Hello!
I thought I would explain why people say Anna and Elsa are different in Frozen 2, compared to everything that came before it, and why it is bad.
The difference between the characters in the films
First, I am going to focus mainly on Elsa as she is simply easier to discuss. Do not get me wrong. Anna is a completely different character in Frozen 2. Her two most defining traits of optimism and her abundance of energy are nonexistent in the sequel, replaced by her freaking out all the time and being sad. I think the reason many people do not feel like Anna is all that different, is because she is the only character whose actions make sense. Kristoff makes no sense on why he is constantly trying to propose especially when their lives are in danger. I will get to Elsa. Anna might be a different character, but I can see the logic in these changes.
And now on to Elsa. First, Elsa’s characterizations in Frozen. Elsa is beyond complicated. She is the perfect girl who is confident in her abilities as queen and naturally takes to the role. She is mature, elegant, loyal, but also playful and mischievous. Her greatest flaw, however, is her secret powers. Her fear overwrote most of her true personality, and she ends up coming off as cold and distant because of it. Elsa grew up believing she had to hide her true self and that she had to do everything on her own. But her real personality still shown through despite everything. During her coronation when Anna and she are finally reunited after so long, Elsa true personality finally gets to shine. Loving and caring towards her sister and is clearly the more mature one while Anna stumbles on her words. She loves the royal lifestyle as she comments about the ball and looks happy looking over her people and everyone having a good time. Then her playful side as she and Anna joke about smelling chocolate. And finally, we get to see her mischievous side as she tricks Anna into dancing with the Duke. This personality is shown when she is a child, and at the end of the movie. It is also further shown in the shorts, with Frozen Fever showing her playful side and love for her sister, and Olaf’s Frozen Adventure, brings back her more mature and elegant side as well as show how she is growing from her troubled past.
Elsa in Frozen 2, is very shy and meek. The one and only thing she is interested in is magic and where her powers come from. She is still elegant, but not like she was before. In Frozen FF and OFA, Elsa was a very confident queen, but in Frozen 2, she is very shy or humble queen. Her maturity is gone, replaced with wonder filled eyes. Speaking of Elsa’s eyes, did you ever notice how narrow Elsa’s eyes are in Frozen 1 and the shorts. A lot of time she had a half-lidded eye so you can really see her eyeshadow. But in Frozen 2, Elsa’s eyes are always bugging out, making her look very cutesy. Elsa is also once again trying to do everything herself as well, making it seem like she learned nothing from Frozen 1.
It is really tricky because there is parts of Elsa that stayed the same, so there is the illusion that she is the same character, but to much is different and key character traits are completely forgotten.
Wants and Motives
The key difference is in Elsa’s Wants and Motivations. Elsa in Frozen 1, wants to be accepted, to be a part of Arendelle and not viewed as a monster. But more importantly, she wants to be with her sister Anna. Everything Elsa does is to protect Anna, and Arendelle. The only way she knew how to do this was to run away and isolate herself, which never worked, but that was her character flaw she needed to overcome. At the end of the day, Anna and Arendelle is what is most important to Elsa, and where she is most happy. Not up in the North Mountain singing Let It Go, or anywhere else. No, with her little sister and the people who love, respect, and accepted her.
Frozen 2 completely changed this. Elsa no longer views Arendelle as her home that she had fought so hard to be accepted by and a part off. She no longer really cares about Anna either, still loving her because they are sisters, but she never really considers Anna in anything. She does not think to tell Anna about the voice before she released the Spirits, then she often forgot about Anna in the forest, then tricked her and pushed her away. And she certainly did not consider what Anna might want at the end of the movie by making her queen. Frozen 2 made Elsa focus on magic only. Trusting the voice because it might explain why she has powers. Trusting the Spirits because they also have something to do with her powers. Only talking with Honeymaren about the Fifth Spirit and how it could be the one calling her.
Hyper Focus on only one goal
This actually leads me into my next point, which is a huge flaw in all the characters. Every character, Anna, Elsa, Kristoff, and Olaf, all have one track minds and goals. Kristoff wants to propose, Elsa wants to find the voice, Anna wants to protect Elsa, and Olaf wants to know what growing up is. These are all fine goals, but for most of the movie, that is all their characters are. There is not moments where the characters take a step back and focus on other things. Anna is the only one who really gets to do other things, but that is only because she is involved in everyone’s stories. Trying to help Elsa with her confidence, and teach Olaf about growing up, and she even takes time to talk with Mattias about who he is. Elsa never felt like she ever stepped out of her quest to help others with theirs, if she did, it was very minuscule, same with Kristoff and getting to know Ryder before going back to focus on proposing.
Compare this to Anna in Frozen 1. Anna’s main goal and what she is aiming for throughout the film is to reunite with her sister and save Arendelle. However, she still takes time for other things. She fell in love with Hans, and she takes the time to worry about Olaf melting or Kristoff’s ice business going down. She enjoys her time with the trolls and learns some lessons about love. And she even marvels at Elsa’s ice palace before asking her to return. This all also helps that Anna’s goals have to change near the end of the movie when Elsa throws her out. I think another difference is, is that in Frozen 2, all the characters have goals, and when they reach it, that is the end of their stories. Elsa wants to find the voice, she does and that is it for her. Kristoff wants to propose, he does and that is it for him. Anna at the beginning of her journey, thinks her goal should be to find true love, but that does not work out. Then she thinks all she has to do is find Elsa and the two can be sisters again and Elsa will lift the curse, but we all know how that ends up. Then Anna’s goal turns to simply trying to save herself, but then Hans betrays her. And finally, Anna’s final goal is to save Elsa, which she succeeds in. This is when Anna’s original goal of reuniting with her sister and saving Arendelle is finally fulfilled.
Do you see what I mean by Frozen 2 characters feeling like they only have one goal, and how there is little deviations for them with those goals? Elsa’s only roadblocks are with the Spirits, but she defeats them in under a minute each, so there is no detours Elsa has to take in order to reach Ahtohallan. Anna is the only character whose goals were changed because she failed her initial goal of protecting Elsa. I will also add that even though Elsa does have the goal of saving the forest and Arendelle, she never really focuses on them, and instead the movie constantly has her thinking about her powers and where they come from first, and the well being of everyone she has ever loved as second, maybe even third with the Spirits and the magic of the forest taking second place.
In short, Elsa, and the rest of the cast, do have some traits that are still the same, so a part of them feels right, but because a lot of key characterizations are missing and are replaced by new ones, and because of the complete change in Wants and Values, as well as the poor writing in having everyone laser focused on one goal, the characters are just not the same. They are completely different characters.
Why this is Bad
And now to explain why these new characterizations are bad.
First, a lot of people use the excuse that it has been 3 years and people change.
I have a couple of counter points to this. First, is that the beginning of Frozen 2, where Anna and Elsa are children, have them with their new personalities. Elsa is magic focused and a very quiet girl. While Anna is strangely into the politics of the Northuldra and Arendelle, as well as having a disturbingly deep obsession with romance, despite only being five and having an older sister that finds it discussing. It makes more sense that Anna’s obsession with romance happened after Elsa ignored her for 13 years, and she was completely alone for 3 after her parents died. I could go into more detail, but to sum it up, Frozen 1 Elsa is shown to be the older sister with a mischievous and playful side, while Anna is shown her youthfulness and love for her sister, all of this is character traits they have for the rest of the movie and for the shorts. Frozen 2, shows Elsa’s quite shyness and obsession with magic, while Anna is more focused on romance and politics.
In short, the beginning of Frozen 2 act like these character traits were always a part of Anna and Elsa, even though it was never shown in Frozen 1, FF, or OFA. So, the excuses of 3 years having passed does not work here.
And even if the 3 years are the cause of the change, it would be very bad writing. Good writing shows us how and why a character changes. Example, Frozen 1 Elsa. Like I said, when she was a child, we saw her personality of being a mischievous and playful girl, but then the accident happened, and because of that, Elsa is traumatized and becomes the fearful and reserved queen that we know her as. “Do You Want to Build a Snowman”, also helps show us Elsa’s growing fear and anxiety as well. Nothing before Frozen 2, or eve during it gives and explanation for Anna and Elsa’s knew personalities. The Voice and “Into the Unknown”, tries to give a reason for why Elsa wants to find the source of her magic, but not enough that it makes sense that she values finding her source over the life she has made in Arendelle.
Frozen is a work of fiction, and there for it needs to make sense. Ever heard the phrase, “Real life is stranger than fiction”, this is because real life does not need to make sense. People in real life are not expected to be consistent, but characters in a story are.
There are also many great examples of unplanned sequels that stayed true to the characters personalities. Shrek, Puss n Boots, The Rescuers. Hiccup from “How to Train Your Dragon” is a good example, as he clearly grows up between films, but even though he is more mature and confident, it is clearly still him. He is still a strategist over a warrior, along with his awkwardness and snark, along with his deep relationship with Toothless. The first movie helped him find himself and give him confidence, and the sequel showed that growth, but still kept his personality the same.
The one thing that is consistent with Elsa, is her reserved nature and trying to solve the problem herself, as well as her tendency to push Anna away. This also has problems because not only does Elsa have a new personality in the sequel, but her character ark is also reset as well. Elsa already learned that she cannot do everything on her own and that she needs to trust and rely on Anna more. OFA also showed Elsa slowly getting better as well. But Frozen 2 has her reset to zero, and the end result is completely different. Frozen 2 is more focused on having Anna learn the lesson that she needs to let Elsa go, rather than have Elsa learn that being with Anna is the key to happiness and success. It makes it seem like Elsa learned absolutely nothing in Frozen 1, and that Anna had wasted her time trying so hard to reunite with her sister.
And finally, people are going to say that it is okay for Anna and Elsa to have new goals after their original goals had been met in the first film. And yes, you are right, and many sequels do this well. I don’t really remember the first Puss N Boots film, but I don’t believe he had to learn the lesson of not running away from death and live his life to the fullest in it. However, this cannot be done with Frozen and Frozen 2.
The directors and creators of the Frozen franchise say that the two films go together and that they tell one complete story. So why does one movie say one thing, and then the next says a completely different thing? Frozen 1, Elsa belongs in Arendelle despite being different and needs to stop pushing her sister away, let her in her life and they can live happily ever after together. Frozen 2, Elsa belongs in a magical place because she has magic, and Anna needs to let her go as they will live happily ever after separated. Frozen 2 contradicts Frozen 1 and undoes everything the film and characters had worked so hard for. The two films to go together at all.
End notes.
I thought I would end this post by saying that Anna and Elsa’s new personalities are not bad. They are pretty good personalities, and my only complaint is that the movie needed a little more time with the story, especially giving Elsa more to do then just follow the voice and fight the Spirits, and of course the rushed ending. But at the end of the day, these are not the Anna and Elsa from Frozen 1 that people came to Frozen 2 to see. I have seen so many people say that they felt like they didn’t see the characters they loved at all in Frozen 2, or if they did, it is watered down versions of the characters. This is also why you will see people say Frozen 2 should have been its own original movie that had nothing to do with the Frozen franchise. I honestly believe that Anna and Elsa’s characters were changed to fit the narrative of Frozen 2’s story, rather than let Anna and Elsa’s personality help shape Frozen 2’s story. At the end of the day, to much of Anna and Elsa had been changed, from their personality to their goals, so they just are not the same characters and this is not only bad writing, it is very infuriating and sad for fans of Frozen 1, especially now a days where Disney only ever promotes Frozen 2 everywhere.
Well, that is all for now.

