Quoting: Guest

Quoting: NezchanI'm sorry Liam, but I don't wanna hear about your Nether regions.

I heard he's got warts in there, as well. Gross.

And let's not even talk about the creeper infestation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I like the weighting of the reporters. My first thought was how they're going to prevent brigading, or mass reporting of an individual in order to silence them and get them banned for malicious reasons, often including fake accounts to boost the numbers. If anything, it's the people characterized as "I'm so offended by everything!" (or as we say in reality, those speaking out against toxicity) who are most often the targets of such actions.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm sorry Liam, but I don't wanna hear about your Nether regions.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

[quote=eldaking]

Quoting: TheSHEEEPRTS games were the multiplayer hotness once, a long time ago, which probably won't happen again. But the genre goes a lot beyond competitive multiplayer, and there could be a lot (more) of amazing single-player RTS if people stopped focusing all their efforts in online skirmishes (which they do to the detriment of the single-player, of course).

It's amusing to contrast the call for single player with the hue and cry when Ravenfield definitely stated that no, there would not be multiplayer even though that style of game was almost always done with multi in mind. As it happens, Ravenfield did very well at crafting a good single player experience, so they made the right decision. But wow, were there a lot of people giving up on the game at the time for that reason.

Not that I disagree. More well crafted single player experiences would be more than welcome. Heck, doing that with an almost inherently multiplayer genre like RTS would set them apart, I think. But they'll be a hard sell for sure.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: chrI think this game does a good job of reminding a die-hard victim-defender like me that there is a person on the other side of such interpersonal conflicts and that fear of equalization of social power relations isn't the only possible reasons someone might take the side of the accused in these kinds of interpersonal conflicts (accusations of abuse or assault). Though I still think it is extremely common reason, if not the most common.

I liked one philosopher's approach to this: In the social-emotional sphere be compassionate and supportive towards the victim (assume they are telling the truth), but keep the legal system separate from the compassion (where presumption of innocence defends the accused party). I guess their suggestion still lacks in compassion towards the accused.

All in all I feel that many of us are afraid of the social media (Twitter, Youtube, etc) mobs launching vicious campaigns against someone. Nobody deserves that devastating psychological hell (I've heard several accounts of such experiences on youtube). I think even the worst of the worst scum on earth shouldn't be subjected to mob violence like that. Our imperfect justice systems should suffice.

I think I'm likely to save more of my empathy for the victims, particularly given that one of them was, and continues to be, the primary focus of what may be the largest sustained harassment campaign in internet history [External Link]. It is important to remember that there's a human on the other side yes, but all indications point to him being....not a very good human. Troubled, in pain himself, yes. But also harmful to almost everyone around him and not above using that pain as leverage over others, a fairly common tactic among domestic abusers.

In terms of humanization in the Holowka case, I'm more inclined to go with the personal story Scott Benson tells [External Link], which paints him as human and worthy of some sympathy, but doesn't gloss over the destructive (both to himself and others) parts of his character, over a game that seems to seek to present his stand-in as a largely hapless innocent who's just caught up in events beyond his control.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheRiddickTo be fair guys EPIC killed Linux and Mac support for Rocket League after claims that there wasn't enough player base to keep supporting it. Which leads me to believe the development upkeep cost of that studio is in real bad shape (devs costing way too much).

This is a problem when a gamedev studio get too big, suddenly they go from only needing 20k profit on a fringe platform to keep supporting it, to needing 10million.... THIS IS 100% what happened with Rocket League!

It makes me wonder if the devs are costing too much, or if the board of directors is demanding a certain level of profit to justify buying them in the first place.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Cyril

Quoting: Liam...violent machines powered by Blood...

It's humans, right? :whistle:

The violent machines powered by Blood were the friends we met along the way.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dejaime

Quoting: marcusUh ... besides that being irrelevant in total since Tencent has a minority stake in Epic, you need to compare the same unit and the same accounting category to make any sense. Tencent had a net income of 79.984 billion CN¥, which is roughly 12 billion USD.

Ops, my bad. I'll fix my previous comment. The number is much less scary now, but still significantly bigger than Valve's.

I disagree that Tencent's being a minority stake makes it irrelevant. It does mean that Tencent has minority vote, and Sweeney is officially still the one making final decisions. But that doesn't mean Tencent does not have any interest in EGS succeeding, thus being irrelevant.

It's worth noting that while Tencent is a minority on paper, in practice that 40% (which gives them the right to nominate Directors to Epic's board) and the amount of money they bring to the table means they pretty much set the agenda at shareholder meetings. They're anything but irrelevant, and you can see their influences in the manipulative monetization practices that have been incorporated into Fortnite as time goes by. Make no mistake, they're in the driver's seat no matter what Sweeny tells people (and likely himself).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Okay, I like the idea that the time mechanic isn't limited to how often you can use it. I was expecting another one of those cases where you only get so many tries, or you need to build up a gauge before you can use the power. This seems like a different approach with more freedom to experiment.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestDon't you find it looks better in low resolution ?

If 0:06 - 0:10 of this trailer is anything to go by, the pixel-y filter makes it much harder to tell what's going on. So...no. Not really. It just looks fuzzier.

View this comment - View article - View full comments