I hate how they will put in clear connections

I play daily and I don’t recall ever seeing this. The one caveat is that they’ll do something like, on the first line, the four boxes will be fresh, prince, bel, air. But then it’s just obvious that is not what they meant.

But that being said, it’s a tough game. I only have an 85% win rate. Often words I’ve never heard of and plenty of the purple groups I can’t figure out even after I’ve eliminated all the other groups.

This is truly lowest of the low type of scum behavior.

I get being upset about it. But, ffs, get some perspective.

Be careful judging because there will be plenty of people here who will think “anyone still playing the game is an idiot.”

But people will buy alcohol because they are addicted. It’s a harmful substance, that the producers know is harmful, especially to addicts, and sell the highly addictive substance anyway. It’s profiting from manipulating weaknesses in human psychology, just like the games are. If no one bought it, people would stop producing it. So simply extending your logic, buying alcohol is self-centered and contributing to alcoholism.

I’m not going to avoid enjoying myself because you say other people can’t control themselves. That’s like telling someone to not drink alcohol because some people suffer from addiction, and alcohol companies advertise.

Im not a big fan of pay to win, but I see no problem with micro transactions for cosmetic stuff. If people are dumb and want to spend their money on that, more power to them, especially if I benefit from it.

Just ditch the idea that you need any of those things. You don’t. From a personal gaming perspective, these have been great for me because I get to play all of these games for free because other people are paying for it for me.

I understand the joy comes from playing the game itself, not the loot.

This is a life lesson as well. You don’t need any of the flashy shit. Trying to avoid it is a losing battle, better to just understand it.

Sure, and if you remove games like Fortnite, it would skew the numbers the other way. It strikes me as an arbitrary distinction.

But, I think what you point out is important, because based on the above replies it seems most people are interpreting this as their desire to play rpg games is what they are saying is more popular, when what is likely really happening is that there are just a lot of casual gamers playing CC type games.

That’s basically what happened to me. I still love pvp games, I just don’t have the time. It’s much more conducive to my lifestyle to play a game I can just pause at any moment and switch to something I need to do.

Plenty of times I agree. However, no other game in the casino is one so heavily reliant on skill, and if you are skilled in it, it can pay off.

I generally agree, but poker is an exception where, if skilled enough, you can actually make money.

When I was leaving college a quarter of a century ago I briefly considered going into game dev…even back then everyone said it was low paid and gruelling work, so I passed.

It’s shocking that people still go into it.

If you whine about the pay increase, but pay it anyway (or continue to pay it now)…the feedback you’re giving is that it’s actually worth that price to you, and your words are effectively meaningless.

Wait, is this is a joke? While I agree there is a lot of “get gud,” the bulk of the rest of it is dumb memes, and beyond that it’s people whining about every little thing. The whiners far out number any shills.

I can’t think of many things I care less about than fictional things being reworked. They’re fiction. “There has to be this truth to this fiction!” is something that will never keep me awake at night and is completely foreign to me. It’s like the same shit when people started whining that the ghost busters are girls, and that Ariel can’t be black. is it entertaining, is the only question I care about.

And don’t get me wrong, I get upset when I watch my sports teams so I’m not, by any stretch of the imagination, above getting upset over stupid shit. Lol

I’m firmly in the wait for reviews and price drop of any new game. But anno 1800 was an amazing game, so I do have high hopes for this.

I have kids and sometimes it’s important thing from a doctor/school/whatever that I want to get.

However, I’m lucky that my cell phone area code is nowhere near where I live, so if I see an area code near my phones area code, I know it’s almost certainly spam. If I get a call from near where I live, its almost certainly legitimate.

This is one long strawmen: you’re generalizing my argument for this single situation to every situation.

You’re basically accusing me of doing what you’re doing: thinking in black and white. In my case if I think that ruining his life here with severe punishment is wrong, it must always be wrong.

Ask yourself this. Is there anyone who did something very stupid in HS that turned out to be a good adult without facing severe consequences for their actions? I can think of a few.

Common or not, they did not make the argument. You presumed a position and then used that made up position to launch an ad hominem.

A kid was arrested, but released pending further investigation, so I’m hard pressed to believe there is no punishment for this. But we’re talking about teenagers here, the fact that he could be punished is there, but was not given serious consideration if any at all…because he isn’t a fully mature adult. So what would a more serious punishment do?

