This has to be one of the dumbest things I’ve seen gamers complain about lately. Many studios have marketed like this - only Naughty Dog gets this reaction because it’s cool to hate them now I guess.
Turtle Rock, Blizzard, and Rockstar also in this camp.
Gamers are sick of being offered bare minimum product riding on the tailcoat of previous successes. We want new and risky titles that were works of passion.
This meme we’re commenting on is clearly a reaction to Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet which is an original IP. At the very least my comment specifically mentions Naughty Dog.
I want original content too and find your comment agreeable but it’s not what this meme is communicating. The creator of this meme is simply coming off as whiny and saying a studio can’t take pride in its history. The artists deserve much credit and I praise the real humans that make our favorite games possible but to say a studio shouldn’t use their track record as a selling point is silly. Nobody would react this way to a FromSoft trailer saying “from the makers of Dark Souls and Bloodborne”.
This is why I’m quite pessimistic about GTA6; it’s been 11 years since GTA5 was first released on the PS3 and Xbox360! A lot of people forget that an entire console generation passed without a new entry into the franchise.
The median turnover at games companies is significantly lower than 11 years, and even Dan Howser and Lazlow Jones have left Rockstar in the interim.
The likelihood that it will live up to player expectations, given how heavily Take2 have milked the hell out of Online via Shark Cards, is woefully low.
But I guess that’s the good part of being a pessimist; you’re either proven correct - or pleasantly surprised!
Not as much as you’d think. I keep my soldiers faceless and unattached until they are fairly leveled up. By the the time they get customized, they tend not to get meatgrindered. Usually.
Quick tip, to allow better flow of gasses leave a free segment on either side of the ladders.
To extend on this, dog a CO2 pit at the bottom of the base.
Learnt those from Francis John ONI playthrough. You should give his videos a go.
Definitely saving this for later. I’ve been trying to use an over complicated series of vents and gas pumps to pump CO2 into a “CO2” room from all over the base that I lock with an airlock and shove a CO2 generator in. It didn’t occur to me to just toss it in a pit lmao
I always leave at least one free space so i can install a fire pole later. I’m going to do this on my next play through, and use the other side for pneumatic tubes!
Yeah, but frankly the high seas usually provide less than Steam does even with money in the equation. And that’s probably the only case when high seas is worse, with all the other services in my experience the high seas provide better service(spotify was close). So the point is if a game doesn’t release on Steam it’s release date just moves to the moment it releases on Steam. Not the best scenario, but Steam really has little competition and Epic surely isn’t trying to be one.
Pretty much everything really. It’s basically a store and that’s it, no cool features that Steam has. They may have achievements now but not positive. Think it took two years just for them to add a shopping cart. They dump money on developers to release exclusively on Epic instead of spending it making a good experience for customers. No reviews, no forums, no workshop etc.
I grab the free games they offer every couple weeks and use Heroic to play them, not touching their launcher.
Tldr: Kickstarter Game with a lot of interest while in development announces a release date on Steam. After the date announcement they get contacted by Epic saying “we’d love to host your game” for an exclusivity deal.
Dev responds that they would be happy to have their game on Epic but promises were made during crowd funding that it would be available on Steam.
Epic replies that they aren’t interested if it’s not exclusive.
This tells me that
Epic is full of shit. "We’d love to have your game, but only if it’s exclusive.
Epic doesn’t care about being a better service for its customers. Having the game available on Epic as well is strictly better for Epic’s customers and they easily could have done that. They chose not to.
Epic is not interested in actually having to compete with other companies. This would require them to provide a better service in some fashion. They are only interested if they can force people “if you want to purchase this game you have to buy it through us” which is anti-consumer.
Everything but I will focus on the main point of the apps. Selling and managing games.
Steam store page has tags for what genre the game is and user reviews as well as information about system requirements. Plus links to click on to go to the developers and publishers pages to see what else they’ve made. You get plenty of information while it’s still easy on the eyes and digestible.
Managing your games with steam is a breeze. They’re listed down the side and the search is there and quick. Click on a game and get more information about it and see a large install or play button. Scroll down to see info about the latest update or activity from friends playing. Right click to get more information like where it’s installed locally.
