You also didn’t hear about it because it’s not great. I watched a stream of it: the gameplay looks uninspired, like a student project to mimic Burnout, and the visuals would have looked dated in 2010.

But it was functional. So it’s neither good nor bad enough to rave about. You just say “huh”, flip a coin, and either uninstall forever or play every 7 months when you remember it’s on your hard drive.

You got sources for that?

My point is he talked about tackling rampantly increasing rent prices, not making it easier to buy houses in NYC. There is not a feasible way he can make those multi-million dollar homes affordable for the types of people he spoke of helping afford rent in the city.

So rich people buying luxury homes (that seem to already exist) is outside the purview of his campaign promises, and don’t reflect on him much except to say “rich people are also interested in Mamdani’s future NYC.”

These are house sales, not rentals.

“Tiktok” is when people use media old people can’t be arsed to learn about.

This is all media, new and old, that they aren’t already using.

Don’t worry I don’t expect Democrats to do anything even vaguely resembling vertebrate work. Just keep inching along, you worms, and get replaced by a functional, good government.

I’m just so tired…

There is a functional product. I played it years ago.

But it ain’t finished yet, which is the insane bit given the breadth of funds and length of time.

Obviously you hide the gross fungi under a nice silvery façade. You don’t compromise aesthetics in space or all the other stellar societies will laugh at us, and uninvite us from the quasar parties.

Military should not be a business.

Fuck you, Bibi.

My god, it’s so simple! We should all tip our bosses for enlightening us! And work 7 days a week for no extra!

With gusto.

You are in essence gatekeeping enjoying a video game as a concept. Like people must enjoy them the way you envision.

What an incredibly inaccurate statement. I love modding video games, I spend more time modding video games than I spend playing video games. I understand that the vision developers have doesn’t often align with what I want from their product.

I don’t agree that developers should be spending dev cycles making a game functional for a user that turns off any configuration of gameplay mechanics.

Saying you can just set a variable from “true to false” is so laughably misunderstanding what goes into software development much less game development that it sounds entitled. What gameplay mechanics are you even saying should be configurable? All of them? Just turn off the combat in a fighting game? At what point is a gameplay mechanic integral to the genre/experience? And who is the person or persons that decide?

Developers should be free to create what they want, and the end user is free to mod it however they want. That includes, for the devs, not purposefully obfuscating things so that modding is more diffcult.

I disagree because it solely approaches games as some sort of “electronic commodity” and outright despises a development group’s artistry.

Sure, not every game is trying to be art. But games have long gone beyond the realm of simply “entertain me”. That opinion is like saying “books should be made in a way that allows users to change the story whenever and however they want.” It is something you can do but there’s no imperative to cater to it.

Presumably, the state stops kicking up the federal government’s share. And hopefully stops collecting it from state residents during tax season, instead of just pocketing it.

Edit: it’s probably obvious but this comment is made without any knowledge about how taxes are collected and funneled through government.

I think we should see what it’s priced at before we start making proclamations about the Steam Machine being the “standard gaming PC”.

I feel like aiding war criminals in deleting evidence should get your company destroyed.

Maybe not all of Alphabet unless we can prove this was an initiative started from the top, but Youtube should be diassembled for one-sidedly purging evidence. Hopefully, those accounts kept offline copies.

This really got me. Like you’re a bystander watching someone fuck up a Pokémon battle.

This puts a spin on the article (which, admittedly, could have its own spin), that smells disingenuous.

She wasn’t saying “yeah, those bozos will be fine in our shoddy bots run down grannies on the crosswalk”, in a mask-off moment. The article was saying Waymo expects someone will be fatally struck by one of their vehicles eventually, but society will have accepted (Waymo’s) driverless cars enough by then that it won’t break the company. “They’ll see Waymo is so much safer than normal drivers even if it still does cause some accidents.” type shit.

It’s still wishful corpo-speak but there’s no reason to mislead.

Edit: I understand that it is the headline of the article itself but we should do better than regurgitating and echoing clickbait titles.