Because Warner Brothers owns the rights to all DC games right now and nobody at Warner has any idea how to actually produce good video games. The Arkham games were good because they came out before loot boxes and online-only games were a thing. Now if a game doesn’t earn a billion dollars in the first year, the game is considered a failure.
Money mumbles. Don’t buy the game, and also actively notify the company of your decision and why. Twitter, feedback form, steam review, whatever channel lets you get that message across.
This doesn’t work. It will never work. You can’t shame conscious consumers into voting with their wallets while the other 99% keeps buying the bad practices.
Thing is, if nobody on Lemmy, and literally nobody in general who cares about anticheat, buys GTA 6, you know what effect that would have on the company’s bottom line? None, they’ll make record profits.
So now you try to convince the 99% of players that are buying the bad practices, that a magic (to them) program that prevents cheaters is bad (since “has too much access” doesn’t really explain anything). They don’t care and won’t care.
Why would they listen to your personal complaint if you, singular, are going to buy it anyway? Your voice only matters to a company if it means you won’t buy their product otherwise. Don’t buy the game, then tell them why you didn’t.
You’re not listening to what I said. I said that most people will buy the game and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. Most people are fucking idiots. You can morally decide not to support it by not buying the game, and that’s perfectly reasonable. But it won’t do fucking shit because all the idiots will still buy the game. That’s just how the world works because most people don’t give a fuck. Unless you can personally convince millions of people to change their behavior and agree with you, you not buying the game doesn’t matter.
There is a network effect to popular games.
However as more people stop buying the network effect gets weaker.
Its happening visibly with the new Call of Duty. Many i know bought it and then stopped playing shortly after because much of their friends are waiting for sales now or just find the game bad.
Those people will be thinking twice before buying next year.
Exactly, every time I say ‘I’m thinking of putting up a Factorio server, you want in?’, they are significantly less likely to be playing (or paying for) the newest game that has kernel-level access. Why, because we are playing Factorio for the next few weeks together and Factorio is fun.
Factorio isn’t the only game we play, but the point is to reinforce yours. If you are playing fun game x, your friends are more likely to play x instead of something else. Even if they have no care about Kernel-Level access, the fact you do affects their buying (and playing) patterns.
Not just the costumes. They green screened the fuck out of that scene. Wonder if they shot the whole thing on a sound stage and tried to AI in the entirety of the background? This has all the earmarks of a “Are you piggies willing to pay $20 a ticket for entrance to the slop show?”
I managed to soft lock the new Pokemon Snap game in the tutorial where they had you take a picture of a Butterfree (I think is the right Pokemon). Somehow when I took a picture, it flapped its wings and turned enough that it was flat in the picture and couldn’t be selected when you were at the next phase of the tutorial selecting the shot to show the Professor Oak stand in. You couldn’t go back to take another picture, so I was effectively unable to continue the game from there. I was pretty proud of my bad picture taking skills.
Oh right, I forgot that people insist on humoring that change. I feel like if everyone keeps just calling it Twitter, he’ll just quietly change it back.
Regardless, X was used to represent a variable for about a thousand years longer than Musk has been using it, so I will keep using it that way too.
Keep it up. For me, that confusion is part of the entertainment. No one will know what the fuck anyone is talking about when they say “X”, necessitating an overly complex explanation every time. Fuck everything about X.
it’s not that I want to think of that loser more than we have to, it’s that i see the title of your post on the feed and for a brief moment i think it’s a headline from a news community. Like @MagicShel said, keep it up.
I don’t know about that, there are other hobbies people participate in that women find “attractive”. So far my hobbies of video games and programming have scared away any partners…
A PC game is either on Steam or GOG or it doesn’t exist to me.
I subscribe to the humble monthly bundle thing and if a game doesn’t activate on one of those two I’m probably never going to play it despite owning it.
I’d maybe have added epic to the list if it wasn’t for the store exclusivity stuff. I know that they’ve dialled it back significantly, but anti-consumer stinks like that don’t readily wash out.
Conversely, GOG is on the list because they’re expressly pro-consumer, particularly with their preservationist initiatives. My monkey brain would prefer everything in one place on Steam, but I recognise behaviour I want to support in these companies, so GOG gets my money too
You forgot patreon. Steam censors the library in places (hello German government & fuck you hard with a rusty rebar). But even outside censorship, patreon game developers usually do not lock in their games into rootkit-protected anticheat/copy protection/whatever bullshit.
