Elon’s companies have been successful despite his input, not because of it. If you’re interested, do some reading on how middle-management protected their teams from his nonsense in both Tesla and SpaceX, basically just feeding him bullshit that sounded good and ignoring him whenever possible. Those people are why the companies have thrived.
Shit, just look at Twitter before and after. The valuation difference is staggering.
If you have a startup and someone offers you 9 figures so they’re the CEO and you still run the day to day…
You’d be an idiot to risk it, because any number of billion dollar companies can fuck you over thru innumerable ways.
So every once and a while someone with shit tier risk assessment lucks out and suddenly becomes unimaginable rich. And those are the people making offers on the next generation of startups.
The system is set up so the worst people possible run shit. Because no sane person would keep “letting it ride” to the point they make billions, and a crazy person who does becomes too big to fail. And once they get to that point, they’ve convinced themselves no one else is smart enough to play Russian roulette 100 times in a row.
At that point they’ve conned themselves into really believing they’re geniuses who know more than anyone.
I tell people this all the time. There are people who have the job of distracting musk like a 3 year old. They don’t believe it and continue to worship him. They act like he personally invented everything and refuse to accept the truth. The only thing he actually invented was the cybertruck.
Did he actually invent the Cybertruck? He drew the world’s shittiest picture that was all straight lines and then made a bunch of toddler-level claims about its abilities while demanding results from the teams of real people that actually had to make his nonsense even somewhat functional.
People who deserve the title of inventor actually do the fucking work. He just said “and it’ll be invincible and climb over mountains and can pull GOD and be SO COOL”
I read this whole article by some truck review guy? And he was confused because he said the cyber truck came within a hair of filling a niche in the truck world that was pretty much free to take, but just narrowly ended up being in a much better established range of trucks that it had no hope in competing in. So yeah… he did all the demanding and none of the thinking, and everyone else was just there for the paycheck.
The niche was what the Rivian and fuck, even the F150 Lightning are doing. The Cybertruck looks like ass and I could almost say the appearance is “kinda neat for trying something different” if it wasn’t such a dogshit product in every single way.
I can’t help but laugh every time I see one, and in the occasional instance that the owners actually pay attention to the world around them and notice, they always glare at me 😂 they know exactly how fucking stupid they look, they just try to pretend nobody agrees
There was a lady lawyer show on TV called ally mcbeal and she was like crazy or something and used to hallucinate the dancing baby. I don’t remember it that well as it was an old people show and I was a kid but yeah way before youtube
Dancing baby was everywhere, truly the first Internet driven viral phenomenon. And yes, it did feature in Ally McBeal which was a huge TV show mid-late 90s which goes to illustrate how truly viral the dancing baby meme was at a time where Internet usage was still limited to only a minority of people with access to desktop computers.
Yeah, dancing baby was 1996, 9 years before 2005, which is an eternity in internet years. Leeroy is one of the internet’s older memes, sure, but way too new to qualify as one of the oldest.
It’s crazy impressive. Especially on a technical level. But it feels like a tech demo more than a game almost. It’s still fun to idle time away in, but it’s not engaging. At all. It’s brain idle time. In a positive way, but also no more than that.
In this case I’d call that a positive statement. That’s what I was looking for when I decided to get the game… I’m not going to shell out my dimes to Bethesda hoping for disco elysium, I basically want something that makes demands of my brain just a little more than solitaire or minesweeper.
I don’t really agree with it not being ‘engaging’ though, I guess depending on what you mean. I’m not staying up at night wondering what’s gonna happen next, but I’m staying up past my bedtime designing space ships and then running out of cash and going and doing a fun loot-and-shoot mission to get more money to build more space ships. That ain’t bad.
Not necessarily but yea it trades the bespoke environments for generated ones that aren’t so dissimilar.
I think it makes for interesting comparison. Both space traveling games, one comprised of specially designed levels navigated by menus, the other less variety but you actually journey to them and given the sheer number you can actually discover and name a planet no one’s ever been to.
