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/)A

a lil bee 🐝

@ alilbee @lemmy.world

帖子
2
评论
143
加入于
3 yr. ago

  • All good, friend. I just think this is possible for us to defeat, even at the ballot box. The American people are powerful when they decide to wield their votes for the actual, true betterment of the country and our democracy. I really think we can do this, together.

  • It's both. I've spent plenty of time in Texas and trust me, there are more than plenty voters over the moon about this.

  • Right, which was in the early 1800s. For better or worse, it's been a major component of their role for 90% of the nation's history. You're right though, I erred in using "entire point".

  • They withheld the vote on obama’s nominee in order to get a Republican to install them.

    Yup, because they had control of the Senate. They were voted in. I'm not denying that Republicans are immoral, unethical scumbags with the intent to power game the system, but we have no tools to fix that in our current system other than overwhelming it. It only gets worse the longer we wait.

    There really aren't a lot of other options for the citizenry. You can LARP at revolution or whatever, but I'm not volunteering first and I don't see a lot of others doing so either. I, and a lot of other vulnerable people, are not going to come out on top, so I'll pass on that solution.

    Fact of the matter is, we could have elected Hillary in 2016. Sure, there was Republican meddling and Comey and yada yada, but it was fully within our abilities and we failed. The Supreme Court would look entirely different right now and we would still have medical rights. We did flip the senate, so it was fully in play before and then Mitch would not have been able to block the Garland appointment. Those are concrete outcomes from something that was fully possible for us to prevent. So I'm just not comfortable writing off voting as worthless at this stage, even with the acknowledged difficulties, gerrymandering, etc.

  • Voters stunned.

    Voters pleased with the choice they've made because of their insane religious beliefs. This is the leopard eating the other faces.

  • If they already had ranked choice, I doubt this would be on the ballot.

  • No worries! I'm full of rage on all this nonsense lately too and I've been in that same mode. I'm happy to join with you in November and in the meantime to start to fix this nonsense!

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Give me Donkey Kong Country HD you cowards

  • Not like we aren't feasting right now anyway. Baldur's Gate, Pathfinder, Pillars of Eternity, Skald, Wasteland. I would love a Dragon Age spinoff that went back to its roots though.

  • 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.

  • Anyone played this enough to compare it to something else? I've never seen the movies but I usually don't mind a generic open world rpg-lite if there's plenty to do.

  • 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?

  • I think we had the same experience with mobas! I distinctly remember getting flamed in that first LoL tutorial match and not even understanding why. I'll now stay in my RPG safe space, thank you

  • Eh, I bet it is. Not like layoffs are happening exclusively at Microsoft and the timeline for the security flaw and gov contract would be well before those layoffs were dreamed up. Hell, some of those employees likely weren't even hired yet.