@PlzGivHugs - eviltoast
  • 26 Posts
  • 299 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle
  • This is happening in the United States’ backyard, and the US government is doing nothing to intervene other than complain about migrants.

    Unless the Haitian government is willing to give significant control of the country over to the US, or pay for US weapons and mercinaries like Israel does theres not a lot they can reasonably do beyond providing financial aid and humanitarian support, as they have been. What else would you have them do, invade Haiti?






  • There is an Avatar TTRPG and it faces similar problems to making a new game based on the series, and handles it similarly to what you’re suggesting.

    The TTRPG divides the setting into Eras, Kyoshi era with the nations still being established, Roku era with established nations, The Hundred Years War era taking place during the war but before Ang wakes, The Aang era, after the show and its sequel comics, and the Kora era taking place after TLoK and its comic trilogy. Notably, none take place during the events of the main series. This means that the can create new stories that better fit the medium and don’t break cannon, and at the same time, you can still interact with significant characters and tie your story into the cannon such as making a quest resulting from the reprocusions of, or a prerequisite for events in the main canon.

    Edit: clearly none of us read the article:

    It’ll put players in the role of an “all-new, never-before-seen Avatar” and take place thousands of years in the past.



  • I’m still kinda confused what the purpose of this new content is. Maybe its just me, but it feels like nothing here is particularly notable mechanically, or visually. The biome itself is ugly and contrasts heavily with most structures you’d want to build in a forest. The new blocks provide little new in terms of colour or texture given that they’re just greyscale wood when we already have a relatively large palette of grayscale blocks. Even the new mob, while somewhat unique, doesn’t feel like it’d be useful for anything but the most niche redstone builds, and aside from that, will be forgotten. Are they planning on adding a bunch more? It didn’t sound like it, but maybe I’m missing something?





  • I think its probably just down to the balance of accessiblity to start but devotion required to keep playing, in combination with the very intense monitization that gets put into production and marketing. For comparison:

    Something like CS is far more accessible, but has a much larger portion of casual players and has Valve’s laissez-faire development/marketing. Valorant is is like CS but even more casual. Dota breeds far more devoted players, but the game is so complex it can’t grow, and again, has neither the high production value nor the marketing because Valve. There are games like Fortnite that can compete in scale, but the nature of the game and the focus on fun content over competitve integrity mean that the tournaments are more marketing events than measures of skill.


  • Information is limitted as the contracts used for developers aren’t shared, but the general understanding is that this only applies to Steam keys.

    The one exception is the wolfire games lawsuit, which includes one alleged instance of Valve asking a developer not to distribute the game for free on their Discord when it is a paid product on Steam. Given the lack of detail, the single anecdote for evidence, the existence of other games where they are priced lower or free off Steam (I.E. Dwarf Fortress), its certainly not a widespread problem, almost certainly not in contract, if it did happen exactly as the anecdote suggests, may have been a misstep on the part of one employee, and may not have happened at all.

    Of course, if Valve does do this, nonetheless mandated it, its an issue, but given that no one else has challenged them on what would be such a blatent anti-trust case, esspecially given how everyone else in the industry has been trying to take Valve’s place for years, I think its unlikely.




  • Lower distribution costs (in exchange for less marketing and a worse product) are not lower prices though. If Epic had spent half the time and money they spent negotiating for exclusives on negotiating for lower prices, Im sure they easily could have. For example, Epic advertises a 12% fee on sales, but if they instead took 10% (maybe spent less on exclusives to account for this) and then required prices be 5% lower than MSRP on other stores, then suddenly its a lot more appealing to customers - the ones actually providing the money - while still offering a much better deal than Steam. Similarly, Epic could have just passed on the saving more directly, like I said, with a rewards program or similar. Epic had plenty of ways to actually lower prices for their customer rather than just their buisiness partners. They just chose not to.

    Frankly, Epic is pretty irrelevant to this point considering how significantly they chose to burn the bridges with their customers right from the get-go anyway. Unless you’re studying how to lose consumer trust or goodwill, they’re not really a good reference.