Both valid but I think starfield shouldn’t really advertise in exploration. Unlike NMS it’s far more narrative based.
Both valid but I think starfield shouldn’t advertise really advertise in exploration. Unlike NMS it’s far more narrative based.
Yep. There are three space games on the market that are not too far apart: NMS, Elite: Dangerous, and Starfield. They have similarities, they have differences, and they have different target audiences.
I told my buddy the other day that it was Bethesda Menu Simulator 2023, and I wasn’t wrong. I was working on my outpost, so I’d place some stuff, go to star map, select the planet with the material, pick a landing spot, land, get up, mine ore for 5 minutes, fast travel to ship, repeat 2-3 more planets, choose the outpost, land, place some more stuff. Then repeat.
i find it less headache to just sit in UC distrobution and fast forward 24 hours to keep reseting inventory to get all the mats I need to build, at least my starter shit.
Or, and I know this is a crazy idea, Bethesda could have made a game that has enough content to fill the space (pun intended) they created. Yes. I can run back to my ship through the mined out area I just cleared just to prove a point that the game is as flawless as you’d like to believe. Or, I can offer one fair critique of the game.
I’m looking forward to what modders do with the canvas Bethesda has provided.
Nah I mean you can just fast travel off the planet without first having to fast travel back to your ship, a few less loading screens and menu interactions right there.
Honestly, I didn’t even think to just go to another planet without stopping by my ship first. That’s somehow… worse? I thought it was super weird when I realized I could do it from the outpost without a ship nearby, but hadn’t thought to just fast travel everywhere all the time.
coming from elite dangerous, flying in NMS feels incredibly simplified. landing is literally “push a button to land”. either way, they both beat starfield in that department
Totally it is but that’s the style. The game isn’t trying to simulate complexity, it’s more a kick back and relax game masquerading as a prog-rock album cover. Pressing X to let your ship land itself gives you just enough time to hit a joint and make a plan.
that may be true, but starfield has some fun quests and interesting characters, which makes the world feel real and not like im the last human being in the universe
I played the game 40+h without any mods and had a lot of fun. It is very much enjoyable without mods. Can mods make the game better? Yes, sure Are the mods needed to have fun with the game? Absolutely not.
For my curiosity, what on Earth could you possibly do for those 40 hours? Cause for me that’s about 5 times more than it’s worth spending with the game in its current state.
I’m 60 hours in and haven’t touched the outpost, ship building, or equipment modding. Main quest and 2 faction side quests completed. I’ve enjoyed my time and bought the game with the expectation that it would be FO4 with some things improved some things worse and a new setting.
There are definitely failings and it’s not a 10/10 game but for a lot of people it’s a great game. The proc gen system needs more variety but that can be improved through updates and mods. If you prefer handcrafted content follow the quests and you’ll see minimal repeats of the POIs. I don’t regret my purchase one bit and would be fine if no DLC, mods, or updates happen even though I prefer they do. End of the day make your own decision based on what you like just realize it’s not a dumpster fire and not the perfect game that everyone should run out and play.
I did more or less like you. I tried the outpost a bit, but when I realized they were irrelevant (same with modification and ship building) I just continued the main quest.
The dame has flaws, and I generally don’t buy games when they just come out, but I’m not disappointed in this purchase, despite the flaws of the game.
Lots of cool side quests, a main quest that is one of the best from Bethesda, exploring the universe. And yes even the power puzzles from time to time to unlock a new power. I have about 100h (hard to say as steam is not logging the time for me anymore because I use mod manager and sfse) now (started with modding after entering NG+ at about 40h and still find new fun things to do. I am in NG+2 at the moment.
Mods I use are mostly cosmetic (I love to change some posters or magazine covers when ich switch NG+) or QoL like faster animations or better UI.
