They are technically correct in that it’s the developers fault that they tied themselves to a proprietary game engine.
In the other hand Godot was nowhere near mature when the slay the spire devs most likely started development. They would be dumb if they used unity for their next game 🤷
I’d guess that companies that failed to turn profit when money was cheap are most likely doomed. However not all of the hype companies are like that. Some could be barely profitable, but shareholder pressure might push them to heavier monetization practices.
To OP: this is a much clearer & better explanation for what I was trying to say.
This is an imperfect analogy, but think of updating between Windows 10 and 11 versus installing updates on windows 10 or win 11.
I have no experience with Fedora, but AFAIK at least in Ubuntu/Debian land, updates are installed from OS version specific package repositories. When the version of the OS is no longer supported, those repositories might not receive updates anymore.
EDIT: this is the main reason I have a rolling release distro on most of my personal machines. The package repos have the newest packages without having to update my OS major version every now and then.
I found steamdb.info. According to them Godot seems to be growing steadily.
My bad. You don’t need a rocket to launch stuff.
I mean you could stay in space, if you were to reach escape velocity. Heat might be an issue though.
Tweaking the nuke to achieve a specific orbit might prove to be difficult. Also it’s not like Blue Origin has nukes right?
Their government has been trying to keep the issue of aid in the public interest for a reason. Sometimes they might go too far, but I think people underestimate the fear a country would experience if they were highly dependent on outside help. Especially if it wasn’t guaranteed to continue due to changes in the political leadership in the other countries.
As always the headline is somewhat misleading.
Yes. OSRS reviews on steam are still listed as very positive.
That’s a job for the parents though isn’t it? And for early teenagers people seem to forget what positive influence the internet could have on their lives. Eg. many IT workers started fiddling around with stuff when they were quite young.
Obviously that has to be reflected in the price of the product. Presumably even more so with storage.
Also there might be a use case, where cost is paramount and the drive would experience very limited writes.
I’ve got a personal anecdote that’s not entirely the same, but I’ve bought a bunch of flash chips from china to use with retro games. Those are often salvaged, but they are also cheap and available to buy. It doesn’t matter if the chips can’t take too many write cycles, if you only flash them a couple of times.
When I did play foss games, I played battle for wesnoth, teeworlds, minetest, super tux csrt and openarena. Lsst one might be dead due to being a mainly multiplayer game.
This is what 3d printing really shines in. Churning out prototypes for minimum cost.
If you’re already familiar with blender, you would only need to learn how to use a slicer, which is not that hard in comparison. Just import the model and fiddle around with print settings if needed.
I came into 3d printing as a complete noob, and most of my time has been spent learning to do modeling in blender/cad. Slicing and printing itself is simple in comparison. Resin might be more involved.
Should the delays and subsequent costs overruns then be simply attributed to increased regulatory complexity or corporate greed?
I’m looking at the list of reactors in France, most of the builds during the last millennium were completed in more or less 10 years. Then there was a gap, and the new one is taking way longer than previous ones.
Same thing has happened in many other countries. Including finland, where at first we got 4 reactors in 6-10 years, and then after a gap of 25 years the next reactor was a clusterfuck that took almost 20years to build.
Both of these reactors are of the same design, and the issues are at least partially attributed to the company having forgot how to manage such large projects due to the years long gap in construction.
Competent nuclear engineers and technicians have retired without being able to pass on their know-how, and cutting-edge nuclear-related industries have disappeared or been converted.
This same fear has been enough to fund SLS and Ariane programs. Basically to avoid the loss of a capability in case it’s needed later on. For some reason it doesn’t seem to apply to nuclear. And now people are complaining that building new reactors is expensive, arguably at least partially due to the supply chains no longer existing in the same scale as before.
Most likely you won’t even notice some of the changes. Reasonably believable cars can already be added to films in post, so no reason why humans couldn’t be. This might not be driven only by AI, but instead on more general tech developments in vfx and such.
Thats the point of having energy abundance. When electricity costs are low enough, it wouldn’t matter, if the source of synthetic fuel was not the most energy efficient one.
Your comparison between phones and VR/AR is reasonable but a bit different as when windows phones were discontinued, Microsoft had pretty much lost the phone os race. Also the windows phones sucked, I’ve used them…
IMO microsoft gave vr/ar a fair chance. They might have been early, but if we are eg. a full decade off must buy VR, then it might not be worth waiting.