Super Mario Run was quite fun as a single-button Mario platformer. You could also try visual novels or point-and-click adventures, or even something just with simple controls like pokémon.
Far Cry 3 was the game that got me to stop buying Ubisoft games. I enjoyed the game, but when someone invited me to an online match (something that almost never happened for me) I found that playing online required some U-Play account or whatever they called it, and it cost $10. I tried the free account code that came with the game, but my brother already used it. So at that point I was pissed. I didn’t play online often, but it would’ve been nice to play with one of the very few friends I had without being expected to pay more money for the game I already paid for.
Fuck. I completely forgot they used to do that bullshit thing for Multiplayer. I think I still have a card for it that came with my childhood copy of AC Revelations somewhere
I’ve heard it can be hard to see with the naked eye, and it seems like it would probably get murdered by city lights. Something like some low power, wide-lens binoculars might help collect enough light to make it visible. Also, I’ve heard that cell phone cameras and cameras in general are pretty good at picking up the Aurora over the naked eye, especially on longer exposures.
Sounds about right. The main problem is getting our somewhere dark, where the horizon is visible. There are buildings for miles around, and its really cold because of the winds. I’ve got so many good excuses. I’m glad you have a long list of objects to look for. Its quite impressive, to be honest. I know my way around, but still not that many DSO’s off the top of my head 🙌
“Oh no, we’re not the top choice for games!”
My kids: we have some time, can we play domething?
I (remembering which games have coop): (opening Epic - nope - opening steam - looking for a game - …)
I was playing on Sinclair spectrum and BBC b computers in the 80s but this kinda rings a vague bell. I’ll ask my brother and get back to you if he remembers anything
Oh, I’ll add on to this one that Rainbow Six 1 and 3 have been some of the best co-op games I’ve ever played, and both have LAN. The second game isn’t readily available for sale anymore. Even that first game involved editing a lot of level config files in order to circumvent bugs, but it was a great time.
I didn’t see a way to set it up on Java without running a local server. Is there? I prefer Java, but it seemed like a lot of hours of work to get a server set up.
Yeah you play single player, pause, and hit “open to lan”
Then someone else can connect to lan by typing in the IP. I think it autodetects a lan connection that’s already open, too, but it’s been a bit since I’ve used it.
Escape, open to lan. autodetected by other Minecraft clients on the network and works modded without issues. You can enable cheats (or not) by default every time you open it again.
Robin Dunbar, an anthropologist, found a relationship between primate brain size and average social group size, and extrapolated that to humans, giving a comfortable group size of around 150 people, known as Dunbar’s number. If you work on the principal that that would be about the average size of a tribe in an unstressed hunter society, it would seem quite pkausible that a hunting group would be around 50 people. It’s large enough to take down pretty much anything you’d want to hunt, and small enough to coordinate efficiently.
As far as i know, it was typically around 100 - 120 people and before i knew that i read somewhere that around 100 is the number of relationships the brain can handle.
It’s a fairly nebulous number, it’s going to be different for each individual, and Dunbar was only positing an approximate relationship between brain size and group size. Even if humans can manage 150 or more relationships, it makes sense to keep your group smaller than that to allow for external relationships too.
bin.pol.social
Ważne