Yes, i’m sure it’s a lot of work to move game engines but time and time again it’s the same story. Closed source anything is free until the easy money has been sucked up so why even bother with anything closed source?
Sooner society stops feeding the greed, hopefully the sooner we get back to a sustainable society!
Part of the problem are the stockholders who expect the shares to go up in price every time. If it starts dipping down enough a huge portion of them will pull their shares and bankrupt the company. This causes companies to mostly think in the short term cause it’s better to make a bit more money than be bankrupt.
Calling people the things they literally are is not name-calling. For example, conservatives tried to overthrow our government, tried to overthrow our democracy, and have been sending elementary schools in my town bomb threats for weeks. It’s not name calling to say they’re terrorists.
Edit: To clarify, the bomb threats are because a librarian joked about having a “woke agenda.” These are the same types of people.
Not at all. I believe that people should have freedom of choice for how they want to play their games. Everyone has a different escape from reality.
I understand that Nexus Mods have the right to choose what they want to host, that’s not the point. I believe that the moderators of the site need to choose what really crosses the line. The mod itself is harmless. Do you agree with hosting the Kill All Children mod for Skyrim still? If so, why?
If the reality you want to escape from is that “sometimes people use pronouns that are different from the ones I think they should use”, you’re an intolerant bigot.
If someone made a mod to remove black people from the game because “sometimes I want to escape from the reality that black people exist” it would be entirely justified to call that person a racist. This is no different.
I’d like to clarify that my argument is centered around the role of platform moderation and how they determine what content crosses ethical or moral lines. While you’ve offered an extreme example with the hypothetical mod that removes black people, the comparison doesn’t precisely align with the mod under discussion.
I used the ‘Kill All Children’ mod for Skyrim as an example to point out inconsistencies in moderation decisions. The objective is to question where the line should be drawn and who gets to draw it, not to endorse intolerant or bigoted views.
No, I haven’t offered an extreme example. I’ve offered an identical example. Escaping from the reality that black people exist, and escaping from the reality that people can in fact just choose their own pronouns are not meaningfully different in any way. In both cases someone is trying to erase from their personal reality the existence of an entire group of people, in a way that is targeted on specific lines of bigotry.
If you’re not willing to acknowledge that simple fact then you’re not ready to have this conservation.
That’s why there is a meaningful difference between this and the kill all children mod. While tasteless and gross, there’s never been any meaningful indication that the people installing kill all children actually want to see children, as a class of people, erased from existence. They’re engaged in some extremely unpleasant roleplaying, but barring the rare exceptions that will exist in any sufficient sample size they’re not actively expressing views about the real world through this choice. OTOH the pronoun removal mod is very much about expressing a desire to, at best, refuse to acknowledge the existence of a group of people, and far more likely a desire that said group not exist at all. And if you don’t believe that desire exists in a not insignificant number of people then I beg you to look outside your window for once in your life.
We can draw a moral line between these two things by applying Popper’s paradox of tolerance; the only thing a tolerant society cannot tolerate is intolerance. There is a clear moral justification for the suppression of expression when it is an expression of intolerance. That is the moral principle that Nexus are applying here (whether they are conscious of it or not).
Not only can you be a defender of free speech and still support the suppression of intolerant speech; it is in fact absolutely necessary to do so. If tolerated, the intolerant will use their freedom of speech to destroy everyone else’s while pushing their intolerant ideals. It is therefore - paradoxically - impossible to support free speech while supporting the free speech of bigots. To be true champions of free speech we must be intolerant of the intolerant.
In response to the point you’ve raised, the issue of platform moderation does involve a complex balance between allowing diversity of opinion and restricting what is considered harmful or intolerant. However, it’s crucial to note that not all forms of censorship or moderation are created equal.
Your argument posits that the ‘Kill All Children’ mod and the pronoun-removal mod are qualitatively different, based on the intent or impact behind them. The latter, you say, has real-world implications, as it aims to negate the existence of a specific group, while the former is seen as “extremely unpleasant role-playing” that isn’t necessarily a call for real-world action against children.
Yet, the stance seems to be rooted in the assumption that everyone who would use the pronoun-removal mod does so with malicious intent to deny the existence of non-binary or transgender people. While that might be true for some, it could also simply be a matter of personal preference for others, without carrying any ideological baggage.
The use of Popper’s paradox of tolerance in this discussion is intriguing but might oversimplify the complexities involved in moderating a digital platform. While intolerance shouldn’t be tolerated, determining what constitutes ‘intolerance’ is often subjective and open to interpretation. Therefore, it’s crucial for platform moderators to engage in transparent and reasoned decision-making processes when determining what is allowed and what is not.
Your last point suggests that it’s not just permissible but necessary to restrict the free speech of those considered intolerant to protect free speech for all. However, this approach can easily lead to a slippery slope where the definition of ‘intolerance’ becomes malleable, potentially leading to an erosion of the very free speech rights that the policy aims to protect.
The issue is not straightforward, and the boundaries of what should or shouldn’t be tolerated in an online community are often fluid. Thus, there remains a need for a nuanced conversation around these topics, which goes beyond labelling something as intolerant and calling for its suppression.
