[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 97 points 9 months ago

The tradeoff kinda made sense at the dawn of streaming, when the transaction was basically trading quality for better pricing and convenience.

Nowadays? Yeaaaaah I don't know about that chief

Crazy to think that we lost all the advantages that streaming offered, kept all the disadvantages, piled on a few more disadvantages on top of that, and people went "sure that makes sense 24 bucks a month worth it bro"

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 83 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

To paraphrase Churchill "Never was so much owed by so many to a single man", NTP has been a critical aspect of XXIst century, from making highly complex clusterized systems work reliably to saving you the pain of adjusting the clock in your smartphone. If you have used even a single networked electronic device for a millisecond in your life, you owe the man some thanks.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 56 points 10 months ago

I mean, now that the video streaming industry has shown us how the endgame looks like for subscription models, you'd have to be crazy to want that for the videogame industry.

Whatever short-term gains you can get in convenience or price by buying into their penetration stage are not worth contributing to leading the hobby down that road even an iota.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 68 points 10 months ago

hey, it also has one of the best boss themes ever made, in which the fucking boss himself does the lyrics, give them some credit

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 120 points 10 months ago

You see, if you pirate a couple textbooks in college because you don't have resources, but you want to earn your right to participate in society and not starve, it's called theft.

But if one of the top 10 companies in the world does the same with thousands of books just to get even richer, it's called fair use.

Simple, really.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 90 points 10 months ago

because every additional layer of abstraction disrupts communication with the Machine Spirit even further

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 66 points 11 months ago

Oooof that's unfortunate, it was the platform for reasonably priced VR systems that weren't made by Facebook (I refuse to acknowledge their rebrand), even if it wasn't the best software...

This is basically another step towards a situation in which your only VR options are either high end Valve offerings or buying into the Facebook ecosystem.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 58 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm not surprised about this. The game was developed entirely around what it would have rather than around what the player would do and you can tell.

I can imagine the initial pitch meetings, with everyone going "whoaaa it will have hundreds of solar systems and biomes whoaaah" and no one going "ok, but what does the player do in them". A few other guys enthusiastically saying "There will be spaceship building and you will get a crew and explore with it" and not a soul in the room thinking of "ok, but how will we make space travel work within our current systems and technology? Can we make it substantial?". And this way of thinking probably permeated every second of development for the first few years.

The game is chockful of vestigial systems that they had obviously intended to be more significant and in depth, but ultimately decided not to develop further, yet still maintained in the game in a manner that only harms the game. The fuel "system", the contraband "system"... So many examples of stuff that doesn't add anything to the game, yet was still maintained because man-hours and money went into it I guess, and because the "and it will have that and that" mentality tool a priority over player experience, player agency, and actual game design.

If I can circlejerk for a bit, this is one of the reasons why Baldurs Gate 3's release and success is so timely. How many areas, how many biomes, how many systems, how many quests and how many square kilometers does that game have versus Starfield? 30 times less? 50 times less? Yet it had an overwhelmingly positive reception where Starfield didn't because its elements put player experience first. Yes it has less quests, but most are super modular and super reactive and not afraid to let you solve them in janky or silly ways that go out of the suggested solutions; yes it has fewer areas smaller in size, but you are constantly coming across stuff to do. Etc etc etc.

I'm really hoping that that contrast changes design philosophies just a tad in the future. Start with how a normal hour for your player looks like. Confirm that your technology can deliver your vision before committing to it, experience be damned. Don't reach for the stars, because contrary to what they say, it won't at least get you the moon, it will just leave you stranded in the middle of bumfucknowhere in space.

And, as we saw in Starfield, that means you get yet another annoying load cutscene.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 54 points 1 year ago

goddammit even the silliest memes become real, I'm done with this reality

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 80 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Reject the idea of an absolute GOTY, normalize a Mt. Rushmore style "Best of the Year" selection.

Games can be great in so many different ways, many of which are somewhat exclusive with each other, that I've never understood the concept of saying that one was absolutely better than the rest.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 62 points 1 year ago

The paradox of homogeneization... The more the industry trends towards chasing what's considered to work and be safe, the more room it leaves for the truly bold like these guys to be successful by doing what's considered to not work anymore.
Always beautiful to see.

[-] BudgieMania@kbin.social 116 points 1 year ago

mid 90s to mid 2000s style was the peak I won't hear otherwise

2

After getting frustrated with some mechanical issues in my FDM printer lately, and realizing that most of what I do with it are jobs probably more appropriate for a resin printer, I impulse ordered a cheap resin printer just to try if they are a better fit for me.

I have read that you need to be a bit more careful with a resin printer in certain aspects. I haven't informed myself much about it yet, but from what I understand:

1 - You really don't want to be in the same room while printing, and it should be in a room with a window open or in a balcony or something similar.
2 - Always wear gloves and a mask when dealing with the material or the prints.
3 - You don't want the sun to ever hit the material for long until you have completed the print.
4 - Optionally you can get a curing machine that does a "second pass" of light, if you don't get this you should expect prints to be somewhat "gooey" and less defined.
5 - Always clean the prints with alcohol and scrub them with some sort of brush to get residues off. This would come after the last past of curing.
6 - The prints are done "upside down" and you should set your supports accordingly.

Is there anything else I'm missing? Is any of that wrong, or are there any caveats about it? I would greatly appreciate any info about the particularities, and also any stories and experiences that you wanna share about resin printing.

Thanks!

view more: next ›

BudgieMania

joined 1 year ago