Plebcouncilman @ Plebcouncilman @sh.itjust.works

Posts

2

Comments

635

Joined

6 mo. ago

Yeah the continued fake outrage from “”””leftists”””” over AI is really starting to get on my nerves. The tech exists, people just need to accept that it’s here and simply move on. It’s a tool like any other.

I mean people enjoy crack and I’m not gonna tell em it’s good for them.

There’s two ways to live life: my way and the objectively morally wrong way. If anyone disagrees with me: my answer is my muscle flex. You cannot see it but I’m a 140lbs 5’10 manlet king with 14% body fat and well read in literature and philosophy. So basically imagine Plato flexing to win an argument. That’s me.

Just in case. Much better games in the indie and AA segments these days.

It’s already outdated for that because the hardware is weak. If what you want is AAA games, just buy a ROG Ally Z1E, it’s much better for your use case. Buy it used.

But I do need to point out that AAA games are trash and you should reflect on your life choices if that’s all you care to play.

I was gonna add a disclosure making an exception for people doing hard physical labor but got lazy. But an office worker which I would assume is most of the lemmy population should not have those issues

It is not a coincidence that you start losing muscle at 30 and that’s were most people start to complain about body aches.

This study also gives credence to it and there’s many more that also confirm it:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6124840

Another aspect is inflammation and I hate to bring it up because it’s such a nebulous concept peddled by online granola mom anti vax types that don’t have a single clue about nutrition. But it is a fact that the shitty diets prevalent in our society cause inflammation in the body, which also contributes to skeletomuscular pain. The worst thing is that people consider it normal when it really isn’t. You’re supposed to be pretty spry up until your 60s or 70s.

Yes.

Nah humiliation doesn’t turn me on so it’s not that.

The dick can be attached to her or she could be sharing it with me.

I would never suck a dick unless a woman was involved. What does that make me?

This is great context too, it’s easy to forget that until recently only Tesla made EVs.

I remember also that Tesla said that all their designs would be open source. Whatever happened to that?

Jokes on them, environmentalists don’t even like EVs these days.

Seriously about the only argument in favor of EVs that is not true is that they are cleaner. The air in the cities might be cleaner but at a net level they still produce ungodly amounts of pollution due to lihium mining.

Yeah no I agree but at a federal level, especially with the outsized economical power California has, you would have to look at if a regulation that they pass could have shockwaves that could be problematic in other states. Like let’s say the top 5 economies in the US decide that ICE engines are banned so now the car manufacturers decide that they can no longer sustain their ICE manufacturing anymore and will only sell EVs. What happens to states that do not have the infrastructure to support only EVs on their roads? So that’s why I say that at a rational level I can understand opposition to that sort of lawmaking.

But actively stopping any organization from adopting a technology that is objectively superior is just stupid. It’s actually anathema to free market capitalism.

There’s really no point in opposing EVs except if you think it will win you elections for some reason because your voters think EVs are woke or some shit.

I can understand opposition to EV mandates like in California because it is heavy handed market intervention. But this? This is like forcing federal agencies to continue doing things on pen and paper instead of computers.

I hear that their claws are in fact dangerous even if they don’t look like it

I mean you could make a studio where there is no manager (how does that work I’m not sure) and you’d still need to make financial forecasting if you want the studio to be an entity that continues to exist. Like I don’t understand your logic here, the only other alternative is to make everyone’s salary contingent to sales and then the pie is divided evenly like in a coop model but that means a lot more of the financial risk is shouldered by the devs and you probably don’t get paid until the game releases.

Like what is a proper alternative that: a) pays you a salary while the game is being developed b) accounts for the risk inherent with not knowing the future?

I’ll never understand how the EV thing became a political issue. I mean I understand how politicians can exploit it as one, but I don’t understand how voters came to see this as a political issue.

These are American made EVs that will lower costs on maintenance and therefore on deliveries why the hell would anyone want to stop this?

Even if you look at it from the angle of protecting the oil, natural gas and coal industry it doesn’t make sense because the energy used to charge cars is generated from those sources.

I mean if you think a system doesn’t work well it’s because you are able to identify why it isn’t working well and can visualize somewhat of an alternative. If that isn’t the case then you cannot be fully sure that there is a better way to do things, and maybe the system is working as well as it can be given the environment the system needs to operate in.

I’m not a dev myself so I can’t speak too much about the pov of being a worker in the industry and the issues you describe with credits. But from a management perspective the problem is that it is simply not possible to accurately predict which games will have a long tail. So if you plan for a long tail and the game isn’t received as well as you expected, what happens then? The game makes a loss. The studio might need to close because they overcommitted resources to the project etc. it’s much safer to assume that all the sales will happen in the first 6 months and forecast for that, and if the game turns out to be more successful than expected then that’s free money basically from a planning POV.

The intention of live service games is pretty much that, creating games that will purposefully and predictably have long tails, but the problem is that even if a game is designed to have a long tail it doesn’t mean that it will find an audience that will give it the momentum needed in the first place.

As for bonuses being tied to reviews or sales, they both have pros and cons. Maybe it should be a little bit of both, because well received game might make lackluster sales while a badly received game might make crazy sales numbers (most AAA games).

As for getting review bombed or getting panned by influencers. That is always a risk in every industry. I find that most games get the reception they deserve, For example a lot of people want to frame the latest Dragon Age for flopping because of chuds, but that is not in fact the case, because those same chuds probably sunk hundreds of of hours into BG3 which is by all chud metrics also a “woke” game. So the problem, very often is the quality of the game. Chuds are more than willing to put up with politics they don’t like in games when the game is objectively (subjective to the expectations of the intended audience) good.

What should be the norm then?

If we’re going to criticize the way things are done, one has to offer an alternative that is better.

Btw I’m not saying that the current way is necessarily the best way.