This is something probably solved with education rather than more punishment.

The human mind doesn’t even really fully mature until your mid 20s. A 15 year old still has a good full decade until full maturity, and they are notorious for making impulsive decisions without realizing the consequences of their actions.

What he did was wrong and he deserves punishment, but ruining his life too for being a dumb teenager does nothing for the unimaginable harm caused to this girl, it just makes more victims.

I don’t know what the right answer is, but I can tell you the wrong answer is to ruin a teenagers life over a stupid act when that isn’t going to solve anything.

Ultimately I’m not sure where I fall on this issue, but the fact that you just mindlessly claimed that this person wants to see tits and clits, when they said nothing of the sort, just exposes how fully you realize you can’t defend an actual position.

And they’ll find out very soon that they need devs when they actually try to test something and nothing works.

Anyone who claims llms are a nothingburger is frankly wrong,

Exactly. When someone says that it either indicates to me that they ignorant (like they aren’t a programmer or haven’t used it) or they are a programmer who has used it, but are not good at all at integrating new tools into their development process.

Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Yup. The problem I see now is that every mistake an ai makes is parroted over and over here and held up as an example of why the tech is garbage. But it’s cherry picking. Yes, they make mistakes, I often scratch my head at the ai results from Google and know to double check it. But the number of times it has pointed me in the right direction way faster than search results has shown to me already how useful it is.

Due to confusing business domain terms, we often name variables the form of XY and YX.

One time copilot autogenerated about two hundred lines of a class that was like. XY; YX; XXY; XYX; XYXY; … XXYYXYXYYYXYXYYXY;

It was pretty hilarious.

But that being said, it’s a great tool that has definitely proven to worth the cost…but like with a co-op, you have to check it’s work.

I’m not ordering pizza from a restaurant if I’ve eaten 12 pizzas before and never liked any of them.

I was very intentional with my language, and pointed out that we know pretty much nothing about the game, so claiming you know you won’t like it is h reasonable. This is nothing like having a pizza, not liking it, and then not getting that same pizza again. This is like not liking the pizza at one store, it’s much closer to saying you don’t like the pizza in one store, so you know you won’t like it in another. Still imperfect because it would be closer saying you’ve never had a pizza you like, so you won’t like the pizza in a new store, which is more reasonable because you have a lot of information about that pizza.

But we have virtually nothing about this game.

It’s been many years, maybe even decades, since I liked a straight up turn-based single player RPG. I seriously can’t think of one that has sucked me in since FFX. I even tried Divinity Original Sin 2 after so much hype and good reviews from my friends. But I just didn’t like it.

However, Baldur’s Gate 3 sucked me in. According to steam, approaching 100 hours of playtime (although I’m sure there is a good chunk of time where I just walked away with the PC with it “paused.”)

I’m not saying you’ll like the game, I have no idea. But to already be convinced that you won’t like it based on pretty much the nothing we’ve got it terribly presumptuous.

Please do tell me how if I wrote the whole definition there of “determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone” instead of shortening it to just “determine quality” it would make my entire point completely invalid.

You see that “or” in the definition? The word I already pointed out to you in the previous post? It does not mean “the one thing from this list that I get to pick because it makes me not wrong” it means “any of these things.” I can’t believe someone insulting me as “not having the reading comprehension of a third grader” needs this explained. It’s honestly hilarious. Although, can we appreciate for a second that you first said it was “subtle” but now are trying to argue that “it so obvious even a third grader would figure it out.” lmao. This is classic. Please keep it up.

Do you see how absurdly idiotic you’re being?

If I’m being absurdly idiotic, god help us because no way in hell we’re going to be able to come up with a term describe your stupidity. You’re not giving us nearly enough space to reach the depths of your stupidity if the fact that I understand what “or” means makes me “absurdly idiotic.” lol

I literally gave you a definition that says a review means to determine quality

“Or” do you really not know what that word means? Do you really not realize that when you cherry pick one part of a definition that it doesn’t mean none of the others apply?

Are.you really such an idiot that you don’t know this? Or is it just that you’re willing to be completely dishonest in defense of your ego?

And of course you don’t address the fact that I called out your reframing. Stupid and dishonest. Lol

you’ll realise that it is impossible to determine the quality of a video game in a purely objective way.

