loobkoob

I think a lot of people on lemmy use lemmy/kbin/the threadiverse interchangeably. But yeah, I use kbin, too.

I definitely find myself being much, much more active on Discord since the whole reddit thing went down. It has its issues, and it’s not exactly a 1:1 substitution for thread-based forums, but I enjoy the greater sense of community that comes with Discord.

The idea that non-game software doesn’t involve creativity or spit balling or iteration is ridiculous. But from what I’ve seen it does involve a lot more waiting for consensus and thinking too far down the road, which are political activities aimed at being right (as measured by vice presidents) rather than productive activities aimed at getting something done or making something cool (as measured by your own name in credits of a completed work offered to the public).

I think the key difference is what the goal is. With non-game software, there’s usually a goal of we want something that achieves X - let’s create, spit-ball and iterate until we achieve that. X is a measurable outcome - it requires some creativity, spitballing and iteration, but it’s easy to see if/when you’ve succeeded.

With games, things are a lot more subjective. The goal is create, spitball and iterate until you have something that people find enjoyable. You just keep going until you recognise that you’ve got something worthwhile. It’s a “you’ll know it when you see it” situation, rather than something you can track your progress towards. Sometimes you can follow a formula/template and iterate on another games’ mechanics/systems and people will like it; sometimes you can do that and people will call it a soulless copycat instead. Sometimes games are technically good but just don’t feel enjoyable; sometimes they’re enjoyable despite any technical issues they might have.

Amazon and Google’s issues stemmed from treating game development like any other software development.

I dislike reddit as much as the next scorned ex-redditor, but I can’t really blame them here, regardless of what state reddit is in. if things are going downhill, obviously selling while they can makes sense. And if things are looking good, why not sell now anyway and have some actual money to spend, rather than just holding onto the Monopoly money in case it’s worth more later? It’s still more than enough money for them to be able to live comfortably for the rest of their lives.

There certainly was some actual “ethics in video game journalism” discussion early on that I felt was legitimate, but that got drowned out pretty quickly by the misogynists (which, from what I gather, was the entire point - it seems the misogynists started the whole thing and used the “ethics in game journalism” thing as a front to try to legitimise their agenda).

I think the discussion about the personal relationships game journalists have with developers in general was a reasonable one to have. It unfortunately ended up just laser focusing on Zoe Quinn supposedly trading sex for good reviews, which was untrue, sexist and resulted in nasty personal attacks. But I think it was worth at least examining the fact that game journalists and game developers often have close relationships and move in the same circles, and that game journalism can often be a stepping stone to game development. Those are absolutely things that could influence someone’s reviews or articles, consciously or subconsciously.

And another conversation worth having was the fact that gaming outlets like IGN were/are funded by adverts from gaming companies. It makes sense, of course - the Venn diagram of IGN’s (or other gaming outlets’) readers and gaming companies’ target audience is almost a perfect circle, which makes the ad space valuable to the gaming companies. And because it’s valuable to gaming companies, it’s better for the outlets to sell the ad space to them for more money than to sell it to generic advertising platforms. But it does mean it seems valid to ask whether the outlets giving bad reviews or writing critical articles might cause their advertisers to pull out, and therefore they might avoid being too critical.

Now I don’t think the games industry is corrupt or running on cronyism, personally. And I certainly don’t believe it’s all run by a shadowy cabal of woke libruls who are trying to force black people, women (and worse, gasp black women shudder) into games. But I do feel it was worth asking about the relationships between journalists, developers, publishers and review outlets - and honestly, those are the kinds of things that both game journalists and people who read game journalism should constantly be re-evaluating. It’s always good to be aware of potential biases and influences.

The fact that the whole thing almost immediately got twisted into misogyny, death threats and a general hate campaign was both disappointing and horrifying. And the fact that it led to the alt-right, and that you can trace a line from it to Brexit and to Donald Trump becoming US president, is even worse.

Part of me hopes none of them are dumb enough to fall for this. Part of me hopes redditors somehow end up as the majority owners of Reddit and either a) return it to being a good website or b) wreak absolute havoc.

Not that your suggestion is necessarily bad in general, but I don’t really think it’s necessary when it comes to Factorio. I think it should be clear from playing the demo whether 100+ more hours of that seems worth the asking price for someone. It’s probably the most representative demo I’ve ever played; the full game is just the demo but more. There are no surprises down the line. There are no random pivots to other genres, or the game trying to stick its fingers in too many pies. There’s no narrative to screw up. There’s no “oh, they clearly just spent all their time polishing the first hour of the game and the rest of it is a technical mess”. It’s the same gameplay loop from the demo for another 50 hours until you “win”.

… and then another 50 hours after that when you decide to optimise things. And then another 100 hours when you decide to make a train-themed base. And then another 700 hours when you discover some of the mods that exist…

:(

If one of the people in a relationship is the problem then both (or all) people need to work together to solve it. That means communicating about the problem without being confrontational, working together to find a solution or compromise, etc. Part of this requires a change in mindset: don't think "you are the problem", think "this aspect of you is the problem". It has to be a team effort.

A phrase that's always stuck with me is "it's not me versus you; it's me and you versus the problem".

