BananaTrifleViolin

I loved CS1 and have had CS2 since launch. I just can’t get into CS2 - it’s just not fun.

A large part of that is Paradox Mods in CS2. When CS1 launched from day one you could go onto the steam workshop and download player made models - houses, offices, train stations, roads etc. It grew rapidly and continuously, and it meant every city you made you could customise and change. The game was constantly refreshing and fun, and you could make whatever you wanted.

For CS2, 2 years on and you still can’t add custom assets to the game. Paradox/CO have released themed region based asset packs that they have made and the mods are there, but the player made assets remain largely missing. And I suspect the reason is Paradox Mods and the upcoming console version - the PC version seems to have been held back from being good so Paradox can get it’s console launch. There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding that the player made content was what made CS1 so great. I suspect CO get that, while Paradox only cares about DLC.

Wow this is terrible news. Basically Paradox owns the IP to Cities Skylines and Colossal Order seemingly want out.

I’d say a large reason CS2 has been such a mess is because it was rushed out, the paradox mod system is just not fit for purpose and there remains a ridiculous focus on getting the console version released + move on to DLCs rather than fixing the main game. I’d put most of the blame on Paradox’s shoulders to be honest.

It’ll be interesting to see what CO does next. CS1 was a great game, CS2 could have been a great game. Will they do another city sim or more onto something else? Seems a shame if they move on as they have grown so much expertise in the genre. I’m hoping they’re cutting free to do a game with their own vision, which was how CS1 came to be.

It’s not about the item whatever it is, it’s about your reaction to it. This was something your spouse got you to show you that they love you; they bought something they thought you would want and need because they see you using this item all the time. It doesn’t matter that they know you like using old things - for them the thing they got you is an expression of their love for you, and your reaction (lets return it, I don’t want it) is like rejecting their love and is insulting.

I don’t know how you said it to your spouse but the way you’ve described it here your reaction sounds like it was entirely factual and emotionless. It may not be what you’re saying but how you said it that is the issue. Did you acknowledge how kind and thoughtful the gift was? Did you acknowledge what it means to get a nice gift from your spouse before saying that actually it’s not something you’d use?

Instead of seeing it as a tit-for-tat exchange and the same as you gifting t-shirts, you need to understand that this was a personal gift from your spouse. You also need to acknowledge you’re difficult to get gifts for because you like old things. You’re not the bad guy for wanting to return the item, you’re likely the bad guy for how you’ve gone about it and hurting your spouses feelings in the process. It may be that you’re not an emotional person or have difficulty reading other people including your spouse - that’s fine but you may need to acknowledge that you’ve hurt their feelings even if you didn’t realise or mean to, and apologise - that may help a lot. It would also be helpful to tell them how your mother-in-laws gift has sentimental value and you didn’t want to replace it. It may still be that you end up returning the item - but it’s far less important that your relationship with your spouse.

The a specious quote. That implies that all gain can only be at a cost for someone else. Instead of the conservation of mass, we’re talking the conservation of misery. It’s nonsense.

So interesting rabbit hole: Aldi was originally 1 company but split between two brothers into Aldi Nord and Aldi Sud (Aldi North and Aldi South) in the 1960s in Germany. The two companies share the same Aldi name, and work somewhat together but are separate and have their own territories. They are owned by the families of the original owners, and they do not compete directly against each other.

Aldi Sud covers southern Germany, eastern and southern Europe, the UK, Ireland, Australia and the USA. In the UK Aldi has got a reputation as a good employer, a discount supermarket that offers quality, and is the fastest growing supermarket. All the competitors now do “price matches” to Aldi to try and keep up. Aldi in the USA, Ireland and Australia are seemingly run very similar to the Aldi in the UK and of course in it’s base in Germany.

Meanwhile, Aldi Nord covers northern Germany, the Benelux countries, France, Spain and Portugal amongst others. It seems Aldi does not have as good a reputation in some of these countries? I can see stuff about aldi being dirty, with poor products and poor customer service. Not sure how true that is, but that is definitely not Aldi’s reputation in the UK where I live. Clean, good quality and happy staff is my experience.

So when you see Aldi in the anglosphere part of the internet, it’s all about Aldi Sud. Also total random aside but the 2 companies do compete in the US: Aldi Sud runs Aldi, while Aldi Nord sort-of-owns Trader Joe’s (it’s a “sister company” owned by the owners of Aldi Nord).

EDIT: Also in the UK, Aldi and Lidl are very similar in quality and style. Although Lidl does more fresh baked goods, and I personally prefer it but Aldi is nearer for me so I shop there.