Just finished Firewatch, and I’m a few hours in Outer Wilds. I enjoy having no way to really fail, and discovering the story bit by bit.
Started Torchlight 2 in coop with a friend living abroad, it’s fun to see a non-blizzard Diablo with a Warcraft 3 aesthetic. Still trying to figure out which mods we want in the long run.
And almost at the end of It Takes Two in couch coop with a friend, we’ve laughed a lot so far !
OK, I’ve read all your comments throughout this thread - I’ve responded to quite a few of them - and now I’m going to say this, and sign off.
Even assuming - as I have tried very hard to do so far - that you’re asking these questions in good faith, there’s very simple reason why no one wants to engage with you, why you’re getting down votes and tired, dismissive answers… this is a settled issue.
There is no meaningful or useful new debate to be had here. You’re turning up in the middle of a PhD physics lecture demanding to have a discussion about whether the Earth orbits the sun. We’ve been there, we had that argument, and the fact that you’re not willing to educate yourself sufficiently on the subject does not mean that you get to throw it out to the floor for fresh discussion as if there’s anything to be gained from that.
That’s why no one wants to have a thrilling intellectual debate with you about this. Because it’s boring, it’s old, and you have not raised a single new or interesting point in this entire thread. And while you’re treating this as intellectual exercise, real people’s lives are being destroyed by the bigots that you are - knowingly or unknowingly - carrying water for.
If all this is news to you, if you thought you were somehow at the forefront of cutting edge intellectual discussion here, then please take this as an opportunity to do some learning and growing. Spend some time listening to marginalized voices. Ask questions - respectfully and without making demands of people’s time - instead of asking for debate.
If you really do mean all this in good faith then I wish you the best and I hope to see you grow and learn from the experience, for your own sake as much as anyone else’s. We all have to start somewhere.
The intent of my posts was not to reopen settled debates, but to explore the principles that underlie how moderation decisions are made on platforms that host user-generated content. I believe this is a worthy subject of inquiry because it can affect various communities in different ways. While you see this issue as settled, the modding community is ever-evolving, and new scenarios that challenge established norms will likely continue to arise. I assure you that my intent is to engage in good faith, and I am open to learning from this experience. If you choose not to engage further, I respect your decision.
You’re coming at this from the angle that this is some strange new reality that the world has never encountered before, but it truly isn’t. This is not an “evolving new situation”, we’re not on the bold frontiers of strange new norms. It’s just bigotry. Bigotry isn’t new, it’s as old as mankind.
There’s a reason we’re all citing philosophical principles laid down in the 1940’s, almost like the world suddenly had a pressing need to reckon with the true cost of allowing violent intolerance to grow unchecked… Maybe some recent event prompted that?
The fact that bigots are communicating their bigotry through mods for videogames now doesn’t change what bigotry is, or how we fight it. This shit is older than any of us here, and the tools and principles are well established.
And the fact that bigots will frame their bigotry in dog whistles with just enough ambiguity that people like you can say “Maybe this was completely innocent” isn’t an accident, it’s by design. That quote from Lee Atwater I shared earlier? He’s talking about the politics of the early 1970s. Most of us weren’t alive then. Again, this is nothing new. The only change is that right now their target is trans people, because they always point their hate at the target society is least willing to defend. Pick off the weak from the herd.
If you’re trying to better understand how this stuff works, I respect that. Just because things have been understood for a long time, doesn’t mean everyone knows them. I didn’t start out magically knowing this stuff either. In my college days I styled myself as a free speech absolutist, someone who would on sheer magnificent principle defend the rights of a Nazi to be a Nazi. I learned better when I actually met and talked to the people that my “principles” were actively harming. So yes, I get it, and if you’re here to learn I commend that.
But please, don’t frame it as a debate. “Should we tolerate the free speech of bigots” is only a debate for the bigots, because like any guilty party they will never stop trying to relitigate their case. They can only benefit from this “debate” and the rest of us can only lose.
They will say things like “You’re just as bad as us if you censor us” to which we say “No, we are not, because our refusal to engage comes from clear moral principles, while yours comes from hatred.”
They will say “If you censor us, where do you draw the line?” to which we say “At the limits of your intolerance. We will tolerate, within reason, everything that is not an expression of bigotry and hatred.”
