she/they
This is just a lot about people’s reactions to something, but nothing about what that something actually was
It’d be nice to see what the actual something was so one could judge for themselves
Edit: I took a look at his twitter, and he seems to be pro-trump and anti-kamala and anti-walz, calling him a socialist who let Minneapolis burn, as well as transphobia thrown in here and there and more that I didn’t bother to read
…so I’m gonna go with “the people’s reactions to him likely had a point”
average person would be able to understand the MD5 checksum
Well, it ought to be just yet another skill in the modern world such as reading, critical thinking, media literacy, paying your taxes, etc. I think just saying “average person won’t understand this” is a bit of a cop out. Like, yes, you’re right, but there is no other way around this, it needs to be implemented as a core feature in social media, the verifications of origins.
This stuff isn’t just going to get better by itself. AI will only get better at faking as time goes on.
I guess because the Gen Z comp sci students are the people who are truly fluent in computers. We were immersed in the internet and digital technology from a young age, but also had the curiosity to go beneath the surface of them, and get a real understanding of how things work. Most people just use the technology superficially, even if they have grown up with the internet and computers.
Linux is designed to be able to do group policies like that very well
Remember, Linux originates back from the terminal days, and the vast majority of servers run Linux. If any OS is made to function well in large organizations, it’s Linux. Windows is popular on desktop for reasons other than better group policies.
I feel like this is already the case, and has been for years. Few AAA games interest me these days, especially the ones coming out of the biggest studios like EA, Ubisoft, Activision-Blizzard, etc. The only recent one was Baldur’s Gate 3, but that by itself is an exception to the norm.
Most AAA games are just complete soulless profit generators. It often feels as if any fun and experimental things get taken out because it would involve too much “risk”, and stand in the way of earning money, instead of trying to make a good or fun or unique game. Instead they are just being made for as wide of a mass appeal as possible, allergic to anything that could make the game a little more interesting and niche.
People are free to continue using proprietary software, but you can’t then continue to complain when they inevitably do another shitty thing in the name of profit.
No wonder people are promoting FOSS, what else do you want to happen? I really don’t get why people are so hostile to FOSS, it’s literally for your own long-term benefit. How many more projects have to enshittify before people get it?
Here’s another question though
“Would I like this game more if I didnt have my cool item right now?”
Hard to say yes… But in practice the answer might very well be yes. Challenge in games is rarely something you directly ask for, you want the reward after all, but often the fun is in exactly overcoming those obstacles, and not actually the reward. In that sense encumbrance might feel bad… but being able to grab every single item always could very well ruin part of the fun.
In the end games are sets of challenges presented in certain ways, and its just whether those challenges work well from a game design perspective.
I don’t see older games being rated lower as a problem. Yes standards rise over time as games and technology gets better, that’s fine! If you took a mediocre modern AAA game and showed it to a reviewer 20 years ago, I’ll bet all my money it would be game of the year.
It makes more sense to let standards rise and adjust reviews to still keep a reasonable rating scale.
Here’s a big question though
What’s the difference between predatory tactics to hook people into a game, and “normal” gameplay, whatever that is? If neither cost any money or have microtransactions in any way?
Is Diablo 2 using predatory mechanics? Is Counter Strike? Is Factorio?
Games are artificial constructs. If you deconstruct them entirely, unless they got some story to tell as the center point of the game, their mechanics and goals are entirely artificial and constructed to get you to keep playing, be engaged, and have fun, whatever that means and implies.
Because, well, in the end, games do not have a grand purpose. Their purpose is entertainment(or be art, but not all games have that goal). And so if vampire survivors keep you engaged and enjoy the game… Is that really that much different to other games? Another example to this are idle/incremental games, as a pure distillation of what games are. Are they predatory? Is there really much difference from the very core of other, more “proper”, games?
Sure, but deadlock isn’t exactly late. And if there’s a time when you want to add more developers, then an alpha when the game is still in the early stages is the best time to do so