Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: Cybolic

Quoting: areamanplaysgame

In the notice it complains how the code now runs on platforms it was never released for

Am I missing something? I thought there was an exception in the DMCA for exactly this - making software more useful to end users.
[..]

I don't know about DMCA, but that exception is definitely valid in the EU. That's how it's legal to "circumvent" DVD and Blu-ray encryption on Linux - if a product cannot be used in the advertised manner on your system, you're allowed to make it work.

Bringing up the decryption for DVD reminds me of all the old shenanigans... like when Debian used to have a non-US repository because it wasn't allowed to install encryption software in the USA... anyone else remember that?

Yup.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: fagnerlnThe problem of Linux communities is that the huge part of it isn't people that cares about freedom of the individuals, is just socialists that want to "fight the burgesses".

Ah, yes, freedom of the individuals. You mean like this:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPOne of those leads to the other, it is unavoidable.
If your focus is on pushing some agenda, your focus is not on doing good writing/worldbuilding/etc. and that will always show.

I'm glad you brought up Star Trek - the worst episodes of all the seasons are those in which the writers forgot about their actual job of being writers and instead went all-in on the preaching - you could say they went against their Prime Directive (ba-dum tshh).

So yes, my problem is with the personal politics of the authors, because when those take the front seat, the writing - and other parts, too - suffer enormously.

I personally am a Lord of the Rings fan. I could argue for hours that it's the greatest work of the 20th century. Well, many would disagree, but almost everyone would agree that Tolkien's worldbuilding was not just excellent, he practically was responsible for the term coming into use. And certainly few would accuse him of neglecting his writing, whether they actually like his writing style or not.

But Tolkien clearly had several agendas going in LoTR. For instance, it's no co-incidence that the people who started Greenpeace all had their copies of LoTR when they set off in the original Greenpeace boat. And it's generally agreed that one aspect of LoTR was a reaction against the whole of Modernism, both literary and cultural and economic--right back to Sir Isaac Newton! Only a fool would consider LoTR to have some kind of journalistic neutrality. And in fact, as has been argued about journalism itself, neutrality in writing isn't really possible--every writer, and every piece of writing, is standing somewhere.

I think there's an irony here. You're fine with really blatantly overt politics. But, despite saying that what bugs you about the less-overt political writing is its deception, what you really don't like is its failure to deceive adequately. What you want is writing whose political leanings are sufficiently organically worked into the whole that you are in fact deceived and fail to notice what they are doing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: elistoAlso WTF is burgesses ?

I wondered about that, too, but now I have this urge to fight it :angry::angry:

There was a guy named Steve Burgess used to have a show on CBC. Maybe that's who they mean?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: fagnerlnThe problem of Linux communities is that the huge part of it isn't people that cares about freedom of the individuals, is just socialists that want to "fight the burgesses".

You say that like it's a bad thing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: Purple Library Guy[
Presumably when you're at sea you can get your swarm of tame lox to attack in a vicious piranha-style feeding frenzy, each nasty little bite part-smoking the opponent while it's still alive, and . . .
No?

More importantly, the existence of lox, tame or otherwise, surely implies the ability to make bagels and cream cheese. Uhm, manly Viking bagels and cream cheese, of course.

Valheims interpretation of lox is bit different. They're large furry land creatures

Smoked/brined salmon are large furry land creatures?! Well, I suppose it's already weird for them to be alive at all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WorMzy

Quoting: g000hI just had a little squint at the spoilers and noticed "Tamed creatures" are in the game. I dislike the idea of taming and using creatures within games (although obviously other people do like that feature).

Wondering how "important" tamed creatures are in the game - Do you have to use them (e.g. Like you cannot get anywhere without dinosaur-taming in ARK) or is it just a nice to have, but not needed, "animal familiar" or similar?

With boars at least, taming them means they don't attack you and can breed with other tamed boars to produce piglets (so long as you feed them carrots). The only purpose for this is, as Ehvis says, is to use them as a food source.

I've never encountered wolves, or lox, but I imagine tamed wolves attack enemies.

Presumably when you're at sea you can get your swarm of tame lox to attack in a vicious piranha-style feeding frenzy, each nasty little bite part-smoking the opponent while it's still alive, and . . .
No?

More importantly, the existence of lox, tame or otherwise, surely implies the ability to make bagels and cream cheese. Uhm, manly Viking bagels and cream cheese, of course.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Yay! Fire, crime and diseases!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Aw, that's a pity. I mean, this isn't the kind of game I'd play, but it seemed like such a nice idea and like it has a lot of heart, so I've been hoping for it to do well. But while style is great, it has to be fun to like, play the game. It'll be sad if it gets dragged down by skimping the basics.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Greed is definitely an enemy to the Norse. Not that you're not supposed to get loot--you most certainly are. Grab all the goodies from those soft Southerners--if they really wanted to keep it they'd defend it better.
But once you have it, you're supposed to be generous, open-handed, a true ring-giver, not a miser who accumulates and hoards it.

(In a weird way I think the Norse (and Anglo-Saxons) kind of realized the issue of too much inequality harming the economy and society. Ultimately the prescribed remedy (open-handed lords who spread the wealth, keeping at least the thane class pretty well off and the economy going) didn't really do enough, and the more open and relatively (only relatively) egalitarian Viking culture gave way to big time kings and something more like mainstream European feudalism. But they tried.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments