squaresinger

squaresinger, 11 miesięcy temu

Cuphead will now be renamed to whatever the cup from Beauty and the Beast was called.

squaresinger, 11 miesięcy temu

Thanks! Couldn’t be bothered to look it up :)

squaresinger, 11 miesięcy temu

The thing is, what use case can benefit from a blockchain?

Scamming, gambling, crime and speculation benefited from the lack of regulation, but barely cared about the underlying concept of a bitcoin.

But for anything real, much better solutions have existed for decades or centuries.

Blockchain is a solution without a problem and has been that for 25 years now.

If you have a solution that hasn’t found a problem in 25 years, chances are that there will never be an actual problem that solution would solve.

So the killer apps of blockchain remain scamming, gambling, speculation and crime. Until there are more stringent regulations, then they’ll go back to Western Union and Paysafe cards.

squaresinger, rok temu

UltimMC is good. It’s a fork of MultiMC that allows playing without account.

squaresinger, rok temu (edited rok temu)

It totally does, that’s why I was asking.

I just wonder what the scam is.

squaresinger, rok temu

Yeah, plenty old enough^^

squaresinger, rok temu

So they just call it pre-installed because they zip it? Oh well…

squaresinger, rok temu

Huh, doesn’t sound too bad. Adblocker takes care of the ads. Slow host, oh well. And the last point I don’t understand.

squaresinger, rok temu

Thanks for the warning. What’s IGG?

squaresinger, rok temu

Sometimes X is also used to abbreviate Crossmas.

squaresinger, rok temu

That’s why I almost exclusively play indie games. They don’t invest massively in graphics, microtransactions or dumb features not related to the game (like the chess/darts/drinking simulators in Watchdogs). Instead, they focus on making games that do one thing and to that one thing great.

squaresinger, rok temu

It’s resource consumption and graphics output are directly linked. If you gain more efficiency, that gives you more headroom to either reduce resource consumption or increase the graphics output. But you can’t maximize both. You have to decide what do to with the resources you have. Use them, or not use them. You can’t do both at the same time.

squaresinger, rok temu

And then you need someone to foot the bill for all that. Preferrably ahead of time.

That’s kinda how lucky Star Citizen got, but that’s not a business model you can replicate a second time.

squaresinger, rok temu

Microtransactions come with specific challenges. Specifically, you have to give the players a reason to pay them, and that’s usually done by making the game purpously worse for those who don’t pay.

squaresinger, rok temu

Yeah, but some of us oldies still remember the before times when we just had 35 Sims 2 expansions.

squaresinger, rok temu

The main differences with Star Citizen are that it’s

• Funded in advance
• Funded by people who have no say in how the product/company should work
• Massively overfunded

This means, CIG has no pressure to ship soon or even at all (if the project fails, they have no liability). They also have nobody telling them what to with the money. They have already made their profit.

I am not knocking CIG for this situation, but if you put it like this, it’s easy to see why for each CIG out there, there are tens of thousands of games on crowdfunding sites that either

• Failed to raise funds
• Failed to get a decent company/legal structure running with the money they raised
• Failed to actually ever deliver anything in an usable state
• Are just pure scams

So as a general business model rather than just an insane stroke of luck, I don’t think this is a good option.

A business model that only earns money after release (like the classic publisher-funded development model) is bad for the obvious cash-grabby and buggy reasons, but at least it consistently delivers games. Contrary to the “earn money before you start development” model that is enabled by crowdfunding, which in general does not deliver games.

In my (not very educated) opinion, early access is probably the best middle ground. You start off with little initial funding required, but by the time you turn to the crowd, you already have a working prototype and company structure. That makes it much more likely for the game to eventually be released in a full version. This option obviously comes with its own downsides as well, but many of my favourite games have been small studios or even individuals who use early acces to fund development.

squaresinger, rok temu

Totally agreed!

squaresinger, rok temu

That’s what happens if you design a game in a way that makes it worse to have a bad player in your team than no player at all.