Hello!
I thought I would explain why people say Anna and Elsa are different in Frozen 2, compared to everything that came before it, and why it is bad.
The difference between the characters in the films
First, I am going to focus mainly on Elsa as she is simply easier to discuss. Do not get me wrong. Anna is a completely different character in Frozen 2. Her two most defining traits of optimism and her abundance of energy are nonexistent in the sequel, replaced by her freaking out all the time and being sad. I think the reason many people do not feel like Anna is all that different, is because she is the only character whose actions make sense. Kristoff makes no sense on why he is constantly trying to propose especially when their lives are in danger. I will get to Elsa. Anna might be a different character, but I can see the logic in these changes.
And now on to Elsa. First, Elsa’s characterizations in Frozen. Elsa is beyond complicated. She is the perfect girl who is confident in her abilities as queen and naturally takes to the role. She is mature, elegant, loyal, but also playful and mischievous. Her greatest flaw, however, is her secret powers. Her fear overwrote most of her true personality, and she ends up coming off as cold and distant because of it. Elsa grew up believing she had to hide her true self and that she had to do everything on her own. But her real personality still shown through despite everything. During her coronation when Anna and she are finally reunited after so long, Elsa true personality finally gets to shine. Loving and caring towards her sister and is clearly the more mature one while Anna stumbles on her words. She loves the royal lifestyle as she comments about the ball and looks happy looking over her people and everyone having a good time. Then her playful side as she and Anna joke about smelling chocolate. And finally, we get to see her mischievous side as she tricks Anna into dancing with the Duke. This personality is shown when she is a child, and at the end of the movie. It is also further shown in the shorts, with Frozen Fever showing her playful side and love for her sister, and Olaf’s Frozen Adventure, brings back her more mature and elegant side as well as show how she is growing from her troubled past.
Elsa in Frozen 2, is very shy and meek. The one and only thing she is interested in is magic and where her powers come from. She is still elegant, but not like she was before. In Frozen FF and OFA, Elsa was a very confident queen, but in Frozen 2, she is very shy or humble queen. Her maturity is gone, replaced with wonder filled eyes. Speaking of Elsa’s eyes, did you ever notice how narrow Elsa’s eyes are in Frozen 1 and the shorts. A lot of time she had a half-lidded eye so you can really see her eyeshadow. But in Frozen 2, Elsa’s eyes are always bugging out, making her look very cutesy. Elsa is also once again trying to do everything herself as well, making it seem like she learned nothing from Frozen 1.
It is really tricky because there is parts of Elsa that stayed the same, so there is the illusion that she is the same character, but to much is different and key character traits are completely forgotten.
Wants and Motives
The key difference is in Elsa’s Wants and Motivations. Elsa in Frozen 1, wants to be accepted, to be a part of Arendelle and not viewed as a monster. But more importantly, she wants to be with her sister Anna. Everything Elsa does is to protect Anna, and Arendelle. The only way she knew how to do this was to run away and isolate herself, which never worked, but that was her character flaw she needed to overcome. At the end of the day, Anna and Arendelle is what is most important to Elsa, and where she is most happy. Not up in the North Mountain singing Let It Go, or anywhere else. No, with her little sister and the people who love, respect, and accepted her.
Frozen 2 completely changed this. Elsa no longer views Arendelle as her home that she had fought so hard to be accepted by and a part off. She no longer really cares about Anna either, still loving her because they are sisters, but she never really considers Anna in anything. She does not think to tell Anna about the voice before she released the Spirits, then she often forgot about Anna in the forest, then tricked her and pushed her away. And she certainly did not consider what Anna might want at the end of the movie by making her queen. Frozen 2 made Elsa focus on magic only. Trusting the voice because it might explain why she has powers. Trusting the Spirits because they also have something to do with her powers. Only talking with Honeymaren about the Fifth Spirit and how it could be the one calling her.
Hyper Focus on only one goal
This actually leads me into my next point, which is a huge flaw in all the characters. Every character, Anna, Elsa, Kristoff, and Olaf, all have one track minds and goals. Kristoff wants to propose, Elsa wants to find the voice, Anna wants to protect Elsa, and Olaf wants to know what growing up is. These are all fine goals, but for most of the movie, that is all their characters are. There is not moments where the characters take a step back and focus on other things. Anna is the only one who really gets to do other things, but that is only because she is involved in everyone’s stories. Trying to help Elsa with her confidence, and teach Olaf about growing up, and she even takes time to talk with Mattias about who he is. Elsa never felt like she ever stepped out of her quest to help others with theirs, if she did, it was very minuscule, same with Kristoff and getting to know Ryder before going back to focus on proposing.
Compare this to Anna in Frozen 1. Anna’s main goal and what she is aiming for throughout the film is to reunite with her sister and save Arendelle. However, she still takes time for other things. She fell in love with Hans, and she takes the time to worry about Olaf melting or Kristoff’s ice business going down. She enjoys her time with the trolls and learns some lessons about love. And she even marvels at Elsa’s ice palace before asking her to return. This all also helps that Anna’s goals have to change near the end of the movie when Elsa throws her out. I think another difference is, is that in Frozen 2, all the characters have goals, and when they reach it, that is the end of their stories. Elsa wants to find the voice, she does and that is it for her. Kristoff wants to propose, he does and that is it for him. Anna at the beginning of her journey, thinks her goal should be to find true love, but that does not work out. Then she thinks all she has to do is find Elsa and the two can be sisters again and Elsa will lift the curse, but we all know how that ends up. Then Anna’s goal turns to simply trying to save herself, but then Hans betrays her. And finally, Anna’s final goal is to save Elsa, which she succeeds in. This is when Anna’s original goal of reuniting with her sister and saving Arendelle is finally fulfilled.
Do you see what I mean by Frozen 2 characters feeling like they only have one goal, and how there is little deviations for them with those goals? Elsa’s only roadblocks are with the Spirits, but she defeats them in under a minute each, so there is no detours Elsa has to take in order to reach Ahtohallan. Anna is the only character whose goals were changed because she failed her initial goal of protecting Elsa. I will also add that even though Elsa does have the goal of saving the forest and Arendelle, she never really focuses on them, and instead the movie constantly has her thinking about her powers and where they come from first, and the well being of everyone she has ever loved as second, maybe even third with the Spirits and the magic of the forest taking second place.
In short, Elsa, and the rest of the cast, do have some traits that are still the same, so a part of them feels right, but because a lot of key characterizations are missing and are replaced by new ones, and because of the complete change in Wants and Values, as well as the poor writing in having everyone laser focused on one goal, the characters are just not the same. They are completely different characters.
Why this is Bad
And now to explain why these new characterizations are bad.
First, a lot of people use the excuse that it has been 3 years and people change.
I have a couple of counter points to this. First, is that the beginning of Frozen 2, where Anna and Elsa are children, have them with their new personalities. Elsa is magic focused and a very quiet girl. While Anna is strangely into the politics of the Northuldra and Arendelle, as well as having a disturbingly deep obsession with romance, despite only being five and having an older sister that finds it discussing. It makes more sense that Anna’s obsession with romance happened after Elsa ignored her for 13 years, and she was completely alone for 3 after her parents died. I could go into more detail, but to sum it up, Frozen 1 Elsa is shown to be the older sister with a mischievous and playful side, while Anna is shown her youthfulness and love for her sister, all of this is character traits they have for the rest of the movie and for the shorts. Frozen 2, shows Elsa’s quite shyness and obsession with magic, while Anna is more focused on romance and politics.
In short, the beginning of Frozen 2 act like these character traits were always a part of Anna and Elsa, even though it was never shown in Frozen 1, FF, or OFA. So, the excuses of 3 years having passed does not work here.
And even if the 3 years are the cause of the change, it would be very bad writing. Good writing shows us how and why a character changes. Example, Frozen 1 Elsa. Like I said, when she was a child, we saw her personality of being a mischievous and playful girl, but then the accident happened, and because of that, Elsa is traumatized and becomes the fearful and reserved queen that we know her as. “Do You Want to Build a Snowman”, also helps show us Elsa’s growing fear and anxiety as well. Nothing before Frozen 2, or eve during it gives and explanation for Anna and Elsa’s knew personalities. The Voice and “Into the Unknown”, tries to give a reason for why Elsa wants to find the source of her magic, but not enough that it makes sense that she values finding her source over the life she has made in Arendelle.
Frozen is a work of fiction, and there for it needs to make sense. Ever heard the phrase, “Real life is stranger than fiction”, this is because real life does not need to make sense. People in real life are not expected to be consistent, but characters in a story are.
There are also many great examples of unplanned sequels that stayed true to the characters personalities. Shrek, Puss n Boots, The Rescuers. Hiccup from “How to Train Your Dragon” is a good example, as he clearly grows up between films, but even though he is more mature and confident, it is clearly still him. He is still a strategist over a warrior, along with his awkwardness and snark, along with his deep relationship with Toothless. The first movie helped him find himself and give him confidence, and the sequel showed that growth, but still kept his personality the same.
The one thing that is consistent with Elsa, is her reserved nature and trying to solve the problem herself, as well as her tendency to push Anna away. This also has problems because not only does Elsa have a new personality in the sequel, but her character ark is also reset as well. Elsa already learned that she cannot do everything on her own and that she needs to trust and rely on Anna more. OFA also showed Elsa slowly getting better as well. But Frozen 2 has her reset to zero, and the end result is completely different. Frozen 2 is more focused on having Anna learn the lesson that she needs to let Elsa go, rather than have Elsa learn that being with Anna is the key to happiness and success. It makes it seem like Elsa learned absolutely nothing in Frozen 1, and that Anna had wasted her time trying so hard to reunite with her sister.
And finally, people are going to say that it is okay for Anna and Elsa to have new goals after their original goals had been met in the first film. And yes, you are right, and many sequels do this well. I don’t really remember the first Puss N Boots film, but I don’t believe he had to learn the lesson of not running away from death and live his life to the fullest in it. However, this cannot be done with Frozen and Frozen 2.
The directors and creators of the Frozen franchise say that the two films go together and that they tell one complete story. So why does one movie say one thing, and then the next says a completely different thing? Frozen 1, Elsa belongs in Arendelle despite being different and needs to stop pushing her sister away, let her in her life and they can live happily ever after together. Frozen 2, Elsa belongs in a magical place because she has magic, and Anna needs to let her go as they will live happily ever after separated. Frozen 2 contradicts Frozen 1 and undoes everything the film and characters had worked so hard for. The two films do not go together at all.
End notes.
I thought I would end this post by saying that Anna and Elsa’s new personalities are not bad. They are pretty good personalities, and my only complaint is that the movie needed a little more time with the story, especially giving Elsa more to do then just follow the voice and fight the Spirits, and of course the rushed ending. But at the end of the day, these are not the Anna and Elsa from Frozen 1 that people came to Frozen 2 to see. I have seen so many people say that they felt like they didn’t see the characters they loved at all in Frozen 2, or if they did, it is watered down versions of the characters. This is also why you will see people say Frozen 2 should have been its own original movie that had nothing to do with the Frozen franchise. I honestly believe that Anna and Elsa’s characters were changed to fit the narrative of Frozen 2’s story, rather than let Anna and Elsa’s personality help shape Frozen 2’s story. At the end of the day, to much of Anna and Elsa had been changed, from their personality to their goals, so they just are not the same characters and this is not only bad writing, it is very infuriating and sad for fans of Frozen 1, especially now a days where Disney only ever promotes Frozen 2 everywhere.
Well, that is all for now.

