I get it that MS has been doing a lot of nice things for open-source for a while and hasn't been busted with anything definitely evil for a longer time, but pro-society actions only legitimize the existence of monopolistic corporations, it doesn't make them good. I think concentration of power is inherently bad, since you can never be certain that the powerful entity is worthy of all the trust. What kind of enormous benefits should such an entity provide to be worth the risks?

I'm not convinced that BE (Bedrock edition) isn't a Linux-hostile action - possibly embracing (not EEE) Linux in the server market, but fighting it in the personal computer market. It is so convenient to say that "Oh we are just being reasonable with money by not porting BE to Linux and macOS". Meanwhile it is available on Android and iOS and Nintendo-Switch which are arguably similar to Linux and macOS in their underlying tech. That sounds suspicious. I fear that they are leaving everyone the benefit of doubt and taking it super slow with using Minecraft to push people to Win10. Legitimate strategy to get people off of WinXP and others, but not for targeting macOS and Linux. At some point the majority of players will be on BE and I can no longer play with my friends without switching to Win10 (or Android, or iOS, or Switch).

Idk, does it sound paranoid to you?
EDIT: I don't want to get people fearful or agitated. I just want more input to my own fears and thoughts.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I personally groaned when I heard that his update will give more nation-specific content. I feel that this a money sink that I don't particularly enjoy. Because that invites for railroading the game and creating more meta-gaming reasons to prefer one state over another.

I'm personally much more interested of having a simulation-sandbox type of a game and just let it loose from a relatively fixed point in time. If making games was as easy as thinking about them once a week, then I would have spawned a rival to Paradox games from this frustration already.

I also dislike the combat-focus of their games. I understand that this is the legacy of the roots of these types of games from board game heritage and cold-war era mentality (everything for the state), but I'd like to just grow my empire not in territory but social and cultural and scientific and QOL development. Like watching (and helping) a tree grow or something.

But that's just me. Maybe most players are very happy with the games currently. And I sure have spent hundreds of hours enjoying their games. I just want... more.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DorritOh no, female characters where they never existed, again.
Why not an ebony Greta Thunberg as Joan of Arc? Yeah, lets rewrite History completely, facts are for racists.

All forms of art (and sources of history) are always (unintentionally) biased by the background and worldview of those that made them. So if you think that representations of history are more accurate when they happen to match your views about the world, then you're unfortunately wrong.

Seeing as pieces of art are biased and wrong to some degree anyway, why not cater to the players - many players (male and female) enjoy playing with female characters as well.

And when it comes to politically charged messages, please never forget that there is no such thing as "free from politics". Everything is inherently political. Even if we're talking about the present rather than the past and even if you're intimately familiar with the status quo (which we never are), then wanting to maintain the status quo with it's current advantages and drawbacks is also a political stance.

Also avoid the mistake of thinking that keeping the status quo is somehow normal or default or natural. Everything has always been evolving and completely stopping any change to maintain your perception of your nostalgic childhood where things used to be right is unnatural. Things will always change. Let us find the best ways to change things.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestCute graphics. I’d buy it if it wasn’t for this: "The danger of the adventure is emphasized by the possibility of saving only in certain places". Replaying the same segment again and again is not something I enjoy. Dead Cells did it right: you can stop playing anywhere and restart from there.

I suspect that might be enjoyable for some folks, but ideally I'd have a flag or setting for people like you. And also for those that might enjoy it, but just don't have the time for that whole experience.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: devnullThey need to do this with their other games too, even TF2 became a shitshow. Reporting players doesn't do anything, hell half the time then end up rejoining anyway. After 10k+ hours, I gave up when it got to the point of not even attaching demos to reports seemed to matter. VAC and/or Valve simply don't give a damn when it comes to this.

One possibility is that if you can't automate it reliably, then giving a damn costs just too damn much.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I've always wanted to switch to Dota2 from League of Legends since the former supports Linux (a lot). The main barrier was always that all the details of gameplay are non-transferable. Many of the mechanics might be the same, but individual heroes and metagame is vastly different. The solution for me was to just stopped playing LoL altogether. (I did play it via PoL and Lutris for a while).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I recommend Tricky Towers for local multiplayer (couch gaming) especially with friends who are on the casual end of gaming spectrum or completely new to games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I like local coop a lot, but there's way too much focus on violence in this for my taste.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GustyGhostI am coming at this from a fairly isolated position as I do not dip my toes into social politics. All I know is that a figure which I respect has come under attack for what appear to be opinions and feelings.

Respecting someone doesn't mean you ignore it if they do something bad. Also the word "feelings" in these kinds of contexts can imply that there is a battle of between rational people and irrational people going on. With your side always being the rational ones. Whilst people can never be neatly fitted into "rational people" and "irrational people". No-one is truly rational probably. And no-one is entirely irrational either. And generally rather than there being tendencies of the side I don't like in a conflict being less rational, it is enormously more probable that I am being biased in interpreting the situation.

Quoting: GustyGhostSo we have the head of a computer movement stepping down because... commentary on the latest headline case? Which also has nothing to do with computers.

Yeah. Apparently if you make comments about things that upset or offend many people in a topic you're not an expert in, you get held responsible for your actions. What a surprise. You can't say whatever you want even if you're somewhat powerful or significant.

Quoting: GustyGhostDon't be surprised if in the next few days, articles are published detailing: John Smith, CEO/PR Rep/Analyst/whatever of Microsoft has graciously assumed the role of president of the FSF.

Maybe I am a nihilist for seeing a coordinated takedown in all of this but it's not like that kind of thing hasn't happened before.

You might or might not be a nihilist, but that wouldn't be connected to anything you said. If you want to use a trendy word for yourself that fits what you said a bit more, then "conspiracy theorist" is what you're looking for. But it's okay. It's normal for all of us to see patterns where there exist none and jump into conclusions. I just think that we can accomplish great things if we try to notice and avoid it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@monnef, I see you have strong opinions connected to many philosophical concepts. Most people (including me) are too lazy to try to have a respectful conversation discussing and explaining the intricacies of those concepts with each next guy who hasn't consumed enough varied sources (videos, or preferably books). I recommend learning more about the topics of ethics and morality. Otherwise we would spend a lot of energy and time arguing about basic concepts and questions that other, more smart people (philosophers) have already explained and solved. Since you will probably accuse my sources of having a liberal agenda (as almost all scientists and artists and thinking people seem to have), I recommend consuming information from varied sources, but being equally skeptical of all of them. And giving all of them a fair chance of explaining themselves. I don't expect you want to spend a lot of time though, so I will just mention a single video that deals with slightly related topics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ESU5ONMMxs&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&index=29 [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments