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.
Giant corporations have proven no amount of profit is too much. There needs to be some guardrails. And some form of preservation of the games your loyal customers have enriched your company to access.
understandable, it took me a few times for it to click. i have the same problem with games that count days; i can’t get myself to finish disco elysium or blue prince because the counter going up makes me think i will run out of time, even though you never do.
Its so interesting how different people perceive these things. Disco Elysium was so stress free for me, I didn’t really think the day counter did anything. With Outer Wilds I think its really the anticipation of what I know is inevitable to come. And then I nervously wait for all those cues that tell me how much time has passed already… And yeah, very stressy for me, haha. Still, I should really push myself to finish it sometime because I’m really curious how it all ties up.
maybe it’s reflective of the personality of the player. i can never get to bed at a reasonable hour and i’ve heard a theory that some people have that problem because the mind thinks that the sooner the next day begins the less time they have to themselves.
without spoiling the details, it’s a bit like groundhog day, or majoras mask.
i always encourage people to take it slow and drink in the world with ow, and that applies because of the “limit”. which isn’t a limit, you can play as long as you’d like. think of it more as a pomodoro timer. it’s also very well signposted.
i don’t think it’s a spoiler to say this because you learn very early in the game - physically everything in the worlds goes back to square one after 22 minutes (or if you die).
you do get to keep a log of everything you learn about the worlds and story but that’s all that persists. the log is actually helpful, so follow that if you get lost.
slight spoiler:
Tap for spoileralso the 22 minute reset is not an arbitrary design choice, it’s part of the story and puzzle.
Oh okay. Thanks for the explanation that really helps. I was envisioning something more permanent from the initial description. That didn’t sound bad at all.
Trying not to spoil too much, there’s a timer but it doesn’t really matter, you will almost never run out of time and retrying is encouraged. There’s almost no time pressure in this game, and the amount of time in that timer is over 20 minutes, which should be plenty of time to do what you have to, and if not you can reset the timer and try again.
I got pretty far with this one and really enjoyed it, and then I spent days trying to get past those goddamn anglerfish and failing over and over again, so I just gave up at that point.
same! turns out you can make it a lot easier for yourself by observation. for example, there are only two of them you actually need to manoeuvre around. also, that entire section takes three to five minutes, but you have like twelve, so it’s fine to take it slow. finally, you can mark your destination from the log to get its location.
Obvious spoiler ahead is obvious: Just let go of the controller when you enter that area, you’ll float peacefully (albeit very close to them) until the exit portal.
same. the trick is to float by doing literally nothing as slow as possible. it takes some trial and error to figure out when you can maneuver again but you do have to be a little patient.
I mean, big YouTubers like Charlie and others covering Thor’s bullshit is what drove this huge spike in signatures so maybe we should be thanking Thor lol
Nah, fuck Thor — he could have been the YouTuber pushing for coverage of Stop Killing Games, instead he decided to double down on his stupid bullshit.
Reminder — he was a Blizzard employee for 7 years. I think that, plus his ‘my shit doesn’t stink and if you think it does, you’re wrong and banned’ attitude should give you all you need to know.
Thor reminds me a lot of chatgpt. Subjects that I am not an expert in, he sounds intelligent and like he is providing good advice. The second he provides advice in an area where I am a subject matter expect, it makes me realize how full of shit he is.
Unless someone corrects me, I think his argument boils down to, “we shouldn’t allow the release of server binaries for online-enabled games because it’s too hard for the developers”.
Well, if that’s the case, then Thor, that’s a “you” (the company) problem. Not a “me” (the consumer) problem. And if you’re not going to release a server binary but we’re “buying” the game, purchasers have legitimate moral and legal grounds to demand that they be informed that they are buying a license, or renting, the game; they are not owning a functional copy of the game outright.
Addendum, for clarity:
My beef isn’t even with a games-as-a-service premise at all. It’s the corporatist trend in arguing that single-player experiences need perpetual online connectivity, or that releasing self-hosted PvP server functionality is prima fascia “unrealistic in every scenario”.
Some games, like WoW, no way. I understand the depth of the server stack for MMOs. Other games that are PvP-competitive could easily be self-hosted.
The irony is that these companies could still make a boatload of money off of these old competitive online games with more maps and skins, even though they’ve deprecated their own server stack and cloud-back-end. Essentially, they’d pass the burden of hosting to the players, but still sell content sporadically.
“Stop Killing Games” needs more refined language about what it’s asking for, no doubt. There are many scenarios where blanket statements about demanding source code are just not feasible.
I’m turning 42 this summer. I’ve been a software developer for 15 years now. I’d like to even say that a few of those years I even came across like I knew what I was talking about. But this basic issue is not about software development. This is about consumer advocacy, and it was a huge turn off to watch him perform the mental gymnastics on why people should be screwed over why false/deceptive advertising by the industry is acceptable.
Require it; if I buy something I require every feature of my own product, if I purchased it
Too hard? Fine.
Then the law should require the fact that you the seller must say I’m renting a game or product, or purchased a limited license. They can’t say I “bought it and own it” if they can prevent me from using it however I want whenever they want. Force them to be explicitly clear about what I’m getting for my money.
purchasers have legitimate moral and legal grounds to demand that they be informed that they are buying a license, or renting, the game; they are not owning a functional copy of the game outright.
I’m pretty sure that’s already the case, if you read the ToS of most games.
The typeface must be 16pt, bold, and the copy itself should be on the front page and be required on the cover description(s).
My beef isn’t even with a games-as-a-service premise at all. It’s the corporatist trend in arguing that single-player experiences need perpetual online connectivity, or that releasing self-hosted PvP server functionality is prima fascia “unrealistic in every scenario”. Some games, like WoW, no way. I get the depth of the server stack for MMOs. Other games that are PvP-competitive could easily be self-hosted. These companies could still make money off of these old competitive online games, even though they’ve deprecated their own server stack.
“Stop Killing Games” needs more refined language about what it’s asking for, no doubt. There are many scenarios where blanket statements about demanding source code are just not feasible.
However, let’s not pretend that the industry is not pushing enshittification tactics used by almost every business that’s publicly traded. That’s the spirit in which this movement is fighting against.
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