Quoting: ZekThePenguinI would be much more excited about an actual Linux anime GAME. Tired of the many visual novels.

As has been mentioned, the Sunrider ones ("Mask of Arcadius" and "Liberation Day" ) are games. There is a sort of visual-novel-like thing happening that strings stuff together, but most of your time is in quite difficult turn-based space battles, and you control a squadron of ships which you get to upgrade in quite varied ways.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: LeopardSo , i'm not a VN gamer guy but i tried that free one ( Sunrider ) to see how it is sexual by Valve means.

So far , there is 0 sexual drawings etc. What was the deal then?

The free version probably doesn't have anything. the other 2 have 18+ patches you can download from the official site.

Just to be clear, the patches are also free. I personally really quite like Sunrider; the battle tactics are surprisingly interesting (considering I really don't think the engine is meant for that kind of thing). It's the kind of game where you can see what seems to you the obvious way to do things and then find on internet chatter that other people are successfully doing it quite differently.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I've been back to Civ: Beyond Earth for a bit. And, well, I like it, but it's no Alpha Centauri. If someone took Alpha C, updated the graphics a little, brought the controls into the modern era (mouse wheel zoom and such) and otherwise maybe made little modern-finish changes to the UI to be more convenient, made it work perfectly on current Linux, and made no other changes, I would be all "Shut up and take my money". It would still be the best SF 4X-on-the-planet game around.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPIf I actually did go out of my way to defend the poor and downtrodden Panterra people, and believe I am doing good, I would be a do-gooder.
Because that would only lead to the Panterra people never learning to defend themselves and always require someone to do it for them, it would actually be a bad result.

If you're right, that's a problem. And it's a widespread claim; give a man a fish, yadda yadda. This is the ostensible rationale, for instance, behind many pushes to reduce, eliminate, or aggressively micromanage social programs. There is however a lot of controversy over how often it is actually true. Much data suggests, for instance, that cutting social programs mainly leads not to increased self-reliance but to poverty and suffering.
Whoever's right, the problem is not the intention to do good, but the possiblity that the means chosen to do it may be mistaken.

Mind you, I would tend to agree that a lot of "aid" organizations supposedly helping people in third world countries end up doing little or no good and often a great deal of harm, and so the people well meaningly supporting them are making mistakes. However, that has relatively little to do with the well-meaning people either donating small amounts of money or staffing the organizations at the lower levels. Left to themselves, they might do quite a bit of good. However, the design of these organizations' programs tends to be shaped by their major sources of money, which tend to be either large corporations or first-world governments, both of which have as their main objective not doing good but making sure the third world countries remain good places for foreign investors to extract profits from. So the "aid" is in fact an investment meant to shape the third-world society to its own disadvantage. In short, the problem is not the do-gooders, but the do-badders, and it is not a problem of unintended consequences but of intended ones.

Good people doing things with good intentions can create bad results. But it's less common than many believe. And the Adam Smith myth of bad people doing things with bad intentions creating good results thanks to the magic of the market can happen too, but that is also far less common than many believe. In fact, good intentions generally create good results, and bad intentions usually create bad ones. The problem is that a lot of the most powerful people have bad intentions, and that can swamp the effects of other actors doing smaller things. Being told that it's good intentions causing the problems tends to help us miss the bad intentions that are actually doing so.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI always love offensive games like that for the sweet butthurt they cause in all the hypocrites and do-gooders [External Link].

I've noticed that it's currently considered much more of a social faux pas to be a do-gooder than a do-badder.

So did I.
A good development, for once.
I'd much rather have more people that are unfriendly and appear dickish, but are honest, than those who "mean well" but only cause more harm.

Most people who are unfriendly and appear dickish aren't actually honest, though. You're claiming a correlation that doesn't exist. Look at the whole US establishment: A bunch of dickish bastards who do enormous harm and spout arrogant violent crap all the time, and who are also collectively as lying and dishonest as the day is long. Apparent niceness has long been displaced as the main form of dishonesty. Rather, the most common approach nowadays is offensiveness purporting to "call a spade a spade" or whatever as a smokescreen for self-serving nonsense.

Also, most people don't just appear dickish. Rather, people who appear dickish very often do actual bad things. Your position is actually kind of naive--when I say "do-badder" you assume that of course there can't be any such thing as an actual bad person who does anything bad, so I must be talking about people who just say shit. No, I'm saying literally, in our society doing actual harm may carry some social stigma (unless you do a LOT of harm, like crash the economy with derivatives trading, then you're a pillar of the community), but it's considered much worse to be some kind of idealist who wants to do good things. We fear the idea that doing good might be possible, I think.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestTo be honest, the internet is full of people complaining 24/7 about people getting offended, it's so boring...

You have to understand, they get very offended by people being offended. People being offended is a trigger for them. We have to make allowances . . .

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI always love offensive games like that for the sweet butthurt they cause in all the hypocrites and do-gooders [External Link].

I've noticed that it's currently considered much more of a social faux pas to be a do-gooder than a do-badder.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I've been looking for something that I can play for a few minutes in between doing other things. Thing is, most of my games aren't really suited to that--like Stellaris, for instance: Once you're in, it's for a good long time. This looks like just the sort of pause-to-relax-for-a-minute thingie I'm looking for.

So, um, does Dean Martin ever show up?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Huh. So let's see . . . if Google ever gets Android stuff working on Chromebooks, that would give you Steam games via link on Chromebooks as a side effect.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManWish it was more than just a shooter. With visuals like that, there should be opportunities to explore and enjoy the scenery.

I suppose for beautiful space settings with time to enjoy the scenery we've got Helium Rain.

View this comment - View article - View full comments