Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)AB
a lil bee 🐝 @ alilbee @lemmy.world
Posts
2
Comments
407
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Of course there's a reason? Legislation was passed (the real problem here) and the entire point of the court is to evaluate legislation against our constitution. I agree with every single statement in your last paragraph, but you have to point the blame at the correct place. SCOTUS taking this up is completely legitimate and falls entirely within their role in our government.

    The state legislators are infringing on private citizens and their medical care. That's the crime here. Even then, it's important to understand that nothing is off limits to legislators. Even our core rights can be changed by a supermajority in the national congress. Power decides what rights get protected in a society. That's been the recurrent tale of history for all time. We are beyond fortunate to have a sliver of that power and we are failing to use it to stomp these legislators into the dust. That's the crime here, not SCOTUS taking up a case that falls entirely under its jurisdiction and mandate.

  • We really need an amendment or two around medical care. However, the same problem preventing that is what is causing the need in the first place: Republicans in national and state legislatures. The judiciary sucks right now, but it's really not their job to do anything but evaluate whether this is constitutional and it likely is (in a post-Dobbs world). I'd love to see the right to privacy ruling come back, but that's not happening. All of those assumptions can be changed with dedicated, long-term strategic voting and a bit of luck with justice health. Please vote.

    Edit: Somebody replied and I have you blocked. Just don't want you to have to wait for a response. Lemmy should really just hide my comments from you so we don't run into this issue, but such is life.

  • To be fair, this was the case in my secular(-ish) public school as well and I believe it was there until the early 2000s. The catholic church has many sins (which Squid did a great job laying out above), but I don't think they, as a group, endorse the concept of corporal punishment like they do with anti-choice practices or the rampant pedophilia. That's a cultural issue with certain regions of the US.

  • People really don't understand how many players there are who just don't care about this stuff. They get none of the gamer rage, they don't check reddit or lemmy, they're not watching Twitter to see what the game journos are pissed about. DLC and MTX make buckets of money, even when compared to the profits from most full games, and they're magnitudes cheaper and easier to develop. They're not going away as long as they're bought and they're going to be bought, I guarantee it. It's not even a bad thing, per se, as long as the player feels they've gotten their money's worth.

    If anyone is looking to return gaming to a pre-"horse armor" state where big DLCs were the only option, you are looking for a fantasy that will never, ever happen. I've seen the numbers for some of the orgs I've worked for and it's hilariously skewed toward that stuff. The real answer is to pivot to different games. Embrace indies and games that don't have MTX. You're never gonna get the AAAs back in the bottle.

  • Thanks for the info! I might check it out then, seeing as you mentioned FC3/4. Not my favorite games but they can be enjoyable when I want to turn my brain off and stealth kill across the land.

    I think you're in luck on your final point. This trailer is for the steam release this week, I think.

  • There's nuance in it, for certain, but there is a large contingent of people who play games that find most open worlds boring. I love a big open world, even a lot of the procedurally-generated ones are fine with me when it's done correctly (looking at you, Starfield 😒). There are myriad options in between there, where it sounds like you might fall as well.

    The key is, as you say, making the world in such a way that it drives the core gameplay loop. This is such a bizarre example, but I just played Animal Well recently and I think it's actually a fantastic example of this. Every area of this large map that you retread over and over again has hidden, intentional elements that clearly drive at the core gameplay loop of "discover secrets everywhere". It's also a 7 year passion project not likely to be replicated. I do think though that the lessons can be learned and applied on less intense projects.

    Sit down, consider your loop. Why is the player here, having fun with your game? Is it to discover secrets? Hide secrets everywhere. Is it to drive around in a souped up car? Add more space and interesting driving conditions. Is it to kill big enemies? Add huge roaming bosses. I think after that focus is determined, then you should shrink it as much as possible while still fitting into your design constraints.

    This is all layman's conjecture though.

  • I also love the Hinterlands, but you and I are in the vast minority based on the initial feedback to Inquisition. It was super common to hear "just push past the Hinterlands, it's so much better afterwards". Even more generally, I've been hearing "why are all the devs making all their games open world for no reason?"

    I'm also an open-world junkie because I love exploration. I'm saddened by this design choice, but I do completely understand where it comes from. It can still be done well and I love the lore of Thedas, so I'll be there to see, I guess.

  • Do you say this about all QoL updates? I'm not going to use this and also think Google sucks in general, but this is such a benign, optional little feature for people who might find it more convenient. Isn't that what development should be all about?

  • hasn't done really any good.

    My partner was able to have a surgery this year she would not have been able to otherwise. She got medications she never would have been able to afford. Sure looks like a bunch of good from over here, but maybe I'm biased. Maybe we can ask them?

  • Almost everything listed is an executive order. Democrats cannot stop those (other than at the ballot box). Try again. L-A-W. It's a bill, passed by both chambers of Congress, signed by the president. Like the Affordable Care Act, the Inflation Reduction Act? Can you give me a single one? Hell, I even left the doors wide open to give me the fucking omnibus from each year and you couldn't even do that. Know why? Because you have no idea how your government works.

  • Right so you have no idea how our government works. I ask for laws and I get SCOTUS. You view it that way because it is all one big number in your head shifting back and forth, because you have no civics education. It's sad.