Pheta
- 0 Posts
- 7 Comments
I’m not sure about what you mean by video (using cameras, or posting videos) But I did check out Teamspeak, as I used to use it a long time ago, and it’s a nice medium between ease of use products like discord and security minded folks who use things like Matrix.
Either way, Teamspeak did add screen sharing, and the cost to host a server is about the price of a nitro sub. That’s if you don’t self host, which is always an option and makes things free.
It’s probably going to be the best option to convince my friends to finally leave discord’s ecosystem. Haven’t liked it since they started adding in bs like quests and the shop, it’s only a matter of time before it enshittifies so bad my friend group will be looking for a way to jump ship.
But I have voiced that I don’t think this route/configuration of leadership will work.
Could you elaborate on this, beyond the one sentence? The rest of your comment makes it clear that you weren’t aware, and still aren’t about much of what was going on with SKG. Given that you don’t have a clear understanding of what the timeline of SKG was, that does leave room for doubt that you understand the initiative. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt, so please explain what you meant.
I hope the initiative causes positive change.
We all do.
I will heavily disagree with you on your evaluation of Sly 4. The higher fidelity models doesn’t really add much to the characters that you couldn’t glean in prior entries in the series, and really only serves to give the characters a more plastic style all while minimizing the features that made them so memorable - their cartoonish aesthetic and stylized design. Not much changed on the design front for any of the major cast, besides more detail regarding their costumes. I will admit that more details on the smaller bits of their costume would be nice in the older entries, but compromising the style and aesthetic is a much worse tradeoff for what was gained. There’s many other people evaluating the level design in Sly 4 so I won’t go into that too much, but suffice to say, Sly 2 has comparable level design, and some are better in my personal opinion, but Sly 3 has the best level design of the franchise. None of those level designs were hindered or empowered by graphical capabilities. The only part that would have a noticeable impact, if anything, would be the post processing effects from some abilities in Sly 4, but I don’t really think those added that much to the experience, as most are gimmicks and costume based, meaning they are only used to solve puzzles and don’t play any further part in your arsenal except when the game specifically calls for those abilities.
Now I don’t disagree that modern computing power could make the series much better, but AAA has this tunnel vision on graphical fidelity, when the indie scene has proved time and again, style always has and always will trump substance.
Ratchet and Clank made the transition successfully because they didn’t overblow the graphical fidelity on Clank, it simply looks like a higher quality model of his early iterations, and has been made easier due to the armor and other sci-fi bits of technology in the series, as the genre scales better with the raw fidelity that most AAA developers pursue than other franchises.
Doesn’t really help either that the first step that the Sly franchise took into this modern era was spearheaded by a third party studio. I’m not gonna bash Sanzaru that much, as it’s clear they had to put in a lot of work to approach Sony and Sucker Punch to even get permission to work on the franchise, and it shows in the humor of their mission design, although they were uncertain of themselves and it shows. So not only was Sanzaru dealing with the difficult position of having the newest entry of a beloved franchise, but also coming up with ways to modernize the gameplay and graphics in a franchise almost iconified in the early 2000’s comic and cartoon aesthetic.
It’s clear they had more to juggle than could have honestly been expected of them, not the least of which that the franchise had been dead in the water for 8 years at that point, as the industry had slowed to a crawl after the creep of design scope and the upscaling of the industry caused much of the workflow to stagnate or recursion in on itself.
I’ve played the game while it was in early access, and now that I’ve played quite a bit (not all) of the game, I’d like to give my thoughts for anyone stumbling on this or keeping an eye on the game and trying to make a decision.
First, the main feature of the game, beyond the aesthetic of an environmentalist version of post-apocalyptic world, is the airships. It’s a mobile base that is both a vehicle and where you do everything. The idea is nothing new, but the execution is done pretty well, in my opinion. There’s basic rooms, but you can unlock more rooms through exploration and research, which can result in some pretty interesting base designs and configurations.
As far as a survival crafting game goes, it doesn’t do too bad to stand out in the sea of similar games, as the game originally began based around not having combat in it at all, but has since adopted some combat mechanics due to popular demand. The environmentalist messaging and themes are very obvious, and it jumped on the bandwagon fairly early on, before the themes got too worn out, so it isn’t stale storytelling at the very least.