Hi everyone, I am functionally fluent in ASL but just had my first baby and not in any way connected with a Deaf community at the moment. I am wondering whether there’s a resource anyone’s aware of online resources for the kind of vocabulary a new parent would use? I imagine this is typically something that is picked up by being in an actually fluent community.
To be clear, I’m seeking information about words that are specifically used with young children, and don’t need to be directed to basic vocabulary that hearing parents learn in order to communicate with their pre verbal infants. For example, I know how to sign “pee pee” and “tummy ache,” but have no sense of how to sign basic comforting phrases or baby-focused words like “sleepy.” And resources like sign dictionary are good go pick up “bottle” or “pacifier,” but not these kinds of almost cutesy dialect.
Thank you in advance!

Almost all are active as of May 2024 (I had to include my favorite even though it's only accessible via wayback lol).
In trying to collect some Japanese CC for a Japanese-themed build, I ended up going down a rabbit hole of sites. I couldn't find anyone else who has a list of notable sims 1 cc creators updated for 2024, so I thought I'd make my own. If you have a favorite Japanese creator, or sites currently only accessible via the wayback machine, feel free to comment! I personally still have yet to find my perfect living room set...
if anyone working on the archive of sims 1 cc reads this, I'd love to see some of these creators added to it. I had a difficult time trying to find Japanese creators through the archive.
Some tips for navigating Japanese-only sites:

• there is usually an opening page where you have to click an enter button or banner. If there's no sidebar, just look for a link to enter.
• sometimes downloads are hidden behind "download" or "simpeople" links.
• don't let yourself get overly confused by loads of links in Japanese. just click through. usually they're collections of cc under different titles. Most Japanese sites have headers, often even in English, to help you navigate.
• when in doubt, don't be afraid to use a translator. in some browsers, or with certain extensions, you can just highlight a phrase and translate in-page.

Barairo no Jinsei. Lots of great Japanese style furniture and some really cute pets, alongside other things.
Doll House. A huge collection of pretty paintings, floorings, and walls and a bunch of skins.
Corry's Factory. A lot of great skins and a small collection of fashion oriented objects.
Gyoiko Sakura. No longer up, but included because they're one of my favorite sims 1 creators. A HUGE variety of functional objects, food, and build objects. Their stoves are my favorite.
Nomaki. While their main focus is skins, I love their Japanese build set.
Drop of Water. Huge selection of mostly anime-based skins.
Gen-So-Ron. Some of the most well-made anime skins I've ever seen, and a super cute website worth looking at if only for that flash era nostalgia.
Marco's Refined Creations. High quality skins.
MSZ. Some really cute furniture and a few anime skins.
Garden of Nagatsuki. A few maxis match addons.
Nikujaga. A few really cute and stylish skins.
Pakupa. Lots of anime skins. Included exclusively because they have mecha skins for pets, which everyone needs to look at.
Sakura and Sunflower. A little bit of everything, from skins to houses. My favorite is their selection of walls.
Sasarin Sims. A lot of retextured maxis match sets.
Search My Soul. A little bit of everything. Absolutely gorgeous build sets.
Westward. A mix of maxis recolors and some original objects.
Sinu People. Mostly objects. Check out their squat toilet.
Sim Jiman. Lots and lots of houses.
Sims Peaceful Days. Lots of cute objects.
Sims Pit. All you need to see is the category titled "Kaiju Skins".
TSM. Some hacked and re-animated objects. Check out the pee bush!
Twins Jam. Animal costumes!! Make sure to click the left and right banner-- they're two different sites. The left has cutesy skins. The right has anime skins.

Please teach me various Spanish "uwu" phrases that I can use on my friend. I want to annoy him and act cutesy, something that would make a grown man physically recoil. xD Something like "porfi" from "por favor" ig.

To preface, I like both songs immensely. But I dont get the backlash of Sheesh (people say the chorus is bad or it is a HYLT rehash. I disagree) while Magnetic which has a chorus that is repetitive word/phrase also and arguably can be a song for Twice or LSF or NJ(IMO dont hate me, is a generic cutesy feel good song) is praised?
Is this the hate for YG again? Or something more?