Not censored but mandated by a government body so they literally have no other option other than doing that.
If the dev is too lazy to fill out a questionnaire for self-categorizing the age rating why is Valve responsible for that?
I am not talking about the age categorization, I am talking about having to implement a customer age verification which they won’t do for the German market, and again, while this would be easy, I don’t necessarily blame steam for it. But that they do censor is unquestioned, and therefore more options are welcome, as long as those stores do not require a launcher, installer or otherwise intrusive software.
Yeah I almost had that happen with me but I think I ended up watching someone play it. Still kind of regret it but at the same time probably wouldn’t have finished it on my own otherwise and I atleast have Deltarune to look forward to now.
It’s good in a way that isn’t really expected - the only thing I can say without spoiling is it did something really different with things that had been there a long time.
Undertale is such a bolt of lightning. It both depends on its player having experience with traditional JRPG and having no fucking clue what it is. But when the conditions line up, as it did for many people at release, it was such a master fully crafted experience. But even the slightest amount of “it’s good because…” really siphons part of the experience away.
Or at least don’t do anymore than choose your preferred platform and then buy it. Its available on Windows, Linux, Mac, PS, Xbox and Switch but not on Android or iOS.
Its a couple of bucks on steam at the moment, included in PSN if you do that, or full price everywhere else.
Tbh, I played it for a few hours, didn’t like it and don’t understand all the fuss about it. Does it get good later?
I was at a point, where I was going through a cave with a castle in the background (it was a few years ago), it was probably some kind of riddle, but I couldn’t be bothered.
Is it worth going forward or did I see enough to just say “it’s not my kind of game”?
To the people who come into point-of-view threads like this one and downvote what other people took the time to share, how about describing your own experiences instead? It would make Lemmy a nicer place to be, and might even add something of value to the discussion.
As with nearly everything in astronomic optics, it’s named after people associated with its creation. Robert Jones and Thomas Bird are the two in this case. Here’s a thread on Cloudy nights with good info.
my fav from that thread (and i propose to make this a copy pasta):
My entire gripe around these scopes is the instruments being offered today, the sub-aperture lens arrangement is not doing any corrections. The lens is a straight up Barlow, nothing more.
If you look at the Bird-Jones design, the design is very specific in the design of both the primary & correcting lens. This means that both elements need to be not only matched but also well manufactured in order to work as designed. When you then look at the few true Bird-Jones instruments that were manufactured, such as the Tasco 8V (which was manufactured by Vixen), the Celestron G8-N and one other (escapes my mind right now but I’ll add it when I remember), these scopes were not cheap but pushing flagship status for these brands & supplied with swish mounts. And none of these scopes can be readily collimated by the end user as the alignment of the optics is so precise it is done in-factory. The 8V alone still maintains almost cult status.
The Bird-Jones design is not without its own shortcomings. It is not perfect without aberration. It is important to remember the ideas behind its design, to provide a short tube OTA option with what was able to be readily manufactured at the time, that being good spherical mirrors.
What is made today is a far cry from what a Bird-Jones offers performance wise. Made cheap with a poor spherical primary & that they are totally collimateable by the end user shows these are not a precision scope. Add to this that not a single Bird-Jones instrument is to be found anywhere else besides these cheap things. Doesn’t this say something?
These cheap instruments, really all cheap instruments are a double edge sword. They make astro more accessible, yes, but their poor quality ends up killing off more people’s enthusiasm for astro than firing it up. Add to this that for many novices if the mount is not a complicated equatorial one then it isn’t an astronomical instrument, & the difficult manner of using a wobble-tron mount & tripod with the mental gymnastics required just too much for most people who buy these and just give up way too soon.
Yes, there will be a few people who will be able to make these scopes work, being all they can afford, and all power to them. I will support such persons. But these are very few compared to the overwhelming number of people who just give up after the poor experience they get from these instruments. Too them astro is just all too hard, and mainly because of a poor instrument.
Call these cheap instruments what they are, a barlowed Newtonian.
bin.pol.social
Ważne