Now, for the changes between early access and 1.0, I will say it’s pretty drastic. I played the very early versions of early access, as well as most major updates that came out between then and now, and the difference is striking. First, in the beginning, you’d have to use a deck mounted extractor (think resource gathering laser tool) to gather materials, and you’d be able to acquire a portable version of the tool later on. In the 1.0 version of the game, that is turned on its head, where you get a portable one first, with deck mounted ones that don’t require energy later (for automation and convivence purposes). Resources feel much more in demand in the 1.0 version, as there is more to craft and upgrade, so you’ll be gathering and going through materials just as quickly. This is partly because most of the gameplay in early access involved exploring, with the underdust locations being the primary story progression areas. This meant that while you were exploring around, you’d be collecting materials passively, and because of this, you’d end up with tons of materials whenever you’d normally pivot to upgrading your base - right after getting a upgrade, or needing space for new facilities.
The 1.0 version is much more streamlined in that story and story required equipment is all marked out for you, meaning you can beeline from one place to the next without much wasted time; great if you’re in a hurry or a journalist, but it does hurt the pacing in terms of resource scarcity. Not to say that resources are any more or less rare, they’re very abundant, in fact. However, due to adding some new resources that are used interspersed throughout the crafting process for more complex items means that you will always have a deficiency somewhere.
I mentioned progression and story being streamlined in 1.0, but in truth it has had a massive overhaul, with proper zones to halt early players wandering into areas they do not have the tools to actually make use of, and to segment story into decent chunks. The game has more side grades for equipment than before, and they add interesting choices for gameplay, although due to the late adoption of combat, the upgrade system for combat is relatively shallow.
From my perspective, it was a promising survival game that focused more on base building and dealing with size constraints, and the interplay with base building, which has developed into a proper, feature complete game. The gameplay may not be for everyone, but it is clear it had a vision for what the game would be, and successfully achieved that goal.
Based on what I’ve played before the 1.0 release, I know that there is more content and mechanics to encounter, so I’ll reply with an update once I’ve properly finished the game and can give a more comprehensive review.
man, some of those comments really got under my skin.
Like, they were so insensitive to the issue and dismissive it was honestly pretty alarming. Like they couldn’t understand why you can’t just go and buy a copy of an unpopular NES game, or why academic study is even a good thing. Like, these are the illiterate, inbred stereotypes that resent having to do book reports because ‘they don’t read good’. It’d be comical if it wasn’t alarming.
I see what you’re saying, but I still don’t see how this gives any merit to the lawsuit, as I’m especially dubious about the multiple lawsuits on valve in a short timeframe. Note how one of the points that the lawsuit is making is that Valve doesn’t verify user’s age, so that is why they’re being sued; for letting children gamble.
It’s a blatant move made by wealthy CEOs who have dirt to either hit valve in one of its more profitable money making centers, or fall in line with demanding PII from customers for a surveillance state.
Just to go back to the gymnastics you’ve set up, I’d also like to point out that I’ve seen kids get their hands on plenty of things they aren’t “supposed” to, like cigarettes, other nicotine products, drugs, and many more. While it isn’t great that safeguards aren’t in place for children, that isn’t exactly a great trade-off for turning into fucking North Korea.
There are solutions for these problems; Better paid, less overworked parents would have more time and mental bandwidth to be involved with their children and be better parents. More strict government regulation (that doesn’t involve dissolving personal freedoms even further than they already have) regarding dangerous practices for its citizens.
And just to get ahead of any insistence that this lawsuit is a good idea, let me give you some examples of what could be done besides giving PII:
Final note here, but if someone is determined to do something, it’s going to be very hard to stop them if they’re not under supervision; think of various high profile murders that occur in the US regularly. Hell, think of all the school shootings! A kid isn’t able to legally own or buy a firearm, hell purchasing a firearm is about the most strict customer filtering you can get outside of more specialized goods, and kids still get their hands on them all the time, so clearly putting the onus on a business to filter it’s customers when it can’t even see them is going to be much more difficult to enforce.