The thing I fucking hate is when the game doesn't make it obvious when a checkpoint is activated. Then you go to quit the game: "Everything since the last checkpoint will be lost". Well WHEN WAS THE LAST MOTHERFUCKING CHECKPOINT, ASSHOLE?
I hate that even when it is obvious. If I save and then immediately quit and it says “everything since the last save will be lost” I’m always paranoid that it means I didn’t actually save correctly.
I mean, I hate that too. “I’m going to lose 5 seconds of progress?! Oh no!” It ought to be able to see that I didn’t do anything progress-relevant in those 5 seconds and just skip the dialog…
Add counters to progression:
20/180 quests completed
1805/9456 dialogue choices explored
567/568 npcs killed
95/102 areas explored
And whatever else you define as progress
Add this info into your save data. When quitting the game, open the most recent save, read the counters, compare to current values, display a nondescript “you’ve had a little/a lot of/no progress since you last saved, are you sure you want to quit without saving?” Shouldn’t take so long that it triggers a lag spike, I don’t think.
I dunno, most games the sexuality of the protagonist is completely irrelevant, and in those cases id tell both sides to stop whining or just play a different game
I’m not seeing the double standard there. Their overall stance sounds like they don’t gaf about anyone complaining about the sexuality of characters in video games because it’s often completely irrelevant to the game itself.
Or did I misunderstand and you mean that since they didn’t call out people complaining about a lack of gay representation they shouldn’t call out everyone complaining now that the complaints go both ways?
If you sleep through all the romantic subplots of the last 40 years of RPGs, but you wake up offended when you discover that Ellie and Riley Kiss at the end of The Last of Us: Left Behind, you’re working from a double standard.
you mean that since they didn’t call out people complaining about a lack of gay representation they shouldn’t call out everyone complaining now that the complaints go both ways?
It just wasn’t clear what the “this” in the comment I replied to was referring to, the OP or the comment it replied to. My own comment assumed it was saying thr comment it replied to had the double standard, but I see now that it might have been agreeing with that comment’s sentiment but saying the OP was about a double standard.
No one gave a fuck about Ellie and Riley kissing in 2014. It wasnt until after the culture wars started that it became a thing. Im still not even sure it is a thing, since everyone was saying that not liking part 2 was only because you dont like “the gayz”. Which is bullshit. The fans of the game, knew for 6 years that Ellie was gay, and that she was going to be the only playable character(which turned out to be bullshit), and everyone was still looking forward to it.
Then the leaks happened, and all of sudden half the fans are bigots…
I’m in a perspective of hoping for more romantic subplots of any kind. I never played through any generation of RPGs that made those popular, and when they were there, they were hastily written in, or just optional.
It’s why I’m excited for a certain JRPG remake that puts one such relation (between a guy and a girl) front and center, so much so that it becomes a driving element of the story. Those who know, know I suppose.
One thing that helps in its case is, it doesn’t advertise on the box “Romance 1-1000 characters!!” IMO, a good romantic plot sneaks up on you after you’ve invested in the characters.
It’s why I’m excited for a certain JRPG remake that puts one such relation (between a guy and a girl) front and center, so much so that it becomes a driving element of the story.
Are we talking about FF7 or something else?
IMO, a good romantic plot sneaks up on you after you’ve invested in the characters.
Honestly, I suppose FF7 is another great example, but I was thinking of the Trails in the Sky remake due out in a month or two.
Sorry if that’s a vague spoiler. It wasn’t even something I knew about the game playing through, but the slow-impact delivery of it worked fantastically.
I’m calling it out right now because someone posted a meme and I’m replying to that post. I am not against more representation in video games, and I find people who whine about it to be annoying children.
Post: Uses the word normies in a positive sense and literally says it’s great that gaming is more accessible
Fediverse: Is this a neckbeard?
It’s amazing that a non-slur single word can get y’all so fucking bent out of shape. It was worth a double take, but not shitting on the entire post. It’s literally a post about a non-traditional gamer / not-power-user / etc person finding a sense of community and fun because of the rise of handhelds. Is shutting down that discussion over one word worth more than seeing the good in recent trends?