The only subtle thing here is the subtle change in your wording from simple “review” to “determine the quality.” I agree with you there, as whether you think something is good or bad is subjective.

But it appears you realize Im right, which is why you’re trying to reframe it. Why is it hard for you to admit you were wrong? It’s okay, no one is perfect.

There’s nothing in the definition of review that requires it to be subjective. It’s shocking that you didn’t even stop to look it up to first figure out if this is accurate.

Are you arguing that alpha testing is not considered in house testing? It’s literally the definition.

The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase of software testing (alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet, used as the number 1). In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.[1][2]

Alpha software is not thoroughly tested by the developer before it is released to customers. Alpha software may contain serious errors, and any resulting instability could cause crashes or data loss.[3] Alpha software may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version.[4] In general, external availability of alpha software is uncommon for proprietary software, while open source software often has publicly available alpha versions. The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature-complete. A beta test is carried out following acceptance testing at the supplier’s site (the alpha test) and immediately before the general release of the software as a product.[5]Wikipedia link

I’m sure parts of the game are well polished. I’m sure some only release a small part of the game for advertising reasons. They are doing something different here maybe. I don’t really know. But this is such a non-issue that the outrage over it is laughable. Not surprising, at all, however, considering I’ve been a gamer all my life and I know how unreasonable we can be.

es dumb consumers exist, but that isn’t a free pass for corporate exploitation or false advertising.

Except I didn’t see where they advertised that people were going to be able to join the alpha with no restrictions, and I don’t see this as “exploitation” at all. People want to play these games first. I don’t get why, but they do. And they are being given that opportunity.

There’s nothing in this wording that implies anything more than “don’t negatively review us”

It’s says subjective negative reviews. it seems if you say “It kept crashing” or “this feature wasn’t working” or “this feature was super bugged” those aren’t subjective.

I actually looked into the game because I didn’t know anything about it and figured I should inform myself a bit.

What makes this whole overreacting raging we are seeing here even more funny and ridiculous is that the game is going to be FTP. So basically, once released, anyone can go and try it out, for free, to see whether or not it’s worth any investment by them.

So, yeah, if someone is offering you to pre-order this game, I definitely suggest you not buy it because they are trying to scam you.

This is a slippery slope fallacy “if they are allowed to do something mild and legal now. . .well, it will just lead to terrible violation of our rights in the future!”

What undermines your point is that if they try to put these illegal restrictions on many people, violating their basic rights, then they are opening themselves up to large class action lawsuits.

Your linked to an article literally starts by asking “What kinds of contracts might not hold up in court?” and then goes on to explain this as one of these as “For example, a court will never enforce a contract promoting something already against state or federal law.” Basically proving my point.

And I’m universally downvoted, and you’re universally upvoted. Lemmy users crack me up.

Marvel want free bug testers, and to get the hype train moving - but don’t want to pay for actual testers who work quietly, and want only positive commentary. Marvel want an astroturf campaign to push preorders, not actual genuine discussion or bug testing.

Okay, then the problem is with the people doing the work for free, not with Marvel realizing that people will do it for free.

The issue is that the people who do this work for free are not like you, and want that early access. . .either for strictly personal reasons or because it benefits them financially (such as is the case with streamers).

Your game isn’t actually ready for alpha

Alpha testing is, by definition, testing on unreleased code. Even though they are offering the testing to some select group of people, it’s still considered un-released.

The only reason you’d make someone sign a legally binding document saying “you’re not allowed to say bad things” is because you know there are bad things to say.

False dichotomy. There is also the possibility that you realize, from experience, that when you start introducing users, unexpected shit happens.

They could do the alpha testing completely internally, or they could give some super fans pre-access with more restrictions on what they are allowed to say. Would I prefer they be able to speak their mind? Of course. But I get why the company would do this and it’s really a complete non-issue.

Sure, they could do an NDA, or they could also get free publicity. It’s reasonable for them to choose the latter, and if you don’t like it, it’s reasonable for you to wait for release.

Preventing people from talking about the bad things won’t magically get rid of the bad things.

Yeah, that’s pretty clearly not the point. They presumably want to fix the bugs without them counting against them in the court of public opinion.

I agree with you. But this is basically a non-issue, which is my point. If you don’t want to be restricted, don’t play the alpha. Why is this so hard for some people to accept? Again, we aren’t talking about a released product, but some playtesting.