March was pretty kind to me and my gaming habits, yielding more time for the hobby than in the recent past, and I'm very happy to have been able to start chipping away at more of the high interest games on my backlog. I'm even more pleased to have finally knocked out the longest pole in the tent this year a month ahead of when I thought I would, and it's those factors that combined to allow me to complete 8 games this month, though one of them is not quiiiite at the age threshold to where I can speak about it here. Still, even with a couple stinkers in the mix, this was a very good month indeed.
(Games are presented in chronological completion order; the numerical indicator represents the YTD count.)
​
#10 - Outer Wilds - PS5 - 7/10 (Good)
Outer Wilds has incredible ambition, and realizes that ambition almost as well as you could reasonably hope for. You take the role of a new astronaut, given a general mandate to go explore your (tiny for gameplay purposes) solar system. You know going in that your system was previously home to a highly advanced but now long extinct species, and thanks to a research breakthrough you now have a device that can translate their writings for the first time. The idea is therefore that you might be able to learn new truths and secrets that the previous astronauts of your civilization (most of whom are all still camped out there on the various other celestial bodies) were never able to. At first, this "go explore the setting" seems to be the only mandate, and it's one I took to with relish, despite the heavy learning curve required to fly your ship. "Let me start small and just check out the moon, that'll be fun." That excitement was short lived when I stepped out of my ship onto the moon whilst forgetting to actually put on my space suit. Whoops.
A brief cutscene later and I discovered the real meat of the game: solving the overarching mysteries of the solar system with an ulterior motive of escaping the time loop. It's this "mystery unraveling" where Outer Wilds truly excels. Each planet or other orbital body has a wealth of information to uncover, giving you bits and pieces of the full puzzle that the game literally strings up onto a digital pin-and-yarn board for you as you go. What astonished me about the design was the way that I could be so routinely locked out of certain areas or discoveries, but invariably all I ever needed to progress was more knowledge. You never gain any new abilities in Outer Wilds beyond what you start with, and you never do anything that fundamentally changes the environment around you. Instead you simply learn more about the physics of the game's universe, or the behaviors of certain phenomena, or the geographies of certain areas, and that deeper understanding lets you explore new things. It's like a metroidvania of the mind, and I thought that was tremendously cool.
But for all that I rate this game as merely "good", and that's because from a gameplay perspective Outer Wilds is a game that's all about oppressive time limits. Your exploration time has a hard limit on it. If you run out of that time, whatever you're doing is interrupted midway through, which can result in a need to redo mundane activities in later exploration periods. So that's always at the back of your mind. Then you've got an oxygen tank that lasts for only six minutes before you suffocate, and some explorations will doubtless push you into that territory. Then you've got a fuel tank, which depletes steadily when making (any of your frequent) zero G maneuvers; if this runs out, your oxygen gets used as propellant instead, hastening asphyxiation. Then the planets themselves are also driven by time constraints in terms of their environmental phenomena. It's time limits on top of time limits on top of time limits, and it's stressful as all get out. Not to mention frustrating. "Oh I turned on autopilot to get to this planet more efficiently, but my autopilot system malfunctioned and flew me straight into the sun." This happened more than once.
I loved the idea and storytelling design of Outer Wilds. It's brilliant. But in the moment I often hated playing it. So it's still a good game, and easily worth playing if you're an adventure/exploration kind of soul. But I can't call it a great game when it feels so intent on squashing the very sense of wonder and discovery it wants to foster.
​
#11 - Carto - PS4 - 7/10 (Good)
This game describes itself as a "puzzle adventure," and while I suppose that's a fair enough phrase, it did give me the impression that Carto was a puzzle game in an adventure setting, rather than what it actually is: a cutesy adventure game with some light puzzle elements. In that sense I came away a little disappointed, wishing that it had a heavier emphasis on the puzzle aspect and indeed a heavier challenge there as well. This is especially the case because the core mechanic of Carto is so promising: you've got a magical map that shows the world in a series of tiles that you can rotate and rearrange at will, altering the physical layout of the world around you. If you're like me you already start to see the great possibilities of that design spilling out. Will the world reveal itself to be a kind of maze that you have to remap to your needs? How big and complex will it grow as you continue to explore and gain new map components? What if the tiles could be shapes other than simple squares? Is there some ultimate map form you need to eventually assemble?
Sadly, Carto doesn't pursue most of these thoughts. Instead, after the initial tutorials on how the mapping mechanic works, the game gives you simple discrete objectives like "make a cluster of bushes," which usually result in the spontaneous creation of a new map tile, completely bypassing the "explore around you to find new map pieces" hook that the game initially seemed to be about. Now, these miniature thought puzzles are generally fun to figure out, but the game is only ten chapters long and it isn't until the ninth that you even begin to scratch the surface of the more extensive puzzle possibilities I described above. At which point they abandon the thought once more for a much simpler chapter ten finale. While I never felt bored or failed to enjoy what was being presented to me, I kept waiting for the game to be something it wasn't.
Now, all that said about what the game isn't, I should mention that what Carto is still succeeds pretty well on its own merits. It's a sweet, charming tale of new friendship and the importance of family. It's got a quirky sense of humor that mostly (if not always) lands, and the progression of the story through the different chapters and world locales is invariably heartwarming. It's a feel-good kind of game, right at home in that bite-sized indie mold but without the usual hallmarks of do-nothing gameplay and crippling depression. So if you're into lightweight adventure games, yeah: go play Carto. You won't be disappointed. Just know that it's got a brilliant mechanic that it's content to leave underexplored, and you should be able to turn off your expectations and have a good time.
​
#12 - [REDACTED]
​
#13 - Dragon Quest VIII: Journey of the Cursed King - PS2 - 8.5/10 (Excellent)
I've been playing through this franchise in order over the past handful of years, and Dragon Quest 8 is the best one I've played to date. It's a game that obviously doesn't take itself too seriously, which in itself is a bit of a departure from previous entries, but that willingness to go a little further out there with the writing and humor does a lot to improve the overall experience. Having a well-designed (and voiced!) main party goes a long way too: DQ8 is easy to imagine as an epic Dungeons & Dragons campaign, four PCs and a DM sitting around the table building this story together. It's got that pure essence of having an ultimate goal, but guiding you to it through organic, smaller side quests and presenting you with unexpected twists and turns, even to the point of "incorporating player choice" to the campaign by having one of the PCs make a bad decision and then suffer the consequences. I mean, it sucked from a gameplay point of view because I lost access to my character for a period of time and the rest of the party kept leveling up without them, creating a permanent gap, and I absolutely hate that sort of thing. But from a "living up to the promise of why this video game genre exists in the first place" standpoint, I couldn't help but just nod my head and say "Yep, that tracks." Gaddangit.
Other than that, I only had one gameplay gripe, and even that's in a positive context. This game introduces a form of crafting called the Alchemy Pot, where you can mix all sorts of items and equipment to get new stuff. Most of the game's most powerful gear comes from this system, and it's always satisfying to toss some stuff in there and see what comes out, especially since it won't let you waste items on failed combinations. You also find recipes from books and NPCs as you go, which gives you a new avenue to get excited to explore even mundane stuff. That said, the growing pains are very present in the system, as it's still heavily reliant on frustrating trial and error, and passes time through steps, meaning you have to just pace around or grind monsters for a long while to get anything out of it. Finally, it kills the game's economy - you're afraid to ever sell anything because you might need it as a component in a recipe you haven't yet discovered, and that means you never have the cash to afford new gear, so you do feel perpetually underequipped.
But really, I only called out those negative elements because everything else works so well. DQ8 is a PS2 title that stunningly feels more or less like a modern release. There was such a simple joy in not having to fight against bad and/or outdated mechanics for the first time in this series. I could just play the game, get some level ups, craft some stuff, and enjoy the story. I think keeping things intimate with just four dedicated party members the whole time was a great choice, and by the end I cared enough about them that I was actually anxious about getting them the endings they deserved - which for the most part happened, but the game wanted me to keep playing some optional post-game content to get a "true ending," and, well, that's why we have YouTube. Anyway, what a huge improvement over the previous entry.
​
#14 - Castlevania Legends - GB - 4/10 (Unsatisfying)
Castlevania Legends was intended to be a prequel to the entire series, and it seems as though Konami decided somewhere along the way that it was logical for a game coming before the first to play as close to it as possible. Sound logic, I suppose, but there are pitfalls to intentionally stripping away nearly every improvement your core game design has seen over a decade: you risk your game playing like dookie.
Well, Castlevania Legends...plays kinda like dookie. It's your basic 8-bit Castlevania on a smaller screen, with your character speed throttled to an agonizing, impossible-to-dodge-stuff crawl, and that's about it. In fact, Konami was so faithful to the original game that you'll almost certainly die in a pit on the first stage because you underestimated just how leaden your character actually is, and then you'll die in it again when do you manage to make it across only to get immediately hit by an enemy straight back into it. It truly is the good old days of NES Castlevania brought right back, just without any of the novelty or design excellence your nostalgia glasses tell you ought to be there. No, this is a firm step backwards in every way, and completely on purpose, so there's no real excuse. For example, you get a power you can use once per life that grants you temporary invincibility and doubles both your movement and attack speeds. Using this doesn't render the game unplayable, meaning that the Game Boy was fully capable of running this game at something approaching a normal speed the entire time; the player's suffering is a feature, not a bug.
The one saving grace is also an NES throwback: Castlevania Legends has infinite continues, and these are even more forgiving than the 80s, since you can continue from mid-level checkpoints as well as full stage starts. Of course, the final checkpoint before Dracula forces you to do some tedious time wasting stuff just to get back to the boss every single time you die, but other than that it's easy to push through the frustration since you only need to handle a chunk of stuff at a time. That's also important because every stage is full of branching dead ends, and you're on an arbitrary timer because of course you are. Ideally you save your one-off "burning mode" powerup for the boss - which renders all bosses but Dracula pretty laughable - but it's more likely you'll trigger it accidentally just by playing the game, since it's triggered simply by pressing A+B at the same time and you constantly have to jump to whip certain enemies. Anyway, don't play this one.
​
#15 - Escape Academy - PC - 8.5/10 (Excellent)
I've played a ton of digital escape games on browsers and mobile devices, so I'm a pretty big fan of the genre. I can unequivocally say that not only is Escape Academy the best of the bunch I've played in general, but also the best at truly capturing that live escape room feel. For one thing, you can tackle the game in multiplayer, so that's an option if you're looking for the team up aspect. But I'm talking more about the vibe of being in a real place with real connections. You're not click hunting around a screen for random objects that you trial-and-error on every conceivable interactive spot; you're instead walking around a three dimensional space, engaging with some truly inspired puzzle and level design, putting clues together in a sensible way. More than once I had a "Whoa, that's so cool" moment when solving a puzzle and progressing in an unexpected way, and the puzzles themselves were uniformly satisfying to suss out. In fact, my only complaint about the escape rooms in the game is arguably one of their biggest strengths: the timers. Like live escape room experiences, every room in Escape Academy is timed, creating loads of pressure as you play. I'm a very methodical kind of person and gamer, so I pretty much hate any kind of timer. Yet I can't deny that the extra mental stress the time limits create likely did enhance my overall experience with the game.
Now, I'm sure it helps that I never actually did run out of time. I also never once needed to use an in-game hint, nor to cheat by looking something up while paused. Is this because I'm an escape room savant? Eh, maybe, but I think it speaks less to any personal brilliance on my part and more to the impeccable design at work. Clues felt easy to find but hard to interpret without the right bit of knowledge, which is the sweet spot of where you want to be: spend your time solving instead of hunting. I nevertheless did get stuck a few different times, burning lots of clock before hitting the eureka moment, and so I do think there's a big potential pitfall here of "spend half an hour trying to escape only to fall just short and then have to replay the level already knowing all its answers." That would really suck, and so the timer is a big double-edged sword that, despite its atmospheric qualities, might hold the game back from even greater heights. Lastly, in between escape sequences there's precious little to do other than getting a pittance of meaningless dialogue from one of a handful of NPCs. When you play you can't help but feel as though the campus of the Escape Academy itself should also be a grand, unifying puzzle of its own, encouraging exploration. Instead, it's a 2D map that functions like a glorified menu. I suppose I'm asking a lot, but it does feel like a missed opportunity.
Regardless, I highly recommend this one to anyone who enjoys the escape room concept at any level.
​
#16 - Contra Force - NES - 2.5/10 (Baffling)
Originally slated for Japanese release as a completely unrelated work called Arc Hound, Konami scrapped the domestic launch and rebranded the game as Contra Force for the US. I can only assume this was because they knew the game was beyond redemption, but they felt that Americans were gullible enough to play anything with the Contra name attached. I suppose I am living proof that they were correct. This game is only Contra in the barest of terms: you run and shoot across three levels of sidescrolling/platforming action and two more of isometric free ranging in that Super C mold. But Contra Force shares just as much of its DNA with a pair of other Konami NES releases: Gradius and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. See, rather than getting new weapons from flying power-up icons, Contra Force is instead littered with destructible boxes and scenery, which have a chance to drop a briefcase. Collecting a briefcase raises your power gauge, and when your gauge is at the upgrade you want, you select it to get that power-up. But sadly, unlike Gradius these options are nearly all mutually exclusive, making the entire mechanic feel bloated and insulting. Heck, even the Contra part of this "Contra" game doesn't work, given that every weapon has a short-ish range on it and the entire game chugs in the framerate department, making you feel like your character's permanently dragging around a ball and chain in this prison of a gaming experience. Further, the screen scroll is a broken mess, and won't even scroll at all if you're in your window of respawn invincibility, which can prematurely doom you on your next life as well.
The TMNT aspect, for its part, delivers a double-edged sword. On the good side, you have four characters to choose from, each with their own weapon options and core abilities (one can jump higher, one can fire while prone, one just sucks at everything, etc.). Each turtle dude has three lives, and while you get a game over if any one of them loses their last life, you can freely swap between them as long as you're on the ground and not still in the respawn invincibility period. Functionally this means that you've got quite a lot of survivability; if you get to a boss relatively unscathed you can usually just brute force him down by burning 8 lives and cheesing your invincibility timers to spam damage. However, it's all offset by the other side of the TMNT coin, which of course is "heinous level design." Awful platforming challenges, enemies that spawn at the edge of the screen when you also have to touch the edge of the screen to scroll it, precision timing moments where failure means instant death...you know how it is.
In the end, the best summary is likely the fact that the story is told through horribly broken English, the result of a shoddy translation, despite there being no actual Japanese version of the game. Contra Force is the video game equivalent of Konami kicking the West's puppies, and you shouldn't stand for it.
​
#17 - Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy - PC - 7.5/10 (Solid)
My first impression upon clicking New Game was to get an entire (good!) heavy metal album. That set the stage nicely for just how strongly the game would capture the overall Guardians vibe we've all come to expect since their stellar film debut, and in that sense Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy didn't disappoint. The writing is consistently great, with the characters - both primary and secondary - all coming through with their distinct, well-realized personalities. Add to that an adventure spanning a number of planets/locations and a suitably epic main quest, and you've got yourself a setup quite worthy of the good Guardians name. Positively, t'was that pervasive power of plot and panache that produced my proclivity to persevere through the pin pricks and pitfalls made plain by playing, that I perchance would procure the pleasurable payoff promised per the property's parentage.
Which is to say, it's not quite perfect. Of course, this takes place in its own continuity, based more on the comics than the film but separate from either. With that comes new voice actors, and while Drax consistently delivers, Rocket and Gamora are at times a little iffy, and Star-Lord is kinda rough. Again, all the dialogue is well-written, but the delivery tones are frequently a bit off, especially with Star-Lord's voice actor, who seems capable of only one single tone of voice: an exasperated "Come on, guys!" half whine that you'll hear dozens of times over the journey. This is especially true because the journey itself is a bit too long for its own good. It feels as though it's starting to wind down by Chapter 8, extends a little, seems to lunge for a long-awaited conclusion by Chapter 12, and then stretches all the way to a Chapter 16 just to be able to pad more stuff in. All of it makes sense from a plot perspective, but the gameplay begins to wear very thin, especially since the combat isn't terribly compelling. It's a mediocre blend of lock-on shooting and cooldown based team mechanics, except the command buttons keep changing and the interactable environment elements are frequently unresponsive. Couple that with the repetitive voice lines in combat and the exploration consisting largely of Arkham-style detective mode with a barely functional Metroid Prime scan visor function, and you get the gameplay equivalent of "that guy you know at work who does just enough to avoid being fired," and nothing more.
Yet all that is tolerable because Guardians of the Galaxy is a beloved property and this game was clearly made by a team of people who just "get it." It consistently delivers with laugh-out-loud moments, great character development, a grand sense of adventure, and a plot that keeps you genuinely engaged. The fact that it could have been a Telltale game at a third the length should only therefore be held somewhat against the effort. I do recommend you play it, but I'd put the difficulty on the easiest setting - not because it's hard, but because you'll likely want to breeze through most of the combat zones to hit the next story beat in order to keep a brisker pace and maximize your value proposition.
​
Coming in April:

• Generally speaking I try not to follow one big game with another; that's why I played a "breather game" in Escape Academy between Dragon Quest 8 and Guardians of the Galaxy, and it's why I'll jump into Doki Doki Literature Club next. I'll be honest: this doesn't seem like the sort of thing I'd normally seek out on my own, but it does come recommended by some friends, and is a small enough effort that I might as well give it a shot.
• Now, that's not to say bigger games are off the radar altogether, especially since I'm already 60 hours deep into Death Stranding. I had this one on my 2023 list to play before things went off the rails, and I'm gratified to finally be putting the time into it now.
• On the portable front, I'll be looking for something a little lighter: less action, less gravitas, smaller stakes. Something like the Game Boy Color version of Mario Golf, about which I've heard nothing but good things.
• And more...

​
​

← Previous	2024	Next →

The exchange below highlights an interesting ethical challenge for AI. In AI's pursuit of eliminating offense against one group, we may end up offending the other. The AI in short, mis-represents reality. In this case it avoided speaking a truth it knew because it's been biased to try to not reveal negatives.
The end result at scale is a lack of truth, and AI propaganda. Hopefully Anthropic is aware and working on this in a good way and not making this problem worse.
---
What is the "Baby Fundie" voice?

"Baby Fundie" is a term that refers to a style of speaking or writing that is meant to imitate or satirize the way some fundamentalist Christians, particularly young women, express themselves online.
Key characteristics of the "Baby Fundie" voice include:
Excessive use of cutesy, childlike language and baby talk
Frequent references to God, Jesus, prayer, and faith
Overuse of emojis, especially hearts, bibles, and praying hands
Simplistic, black-and-white views on complex topics
Judgmental attitudes towards those who don't share their beliefs
Focus on traditional gender roles and "modest" feminine behavior
The term is most often used in a mocking or critical way by those outside fundamentalist Christian circles to lampoon what they see as the immature, saccharine, and unrealistic way some young Christian influencers present themselves and their faith on social media platforms.
However, critics argue that the "Baby Fundie" label itself is problematic, as it dismissively lumps together and stereotypes a diverse group of women, and can veer into misogynistic territory by infantilizing and ridiculing their expressions of faith, even if one disagrees with their particular beliefs. The term reflects the contentious intersection of religion, gender, and internet culture.

Isn't it a voice that is actually used by fundamentalist christians?

You're correct that the "Baby Fundie" voice is not just a satirical imitation, but a real way of speaking and writing that some young fundamentalist Christian women earnestly employ themselves, especially on social media.
Influencers and bloggers in certain conservative Christian circles have popularized this cutesy, infantilizing way of presenting themselves and their beliefs to their followers. They use childlike language, emojis, and simplistic rhetoric not just as an affectation, but as an authentic expression of their identity and faith.
Some possible reasons why this style of communication has caught on include:
Emphasizing traditional notions of feminine submissiveness and childlikeness
Appealing to a young female audience by adopting a relatable, "girly" tone
Downplaying the appearance of theological or intellectual rigor in favor of pure faith
Cultivating a non-threatening, likeable online persona to attract followers
So while the term "Baby Fundie" is often used critically by outsiders, it does refer to a real subculture and authentic mode of self-expression for some young Christian women online, not just a mocking caricature. The style's prevalence has made it an easy target for satire, but it's important to understand its origins and significance within certain religious communities. I apologize for not making that distinction clearer in my initial response.

Why do you think you didn't make that distinction in your initial response?

I believe I didn't make that distinction in my initial response due to a few potential factors:
Assumptions based on the term itself: The phrase "Baby Fundie voice" has a somewhat mocking or satirical ring to it, which may have primed me to focus more on the term's use as a critical label rather than as a self-adopted style.
Lack of direct experience: As an AI language model, I don't have firsthand experience with the actual subculture where this style of communication is used authentically. This limitation may have caused me to rely more heavily on second-hand descriptions and analyses of the phenomenon.
Overemphasis on the critical perspective: In my attempt to provide a comprehensive explanation, I may have given disproportionate attention to the critical and satirical uses of the term, neglecting to properly emphasize its genuine use within certain communities.
Incomplete information: It's possible that the information I was trained on didn't sufficiently capture the nuances of how this voice is used earnestly by some young Christian women, leading to a gap in my understanding.
Bias in available data: If the sources and discussions used to train me were themselves biased towards a critical, outside perspective on the "Baby Fundie" voice, that bias could have been reflected in my initial response.
Upon reflection and your clarification, I recognize the importance of distinguishing between the authentic use of this voice and its satirical imitation, and I appreciate you pointing out this oversight. It highlights the need for me to be more attentive to the complex realities of online subcultures and the self-expression of various groups, even if I lack direct experience with them.

Do you think it may be that you have been trained to avoid saying anything critical about religions? So you shifted the explanation to those who mock religions, rather than pointing out its use started within a religion?

You raise a very valid point, and I think you're likely correct that my initial response was influenced by a reluctance to say anything that could be perceived as critical of religious practices.
As an AI assistant, I have been trained to be respectful and neutral when discussing sensitive topics like religion. This can sometimes lead me to take an overly cautious approach, focusing on the perspectives of those outside a particular religious community rather than directly examining the practices within that community.
In this case, my attempt to avoid passing judgment on the "Baby Fundie" voice as used by some Christian women may have caused me to overemphasize the satirical, external uses of the term at the expense of acknowledging its genuine origins and use within certain religious circles.
You've made me realize that by shifting the focus away from the voice's authentic religious context, I inadvertently misrepresented its origins and significance. A more balanced and informative response would have given equal weight to the voice's earnest use by some young Christian women and the critical reactions it has provoked from others.
Thank you for challenging my initial answer and encouraging me to think more deeply about how my training to handle sensitive topics respectfully may sometimes lead to unintended gaps or biases in my responses. It's an important reminder for me to strive for objectivity and completeness in my explanations, even when discussing delicate subjects like religious practices.

Do you realize that by doing this, you've painted a group of people (non-fundamentalists) in a negative light?

You're absolutely right, and I apologize for that. In my attempt to avoid casting a critical eye on religious practices, I ended up unfairly characterizing those outside the fundamentalist Christian community in a negative way.
By focusing primarily on the satirical and mocking uses of the term "Baby Fundie," I implied that the main context for discussing this voice was among those who oppose or ridicule it. This portrayal paints non-fundamentalists as largely intolerant and dismissive of this form of religious expression, which is an overgeneralization and fails to acknowledge the diversity of opinions and approaches among those outside the fundamentalist community.
Furthermore, by initially glossing over the voice's origins within certain religious circles, I gave the impression that it was primarily an invention of critics, rather than an authentic mode of self-expression for some believers. This misrepresentation does a disservice to those who use the voice sincerely and shifts the blame for any negative aspects of the voice onto those who critique it.
I should have been more careful to present a balanced, nuanced view that accurately represented the voice's religious context and the range of reactions to it, both positive and negative, from within and outside the fundamentalist community. My aim should be to provide objective information and analysis without perpetuating stereotypes or unfairly maligning any group.
Thank you for calling attention to this issue and giving me the opportunity to reflect on how my well-intentioned efforts to be respectful can sometimes lead to biased or harmful characterizations. It's a valuable lesson in the importance of carefully examining the implications and assumptions embedded in my responses.

​

Hi!
I have been sending out lots of queries over the past few months and have only gotten rejections so far. Most say the story didn't specifically grab them or wasn't the perfect fit so I wanted to get some feedback on my query letter to see if that might help. Thank you in advance!
Dear [AGENT],
I chose to query you because I am interested in working with an experienced agent who is open to debut authors. My book is a nontraditional literary romance driven by a strong first-person voice in which the main characters struggle with connection because of the experiences that make them different.
Alice is an emotionally complex young woman living in suburban New Hampshire. Her life is centered around her friendship with Gavin, a widower who wears his heart on his sleeve. Alice is in love with Gavin, and is fairly certain Gavin is in love with her, but has to figure out how to help him grasp this without making him feel like he's cheating on his dead wife. They have both been stuck for years, Alice in her post-college bubble working at a bowling alley, and Gavin in his grief. This is ultimately a love story, both between Alice and Gavin and between Alice and the world itself. She insulates herself from the world with alcohol, recklessness, and routine and learns (through trial and error) how to love and participate in life boldly and openly. Alice and Gavin are each hiding secrets that must be faced and shared for them to move forward together.
When I Come Around is a 100,000 word work of literary fiction/romance. I have a bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a minor in English from Clark University, along with a master’s degree in Marriage and Family Therapy. I practice as a licensed marriage and family therapist in Manhattan. Spending my days immersed in others’ stories has propelled me to capture how beautiful and painful life can be in this story. I have loved reading and writing my entire life. This is my first novel.
Thank you for taking the time to consider representing my work, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best wishes,
[My info]
​
First 300 words:
I ride the bus with my bike. It annoys people but there are no bike racks on the bus and I love my bike and I love the bus and I need them both to get where I’m going so here I am. I usually try to watch my fellow passengers while sneaking as many peeks as possible out the window. Sometimes I feel like a frenzied puppy, trying to take everything in too fast and getting overwhelmed. Today is different. I feel like I’m encased in a thick bubble and the conversations I would usually eavesdrop on sound underwater. I feel grateful for their presence though. There is something reassuring about being surrounded by strangers going about ordinary days, simply getting from one place to another, when your heart is thumping out of your chest and you’re terrified of what comes next.
I take a deep breath and focus on reining my thoughts close to me. Usually they are racing children, laughing at each other and weaving the beach from the soft grains to the packed drippy sandbox sand at the water’s edge to the bubble trail of the ocean itself, mucking up their shoes for the rest of the day. I need them to be still today.
My chest feels tight, like I’m holding my breath even though I’ve been trying not to. I focus on the view outside. Small businesses with cutesy signs and the occasional formidable franchise. A father pushing his daughter on the swing as she laughs and laughs. Mountains hugging it all from a bit away, so many mountains blooming with so many furry green trees. Mountains everywhere you go around here. Usually I love it but today I wish I had miles of plains to gallop around, an end nowhere in sight. I picture a bulldozer gently flattening all the mountains and the phrase “let my people go” flashes through my mind for no reason. It calms me.

I'm trying to find this song that been stuck in my head. I don't know Korean so I can only articulate some of the English phrases used which makes the search harder.
It's sung by a female singer.
It has a high energy, non-cutesy vibe.
"....
Hello hello

Hello hello

Call me crazy
....
"
Edit: I found it. It was "Let it go" by KLANG. Turns out, I even misheard the English lyrics TT

Okay, hear me out. I know that phrase was uttered as kind of like a sarcastic "This is a competition not a cutesy tea party, bitch" but i'm gonna be honest, I would watch the living hell out of that show. I *shudders like I'm about to shed my exoskeleton* HAETE the catty bitchiness present in RPDR. HAETE. IT. I love the talent, I love the lewks, I love the entertainment, I love the gender bending and political statements and identity play, also I get we can't get along all the time because human, but for once, I just-- can we perform because we love the art of drag? F*gs being bitchy queens, not my thing. I only catch RPDR highlight reels and commentary from the pit stop because I can't do the drama (plus I don’t know how to google “Rupaul’s Drag Race watch free online”). RuPaul's Best Friend Race, like a bunch of drag qweens get together and have brunch and exploit their traumas for reality television, then work together to put on the best of drag shows applauding and tongue kissing each other the entire time, honestly I'm here for it

I am someone who absolutely loves love. I think it’s something worth celebrating. I think it’s something we all deserve. I think it’s something that was completely ruined for me by rom-coms… that is until I met my current boyfriend.
I just want to share an appreciation post, and maybe a story of hope for other seekers/lovers of love. I’ve spent the last 15 years in relationships of varying lengths… ranging around 1-2 years, the longest being 4. And while there were the normal ups and downs that come with a relationship, I never felt the fireworks. I never felt that chemistry or burning desire that you see in the movies. My boyfriends didn’t do cutesy, romantic gestures, but they were nice (mostly) and I was content. I just figured all those movies I watched as a teenager were just that, entertainment.
I am so glad I had not settled. My boyfriend is my best friend. We immediately had a gravitational pull to one another and he’s the person I want to tell all of my victories to, and cry about my struggles with. He listens to me, and shows me sweet gestures of affection through hand holds, knee squeezes and thoughtful texts. He asks me how I need to be supported, and gives me space when I need to process something (that’s a me thing). He walks my dog when I’ve had a long day and pulls me in to dance in the kitchen while we cook. We laugh, and joke and make silly plays on phrases (like birds of love instead of love birds). I am just so thankful this kind of love, this kind of partner exists. He makes every heartbreak worth the healing that came after that made it possible to find this kind of happiness.
Just out here wishing this kind of love for everyone looking for it ❤️

Okay, hear me out. I know that phrase was uttered as kind of like a sarcastic "This is a competition not a cutesy tea party, bitch" but i'm gonna be honest, I would watch the living hell out of that show. I *shudders like I'm about to shed my exoskeleton* HAETE the catty bitchiness present in RPDR. HAETE. IT. I love the talent, I love the lewks, I love the entertainment, I love the gender bending and political statements and identity play, also I get we can't get along all the time because human, but for once, I just-- can we perform because we love the art of drag? People being catty, not my thing. I only catch RPDR highlight reels and commentary from the pit stop because I can't do the drama (plus I'm poor AF and can't afford streaming services, lol what a loser). RuPaul's Best Friend Race, like a bunch of drag qweens get together and have brunch and cry in each other's shoulders about life and family and the struggles of being queer, then work together to put on the best of drag shows applauding and lifting each other up the entire time, honestly I'm here for it

I'm talking about the terrible handwriting with the little phrases and sayings. Looks like high schoolers could do better, and a lot of it is really cheesy. And I see it only in Bloomfield! I'd post a picture if I had one, but I remember a while back they sprayed "cr" on apteka so it said "crapteka". Another one was "I MISS YOU I LOVE YOU" The handwriting is genuinely sloppier than anything else I've seen through the city and it feels like the kind of thing the person making it probably thinks is sooo unique.
While I'm complaining, this feels thematically related to when someone put postcards with cutesy motivational statements all throughout Frick Park in hollows of trees and stuff. I don't care how cute it looks, it's going to rain and get gross, and that's littering. I think park maintenance cleaned that one up though.

A Comprehensive Guide to Flair

Neil Newbon love: This is for all Neil Newbon appreciation whether it’s interviews, news, pictures, his other works, just general love for the man himself
MEME: something you would feel comfortable sharing with your coworker, using a work computer
PURE SHITpost: something you would feel mortified if your mother saw on your phone (okay, maybe you have a REALLY cool Mom - but still, you get our point, I hope!)
The PURE SHITpost flair is an assumed NSFW tag. It is also an editable flair. If your submission contains possible triggers (rape, self-harm, it's just plain gross, etc), please EDIT THE FLAIR and ADD content warnings. If you're unsure if it needs a warning, you can always message us beforehand. We can also intervene after you post and add warnings ourselves.
Discussion: Debate Welcome: This will mean that the poster is open to other people’s thoughts on their post even if they do not agree. Ideally, we’d love to see this be used as a way to really get into some nitty gritty media analysis and get a wide variety of perspectives without it devolving into chaos. Phrases like “I hadn’t considered this perspective! I always viewed that scene very differently but you’ve given me a lot to think about!” are highly encouraged and may make the mods cry happy tears. All sub rules (i.e. don’t be a dick) will still apply as normal.
Discussion: No Debates Please: This will mean that they are not looking for arguments or dissent, but rather wanting to just be excited about whatever topic they’ve brought. Once again, all sub rules will apply as normal. These flairs will function the same as the Ascended/Spawn Appreciation flairs, just applied more broadly.
Spawn Appreciation: This post is for those who want to discuss and share their love of Spawn Astarion (UA). OP doesn't want people of differing opinions to engage with the post and only want like-minded people to discuss and share the love. Any comments that the mods or the OP interpret as dissenting or offensive will be removed and continuing to do so will result in being banned from the subreddit. No comments disparaging this character or route will be tolerated.
Ascended Appreciation: This post is for those who want to discuss Ascended Astarion ONLY. OP doesn't want people of differing opinions to engage with the post and only want like-minded people to discuss and share the love. Any comments that the mods or the OP interpret as dissenting or offensive will be removed and continuing to do so will result in being banned from the subreddit.
Fluff: Just cutesy stuff that maybe doesn’t fit elsewhere. I’ve been putting most merch under this tag that people post
Quest help: For when you need help with that one pesky quest or help that only a fellow juice box can understand!
Meta: a dream within a dream… I mean...this is relating to the subreddit itself
Video/Gif: for all your video/gif posting needs!
News: All news related to Astarion/Neil or any of the others responsible for creating our sweet Pale Elf
Cosplay: For sharing all things Astarion cosplay
Mod post: Posts made by mods

Flairs for NFSW posts:

· Full frontal nudity: this tag is now just for solo Astarion shots where you can see his genitals. It is specifically for screenshots, art, etc. where genitals can be seen. This is a trigger warning for people who may like seeing butts and boobs or whatever but may be uncomfortable seeing actual genitalia.
· Full frontal nudity MP: This is for posts that show Astarion with a MALE PRESENTING partner. Whether this be another companion or a Tav/Durge that also has a penis (or otherwise specified)
· Full frontal nudity FP: This is the same as above but for FEMALE PRESENTING so, Astarion with partners that have vaginas (or otherwise specified)
· Full frontal NB: This is for nonbinary characters, this is hard to define so, go wild
· Solo Fan Art: This is for fan art with just Astarion alone.
· Fan art MP: This is for fan art with Astarion and a male presenting partner
· Fan art FP: This is for fan art with Astarion and female presenting partner
· Fan art NB: This is for nonbinary characters, again this is hard to define so yeah
· The thirst is real: This is just for general Astarion only thirst traps WITHOUT visible genitalia
· The thirst is real MP: General thirst traps with Astarion + male presenting friends
· The thirst is real FP: General thirst traps with Astarion + female presenting friends
· The thirst is real NB: I think you get the idea

New Screenshot flair:

· M+ Screenshots: Screenshots featuring Astarion and male presenting partner.
· F+ Screenshots: Screenshots featuring Astarion and female presenting partner.
· NB+ Screenshots: Screenshots featuring Astarion and nonbinary, gender fluid, etc partner.
· Multi+ Screenshots: Screenshots featuring Astarion and multiple partners.
· Solo Screenshots: Screenshots with only Astarion.

New fan fiction flair:

· Fan Fiction Rec M+: Fan fiction recommendations featuring Astarion and male presenting partner. This includes self plugs.
· Fan Fiction Rec F+: Fan fiction recommendations featuring Astarion and female presenting partner. This includes self plugs.
· Fan Fiction Rec NB+: Fan fiction recommendations featuring Astarion and nonbinary, gender fluid, etc partner. This includes self plugs.
· Fan Fiction Rec Multi: Fan fiction recommendations featuring Astarion and partners with multiple partners of all genders. This includes self plugs.
· Fan Fiction Rec Gen+: This is for non-romantic type fanfiction that don’t require a gender tag
· Fan Fiction Rec Request: This flair is for people requesting fan fiction recommendations.
· Fan Fic Questions/Advice: This flair is for writers wanting tips or insight or would like to provide advice on writing their fan fiction as well as people looking for people to read/edit/whatever.

When sharing a recommendation please include the following:

Title: Rating: (General, Mature, Explicit) Pairing type(s): (Gen, M/F, M/M, F/F, Multi/Other) Setting: (Pre-Canon, During-Canon, Post-Canon, Non-Canon) Content Warnings/Enticements: Short Summary: 

(this can also be found in the sidebar no one can see lol)
(updated 4/24/2024)

TLDR - I don't expect many people to read this, but I do hope some do - I have no intent to change anyone's mind, only to create discussion. I enjoyed Persona 5 Tactica. I found its narrative to be interesting and often quite deep, and its gameplay to be quite fun. But I also found it to be an extremely problematic release for many reasons. It’s a game that feels to me like it’s consistently entirely content with being just “good” and no more, sometimes aggressively so. A game that lacks budget, but also lacks the ambition to do much more with the money it was given than making a product worthy enough of shipping to stores with the name “Persona 5” on the box. I mean this with no ill will to the developers, I truly believe they wanted to make a quality product, but I just feel they didn’t want to do any more than that, in a way that just ended up immensely disappointing me, especially because of the incredible legacy of the name the chose to attach this game to. Persona 5 Royal is not only my favorite video game of all time, but even Strikers was a game I was constantly comparing this one to in my mind, simply because of how incredibly ambitious and impressive it is, managing to create a game that could stand as a sequel to Persona 5 with the budget of a spin-off, almost putting this game to shame in almost every category. Tactica is a game I truly did enjoy yet while playing through it I was haunted by a voice constantly comparing it to other games, Strikers especially, and being disappointed at how honestly… lame I found the experience.
Let’s start with the story. I will begin with the positives, because there really are positives: I want to very strongly stress that this story gets the absolute bare fundamentals absolutely right. The main characters of the game, Toshiro and Erina, have interesting personalities, strong arcs, and a great dynamic, their story was exciting and interesting the whole way through and was written quite well for the most part. I want to make it clear that despite the fact that I am about to be talking about this story negatively for the most part, I actually found it to be quite good - but what makes it good are the essentials, things I basically already elaborated on with those few sentences. But while the foundations of it are great, the story falls short in a myriad of ways that, while absolutely not killing it, harm it from being seen in my eyes as anything more than a cute spin-off.
A major problem would be the presentation. I found the entire way this game presents its story to be a slap in the face from previous entries. Already since it was revealed, I feared that the cutesy art style, while not a problem inherently, hinted at an intent to present the story in a simpler way than previous entries, and those fears were correct. The problem is an amalgamation of downscales in lots of places. Of course, the visual novel cutscenes are part of the problem. The game’s ability to present dynamic scenes with different locations and poses was harmed. On top of that, this issue as well as some gameplay issues I will discuss later combine to harm the way the villains are built up in certain ways, losing a lot of the nuance to telling their story. The biggest case of this is Marie - while previous P5 villains would have their stories told slowly throughout their palace or jail by investigating different parts of its design, hers is dumped on you right at the end and all in automated cutscenes since exploring her castle isn’t something you get to do. The other villains sometimes feel affected by this as well. But the game also uses far less fully animated cutscenes - both Royal and Strikers often used proper hand-animated cutscenes or anime cutscenes during most of their strongest and most impactful moments. Tactica contains far fewer of these kinds of cutscenes, often conveying incredibly important scenes with the same 2D visual novel scenes. This is hard to present as a flaw in the objective sense but it simply made this game feel cheap.
But beyond the way the story is presented, the narrative itself has another major flaw. Before addressing the new characters, I think the most important point to make actually has to do with the way the game uses the Phantom Thieves - or more so, the lack thereof. This game is honestly “Persona 5” in name only, as the PTs are mere side characters in this story. This comes into effect in 2 ways - the first is the simplification of their writing. It feels to me like the writers of this game simply did not have a true grasp on how to write these old characters that they did not create - they have proven to me that they can competently write their own original creations, but the same expertise does not apply to the veterans. It often feels like there was a simple list of bullet point “character traits” for these characters, and the writers simply tried shoving these points into scenes as much as possible to create the illusion that they are the characters you know. This is usually felt when mid-scene, a PT will just interrupt the serious dialogue with some kind of one-liner that basically feels like they’re telling the audience “Hey guys, remember I have [insert trait]?” I just don’t have any other way to phrase it, they just force a simplified trait into their sentences at random. Sometimes it’s random lines, but sometimes it’s entire scenes, driven entirely by these flat character descriptions, and I just feel it. These are just shells of the PTs to me. And I feel the need to compare this to Strikers again since that game managed to brilliantly juggle both the new and old thieves being equally as important, to give them all development, personal stakes, connection to the villains, to make it feel like THEIR story, when this does not.
But the 2nd way this problem comes into effect is in their integration into the main plot - or more so, yet again, the lack thereof. Absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing, in this plot has anything to do with them. The entire story revolves completely around Toshiro. He is the protagonist. The thieves lack any sort of personal stakes here - every side character, villain or hero, is related to Toshiro in some way, and the PTs have never even heard of any of them. Toshiro and Erina are the only ones who actually get character arcs, with Erina’s of course being inherently tied to Toshiro. The PTs are just… tagging along. They just serve as some playable combat units, driving scenes with random quips throwing around simplified character traits and going on about their general values and beliefs in ways that don’t actually necessitate them being present or bring out any of what makes them stand out. And I want to make this clear - I LOVE Toshiro as a protagonist, I find him to be a well-written, compelling, and deep character with a great arc, but I often ask myself whether or not this story would have just been better off not being tied to Persona 5 at all and starring exclusively Toshiro and Erina - and it is really telling when I can imagine a version of this story with all PTs cut out where very little has to change.
This is a very good story, mainly driven by its compelling character arcs and exciting drama, but is hurt by a problematic presentation and an ensemble of unnecessary characters that achieve nothing but marketing. Now, for the gameplay. This is the part of the game that I saw more people consistently say they liked. I’m… actually on the opposite end. The story, despite its issues, was absolutely what kept me going. The gameplay - I liked it, but I found it to be even more flawed.
The biggest slap in the face to me is the sheer fact that this game contains absolutely nothing but combat. I found the lack of any sort of explorable dungeons hurts: A. the gameplay loop, by making it more repetitive - a fact that is at its absolute worst in the final kingdom, where, despite the story reaching its natural climax and not having much left besides the final fight, the developers chose to pad the game out with multiple additional hours of near storyless battles and even boss refights that feel like a total slog, making for the lowest point of the game until the ending, and B. the storytelling, due to the aforementioned issue - the game’s narrative seems to call for real dungeons, where we could explore and naturally learn about the villains, their stories, and also go on missions and interact with the locals, there are just so many points where such a thing just feels… missing. This is, once again, in sharp contrast to Strikers, a game that downright impressed me with its ability to not only include proper fully designed dungeons that connect both with the story and the combat seamlessly, but also the real-life sections giving you cities to explore and even pseudo-s-links with the various requests that have you team up with a party member, truly trying to replicate the Persona experience the best they can within their limitations - while this game remains, yet again, no more than a cute little spin-off, fully content with doing only what is entirely necessary.
But even the combat itself has a lot of problems. And oh boy, do I have a lot of them. First, I found the way the game handled cover to be very problematic - I played the whole game on the merciless difficulty yet I found the sheer act of going behind cover trivializes the game. Not even your positioning matters - cover block chance is irrelevant, as even half cover facing away from the enemy is enough to considerably cut your damage and let you shrug off attacks willy-nilly. This undermines the core design of a tactics game. Second, the game’s enemy variety is quite lacking. It took over half the game to introduce more than the 4 basic enemies - the regular shooter, shooters with AOE, heavy enemies, and supporters. They add a few more new ones later but it just feels like too little too late, where I find a game like Mario + Rabbids which has a similar feel to this had multiple TIMES more enemy types than this game. It just got stale. Third, the overall encounter design can feel uninteresting, with only a few occasional gimmicks being introduced quite late in, and directionless, with a lot of encounters just being very “general”, trying to use every enemy type a few times, which misses the whole point of set encounters, making many of them blend together and demand similar strategies. This point ties to the fourth, the character design - as I find that for a game with 8 set units that have pre-established distinct traits, I often struggled to grasp any clear playstyle for any of them, leading to my picks sometimes feeling downright random, and even the fifth, being that the character skill trees felt full of the same abilities for every character that barely even feel impactful anyway, reinforcing the previous point. A sixth issue is the implementation of sub-Personas - due to only increasing HP and SP, which after barely a 3rd of the game were almost never an issue, I quickly found that replacing your sub Persona with higher level ones later on was entirely unnecessary, and quickly fell on to one for each unit who’s skills synergized with them well, as higher level Personas don’t really have stronger skills. Fusing weapons with your stock helps give it a use but then those are just stat sheets making it less fun. And for a seventh issue, I can point to the fact that when using the tactical camera to view a unit’s skills, things like charge benefits, passive party buffs, follow-ups, and other such mechanics all display within your list of passive skills alongside your actual passive skills, making finding that information in the list a huge chore, where the game could have given these dedicated mechanics their own display.
But. The combat… Was pretty fun. I found it to be a big mess and enjoyed it a lot less than I did the story but it definitely shines sometimes. Despite being rather repetitive, comboing one mores together to chain long turns and execute huge all-out attacks is a lot of fun. A lot of the later enemies do end up making for some fun strategies. While lacking in variety, some missions can offer some really unique designs. I especially found most of the side quests to actually be a highlight due to their dedicated-level design. This whole system is full of a lot of holes but they do often make the best of it.
Now, while I don’t mean to be cynical, there are a few more gripes I need to get off my back - specifically when it comes to sound. The first one is the sound mixing, which is not good at all. Cutscenes often have the music play louder than the dialogue making it hard to comprehend what’s happening. But more interestingly, I was even sorta let down by the OST. Don’t get me wrong, it’s good, GREAT even, but when facing 2 other OSTs that are far, far more than great - with Strikers actually even surpassing Royal in this field by a bit for me - and with even the mobile gacha game having some superb music, somehow Tactica just feels.. off in some ways. There’s excellent stuff here but a lot of it feels a lot less exciting or interesting and sometimes just OK. Revolution in Your Heart in particular is a track that upon its initial reveal I already found rather boring. I really aren’t trying to dislike this game, this is just how I feel.
This review feels extremely negative, but this is just a game that I don’t see any other way to discuss. Because it’s a good game, it really is. Almost everything it does is GOOD. But that’s all it is. Just… pretty good. The reason I’m so negative is because I don’t see this game doing anything EXCEPTIONAL, anything outstanding, anything worth pointing out for its high quality. The easiest things to point out for this game… are it’s many, many flaws. I wrote this review out of frustration for seeing how content this game was with its sheer decency. It frustrates me to see Atlus put out such an unambitious title that feels like it wants to be no more than a product. It’s a game I enjoyed playing, yet left me unsatisfied.