They will say “You cannot judge our intent or know our souls. How can you assign blame to our actions?” to which we say “We will judge you by your actions. The drunk driver doesn’t mean to cause harm, but we still criminalize the behaviour because it is harmful. If you do not intend to be a bigot, but you choose to actively express bigotry, we will hold you accountable for your actions all the same. A racist prank is still racist. Saying ‘Just kidding’ doesn’t undo the harm spread by your words. It is on you to learn these things and be better.”
They will say “But you could get it wrong. What if you misjudge the innocent?” to which we say “This could apply to any action of society. The innocent are convicted of crimes they did not commit, but this does undermine the value of having laws, it only reinforces that we must apply those laws as carefully and as justly as possible, that we must never forget the human cost of these decisions. It does not invalidate the decisions.”
They will find every angle, seek every accommodation, because they have nothing to lose by trying. They will never stop, and we can only let their arguments fall on deaf ears.
I’m not saying that there is absolutely no room for discussion to be had within this realm. There is always room for discussion in any subject. But you need to be mindful of the difference between “I think our models of climate change could be improved in this specific way…” vs “Is climate science real?” You won’t get any traction by arriving at a school and trying to dig up the foundations. Educate yourself on the fundamentals, and from there you can seek out specific areas where meaningful argument can be made, without needlessly relitigating core principles.
Your detailed response outlines a nuanced stance on the issue, framing it within a long historical context. However, I believe that framing the issue as ‘already resolved’ dismisses the evolving complexities of online moderation, and how it intersects with the fluid nature of speech and social norms.
Historical Precedence: While it’s true that bigotry has existed throughout human history, how we engage with it has evolved, especially in the digital era. To suggest that the ‘tools and principles are well-established’ may not fully capture the complexity of online spaces where interaction occurs asynchronously, across cultures, and without the benefit of vocal tone or facial expression.
Freedom of Speech: You critique the notion of debating whether we should ‘tolerate the free speech of bigots.’ However, even well-intended moderation can have a chilling effect on speech. How do we prevent the slippery slope where the bounds of acceptable speech continually narrow?
Intent vs Impact: You suggest judging people solely by their actions, but this discounts the complex interplay between intent and interpretation. Who gets to define what constitutes bigotry in a statement open to multiple interpretations?
Potential for Misjudgment: You accept that innocent people could be wrongly accused but say that this doesn’t invalidate the act of moderation. While true, this doesn’t address the ethical dilemma of sacrificing individual fairness for collective security.
The Role of Debate: The dismissal of debate as a tool available only to bigots undermines the basis of democratic society. Even well-established principles benefit from regular scrutiny. Shouldn’t we always strive to challenge our existing models to account for new variables?
Moral High Ground: Your argument assumes a moral high ground, positioning any differing opinion as inherently stemming from hatred or ignorance. This approach precludes constructive discussion and leaves no room for the reevaluation of norms and rules.
In sum, I respect your position but believe that it does not leave room for the complexities and nuances of this discussion. Insinuating that only ‘bigots’ would want to engage in a debate about freedom of speech and platform moderation is reductive and does not further a meaningful conversation about how we navigate these tricky waters.
Kenshi. Take a look at it. You control people in a very active world, but you build settlements and mine iron, stone and copper and build things, and explore to get more research to build better things and improve your people so they can build even bigger and better things. Deep lore if you like that as well, but easy to ignore.
If your into the space vibes Empyrion Galactic Survival is a great one that goes from mining by hand to mining vehicles to asteroid mining with huge ships!
I’ve had more unused time this and last week than usual due to a persistent case of Covid, so I’ve played Return to Monkey Island again. It’s so much lovelier than I remembered - it took a few “just average good” games inbetween to notice just what a piece of art this game is. There’s a billion of details you hardly notice: the pattern of the frame around the main menu changes every time, there’s so much going on even in the most obscure and distant corners of the background that adds nothing to the story but a lot to the atmosphere, and characters constantly hint at non-canon things that happened earlier in the game based on the player’s choices.
It’s also a bittersweet game for two reasons:
It keeps confronting Guybrush (the protagonist) with the consequences of his actions on his quest to find The Secret - he destroys an ancient tree and makes the woodland critters cry, a museum is shut down because of him, a friend is abducted and his shop is destroyed, a kingdom falls into chaos etc., all just because he wants to find The Secret for the principle of the thing.
