Why I don't get this, by unclghost

In the first panel, it looks like the guy thinks it was just a harmless joke and his friends look like they didn't in fact incept him, setting it up for a "but we DIDN'T incept you!"-type punchline.

But then, in the second panel, his expression and sweat make it look like he knows full well they didn't incept him, which raises the question of why he's even bringing it up, since if they didn't incept him they'd have no idea that he was dreaming about Leo DiCaprio in the first place, and if they did, their expressions in the first panel don't make sense.

Then, in the last panel, where he's presumably being honest with both himself and the psychiatrist, he does say that it was an inception, but if it really was just his friends pranking him, why would he still be upset about it? Did his knowledge of the situation change between panels 2 and 3? If so, the only way it could have changed would have been going from thinking it wasn't an inception to thinking it was an inception, which would have been much *less* cause for alarm.

The best explanation I can come up with is that it was an inception and the part he's upset about is that he ended up liking it, but that still doesn't explain his friends in panel 1.

(I'm not expecting an official explanation or anything, this has just been burrowing into the back of my mind all day)

There was quite a bit at the end that could have been parodied, like the SHIP BULKHEAD DOOR that isn't stopped by the BODY OF THOMAS MCCARTHY but is stopped by a ROPE.

Microsoft sells software and not hardware, unlike Apple, aside from products such as the Xbox.

It's back for me now.

It's down in Washington state and I think I saw someone say it's down as far away as Greece.

"There are no spelling mistakes in the article. Just some missing apostrophes. Big whoop. If you can't tell 'dont' is 'don't' then you fail at english and life anyway. Stop using a scapegoat."

Why is everyone acting like this is the main point? It's a poorly edited article. I have to be honest here, I thought it was someone's blog when I first saw it. That does affect credibility, but logic should the main focus (no pun intended) here. This belongs in the opinion category, not a "daily discussion."

"Making good on its intentions to continue supporting the original Left 4 Dead, Valve says that the next batch of downloadable content for the Xbox 360 and PC game will be announced sometime this Summer."

Perhaps, but Valve still has yet to actually announce any of the DLC they'd already promised. From what we've seen so far, the updates haven't been anywhere near what we've seen. At this point in time, the release cycle seems like an odd decision. Whether you'd prefer to go with what we can tell so far or a hypothetical future situation where it all makes sense then is up to you. The boycotters are going with what's actually happened so far.

"Why didnt anyone complain about Call of Duty: World at War?"

Because Activision already rehashes the same game over and over every year with minor changes as a sequel. People don't want Valve going down that route.

Who said it was anyone's main point? You're the one searching for an argument here. I just find it an example of the unprofessionalism of this article, and since Rocco et al. seem reluctant to actually respond to any of the other points, here you are making an issue out of it too.

"It does not take a genius to copy and paste an article's text onto Microsoft Word 2003/2007, whichever you prefer, and correct the missing apostrophes and commas."

Exactly...

"This boycott is stupid, this article is dumb, and, Ghost, you are a fucking tool."

I'm glad we can be so rational.

"If u ppl dont like it ... then STFU and they have the right to set the pricing too "

They quite obviously have the right to set prices to whatever they want (assuming they stay within monopoly law, of course) but they have the responsibility to return on their promises to customers.

"360 is obviously the best console. PC gamers are jokes.
Call me a fanboy or call me right? Either work..."

Fanboy it is.

"For all the people bagging on his spelling mistakes? HA.
I just find it hilarious that the internet has become my Literature class...

Rocco, your beyond correct. "

There's a difference between spelling mistakes in comments (such as the one in yours) and in writing an article for a website, even an opinion piece such as this one.

"The only thing we should be boycotting is war."

Then dont pay your taxes or STFU. LOL!

"How were all of these things plus whatever else is still unannounced going to be free DLC added to the first game? LOL! "

Not all of them were, until Valve decided to spin them off into a full-priced sequel, hence the dismay of many people. Note, however, that there's nothing in the Source engine that would prevent them from just making all of those additions (with the possible exception of a story :P) as updates or even optional paid DLC. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/04/valve-... Original statement: “So we’ll do the same thing with Left 4 Dead where we’ll have the initial release and then we’ll release more movies, more characters, more weapons, unlockables, achievements, because that’s the way you continue to grow a community over time.” Later, they say that they decided on a sequel because people wanted more content, but they decided they thought of too much for DLC. They still have yet to announce DLC for L4D that's anywhere near the scale of TF2, which for many is the main issue. The problem isn't the amount of new content that's not DLC, the console versions, or even the release cycle, it's that Valve seems to be working on L4D2 instead of the promised new content.