Oh, I'm definately not expecting NDP to win the next election. My thought is more that if the Liberal party keeps imploding at the rate it is right now, it might be possible that NDP might be able to breifly take power once people are tired of CPC rule and the pendulum swings back. I don't expect they'll stay in power long (or at least not with any integrity) but at that point, it'd be in their best interest to pass electoral reform to avoid splitting votes with the Liberals.
I know its a long shot, and its unlikely they'd implement anything better than instant runoff / ranked choice, but at this point, thats the only hope for better goverment that seems at all feasible.
At this rate, maybe we'll get lucky and NDP will (at least breifly) get some power and push for electoral reform. Its a long shot, but at point, it seems like the only way to get a better election system.
I don't want or need incentivizing to play a game I enjoy.
The whole point of what I said was that it shouldn't be an incentive to play the game, it should be an incentive to try new things within the game that you already enjoy, should you chose to.
For example, me and my friend group put 1000+ hours into CS:GO. Almost all of this was in competitve because that is the mode the game is built around and the mode that is considered the "real" game. At the same time, playing the same game day after day, while enjoyable, is also repetitve. When operations (battlepasses with missions) began, we'd organize to complete those tasks as well as playing normal comp. Most only took 15-20 minutes and while the games were less refined, they were still fun and injected some variety into our otherwise repetitive gameplay. The game as a whole was made more fun because the tasks convinced people to leave the better gamemode in favour of adding variety. At the same time, not all of us completed all the tasks, and not all of them were needed for all the battlepass rewards. It was just a way to encourage exploring other parts of the game you might not have touched since you learned the meta, or found your favorite gamemode.
If not overly manipulative or overly forced on the player, they can be a fun bonus for the game. Overwatch 1 comes to mind as an example, and War Thunder's battlepass missions are sometimes good.That said, it should be basically offering an alternative approach to playing, rather than the more abusive, "Log in daily and grind for 8 hours" that is so common. "Play 3 arcade mode games for a free skin" is encouraging you to take a break from comp and try a more casual mode. Its a great way to reward less serious play. "Kill 3 enemies with small, medium, and large caliber guns for a new decal." encourages trying new equipment and playing off-meta equipment. Theres lots of boons for this sort of content (if implemented well), regardless of the monitization.
Edit: To put it another way, players optimize the fun out of games - examples could be playing only the meta, or taking the game way too seriously. Good battlepasses and missions encourage trying other ways to play for variety or for fun.
It isn't absolute, but its rare for a politician not to be corrupt in some way. Generally to get into power, you have to be willing to put yourself above others or abuse the system. Then, once you're in power, most systems encourage corruption, or even make it hard to avoid. Generally the more powerful the position, the worse it is. That said, just as you should never underestimate the amount of evil in the world, you shouldn't underestimate the amount of good. Even if the system is stacked against them, some good people do manage to get through and genuinely do good things for their people.
Well, seeing as your post seemed to be much closer to an excuse to post a news article (and one that is particularly iffy sounding at that) rather than an open ended question, I can see why they would have assumed it'd be an attempt at astroterfing.
Personally, I'm not too opposed to one-way federation, at least for the moment. They're not a large platform, nor particularly competitve with the more open Fediverse (for the moment). The lack of attribution on the other hand, is iffy, both in terms of giving OC creators proper attribution for their work, and in terms of reducing misinformation (IE showing .ml posts as standard news posts).
All that said, I don't think its a large enough issue to be concerned about for now. Give it like 3-6 months and see if things have changed (or if the problem has disappeared). This isn't like Threads where we have to worry about a billion dollar Embrace Extend Extinguish campaign. Who knows, if we're esspecially lucky, the site might grow into a better Fediverse alternative to Lemmy, or will grow and die in a way that sends positive users our way - something that would greatly benifit the Fediverse in it's current state.
The vast majority of those machines are very rigged, with a configurable winrate. I'm guessing that machine was set to just never pay out the large prize.
But I will say that Rivals and OW2 are absolutely proving the F2P is here to stay as a model for games. So I really think those in the OW community who were salty about OW2 swapping over have basically lost the war on the topic.
I mean, whether f2p would contiue wasn't really ever in question. Its been a successful model for multiplayer for a decade. The question is more in how abusive monitization can be before players will move to competition or leave. Hopefully this shows that players are eager to jump ship (or at least move to competition) when the monitization is as bad as OW2.
This is why I think saying live service overwatch likes have no space isn't a fair explanation to why Concord failed.
Or Deadlock for that matter, which is even sillier to declare DoA given that its still an in development, limited access product, and one aimed at more dedicated players. Not that any of thar has stopped people.
I'm not educated enough to have an opinion on this, but is the EU different from other places in terms of requiring a lot of expensive campaigning to have any chance to win?
I can't say I've noticed this, but depending on the design, it might just be about ensuring contrast of different elements. Red contrasts a yellow crown and beige skin pretty well whereas blonde hair would blend with skin and crown, and brown isn't as bad but isn't great and doesn't work with brown skin. Black works, but can be hard to do with any detail in a minimalist style or one using black outlines. This leaves, red, and grey (with grey being them more common option in my experience).
Purpose:
Determine if you are able to harm teammates, or they are able to harm you in Counter Strike 2.
Hypothesis:
Teammates are able to harm one another, although damage is decreased relative to damage against enemies.
Materials:
2 copies of the game Counter Strike 2
an in-game AWP rifle
Procedure
Aim at teammate's head and click mouse.
Observations
Teammate is dead.
Conclusions
Friendly fire is enabled in Counter Strike 2. Further testing is required to determine if damage is decreased relative to damage against enemies.
Sometimes all thats relevant is the link, or the commentary would be more appropriate as a comment. For example, posting a news article to a news community or a set of patchnotes to a game's community. At least personally, thats the majority of what I want to see: a post with a bunch of fairly direct information, and discussion of its implications in the comments.
An upvote should be for quality content/discussion. This might be a well researched comment, a good joke, or just something that leads the discussion in a meaningful or interesting way. Generally, things I think should be valued or shared. There will obviously be bias, but my opinion isn't the basis of my decision. I try to upvote good-faith or thorough arguments I disagree with.
Downvotes are for low-quality and unhelpful content that I think shouldn't be spread. This doesn't have to be irrelevant or against the community rules, but often is. Things I might downvote include overused reposts, unnecessarily rude or insulting comments, low quality comments (IE someone trying to argue a well cited comment with an anecdote and nothing else), or spam.
Ill double check the available documents, and edit this comment, but at least when I last checked like six months ago, they only had one example, and it was Steam warning a developer for giving away free copies (if I remember right, Steam keys) on their Discord. I never saw any other solid evidence.
Oh, I'm definately not expecting NDP to win the next election. My thought is more that if the Liberal party keeps imploding at the rate it is right now, it might be possible that NDP might be able to breifly take power once people are tired of CPC rule and the pendulum swings back. I don't expect they'll stay in power long (or at least not with any integrity) but at that point, it'd be in their best interest to pass electoral reform to avoid splitting votes with the Liberals.
I know its a long shot, and its unlikely they'd implement anything better than instant runoff / ranked choice, but at this point, thats the only hope for better goverment that seems at all feasible.