While that might be true for some, it could also simply be a matter of personal preference for others, without carrying any ideological baggage.
Give me one single scenario in which a person needs to remove the option to select your characters pronouns, without that decision carrying, as you put it, ideological baggage.
A scenario that comes to mind is one where a player simply wants to streamline their game experience, eliminating any elements they perceive as non-essential to their gameplay. This wouldn’t necessarily imply ideological baggage; it could simply be an attempt to customize the game to better suit their individual preferences. However, I acknowledge that the topic is complex and there’s a lot to consider in the broader conversation about platform moderation.
Fair point about the default option being prefilled. However, the idea of what ‘streamlining’ means can differ among individuals. Some might want to remove elements they find non-essential, even if those elements are prefilled. It’s about catering to one’s own idea of what the game should be. Why should the interpretation of ‘streamlining’ be limited to your understanding?
Oh, now I see. It was never about the pronouns, it’s just about streamlining the user experience. How could I have been so stupid, thinking that the only intent behind this mod was bigoty, when in reality it was innocent streamlining.
…
Dude, the dog whistle isn’t subtle. Could you stop?
My aim is to discuss what types of content should be removed and why. The mod’s creator did include comments that violate guidelines, so its removal is justified on that basis. However, dismissing the topic as a ‘dog whistle’ doesn’t help us explore the larger questions around platform moderation and community standards.
If you wanted to discuss that, your first step would be to look for Nexusmods moderation policy and read it. Or if they don’t have one published to note that fact.
Then start a post discussing that moderation policy and asking how moderation should be done.
Instead you started your post by focusing on the removal of a particular bigoted mod, which of course makes it a needlessly charged discussion if you’re looking for purely rational discussion about how moderation decisions are made. Then you keep making these absurd arguments — like claiming this mod may have just been about streamlining. This looks like trolling. And it talks like trolling. You claim I’m missing the point. I don’t think I am. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck… it’s probably a maga troll that’s “just asking questions”.
While I acknowledge that the discussion started with the example of a specific mod, the intent was to use that as a jumping-off point for broader questions about moderation. However, I concede that the charged nature of that particular mod has perhaps overshadowed the broader discussion I was aiming for. I did review Nexus Mods guidelines, and the mod in question was rightly removed based on them. The idea was to prompt thought about how these policies are crafted and applied across a range of content. The mention of ‘streamlining’ was intended to explore the various motivations behind mod creation, not to justify this specific mod’s existence. I assure you, this is not an attempt at trolling but rather an effort to foster a meaningful conversation about platform governance.
Of course they are valuable. But corporations will always prioritize that which generates value for themselves.
What good are those massive improvements to gaming cards when GPU costs spiral into the multiple thousands of dollars and become completely unavailable to 98% of gamers? 'Cause institutional buyers have no qualms dropping $20k per card, and that will inflate the market to an insane degree. Jensen knows this and will happily kick individual consumers right into the firepit.
Huh? They don’t have a monopoly in any space, and have significant competitors. And I don’t really see how they are slowing down innovation. I think it’s fair to say that Nvidia are investing significanly in R&D, and is driving innovation more than anyone else in the industry for the moment.
Steam controller is in its own league, but hell, even the PS and Nintendo controllers have supported gyro control through steam for quite awhile. The Xbox controller is finally advancing past 2003, and into the modern era.
I’m more talking about API level. There isn’t a proper standard operating-system-level interface in Windows for gyro, so 3rd party controllers don’t have it, so it’s not really a thing in Windows/Xbox-first games.
This will raise the floor so every gamepad will be expected to have gyro.
Reminder that whales in Korea had soo much power, they had a round table meeting to force Nexon of Korea to bend to their demands due to Nexon lieong about the “randomness” of line stat generation in maplestory, cauaing them to essentially refund 2 years worth in materials.
Disc’s haven’t seemed to matter in a while. “Pop in this game to download 35GB of game data” “download complete, please download 12GB update before playing game” “update complete, do you have code for expansion pack?, if so please download these 3 7-9GB updates” *phew only a tenth of a TB later I am playing the game
You know Beamdog did all the old the BioWare Enhanced Editions that are pretty well done. Those guys definitely have a reverence for those old games and aren't just some cookie cutter studio putting out mobile shovelware. Those are real people with passion and families to feed, try not to be so harsh as to say "lay them all off"
Never heard of them specifically thats why I say all and have no qualms with their studio either but id fling em head first into the woodchuck if it meant getting some actual original new titles worthy of critical acclaim.
So you’re just cheering on blatant capitalistic bullshit because of your presumption of other “capitalistic” offense of a developer you know nothing about?
No the gaming industry has been run into the ground by greed i dont give a fuck about any devs or any studio theyre all to blame so stir the pot I say fire them all and replace them with AI wouldnt be any less soulless.
You know whats better? Not reporting shit, I just published my game. I don’t want to report a bunch of numbers to Unity each month. I want to push updates to fix issues my users are complaining about. How the fuck are the biggest chucklefucks in charge of every company? Give me the fucking reigns I can do better than this.