I hope we continue to see more good handhelds get made - I’d personally love a Steam Deck, but seeing Valve get some good competition would be good for the technology (not you, Apple / Meta). Maybe I’m just too old, but I’d love to see slide-out keyboards again…
I’m glad that somebody said it. Lemmy is becoming quite a shit show in this regard. These FOSS enthusiasts and Linux master race people are really starting to deter me from the platform.
I love FOSS software! I love Linux! I hate people telling other people how to think or what to spend their time with. Most of the people in this thread can fuck right off.
Post: Uses the word normies in a positive sense and literally says it’s great that gaming is more accessible
Fediverse: Is this a neckbeard?
The reaction is a bit more like
“B-B-B-BUT THE CONNOTATIONS!!! Bro you just LITERALLY used a word that has PROBLEMATIC CONNOTATIONS because it’s ALSO USED by PEOPLE I DON’T LIKE, and that makes you GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION!!! I am PROUD of how I combine purity testing and code switching into a DEFINITELY accurate litmus test, because I think I’m a character from Dune!! I don’t know what the FUCK ‘context’ is but it SOUNDS like something the ALT-RIGHT would care about!!!”
If I ever caught myself taking an obvious self-effacing remark seriously, I would be so ashamed. Anyone coming into this thread with hurt feelings about the word “normies” is a huge dork and needs go outside.
I would really appreciate if we stopped doing the “if you disagree with my opinion you’re an [insult] and also must be out of touch with reality so I will say you need to go outside” thing. It’s really exhausting. This is Beehaw, the be(e) nice server and I’m kind of getting sick of seeing this kind of snark on a server where the expectation is people being nice to each other.
I was skeptical at “normies” but the overall tone of the post is inclusive, so I’m not the target of your rant because I figured it out. I was able to figure it out because I’m terminally online and have the experience with online posts to know that some people use it as a pejorative and some people use it as a self-deprecating catch-all for people who aren’t too into their hobby.
I also have autism and some people with the condition aren’t as good as me at putting together the connotations of words AND the overall post to figure out the poster’s intentions. And some people aren’t terminally online and have less exposure to seeing this word used. They’ve likely overwhelmingly seen it used as a pejorative, and end up very skeptical of this post. I don’t like the idea that people like me, or that people who might have reasonably arrived at a different conclusion about this, are being told that they’re huge dorks who need to go outside.
Really starting to feel like Beehaw is just like any other online space. I see the same amount of snark and negative assumptions of people who didn’t see something the commenter’s/poster’s way. Sure, it’s free of bigotry, but all the spaces I occupied were already bigotry-free. Even back when I was on Reddit, because in the small subreddits I looked at the few bigots were downvoted to hell and had their comments hidden. (I’m aware that not everyone was lucky enough to only be interested in topics that had easily accessible bigotry-free areas so Beehaw still serves a useful purpose for them.)
Yeah, I get it. Here’s the thing though, this specific part:
I also have autism and some people with the condition aren’t as good as me at putting together the connotations of words AND the overall post to figure out the poster’s intentions. And some people aren’t terminally online and have less exposure to seeing this word used. They’ve likely overwhelmingly seen it used as a pejorative, and end up very skeptical of this post.
Those people all have one thing in common: nobody put a gun to their head and said “what’s going on with this post? Make the call and post your comment NOW”. One thing all we here on the internet do all have in common is the ability to read, and to use our sapience to make decisions about what we read. To say “this seems out of line. Could it be what I think it is, or am I assuming?” By process of elimination, a person either chooses to do that, or chooses to be assumptive. And also:
I don’t like the idea that people like me, or that people who might have reasonably arrived at a different conclusion about this, are being told that they’re huge dorks who need to go outside.
There is no reasonable way to get to the wrong conclusion.
Ever.
If you’re being reasonable, you either find the right conclusion beyond all reasonable doubt, or you concede that you don’t have enough information and then move on with your life. The only way to get to the wrong conclusion is to jump to conclusions, because being reasonable requires you to start from the point of “there may be no answer I can find”. The people in this thread who got it wrong made assumptions, jumped to conclusions, and defended themselves by being belligerent. That is a fundamental lack of respect for others’ intelligence that goes beyond being rude to people and using mean words.
