TechnicallyColors

Moreso the supernatural stuff for me. The other stuff was dark but I wasn't checking for Brian under my bed.

!Although after reading some of the wiki today I'm a bit more reassured that a lot of the supernatural stuff in Echo seems to be neutral/benevolent, or at least misunderstood.!<

Ugh, I feel like there's no way I could do Arches if it's way scarier than Echo. Maybe if I only do it during the day. I'm fairly sure when I did Echo I played it into the night and regretted that. I do feel like dipping back into it all for the story though. I think I'll try the let's play series at some point to start with.

If you want more psychological horror emotional abuse, try Echo, which gets frequently compared to DDLC. It's set up like a gay furry visual novel to start with, but it's more like Night in the Woods where the paths are who you hang out with instead of who you explicitly want to "date". As the story progresses it gets extremely dark. I could only do one of the paths before I had to look up the others because I'm too much of a chicken.

Fair warning that it's a slow burn to get to the rough stuff, but the story is solid and it's humorous on the way so it's not boring.

Edit: I hadn't played Echo in a few years so I went to the wiki to refresh myself on the story and it is a lot more tightly-written and lore-heavy than I realized. Each "path" has a different story with a subset of the lore, so you need to play all of them to begin to understand the full picture. Even by playing all paths I think you'd have to be observant to connect some of the mysteries though. There's also a sequel, a prequel, and a prequel-prequel(?), which all presumably contribute to the lore. I see there's a giant Let's Play of most of it, which I think I now feel compelled to watch at some point. It would probably be less spooky to experience it with other people in control.

The previous person was worried that Valve wouldn't be able to convince "a sizable chunk of users" to move to Linux because all of the software they sell is written for Windows. If we apply a little bit of critical thinking, we realize that Valve has actually already thought of this(!) and applied a different(!) solution that solves the same problem(!) without requiring "everyone to write software for something that's not the platform nearly all users are running". If you want to see Valve's attempt at getting everyone to switch to Linux without using compatibility tools you should look into how successful their Steam Machine campaign was.

They've more or less already done that with Proton and DXVK. Nearly all Windows games "just work" on Linux without developers needing to change anything. TBH whenever big studios develop Linux versions of games they're usually not well-done anyway; for now it's better if people develop with their comfy Windows tools and let compatibility tools take care of the translation. When the balance shifts to Linux dominance we can start pressing on them to learn how to use Linux SDKs.

Yes, almost certainly.

I really wish GOG was a stronger supporter of Linux. I would move my business over to GOG where possible if so. Right now I heavily value the work that Valve has put into not only making Linux gaming a reality, but the Linux desktop in general as a side-effect.

You keep using the word "animal", but anthropomorphic cartoons are not real animals. Attraction to real animals is not what being a furry is. (You already know this, you are using the term in a loaded way in order to say one thing but mean another) (this unfortunately does not convince anyone).

There's nothing inherent to being a furry that demands a "delusional fantasy" (you would know this if you knew what furries are). You call yourself Deceptichum and have a transformers avatar - you may be at risk of being in a "delusional fantasy" if that's how you want to classify the people with anonymous names and furry avatars!

So where is the part where the "world is a worse place" because of furries?

It is repeatedly hilarious that you pretend that these arguments are any different than the ones homophobes are using. What is the harm, exactly?

Giving up when facing any opposition seems like you never really intended on improving your worldview. You just want to be hateful of things that you don't understand. The irony of you thinking that those who oppose the LGBT are any different is not lost on me. It's easy to punch down on things that you don't personally like, but those are real people that you're targeting with your malice. I'm not a furry, but I am gay, and as an LGBT member yourself you should understand the power of being an ally to a minority that often gets painted in a bad light. Doubly so when ~80% of furries are LGBTQIA+ in the first place; it's an LGBT subculture.

That is again not even close to a correct definition, and it is interesting that you think yourself the best person to judge something that you don't know the first thing about.

Unhealthy designated by you, the puritan police? Do you know that the anti-LGBT people also consider being gay unhealthy? They're drawing the line in a different place, but still playing the same role you are. Would you recommend shock therapy for furries, or is that just a cure for being gay? If you're so concerned with how the furry fandom works you should maybe actually research your bigotry and learn that it's massive, and no two furries express themselves in the same way. Many do not have overlapping interests at all. You are on the fediverse, so I'd suggest you get comfortable with the idea that people are allowed to exist without your permission.