BOTW is incredible. Probably my favorite game in terms of design.
However, its dungeons aren’t just weak, they’re barely skirting the definition of dungeon. They’re by far the weakest part of the game. Its story is solid but I think the execution of the story and performances are also weak.
Majora has a gameplay loop that is completely one with its story. Very few games manage to have the core loop truly be informed by their story, which is sublime when it happens.
And it also hits traditional Zelda tropes, such has dungeons with legitimate puzzles that you have to think about.
BOTW would be THE GOAT game if its weak points weren’t so weak compared to the rest of the franchise. They were sacrifices to its new gameplay paradigm. But they really didn’t have to be sacrificed.
Majora, especially if you played it when you were like 12, caused you to feel real anxiety constantly. The dread was always marching your way.
BOTW is simply the opposite. Total freedom and creativity means there is no urgency or anxious story beats propelling you to some catharsis.
Like I said, I think they should wield their expertise towards making alt implementations of Mastodon and Lemmy that support multiple ways of video—paywall or otherwise—because the primary problem with video is always distribution and engagement. Miming YouTube more directly will always fail. It has for two decades now.
I am of the belief we do not need PeerTube at all.
We need a custom Lemmy instance that has video upload baked in, as well as a method of monetizing it for the server/“creator” (who is in a structural sense the moderator of the community to which it was uploaded).
Lemmy is simply better at distributing the information. PeerTube is a red herring and P2P video sucks. We need to make it easy for a server operator to have a mechanism for paying for the bandwidth (take payments and contain distribution to paying users, and account for bandwidth when distributing operating income after costs).
Not "like" Lemmy, FWIW. Lemmy already allows for permissioned users and those servers can still be federated with something like Lemmy World.
If you wanted to do it quick and dirty, you could have a permissioned Lemmy (like other closed Lemmy servers) whereby the permission was say, pay-as-you-go with a Stripe portal. I pay $50 for a year to be a user.
On the other side, this user does not have permission to post content/links (this is also a feature of Lemmy today, whereby a community owner can allow only mods to post content).
Creator-permissioned accounts (ones that can start communities and post) are white-listed effectively by the server operators.
It is with these users that the $50 is shared after server costs are considered.
These users can do the default which is content is posted and closed on the instance. But an "open" community could effectively be the place for free content, and those "freemium" links would be shareable with federated servers more easily.
The real trick is: can you implement it such that I could pay for this server as a user of Lemmy World and not have to create a new account. That's the hardest part of federated, subscription Lemmy-as-YouTube.
I am working on a solution built off of Lemmy that I hope combats the primary issue of cost/delivery for server managers in a partially automated fashion.
Your thesis relies on the premise that it’s possible to elect an incorruptible politician or series of politicians to occupy the power seat required to do a particular thing. But buying politicians will always and forever be the game; so rather than put the scale there for someone to play favorites, it has to be preferable to remove the scale so the temptation cannot be revisited.
If the government gets to pick a winner of an industry, whether it’s on paper a “little guy” or a corporation, then even if for the first few years this is working, you cannot ensure that the next guy won’t use the same tool to pick a different winner.