To say “this seems out of line. Could it be what I think it is, or am I assuming?” By process of elimination, a person either chooses to do that, or chooses to be assumptive.
I’m assuming you’re human right now, even though the possibility exists that you are an alien who hasn’t revealed themselves as such and that your alien self prioritizes engaging here instead of talking to the world’s governments. I’m choosing to be assumptive because I don’t care to track you down and try to match your identity to a human person in real life, because I find doing that distasteful even if I never end up exposing your identity to anyone else in the world, and because I am extremely confident that this assumption is correct. But it is still an unproven assumption.
Should I hold the possibility that on the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog or alien or something in my head because it’s an assumption? Probably not. I should probably assume you are human. People will make assumptions they believe to be reasonable, and people will also call out what they believe to be bad behavior even if they’re wrong.
You’ve already been asked to be nice yesterday. It’s not about “suffering fools”, its about working to make Beehaw a positive space, and acting in good faith, even when you disagree with other users. Resorting to insults is not in line with that.
That really just went right over your head, huh? I really thought anybody would be able to make the connection. Pro tip: being nice, acting in good faith, and insulting people are all matters of intent, not just action. If you’re going to moderate based on peoples’ intent, that I’d think it’s probably pretty important that you actually be right about it in the first place. Wouldn’t you agree?
Here’s my perspective on how I’ve viewed this exchange:
In response to your initial comment, Evergreen expressed their opinion on how people might have interpreted a comment to be more literal than it was intended. They also expressed their desire for Beehaw to try and move away from the type of dismissive “go outside and touch grass” type of argument many of us were accustomed to seeing on Reddit. They provided examples of where the use of “normies” has previously been a negative connotation, and how someone might arrive at that conclusion based on prior experience, even if it was not accurate
From my perspective, your response to that comment boiled down to 2 points: -No one is obligated to respond -It doesn’t matter what your previous experience is, it is wrong to assume that an interaction might be playing out like previous times it played out.
If it were worded less aggressively and more cooperatively, I believe this could have been a very constructive conversation about social expectations and assumptions.
Evergreen then responded with a list of reasonable assumptions that we make based on previous experience.
You responded with an insult.
Its pretty clear with that last message, and your responses to moderators that your intent is not to have constructive conversations and make an effort to make Beehaw a better space.
Hi, please remember to Be(e) nice. I also think it’s a little silly to get in a huge flap about the headline of this article, but I’d ask that you also remember to be kind to other users.
Valve never intended for deadlock to have as much media coverage as it did. It happened anyways because a media outlet chose to ignore the informal NDA message that popped up when launching the game. The message was removed shortly after the incident.
We appreciate the passion of our community; however, the decision to discontinue online services is multi-faceted, never taken lightly and must be an option for companies when an online experience is no longer commercially viable. We understand that it can be disappointing for players but, when it does happen, the industry ensures that players are given fair notice of the prospective changes in compliance with local consumer protection laws.
Private servers are not always a viable alternative option for players as the protections we put in place to secure players’ data, remove illegal content, and combat unsafe community content would not exist and would leave rights holders liable. In addition, many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only; in effect, these proposals would curtail developer choice by making these video games prohibitively expensive to create.
…
Stop Killing Games is not trying to force companies to provide private servers or anything like that, but leave the game in a playable state after shutting off servers. This can mean:
provide alternatives to any online-only content
make the game P2P if it requires multiplayer (no server needed, each client is a server)
gracefully degrading the client experience when there’s no server
Of course, releasing server code is an option.
The expectation is:
if it’s a subscription game, I get access for whatever period I pay for
if it’s F2P, go nuts and break it whenever you want; there is the issue of I shame purchases, so that depends on how it’s advertised
if it’s a purchased game, it should still work after support ends
That didn’t restrict design decisions, it just places a requirement when the game is discontinued. If companies know this going in, they can plan ahead for their exit, just like we expect for mining companies (they’re expected to fill in holes and make it look nice once they’re done).
I argue Stop Killing Games doesn’t go far enough, and if it’s pissing off the games industry as well, then that means it strikes a good balance.
If server code is released such that people can run private servers after the official servers are shut down, then legally the people running the servers should be the ones liable for illegal activity that happens on them.
I could imagine third-party companies springing up whose entire business model is JUST providing unofficial servers for discontinued games and moderating them. Maybe a subscription service that provides access to servers for several different online service games.
Of course, it would be more likely that it would be just a player who hosts a server for themselves and their friends and doesn’t attempt to be profitable. That would be fine too.
I could imagine third-party companies springing up whose entire business model is JUST providing unofficial servers for discontinued games and moderating them
That kind of already exists, you can buy hosting for Minecraft and other games. AFAIK, moderation isn’t a part of it, but many private groups exist that run public servers and manage their own moderation. It exists already, and that should absolutely be brought up as a bill is being considered.
We have had that exact model for decades. Hosting companies use to and probably still offer rack space for arena shooters. The main company managed the master server, which was just a listing of IP addresses, but there were only ever a few official game servers with defaults loaded.
Minecraft has private servers (at least on Minecraft java) as well as their own server platform “Realms”, also every client is also a server. Though the authentication system is a Microsoft account so that’s likely to still be online well into the future
I understood that from a IP and trademark stand point. It could be hard to retain your copyright or trademark if you are no longer controlling a product
No, copyright isn’t relinquished from any of that (not even any effect on damages if you still require players to have bought the game to use the private servers), and trademarks wouldn’t be affected at all if you simply require that 3rd party servers are marked as unofficial
Exactly, and that also includes online games like Minecraft. Nobody is going to sue Microsoft because of what someone said or did in a private Minecraft server, though they might if it’s a Microsoft hosted one.
Stop Killing Games is not trying to force companies to provide private servers
I don’t think this is what they mean. They say that of they provide the tools for users to deploy the servers, bad things can happen. So I think they understood SKG, they just lie about the consequences for gamers
If that’s their argument, then the counterargument is simple: preserve the game another way. If hosting servers is dangerous, put the server code into the client and allow multiplayer w/ P2P tech, as had been done since the 90s (e.g. StarCraft).
What they seem to be doing is reframing the problem as requiring users to host servers, and arguing the various legal issues related to that. SKG just needs to clarify that there are multiple options here, and since devs know about the law at the start (SKG isn’t retroactive), studios can plan ahead.
It’s just a disingenuous argument trying to reframe the problem into cyber security and IP contexts, while neither has been an issue for other games in the past.
Another part of it is that if they discontinue support, they can’t stop the community from creating their own server software.
There are so many ways to approach this. The point is ensuring consumers retain the right to keep using what they purchased, even if they have to support it themselves.
Sort of. They need to have the tools as well. So I suppose they could release the APIs for their servers before shutting down their servers so community servers can be created, that would probably be sufficient. But they need to do something beyond just saying, “we won’t sue you if you reverse engineer it.”
Yeah… The abstract (sorry, will read article a bit later) is bunch of nonsense to me (in respect to what is written, no offense to you):
online experience commercially viable? The fuck they are talking about? Yeah, I know what is meant, but they would get fucking F in school for expressing thoughts in such a nonsensical way
protections against illegal content would not exist on private servers? Really? Like only your company’s servers can run that? What, you write them in machine code directly? Or is it all done manually? Anyhow, just release source code and it will be up to community to find a way to make it run
I can’t throw boxes away because I’ve moved so many times to avoid rising rental costs. I’m packing again right now, and it’s really nice to have the little inserts that kind of stabilize the consoles in their boxes
Yeah, the person in the picture seems to either not move often or not resell things. I've moved quite a bit and having the boxes for all my things has helped immensely. Instead of buying new boxes for everything, trying to fit stuff in there, unpacking and throwing away all boxes because "somebody held my hand", I just reuse.
In the past 14 years, ever since becoming an adult, I have had to move 11 different times. I have learned just how useful good boxes are. I can’t get rid of them, I’m gonna need them when I move again next year.
It’s crazy how strongly the brain tries to protect us from old stresses, without us being consciously aware of it.
I’m glad you don’t need to move every year anymore! It’s one of those normalized things that truly shouldn’t be. I mean, it’s not the avocado toast that’s keeping homeownership out of reach, it’s the constant moving/application/deposit/etc fees we face so often
The Sniper Elite series is basically nazi-killing porn. Those won’t let you down, especially if you enjoy unplanned testicular detonations happening to nazis of any kind.