I have 60 hours in and just got to the temples. There’s a ton of things to do. I’ll probably get 100 hours into the base game and then many, many more hours from mods.
You keep asking this in this thread. What answer do you want? The game has a shitload of content in it. I’m 35ish hours in and I have so many random quests and things to do. I’ve spent hours wandering around planets. Around cities. In space stations. Scanning things, reading stuff.
It’s completely fine if what the game has to offer doesn’t appeal to you, but if you truly cannot comprehend how anyone could enjoy it, then I’m afraid you just don’t have much perspective.
This is, objectively speaking, a large scale open world game with hundreds of hours of content. It should be self evident that what it has to offer will appeal to some and not to others. How can you think that because it doesn’t appeal to you, it shouldn’t appeal to anyone? That makes no sense.
I do see your point, but it's out there now. How many thousands of people just grabbed it, or will, because of the article?
Just like PGP, decss, and countless other things, it will be kicking around at the usual places for anyone who wants it for long time, probably well past the point where anyone cares anymore.
Yeah it kills me when I see someone share something like this in the early stages of development though, like great you just ensured this will never see the light of day
Damn this is a pathetic response. He could’ve said “We’ve tried our best to make it as polished as possible before launch, and are working towards further optimising it to give you the best experience, wherever you play”. Even if they did jackshit, it would not come out as condescending and snarky. Maybe he wasn’t prepared for a tough question on the spot right at the beginning of the interview, but it does show how he thinks about his games. In his mind, the game running at all on PC is optimised enough.
I am not saying he’s bad for not making Creation Engine super optimised engine on this planet, I’m saying he’s bad for not acknowledging it is currently most demanding engine despite looking merely half as good as Cyberpunk 2077 or idk Arkham Knight.
They’re clearly building their games in an extremely inefficient way. Starfield does not have anything going on in it that other games with much lower requirements also have done.
You see evidence of this in their previous games. One of the major performance issues with Fallout 4 for example, was that instead of building their cities in performant ways, they literally plonked every building as an individual asset into the world which thrashed the CPU for no reason. Modders just had to merge them all into one model to significantly improve performance. Their games are full of things like this and Starfield will be no different.
Unless I’m completely mistaken here, modders didn’t combine the buildings together, that’s how they are by default. Mods, however, sometimes needed to break said system which resulted in massively degraded performance.
Nah the Boston performance was terrible in vanilla. The precombination fixes made huge performance improvements. There were issues with mods breaking precombined meshes but that was a separate issue.
Why would he? Todd hates everyone who plays his games and cares only about separating money from pockets. Fallout 76 made that quite clear to everyone.
If he gave a standard appeasing PR statement without following it up at all, that would somehow be preferable? This may be snarky, but at least you know what to expect.
Not to excuse any hate speech of any kind, but looking around at social media and the effect it has especially on young people and saying “steam forums are the problem” seems like missing the forest for the trees
Me. There’s just an irony in pointing out the failure of Steam to effectively moderate (true) when Twitter has a much larger footprint, seems to be actively encouraging hate speech not just tolerating it, and is being rewardered for such behavior. The article points this out too:
There’s an aspect of irony to the complaint: Elon Musk turned Twitter into a haven for racism and far-right rhetoric, after all, and he’s being rewarded with a high seat in the incoming US government.
Senators only have so much time to pick and choose which issues to raise awareness about, so Steam seems like a weird fight to pick given the wider landscape ¯_(ツ)_/¯ . Could just be there’s a much higher chance of getting an actual change from Steam than a larger social media platform.
Apparently the people doing this type of pressuring on the credit card companies are anti-furries, TERFs, and other right-wing anti-porn think tanks, with a possible goal to erase all queer or pornographic content off the internet.
Yeah, as much as I absolutely hate people who draw/write incest and pedophilia on a fetishistic manner I know it’s just the first step to banning any other type of porn.
Those people should probably tag their shit, tho. Furries who are into incest are extremely bad about this.