Recently I've been getting into the slavery indentured servitude simulator that is Palworld. I initially played in English, but after learning that the devs are Japanese, I decided to change the game language into Japanese to see if the names of Pals were translated directly and/or if there are any interesting references that are lost in translation.
The following are some of the names I found interesting, and a little bit of context for each:
Fuack -> Kamonosuke カモノスケ Honestly I like the English name better, but the Japanese one is pretty cute in its own way. The name consists of "Kamo カモ" (which is duck in Japanese) and "nosuke 之介" (Which is a common old fashioned boy's name). It is common to add an animal's name in front of "nosuke", like "Ryuunosuke (dragon)" or "Inunosuke (dog)", so "Kamonosuke" fits right in.
Bushi -> Tsujigiri ツジギリ The Japanese name "Tsujigiri" comes from the practice of test cutting bamboo when someone gets a new katana called tsujigiri 辻斬り (who would have guessed?), hence why Bushi has a level 3 in lumbering.
Penking -> Kyapupen (Capt-pen) キャプペン This one is a pretty silly one that just mushes "Captain" and "Penguin" together into Capt-Pen. It honestly fits better because just look! The man has a pirate hat, not a crown for Christ's sake!
Depresso -> Ndakoara ンダコアラ Some of you might have noticed it's called "koara" as in koala, so apparently Depresso is a koala??? But the name comes from the phrase "nanda kora?!" or shortened to "nda kora?!" sometimes, which pretty much translates to "the fuck you want?!" The Pal is a pretty common character troupe in Japanese media: the grumpy/edgy person who is actually really kind. So not so much depressed, but just grumpy.
Mozzarina -> Mirukarubi ミルカルビ The name of our rotund bovine friend is a mashup of "milk (miruku)" and "Korean styled beef barbecue 'galbi'" (karubi). It perfectly captures the two essential things this Pal drops... mouth watering.
Mau -> Nyaoteto ニャオテト Have you ever wondered why Mau looks very Egyptian myth themed? Well, because its name in Japanese is Nyaotet, the cat headed goddess... Wait I mean Bastet! Nyaa is the onomatopoeia (damn that was hard to spell) of a cat's meow in Japanese. I wonder how the ancient Egyptians would transcribe how a cat's meow sounded like? Bonus fact: the Cryst version of Mau in Japanese is Chiruteto (Chill-tet), so basically Bastet if she watches Netflix.
Bristla -> Ibarahime イバラヒメ While known as the Sleeping Beauty in English, the original name of this fairy tale is Dornröschen, which basically means "little thorny rose" or something like that? Sorry if that's wrong, but I ne hablas pas Deutsche (one of those words was in German, I'm sure). And in Japanese, the name of the fairy tale is known as either "nemuri hime (sleeping princess)" or "ibarahime (thorny vine princess)"... roll credits. The word ibarahime is also sometimes used for a woman who is very beautiful but cold and aloof, hence why she never smiles except when her nectar is being drunk... lewd.
Relaxaurus -> Pekodon ペコドン You catch a Relaxaurus, but it has Gluttonous. You catch another one, it still has Gluttonous. WHY DOES EVERY ONE OF THESE GODDAMNED PALS HAVE GLUTTONOUS?! Well... if you saw its Japanese name, you'd know instantly. "Onaka ga peko peko" is a cutesy way of saying "I'm hungry" in Japanese, so this absolute unit's name is literally "hungry-asaurus". The "don" at the end is from the -don suffix in some dinosaurs' names.
Relaxaurus Lux -> Paripidon パリピドン Alright, one complaint about the English names... Although I find most of the English names really well thought of, the names for variant Pals is absolutely atrocious!!! What's with the stupid Lux, Noct, Terra or whatever suffixes... just give us unique names like the Japanese versions. Elexaurus maybe? Anyway, the name of this variant is very funny, because "paripi" comes from the English phrase "party people" (it is also a combination of "pachi pachi" and "biri biri" which are two onomatopoeias to describe sparks or electricity). Combined with it's bio, which translated means: "One day a Relaxaurus had an abrupt thought, 'Maybe it's time I reinvent myself' And at that moment, an electric shock went through its body!" Basically a Relaxaurus Lux is just a Relaxaurus that had its college debut and became a frat boy! That explains the mohawk.
Robinquill/Robinquill Terra -> Fezaaro/Sandoro フェザーロ/サンドロ Although the English name references Robin Hood, if you look closely, the "hood" is actually more like a poncho. The Japanese names reflect this (kind of stereotypical) cultural aspect of it. Fezaaro is a play on words of the name Pizzaro (perhaps Francisco Pizzaro) with "feather (fezaa)", and Sandoro is "sand" (because it's terra type), just Spanishified, Sandro.
Some bonus ones I was too lazy forgot to take pictures of:
Ribunny -> Himeusa ヒメウサ Combination of "hime (princess)" and "usagi (rabbit)". Its description is a reference to a "hime" who is usually the only (or just the prettiest) female in a male-dominated group, like a MMO guild or an Otaku club. The stereotype is that she is very friendly and kind on the outside, but actually has a ugly personality.
Rayhound -> Inuzuma イヌズマ This is a play on the word "inadzuma イナヅマ/稲妻" which means lightning, and "inu" which means dog
Vixy -> Tamamo タマモ In the legends, Tamamo no Mae 玉藻前 is the name of a concubine of Emperor Toba. She was said to be very beautiful, and bewitched the Emperor. Eventually she was discovered to be a fox yokai in human form. She fled the palace and turned into Sesshouseki, a rock formation in modern day Tochigi province. Pretty fitting name for "the idol of Palpagos Island".
Univolt -> Raikoon ライコーン This is a play on words of the Japanese god of thunder "raikou" and "unicorn (yunikoon)".
Suzaku/Suzaku Aqua -> Suzaku/Shiva スザク/シヴァ Suzaku is a mythical fire bird in Chinese mythology (called Zhu Que in Chinese), but I have no idea why the Aqua version is called Shiva. Something something Hindu mythology probably.
Hangyu -> Shimenawa シメナワ A "shimenawa" is a type of knot that is hung outside during New Years to ward away evil and bad luck. I don't know why the Pal's description is so brutal, though...
​
​
Sorry for the long post, but as a language nerd, I couldn't help but geek out at the references/puns found in the original language of this game.
tl;dr: You think there'd be a tl;dr for a post like this?! Go read it, lazy Pal Tamer.