The new entry in the series drops today, my nerd herd plans on doing the co-op campaign this weekend. I played SE4 and had a blast mixing WWII with the stealth aspects of Assassins Creed (the old ones where Ubisoft wasn’t just phoning it in).
From the trailer it looks like we got a new MC, or atleast the whole game is more french (because your in France).
Going to miss the wonderbread mouth-breathing american tourist in Italy like SE4 had.
As for game-play, they added Souls like invasions in SE5 and they still have the co-op campaign (which is the important part). Beyond that, looks about the same ol’ shooting nazis like we have always had.
Authentication servers do not run themselves, they need babysitting and patching and upgrading because this is users’ passwords and secrets. Microsoft obviously does not want to keep managing this old login system because it’s miserable unrewarding janitorial work for a sysadmin or a developer.
Oh gosh, they bought a computer game company and they don’t want to pay to support existing customers? They don’t want to maintain accounts that represent HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of hours of creativity, a long-time faithful user fanbase, because they now feel it’s miserable unrewarding janitorial work?
It’s MINECRAFT! Do you even know what people do on Minecraft? It’s not saving progress we’re talking about here. It’s destroying an ARCHIVE. It’s a life some kid has lived in there.
You make it sound like it’s perfectly reasonable to ditch this community because it’s an expense and an inconvenience. Get lost with your Microsoft defense. They don’t need you. They don’t give a shit.
I think they’re a very vocal, but disagreed with, minority. I think some people here think all of Lemmy is unwaveringly anti-corporation and anti-capitalist.
I’d consider myself mostly anti-corporation and mostly anti-capitalist, but I also understand that not everything every corporation does is out of some desire to commit the worst thing possible on mankind (e.g. retiring old authentication servers that they’ve kept running for years while warning people that it’d eventually be cut off).
Anyway, Lemmy hates these 5 Cs (in no particular order): -Corporations
-CEOs (in particular Elon Musk and Spez)
-Conservative politics of any kind
-Capitalism
-Chromium browsers, even the privacy-oriented spinoffs.
The players still have their stuff and their user ID, just under a new login process. They’ve been pestering users to make this migration for years and years.
Edit: also, this is Java edition, meaning the worlds they built are just Minecraft save files that a new user could access. The cloud-based one was Bedrock Edition, that’s the one where you’d have cloud-based worlds that you could lose if you lost your account.
What’s getting destroyed? You wouldn’t be able to login to the server but the data would still be there. Transfer the account (or make a new one) and the data’s still there as well.
I’m more annoyed that Microsoft split off Java Edition and Bedrock into two pieces of incompatible software, but I’m honestly surprised they’ve supported the old auth services for this long.
I don’t see how you could possibly make Bedrock and Java compatible with each other seeing as the whole point of Java edition is compatibility with mods written in…Java…
The shitty thing to do would have been to tell mod users to fuck off and force everyone over to Bedrock. Instead they’ve done well by the community, maintaining Java edition and even giving it preferential treatment when it comes to updates. Bedrock is built for consoles, where mods are not a thing and performance is more important.
The fun part is most of the people bitching have no clue how to do any of this. Probably the same people who bitch about new games not supporting Windows 7.
You’re welcome to take on the rewrite of our auth-service too, since it seems so trivial in your world. Always fun to drag legacy services around for those 12 really loud and angry users.
They don’t want to hire people to build and maintain a secure login platform when their parent company already has one. This is way more work and liability than most people realize.
Yeah that’s kind of huge tbh. I honestly hadn’t read that much about Proton. Like that fact that it’s open source.
Just remember all the discussions from the early days of Steam on Linux where some were miffed about running non-free software. I then figured that it was a necessary evil to have games work with less hassle. The games themselves are largely closed source as well, so it’s kind of moot that Steam is also.
Yeah, well familiar with wine going back over 10 years of using Linux as primary OS with the occasional foray into getting my games running on Linux. Most of this time I have just kept a copy of Windows available for games though since it’s been way too much hassle getting things to run until the last couple of years.
Assassin’s Creed. The actual gameplay is almost never as interesting as just walking around a meticulous recreation of ancient civilizations as a digital tourist.
bin.pol.social
Ważne