So a few things:

• sorry that’s been happening to you, it must suck
• the Reddit admin’s response doesn’t seem great
• this isn’t a relevant place to be posting this
• your tone in the DMs with the admin and in the comments comes off as overly panicked and alarmist. It’s going to be hard to win anyone over like that. Take some time, write it up with a more calm and informative tone, add proper context, etc.
• you’re not going to get your story out there by spamming it in random, inappropriate fediverse communities. If you’ve got solid evidence, email a journalist at a place like The Verge or Ars Technica about it. Just don’t expect them to care if you don’t have evidence - right now, it just mostly reads as “user upset that Reddit admin didn’t ban other user”. Yes, it sucks, but it largely just reads as a social media drama piece at the moment, and not anything with any real substance to it.
• or just report it directly to law enforcement

At least public transit is an ongoing service. I’m far less opposed to subscriptions when I’m actually being provided with something for them.

Car manufacturers trying to charge subscriptions for features in the car you own feels like racketeering. They’re not providing an ongoing service, they’re asking me to keep paying them to not remove a feature.

Communism does work on a communal level - it’s no coincidence they’re rooted in the same word - but it absolutely needs a level of accountability at the top that can only come from actually knowing the people they’re responsible for. Once you get beyond a couple of hundred people in a community at most, and it stops being an “everyone knows everyone” kind of thing, communism is just far too susceptible to corruption.

My gaming group takes a somewhat communist approach to starting out in survival games - Minecraft, ARK, etc - and it works well. No-one’s going to destroy any friendships over half a stack of stone and two bits of cooked food so corruption isn’t an issue. Plus it’s more efficient for us to work together at that point rather than all try to individually collect everything we need. Sure, it’s just video games, but it shows the system can work and have benefits. It just doesn’t scale up at all.

I know multiple queer people who use “faggot” in a way that lets them take ownership of the word rather than allow it to be a slur. But importantly, there’s context to them saying it that makes it clear it’s not a slur. It’ll be among friends who know them well enough, or on dating profiles/kink websites where it’s abundantly clear from how they use it and everything else they’ve written that it’s them reclaiming the word.

Your comment doesn’t have that context. You’re an anonymous stranger in a thread filled with anonymous strangers, and there’s nothing about your comment that implies you’re not using the word as a slur. In fact, the way you used it was as a pejorative. It comes off as offensive and inappropriate.

If a single one of those niche subreddits disappears, the site will be fine. So, sure, you can argue they’re individually irrelevant to Reddit as a platform, I guess. But Reddit having a vast collection of niche subreddits is what keeps the platform alive. Do you think people would be nearly as engaged in the long term if it was only world news, politics and memes? Those broad categories are going to have the widest appeal but they’re not what a lot of people stay for. They stay so they can discuss their favourite TV show, the specific game they’re playing right now, the niche hobby they’re interested in, the particular celebrity they’re weirdly obsessed with, that incredibly specific kind of porn that gets them off.

And there’s a reason a lot of people add “reddit” to the end of their Google searches - there are all kinds of niche subreddits with information they’re looking for about a particular issue they’re having right now. If I’m having issues with my electric garage door, having a high-quality, well-maintained forum dedicated to the subject - filled with experts and knowledgeable enthusiasts - is exactly what I need, and Reddit had that.

Memes might have a broader appeal and be more monetisable right now, but losing all the niche subfora is something that will hurt Reddit in the long term.

I can only assume from this comment that you’re American. In countries with nationalised healthcare, our medical professionals don’t profit at all from selling medication; they prescribe medication because it is what their patients need. America might have a profit-driven healthcare system but don’t assume that every country does.

The factory must grow!

Like I said, I’ve been actively boycotting Blizzard for years now; I’m not sure why you think I’d want to “slop on their dick”. But yes, if a game is fine on a technical level and mediocre in every other sense, why wouldn’t it be a 5/10? A game that runs properly and is otherwise unnoteworthy is probably already better than the average game out there. There’s a lot of shovelware.

There’s a reason review outlets like IGN rarely give scores below 5/10 - it’s that almost any AA or AAA studio is going to be competent enough to get their game to run and have something to it. Even Redfall is a 5/10 on Metacritic. 5/10 games aren’t generally worth your time, but that’s only because there are so many 7+/10 games competing for your time/attention.

Even though I have no love for Blizzard as a company, and have never played Overwatch 2, I refuse to believe it’s in the bottom half of all games ever. A lot of the grievances I’ve seen about it seem completely justified, but it’s not a game that’s truly awful. It’s good on a technical level. It has good art direction. The characters are unique and identifiable, even to people who’ve never played Overwatch. I get that people don’t like the balance, they don’t like Blizzard’s money-grabbing, they don’t like the change to 5v5(?), and they don’t like whatever else people are complaining about. But that doesn’t make it the worst game on Steam, and it doesn’t make every single aspect of it bad.

This is stupid. I have no love for Overwatch or Blizzard - I’ve been boycotting them for years, in fact. But there are far, far worse games on Steam than OW2. The fact that, to my knowledge, it runs properly, doesn’t have crypto miners built into it, and isn’t just made from stolen assets already puts it at like a 5/10 at minimum.

I’m all for consumers standing up for themselves and being critical or poor products, but I really wish people wouldn’t get caught up in these hate bandwagons.

@itsdavetho

You have 1680 reputation points, at least when I view your profile via kbin. kbin does show reputation totals, unlike Lemmy.