paraphrand
- 0 Posts
- 139 Comments
The oligopolies rarely buy out smaller companies and keep to promises, or let those companies do what they did best.
They buy them to control competition.
Not putting these titles on their service isn’t a tactic to control competition, but it is indicative of their lack of giving a shit about what they have hoarded.
Yeah. Tim just wants his shitty App Store in more places so he can make his own anti competitive deals to force people to use it.
If the Epic Games store was a great feature rich platform on PC, Mac and Linux, then I would be inclined to take him at his word. But they have been running it for how many years? And it’s still bare bones and not offering anything compelling apart from subsidized free games.
I don’t jive with the guy heading it up. With the way he communicates the message, with the style of video he makes, or with the approach of a petition. I think all of that combined is a weight on the effort.
That’s where I’ll leave it though. Cuz I’m just one guy. No need to throw a bunch of downvotes on this. My voice won’t hurt the cause.
I’m not against the goal. But I have voiced that I don’t think this route/configuration of leadership will work.
I only heard about it once people on Lemmy started talking shit about this pirate guy. I hadn’t heard about him either. So it came on my radar as drama. And I ended up having a rough time sharing my point of view. People are really emotional about this intuitive. They take any criticism as an attack that could harm progress on signatures.
In the end the drama with this pirate dork ended up actually bringing positive attention that helped an otherwise flagging initiative for signatures.
I hope the initiative causes positive change.
I think it mostly revolves around how you get 100 players together for a good game. The match making part. I’m skeptical of the quality of match making, but that’s not a showstopper for people committed to playing. But if we set aside the need for someone to maintain hosting, then it becomes peer to peer or a lan party, or a combination of the two.
I remember what it was like rounding up and wrangling 80 people to raid in WoW back in the day.
And none of this is a showstopper I don’t see why we can’t talk about that. It’s not like discussing the difficult edge cases or the feasibility of the details could harm things.
My initial question in this thread framed changing the game design, not networking stack. So it was about making it all local/same screen only. An absurd example on purpose.
Man. Y’all really think I’m talking about networking design?
I thought we were talking about gameplay design. That’s why I picked 100 player battle royal.
“Change the game design” implies that, to me. I didn’t pick a single player experience with always online requirements. Or a 4 player game with online matchmaking and no direct connect options.
There’s such a strong, and obsessive need among a bunch of people on this topic to explain and explain, and not parse the precise thing being asked.
There’s also a lot of people who conflate having the opinion that the effort will fail due to its approach and the person/people behind it with not wanting it to succeed.
What I’m doing is poking at how people are behaving and how they talk about this initiative. And how the messaging is confusing and all over the place. It takes 5 people racing to explain it to me when I understand perfectly, and lay out a specific case. Yet no one replies to explain how my example would work.
I’m not the only one who sees this initiative as misguided, and mis framed.
Sorry for coming off like a troll, usually my outlier questions get responses instead of people acting like they are here.
I’ve really dug a bit too deep on this one, and I’ll try to stop replying now.
You guys…
I picked an actual “online only” example for a reason. Yet everyone is jumping around talking about other things.
Turning a battle royal into a lan only game sounds like the solution I was expecting in my replies. And then yeah, you can even route that over the internet.
But that’s not changing the design, really. It’s providing the infrastructure needed to run it, even if it’s lan only, and would need more to run it over the internet.
You made this statement by using the most optimized high end VR title in existence. And the creators of the game their own engine!
Graphics do matter. That’s why you cited Alyx. Right? Because the game is impressive in many ways, graphics being a really big one. Graphics in VR have generally stagnated for the past 5 years since Alyx came out.
Graphics are why the interactions with bottles in that game are so impressive. Just to highlight one small thing.