You guys say all kinds of crazy unhinged crap about el sayed painting him as some sort of radical, but he does one little tap back and you implode into a little ball of outrage? Like come on. 

Let's be frank. I could go for either McMorrow or El Sayed. Both are excellent candidates. I like El Sayed because I vibe with his energy and realize there's more to his policy platform than on his campaign website, and that he's the most progressive candidate. However, McMorrow is pretty decent herself. I dont think she's as charismatic, I dont think she's as progressive. And you could say, him punching right is arguably a little "mean". But again, are you really gonna pull that crap AFTER dragging El Sayed through the hell he's been putting up with this campaign cycle? Like the centrists are out to unfairly smear him and drag him through the mud and the second he retaliates at all suddenly El Sayed is a bad guy? Again, I know that itself is campaigning, but it just  seems dishonest.

Honestly, I'll be blunt. I would be happy with either El Sayed or Mcmorrow. I do think that El Sayed acting like "only i can fix it" is a bit hacky and dishonest. But so are like...95% of the attacks against El Sayed. So...yeah.

But yeah, objectively speaking, yeah, mcmorrow's marching band was cringe, the centrist outrage is ridiculous, but that doesnt make mcmorrow a bad candidate either. Like i wanna make it clear, even if im kinda taking el sayed's side, I'm NOT anti mcmorrow. I might be anti haley stevens, but mcmorrow is pretty decent. And she does have a nice platform. Let's be honest.  

What is so offensive that Hasan is saying at Abdul El Sayed's rallies?

 So...I keep hearing the more establishmenty democrats freaking tf out about Hasan Piker and Abdul El Sayed. I saw some people today claiming he was quoting Lenin at his rallies and praising Mao and blah blah blah, and honestly, I decided to queue up a recent rally and listen to what was being said. 

The rally itself was pretty tame. basically, it was "we want to do good things for the American people, do nothing democrats take money from corporate donors NOT to do that, and then they attack us as radicals, we stand by hasan, and we stand by our vision, we want to make your lives better, they don't." That's the summary of the rally. I watched Hasan speak, I watched El Sayed speak, I watched them all speak. Sure, they did do some palestine stuff, mostly condemning the genocide, and pointing out that the Israel lobby was influencing our politics to make us arm and fund their genocide. And, of course, El Sayed himself pointed out, he's not anti semitic, he supports all people of all faiths. These are just bad faith attacks.

And yeah...I walk away thinking...these ARE just bad faith attacks. Look. I don't always see eye to eye with the progressive left these days. I support a public option instead of medicare for all. I reject a green new deal in favor of a UBI. But make no mistake, I ALSO want good things for the American people, and I recognize that the biggest obstacles, other than the republicans, are corporate democrats and their donors. I fail to see what's so offensive about what's being said. They dont like centrist democrats being attacked for taking rich peoples' money and doing nothing? Oh, it offends you that we say that? That's too negative? Well, it's true. And at least our attacks against that wing of the party are TRUE. 

Here, these guys are taking most of Hasan's most extreme opinions and cherrypicking them, often out of context, to make him look bad. And when it comes to praising mao and quoting lenin at rallies, yeah, no. he did no such thing. 

Either way, we're voting (well, if you're in michigan, Im cheering from the sidelines here in PA) for El Sayed, NOT Hasan Piker. I don't care what Hasan has said on his stream. I have mixed opinions about the guy. He's a bit too far left for me, yes. I mean, I have my stances, I clearly delineate my human centered capitalist politics from the progressive left these days. They're two separate ideologies. BUT...we also have common enemies, those corporate funded do nothing democrats, and those fascist republicans. And that's why I often am so willing to stand up for these guys despite not always seeing eye to eye with them. I mean, yeah. What's so offensive here? That these guys are speaking truth to power? What's so subversive? Red scare tactics is all the establishment has. Because at the end of the day, they stand for nothing, except corporate interests that slow progress and make our lives harder.

I used to believe when I was young, that a better world wasn't possible. That things weren't fair, but this was the best we could do, because human nature, systems failing, blah blah blah. But then I got an education in political science. I looked at the problems myself. I studied the solutions. And a better world IS possible. The thing is, wealthy people have structured the system to make us slaves, and have indoctrinated us from birth into slave mentalities. All of this "a better world isn't possible" nonsense is part of that. Slaves dont push for change if their suffering is inevitable and trying makes it worse. They dont push for change if morality becomes about having a good work ethic and serving their corporate masters. They dont push for change if they're more focused worrying about the next life to care what happens in this one. 

And when I realized this, that's when I started pushing for change. And not only do I push for change, I push for specific change. Again, my vision isn't the progressive left's vision. At least not exactly. I support a UBI over jobs programs, since jobs are just more slavery. I push for a public option over medicare for all because my ideological dedication to UBI as a tool to free humanity from work trumps my specific focus on one healthcare solution. That's where i differ most from the progressive left. But again, our common enemies are the same. 

What I want people to do is to look at the facts for themselves. Figure out what they value, look at how it can be accomplished, and fight for it. We dont always have to agree on specific solutions. But right now, we gotta band together against fascist republicans and do nothing democrats. Support El Sayed, support McMorrow. We can debate some of the specifics of that. I have shown some preference for mcmorrow before going down the el sayed rabbit hole and she's pretty decent too. But...just don't support Stevens, as she's a "do nothing democrat" in my view, and don't support the republicans. 

Don't believe this nonsense coming out of the corporate funded do nothing wing of the party. They wanna turn you against people who actually do wanna make your lives better, because they want you to vote for your own continued oppression instead. Don't believe them. Make up your own mind and vote.