Yeah I don’t really like the model where it starts basic and hard, and each failure makes it a little easier.

Feels like it would be more interesting if you started with high stats, and each successful run you had to remove or lower something. Sure, you won with 200 health but can you win with 100? Hades kind of had this alongside the upgrades as you go.

I didn’t like dead cells or rogue legacy that much because it felt like I would’ve won if I had grinded more, and that’s not what I want.

I feel like games are usually a mix of execution challenges and numbers challenges. In a pure action game or other games without progression (eg: chess) you win or lose from your decisions and input. But in numbers games, you win or lose based on the stats. There’s really no way cloud from the start of the original ff7 can defeat disc 3 bosses. The numbers just aren’t there.

Some rogue-lites feel like they’re trying to be execution games but have a less clear numbers check on top. Doesn’t always work for me.

I do really like the traditional rogue like Crawl: Stone Soup, though. No meta game aside from the occasional player ghost.

Is it like the other ones where it takes several hours until you start finding interesting guns and get cool powers?

I don’t understand how my coworkers are using windows. Like, they routinely have issues where it randomly reboots or gets sluggish. And it’s just flat out unfit for software development, unless you’re targeting windows specific stuff. They can’t even run our code locally.

Maybe some of the problems are janky security stuff to try to lock it down

I’ve heard this but I haven’t taken the time to find a rom and emulator and get it working (on Linux)

I was going to say diablo4 as well. Diablo1 and 2 were some of my favorite games in my youth, but I just don’t want to give blizzard any more money. Path of exile 1 and 2 are good for the same itch.

Also any console exclusives. Bloodborne? Would love to play. Not buying a console. New Zelda and Mario? Same.

Oh! That’s what I’ve been doing. Works out fine and is easy to stick with.

Conservatives don’t care about truth or internal consistency. They just want to harm the out-group.

If there’s any justice, everyone who works for Palantir will be lined up next to everyone who worked for ICE.

Do you think the people that send junk like “hi” or “quick chat?” get annoyed when they’re the recipient? Or they just think it’s normal?

I feel like this topic somehow aligns with the form of a 2017 Twitter screenshot posted on tiktok posted on Lemmy.

I had a guy do this once when I was struggling to get my laundry bag into my cart. He just used his free hand to steady the cart for me, but didn’t stop his phone call.

I wonder if McCain is dishonest, stupid, or both. I think both, but stupid is the dominant mechanism here. I think she’s too idiotic to grasp that all things have a political context and subtext, even when it’s not an explicit “vote for XYZ”. But maybe she gets that and is just being dishonest for clout.

Either way I hope she goes away and never impacts the world again.

Turning off almost all notifications, running adblock , and ditching social media (except Lemmy, if that counts) , seems to really limit the damage.

I’ve read that conservatives model the world as “strict rules that have exceptions made on a case by case basis”. That maybe works if you’re in a small village. Smarter people realize that doesn’t scale and you should write better rules in the first place.

Justin Humphrey should be removed from office.

Did zuck personally buy these or did a team of analysts doing research make proposals and he picked some?

It could maybe be useful information if the questions, answers, and test taking process are all public and non-binding.

Like, they get a pen and paper and a quiz appropriate for high school seniors. They’re filmed taking it in a classroom, and the results are all public. Different institutions can grade each test.

If you want to vote for the guy who says “the president writes laws” then that’s on you.

If conservatives try to make it like old timey literacy tests, it’s non binding so it can’t so much harm. Might even make them look bad, since it’s all public.

If the legal system concludes that he cannot be charged for murder, then the legal system is in error and should be amended.

The legal system is not a sacred, immutable, thing. It’s a bunch of agreements.

Allowing them on the platform doesn’t mean a full endorsement of the belief. It means that he (or whoever makes the decision) finds the belief acceptable enough to platform.

There is likely some line which is too far, and not allowed on the platform. Perhaps “eating live babies”? “Kicking puppies”? Something that is so unacceptable, it would not be allowed. This argument is that ICE and Nazi stuff belongs on the far side. That as a platform owner, you can say “that’s not allowed here”.

Allowing one person to say “I think the NY Yankees are the best” and another to say “I think the NY mets are the best” on your platform (eg: website, newspaper, bulletin board) doesn’t mean that you personally believe both. But if you let someone post “I think white people are best” and just leave that up, that’s saying that’s an acceptable message to say. Just harmless like talking about baseball.

This argument is some positions, like what ICE is doing, is outside the range of acceptable. The platform (a website in this case) should say they have to take that elsewhere.

Yes. And verification requires platforming, so transitively they shouldn’t be verified.