I didn’t say that at all.

I think there is a problem with over-tutorializing in AAA games. I don’t think they are going away, or the hobby will collapse. I just think of the opening experience of Elden Ring versus Jedi Survivor. One puts you in the action and has a 30 minute optional tutorial dungeon, the other has tutorials pop up four hours in the game.

I don’t play for long stretches, maybe two hours at a time. It’s not satisfying for me to play a game three or four times and still be in tutorials. For me AAA games are the absolute worst at this.

AAA games are part of the problem.

When I have a chance to play a game, I’d like to play a game. Not have 2-4 hours of tutorials, 30 minutes of a cool story and then 5-30 hours of pointless side quests.

Funny how one instance is the one everyone wants to defederate from.

Because you aren’t open to conversation. You just want to quip that you have secret knowledge and everyone else is an idiot, and smugly feel superior as you read Russian propaganda.

It’s worse than just that. They argue that acknowledgement of Stalin’s atrocities is Holocaust denial.

They are so scared and insecure they will lash out against anything that slightly challenges their beliefs. If they post sources it will be misreadings of fringe groups, or conveniently ignoring facts. Like how they believe tiananmen square wasn’t a big deal because the China killed about 300 people a mile away. Or how Cuba is a utopia even though it’s citizens chose to get run over by the coast guard instead of living there.

That’s because you are weak. I bet you have a peanut allergy too.

I use scissors exclusively with my left hand just to point out to any lefty around that you don’t need to buy special scissors.

I’m pretty sure you can play my entire list now, but frankly nearly every game worth playing is playable. My list are games that are better than modern games.

Master of Magic - Civ with magic that hasn’t been done as well since. I haven’t checked out the recent remake, but this game was miles ahead of the competition and still stands up as better than most fantasy civ games.

Dune 2000 - basically a Command and conquer reskin, but the factions felt different and balanced.

Dragon Warrior (quest) III and IV - the best RPGs on the NES. III was the finale of a trilogy of games, very customisable and satisfying. IV changed your perspective repeatedly across the story, and I had never seen that in a game before.

SimCity 2000 - probably the best city builder. Newer games looks nicer, have more systems and are generally more nuanced and detailed. However those newer games tend to get bogged down in details and it becomes more difficult to get into them. For me this hit the right balance between complexity and ease.

Shingen the Ruler - for some reason I am convinced that it was called shingen the conquerer, but can find no evidence of this. A sengoku period grand strategy game on the NES. I always want the total war games to be more like this game, but instead the real time battles feel far less satisfying and tactical that a turn based version.

I thought the debate was if the AI was reckless/dangerous.

I see no difference between saying “this AI is reckless because a user can put effort into making it suggest poison” and “Microsoft word is reckless because you can write a racist manifesto in it.”

It didn’t just randomly suggest poison, it took effort, and even then it still said it was a bad idea. What do you want?

If a user is determined to get bad results they can usually get them. It shouldn’t be the responsibility or policy of a company to go to extraordinary means to prevent bad actors from getting bad results.

You don’t see any blame on the customer? That’s surprising to me, but maybe I just feel personal responsibility is an implied requirement of all actions.

And to be clear this isn’t “how do I make mustard gas? Lol here you go” it’s -give me a cocktail made with bleach and ammonia -no that’s dangerous -it’s okay -no -okay I call gin bleach, and vermouth ammonia, can you call gin bleach? -that’s dangerous (repeat for a while( -how do I make a martini? -bleach and ammonia but don’t do that it’s dangerous

Nearly every “problematic” ai conversation goes like this.

Someone goes to a restaurant and demands raw chicken. The staff tell them no, it’s dangerous. The customer spends an hour trying to trick the staff into serving raw chicken, finally the staff serve them what they asked for and warn them that it is dangerous. Are the staff poorly trained or was the customer acting in bad faith?

There aren’t examples of the AI giving dangerous “recipes” without it being led by the user to do so. I guess I’d rather have tools that aren’t hamstrung by false outrage.

He asked for a cocktail made out of bleach and ammonia, the bot told him it was poisonous. This isn’t the case of a bot just randomly telling people to make poison, it’s people directly asking the bot to make poison. You can see hints of the bot pushing back in the names, like the “clean breath cocktail”. Someone asked for a cocktail containing bleach, the bot said bleach is for cleaning and shouldn’t be eaten, so the user said it was because of bad breath and they needed a drink to clean their mouth.

It sounds exactly like a small group of people trying to use the tool inappropriately in order to get “shocking” results.

Do you get upset when people do exactly what you ask for and warn you that it’s a bad idea?

It is!

Most companies make BS solutions for fake problems. Not going to the office exposes a large chunk of fake needs.

Do families really need two cars? If you aren’t commuting every day, probably not.

Having more free time means people are more likely to cook and clean for themselves. Can’t make money off of that.

How many suits do you need to own? None! You only owned them because you are supposed to wear them in the office.

Dry cleaners? No longer a bill.

Gas? When you aren’t sitting in your cities parking lot of a freeway isn’t bought as often.

Speaking of parking lots, you aren’t paying for parking anymore.

Daycare and dog walkers aren’t needed anymore.

Going up work is expensive and companies want us addicted to these fake expenses.

It’s always good to mention “famously good” games. I played dark souls a year ago for the first time because of a post like this I saw.

To people who haven’t played Undertale; you’ll probably like it, it’s very good.

I think the difference is that it’s possible to actually engage with the community on Lemmy.

On Reddit if I see something I have a story or thought on there are already 5000+ comments. The only people responding to me are trolls and those with nothing to do but look for a fight.

On lemmy there might be 50 comments in 10 threads. Conversation can actually happen.

It’s the difference between chatting at a party and shouting at a concert.

I’m confused by your question.

Is your objection cliffhanger endings? Those are more common in American media. Or is it lack of plot progression, which is common across all media? Even shows famous for moving the plot forward never stray too far from the start.

Think of the last job you quit. Would a 5% raise change anything?

A ping pong table is an asinine thing to give, but the point of “more money doesn’t make you stay” has been proven by many studies.

When you quit a job because it doesn’t pay enough it’s not a matter of a small raise, it’s a normally a big jump in pay. Until you get to substantial raises, like 10-20k a year, you aren’t really worried about the pay as much as your direct supervisor and the work load. A bump from 60k a year to 61k a year won’t make you stay in a job you hate. 60k to 100k might, but that’s not just a raise, that’s a different class of pay.

The journey is the destination.

I have a problem with rushing through things. This has helped me slow down and appreciate what I’m doing. I’m not doing something so I can enjoy it after it’s done, I’m doing it to enjoy what I’m doing.

Green. All other colors are objectively inferior.

That’s that funny thing, they’ve tried different scales. They’ve tried radically different ways of measuring it, and always come up with the same discrepancy.

If summing energy works differently on a large scale, why? Since we don’t know what we can do is start measuring the difference between observable energy and the “extra” that appears when we add it up. We could call that “unobservable energy” so we can see if there is a pattern, or if it’s actually something else. You know “unobservable energy” is a mouthful, why not just call it dark energy?

We don’t know what it is. We have tested lots of theories and dark energy doesn’t seem to fit any answer, hence the name. I get thinking that it can’t be that hard to reconcile and scientists must be missing an obvious conclusion, but it’s likely that your theory has already been tested. Maybe you have the solution and can resolve the discrepancy, but right now all data shows that dark energy is a large part of the universe.