I feel like most digital stores already gives you all the statistics you need to make this trivial though. Steam even reports the difference after refunds/returns for you.
it’s the best way to do a rev share. pretty sure unreal engine lets you self report too. If you start a business you can’t complain about having to run a a business by tracking sales.
I can when I didn’t have to do it before and this policy is forced upon me by an established vendor. Thats like saying you can’t bitch about material vendors in the construction industry, you absolutely can because they make your business work and you’ve entrusted them not to fuck you.
With all intentions of respect, and in complete agreement that Unity’s new terms are alarming, If you dont have any intentions of tracking your sales unless you are forced to by the creators of your engine you are using, I’m questioning if you have the chops to be a successful dev in the first place. This is why the vast majority of devs don’t even make enough to even pay Unity the fee and should just stick with a publisher instead of trying to handle the business end of things on their own.
Its not the tracking of sales thats the issue. Its having to report it to someone so they can take even more of my money when we haven’t been doing that for years.
I saw a theory from another lemmy user a while back that made a lot of sense. Basically shareholders get to a point where the want cash now. So they make a deal with the current CEO to do something shitty for short term profits. The shareholders get paid in the short term and then once the share price takes a hit they buy more shares at a discount. They then fire the current CEO who takes a nice exit fee and install someone else to do damage control and grow the stock price again. This is the only thing that makes sense to me because the alternative is that the current CEO is just actually that dumb.
For me the problem is that the shareholders are putting enormous pressure on publicly traded companies requiring ever lasting exponential growth.
Back then I posted a thread about why I think publicly traded companies are bad for our society, as an unpopular opinion and I got severely downvoted, but hey isn’t this another example for the latter?
This SaaS model was born exactly out of this and it is the worst offender.
Back then we were able to own our own software/hardware, now everything is leasing and perpetual paying for things you need/use everyday. Thank God we have foss apps that in most cases are better alternatives.
The Unity train wreck is such a beautiful example of shitting where you eat.
All they had to do was to shut up and do nothing and everything would be fine.
Instead, they were greedy af and their continued fall would be almost entertaining if it didn’t highlight how shit the industry can be.
well technically, if they shut up and did nothing they’d go under. unity operates at a loss right now. if you’re interested in what actually went down in the talks when they cooked this bullshit up, this is a good read from a tech investor who has some insight into unity leaderships new business model while being entirely unbiased:
It’s extremely expensive to build/support an engine used by millions of devs, across 25+ platforms (+ multiple device generations), producing 100K+ games/yr across various art/render styles
Unity has a small army of 3K+ engineers working on it
~80% (est.) of Unity users don’t pay anything for the service. Unity’s ads business (highly profitable) funds the engine business
The engine business is not profitable standalone
It’s not sustainable
The strategic question for Unity was always: assuming the low cost of the engine, what other developer services can we provide to developers to increase average revenue per user (ARPU)?
The runtime fee was a shock to me: only a year ago this option was completely off the table
So what changed for Unity and why now?
The macro enviornment has resulted in hiring freezes. For a seats license model like Unity’s, this means poor revenue growth
GenAI will result in smaller teams building AAA quality games. Smaller/efficient teams = great for studios’ profits but bad for Unity’s seats model
Apple privacy changes (ATT/IDFA) pushed game monetization towards IAP and away from in-game ads. Hurts Unity’s ads business
Dev adoption of Unity cloud services like Unity Gaming Services, DevOps, etc likely hasn’t been strong enough to make the engine biz profitable
I don’t know shit about it, but I’m guessing the ad business isn’t really standalone itself. Guessing it’s the ad service that kicks in for developers that don’t pay for the engine. If that is true, it’s stupid to expect both to be individually profitable. It’s also likely the ad business wouldn’t be profitable if it didn’t have all those indie developers that have it incorporated into their games. Really sounds like a working system just wasn’t profitable enough, and they needed more blood from the stone.
it’s mostly the very large mobile apps like genshin impact or whatever it’s called that actually payed the fee, the vast majority of small and indie developers don’t usually make enough to even qualify for the pro plan. Unity’s seat model was always insanely underpriced for the value the engine provided - 3K senior software engineers @ $200K cost maybe 600 million dollars a year, and maybe 20% of users payed anywhere from three hundred bucks to a little over a thousand for unlimited engine access.
The pronoun mod took away pronoun choices. It was created by an obvious transphobe, and Nexus got rid of it because they have no patience for obvious transphobes.
Seriously the assumption of free time that corpos have for their consumer base is WILD, but it just feeds into the ‘must have 100% market share’ mentality that drives the culture as we lose every shred of our living moments on anything but living
It’s a weird visual bug. The only solution to remove it (so far) is by using console commands. Open the console, click on the asteroid, then type disable on the console.
I was already disappointed with the unimmersive the space travel is in the game, and this bug just added itself to the list of disappointments.
Some technical notes: When I looked at the asteroids using the console, I expected them to be STATIC Objects; they were actually something called CONST iirc. Just some fun facts.
In best case, I will play the game after the first patch after 2.0 + PL. Good that I’m still in my first playthrough in Baldurs Gate 3. So if the patch comes around the weekend of the 6th of October, I should be fine.
games
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.