Epic, at least when I last used it. Didn’t have user reviews, the page had large widgets for all the information making everything feel clutter while giving you less info about the game. Didn’t have tags and sure it did label the publisher but not the developers and you couldn’t click to see their other works.
Epic’s library management once again large widgets while giving less information. Feels cluttered. Install button is small. At the time I used epic there was not easy way to open install location. You had to go in file explorer yourself and find it.
While I’m on the topic of stores to why do console store pages suck as well compared to steam?! The console is literally sold at a loss and make money by selling you games but their store pages are shit compared to steam.
My worry is that without a lawsuit or other action, we'll keep seeing LLM slop companies taking down smaller websites for bogus reasons. This needs to be codified somehow that there were damages done to Itch's earnings (and more importantly the earnings of the independent creators on the platform who should start a class-action suit), and that what Funko's contracted LLM company did was wrong.
There's financial damages, loss of profit, emotional distress, reputation loss, and more. We need to take action against these companies for their wrongdoing. So either they need to willingly pay up and have that payment be known and public, or they need to be made to pay by the courts.
The expression is actually “hear, hear!” A shortening of “hear him, hear him”, an instruction saying “listen to what this guy’s saying. It’s good shit.”
Itch is by no means a small time player. Doing some very fast statistics off of the game price breakdowns available and the counts of games available vs. the number they rate as best sellers, if 20% of their best sellers make a sale each day and 7.5% of their non-best sellers make a sale each day, assuming an average price for the three pricing filters of (under $5, $2.5), ($5 to $15, $10), (over $15, $20), then Itch sells approximately $20k/day. Half a day is $10k. If those averages are actually much higher in their respective areas, as in just below the maximum then the daily total jumps to over $35k/day. There is wiggle room in my assumptions, but it is safe to say that Itch sees about $25k±7k/day.
As mentioned in other suits, there are nonmonetary damages as well which are harder to quantify without access to their analytics such as reputation damage, lost traffic, maintenance and repair from the forced outage at the domain level, etc. I could see a suit for $50k in actual damages and another $500k-$1M in punitive damages to send the message that this behavior is intolerable in general.
A law firm capable of handling such a suit would probably bill at a rate of $2000/hr, or more.
If your numbers are right, then they could afford to pay for 20 hours of work. That’s probably not enough to even file the suit. Again, this assumes your numbers are right but even if they were 10x this it may still not make sense to file a suit.
Unfortunately, I don’t think the math works out in their favor.
Except that most firms that charge $2000/hour take the fee from the settlement, not up front, when doing civil litigation. Really only criminal law is paid directly by the client, at least in the US.
Well let’s say $30k, treble damages to $90k. So up to 45 hours of billable time before losing money. I don’t know how much time a suit takes, but I’m pretty sure it’s more than that. I don’t know how likely it is for them to award legal fees, either.
Even if they work on contingency, they’d still have to be sure they’d win and turn a profit before they’d take the case.
That is where punitive damages come in. Most huge settlements are substantially punitive, which are damages awarded not on merit, but with the express intent of making the settlement hurt enough that the offender, and others in similar situations, think twice about taking similar actions.
Itch doesn’t appear interested in suing unfortunately. I want them to, not because I’m bloodthirsty, but to set precedent that this wreckless use of AI content moderation isn’t OK. I can imagine Disney and Nintendo following this.
Yes, “reckful” is a real word, although it is rarely used in modern English. It means being thoughtful, careful, or prudent, essentially the opposite of “reckless.” It comes from the same root as “reck,” which means to care or pay attention to.
Examples of Usage:
In older texts, “reckful” might describe someone who is cautious or considerate of consequences: “He was reckful in his approach, weighing every decision carefully.”
Why It’s Uncommon:
“Reckless” became the dominant term in English, and “reckful” fell out of common usage. Today, terms like “careful,” “prudent,” or “mindful” are more likely to be used in its place.
So while “reckful” is technically correct and would make sense in context, it might sound archaic or poetic to most modern English speakers.
They really should because the law has already decided that AI isn’t an independent entity, and is essentially just a computer program.
So whoever initiated the AI is ultimately responsible for its behavior, they can’t claim the AI malfunctioned because they chose not to bother having any human oversight, they knew that this was always a possibility and still they took responsibility for it.
lemmy.world
Aktywne