Thank fuck for that. With any luck the better conditions will even give them the power to push back on management if management demands something stupid be added to a game.
In an industry as notoriously dreadful as game development, every bit of quality of life counts.
Not even that, but usually this comes with the actual big target on your back: Being publicly traded.
Now of course, you can be publicly traded without being a big corp, and you can be a big corp that is held privately. But usually these big corpos are the ones that are on the stock market, and yes, the moment that happens everything becomes secondary to your actual responsibility: To the shareholders. Line must go up! And an easy one is to fire more workers.
Unless I’m not seeing something, game production is expensive. Most studios are 1-2 bad games away from closing their doors. Games are expensive as hell to produce and as much as it sucks the “going public” option is sometimes the only way to go.
It’s easy to forget but most small (1-3 people) team indie devs probably aren’t even working a salary. They split the earnings from the game and either live off of that or reinvest it into their company but the moment salaries need to get paid, or office space needs to be used (not really necessary for small teams) that’s when expenses get insanely high. I’m not a business person but I can understand why you’d want to “trim the fat” (I don’t support it at all but to play devil’s advocate, I can see the logic despite the flaws). Growth means structure, and structure means expense.
No. I mean someone with ethics and morals and just wants to sell something for a single price and be done.
There’s a reason Minecraft and Factorio get a lot of love. It’s because you pay once and you’re done. Yet they still make new things. Although Mojang is going that way.
The Luddites were members of a 19th-century movement of English textile workers who opposed the use of certain types of cost-saving machinery, and often destroyed the machines in clandestine raids. They protested against manufacturers who used machines in “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to replace the skilled labour of workers and drive down wages by producing inferior goods.
They were idiots trying to maintain a poverty based system simply because they weren’t on the very lowest rung. They were also proven very wrong, demand for textiles increased dramatically as prices fell and areas where there had been nothing but privation flourished into affluent communities with longer lifespans, better wages and improved living conditions for everyone even the lowest classes - this resulted in improvements literacy amoung the poor and resulted in the erosion of the class system as the early industrial era matured.
If the luddities had won we’d all be far worse off now.
You are conflating technology and its benefits with the owning class’s misuse of that technology. Capitalist apologists love to do this because otherwise the crimes of capitalism would have to stand on their own and there would be no defending them.
It’s exactly this conflation that lets people claim that the luddites were entirely anti-technology, but they weren’t. Again this is a lie that has been spread by capitalists to defend their own image.
The luddites were killed and suppressed by the military and the government made industrial sabotage a capital offense, and then slandered them. Maybe if they’d won we’d live in a world where reporters weren’t murdered over the Panama papers for instance.
So your argument is that their stated aims were a lie and speeches claimed to be from notable figures in the movement were fabricated after the fact? Further that their violent actions should have been overlooked and if they had been there would be no corruption in the world today?
Surely you can see how that argument is about as credible as flat earth?
I don’t understand why people think they can just rewrite history to suit their needs.
You want me to give you a history lesson? Funny that when you wanted people to believe an inversion of the history everyone knows you didn’t see any need for sources but now you expect me to meticulously demonstrate every word? and yes we all know it’ll never be enough…
It doesn’t matter though because you’re not serious about what you’re saying and literally no one would belive your nonsense.
E: You can scroll down to the dividing line if you want to read the history and not my condescending screed about your ignorance. I suspect you won’t read much of this so I’m putting this note here at the top to let you know that if you don’t read the whole comment then you’ll probably sound like a fool in your reply. I mean that’s already true but like… even moreso. If you don’t like the way I’m talking to you, you can refer yourself to the way you just talked to me.
Okay, so I think you’ve fucked up here. I think that because you seem to think I’m asking you for a demonstration, ie, for sources. But if you actually read my comment carefully you would know that I asked you for a claim. This was me politely asking you to simply say what you mean instead of hiding behind insinuations and vague hand-waving.
And the reason this is a fuck-up is because anyone who actually knew how to understand and source literature on a topic like this would have immediately known the distinction between making a claim, and demonstrating a claim. I have made quite clear claims but not yet demonstrated them. You have not made a single claim that could even be demonstrated, you have just assumed that everybody already agrees with your version to the point that it does not even need to be stated.
I also know it’s a fuck-up because I have heard this fact as a rebuttal of a common misconception several times from a number of trustworthy sources, and before I repeated it I quickly checked to make sure I had it right, and it does appear to be the consensus of historians; I found no evidence of a credible debate on this; nobody is replying to some other side on this; it is uncontroversial.
I said the same thing four different ways there because you do seem to have some trouble following what is being said.
I am now going to go beyond what I originally asked you for and give you some real information, and then after that, if you still feel like it would be a good idea, you can reply. I suspect you won’t want to though, because if you had the information to hand you wouldn’t have protested so hard against me asking for even the most basic stating of your position. You also might have read something and learned that you were wrong, but let’s not expect the moon. I suspect you went so hard because you realised you had nothing and you hoped I would be cowed by your obvious confidence, but I wasn’t. I was in fact somewhat invigorated by it.
The label now has many meanings, but when the group protested 200 years ago, technology wasn’t really the enemy
The word “Luddite,” handed down from a British industrial protest that began 200 years ago this month, turns up in our daily language in ways that suggest we’re confused not just about technology, but also about who the original Luddites were and what being a modern one actually means.
Despite their modern reputation, the original Luddites were neither opposed to technology nor inept at using it. Many were highly skilled machine operators in the textile industry. Nor was the technology they attacked particularly new. Moreover, the idea of smashing machines as a form of industrial protest did not begin or end with them. In truth, the secret of their enduring reputation depends less on what they did than on the name under which they did it. You could say they were good at branding.
As the Industrial Revolution began, workers naturally worried about being displaced by increasingly efficient machines. But the Luddites themselves “were totally fine with machines,” says Kevin Binfield, editor of the 2004 collection Writings of the Luddites. They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices. “They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.”
Also because I can see your fingers racing to the keyboard about this: the first article on wikipedia is not the only thing I have read on this, I am simply using it because it is a good overview and starting point, and because it clearly shows just how easy it would have been for you to learn literally a single thing about this topic, but you chose virulent ignorance instead. I have in fact gone beyond wikipedia by giving you an actual source, and you aren’t even there yet. By failing to even state your position, you have refused to enter the arena of discussing facts.
Now, I did mention the Panama papers, and that was a nod to the way that the rich employ violence against their detractors, and perhaps that was a stretch, but I could make the argument to someone interested. I doubt you are.
The problems the Luddites were protesting are more closely related to the modern problem of Fast Fashion, in which vast quantities of extremely poor quality transient clothing is produced and destroyed every single year. It is an economic, ecological and social disaster that ironically employs many many people in the most brutal shop conditions. The “cheap” clothing you championed as the cause of the “flourishing” is exactly the problem that the Luddites feared, and it has not been good for the planet or for people. The horrendous work conditions of the industrial revolution also led to clothing factories where children were employed to crawl under operating machines and were frequently minced by them. This is the kind of barbaric treatment of human beings that the Luddites were against and that the ruling class had them killed to maintain. This sort of thing still happens today, but in far away countries with poor populations that you don’t see. Capitalism hasn’t resulted in plenty, it has resulted in abject poverty for the vast majority of the world’s population so that a small minority can live in luxurious comfort. I assume you don’t think that’s real capitalism or something, but you’d be wrong about that too.
The term Luddite did not come to have its modern meaning until the 1950’s, at which point anyone who had ever known a Luddite was long dead and they were not able to protest the slander, but popular perception is often given by the ruling class, so we get people like you who apparently go off the vibes of the word you’re familiar with and confuse that for actual knowledge.
pcgamer.com
Ważne