It does a very good job of likening the changes in the game - new pirate leaders doing things differently than the old ones, practitioners of that new-fangled Dark Magic putting the Voodoo Lady out of business etc. - to changes in the real world, where the glory days of the Monkey Island series in particular and point-and-click adventures in general are all but over.
Still, for old farts like me who grew up with anything Lucasfilm from Maniac Mansion to Full Throttle, the game feels a bit like coming home - and as far as point-and-click adventures go, they don’t come much more brilliant than this one.
Warframe. Always coming back to Warframe. It’s just too fun making my murdermachines look pretty, and there’s always something new to work toward. The game also runs incredibly well for how good it looks and how much is going on at once, I should NOT be able to run it at max settings 4k at 60fps with a mid-range gaming PC.
Plus it’s really fun getting those big red damage numbers on enemies with the right builds, and I still haven’t played another game with a movement system as fun as this one.
I’ve also been having fun with Armored Core VI, minus the out of place bosses. They definitely just put them in to be like “Look! We have the FromSoft™ bosses!” I ended up making a cheese build to effectively skip them. The actual mech combat parts are really fun though, and I love trying all the different kinds of loadouts! Runs well on a Steam Deck too which is always good.
<span style="color:#323232;">You can run a launch discount, but once your launch discount ends, you cannot run any other discounts for 30 days.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">It is not possible to discount your product for 30 days following a price increase in any currency.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Discounts cannot be run within 30 days of your prior discount, with the exception of Steam-wide seasonal events.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Discounts for seasonal sale events cannot be run within 30 days of releasing your title, within 30 days from when your launch discount ends, or within 30 days of a price increase in any currency.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">You may not change your price while a promotion is currently live or scheduled for the future.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">It is not possible to discount a product by more than 90% or less than 10%.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">it is not possible to create new discounts for a product that would result in the price in any currency falling below Steam's minimum possible transaction price. See details.
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Custom discounts cannot last longer than two weeks, or run for shorter than 1 day.
</span>
This is just a hunch, but could there be a loophole possible with those promotions where you get a discount, but only if you own another related game? Maybe devs can just add discount for owning a free game and fake a permanent discount that way?
But as OP already said, we’d need a dev who’s already published a game to confirm these kind of theories.
Edit: This comment is probably right and it’s just an automatically applied bundle discount, but there’s a bug in the Wishlist where it shows the combined price of the bundled games. If that’s the case then Valve should really fix this ASAP, since it probably falls under false advertising in some countries, even if it’s a bug.
Also, as it was pointed out, Steam does not control pricing, that would be entirely in the hand of the publisher or developer, not to mention it is against TOS (and also illegal in some markets)
Then tried adding to cart from my wishlist. It added both games, but on my wishlist it only shows the one game. That’s just really buggy, and fortunately only unintentionally deceptive instead of intentionally.
I remember seeing ads on my phone saying “if you bought a game on steam, you could be entitled to financial compensation” since like a year and a half ago. I didn’t look any further cause I didn’t wanna see a thousand ads for legal mumbo jumbo, but I just thought there were a few isolated incidents of ripoff pricing or phony game sales
Dead Space 1, the original. I recently realized I own it on the EA account I forgot having made and figured I’d take a look. I’m partway through chapter 3 now. The game really shows its age graphically, the ragdoll physics on the many corpses lying around keeps glitching out, and if the game is actually trying to be horrifying I feel a touch more subtlety would have been called for. It often feels more like a haunted house than something that’s supposed to seem like a real place.
That being said, the combat is satisfyingly visceral (the gimmick of focusing on cutting off limbs was a very good idea), and tech limitations aside both the art direction and sound design are very solid. The times the game actually manages to be unnerving is almost always due to the tension of hearing the monsters in the walls but not being able to pinpoint its location.
Overall, I’m not exactly in love with it but I’ll probably play it all the way through.
There is a fix you can apply to fix the glitching ragdolls. If I recall correctly if you don't fix it there will eventually be a physics related puzzle that won't work right because the physics won't be responding correctly and you'll get stuck, but my memory could be wrong.
It's pretty easy to fix and will increase your immersion
Absolutely. Most of the fun end-game game loops don’t even show up until half way through sunbreak. Near the end of sunbreak is when you get the fun armor skills, outlandish weapons, and hard difficulties and end-game monsters that really make monster hunter a joy to experience.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne