gila

joined 1 year ago
[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

From a developer perspective, tonnes of stuff. Shortcuts, power (edit: see Diablo Immortal for some live examples). From a gamer perspective, it's really the ideal scenario in this day and age, but Blizzard'll cop hate all the same.

Other similar games like Last Epoch are doing paid alt animations for skills, but Diablo team just aren't that creative, and the game wasn't designed well enough to accommodate something like that.

[โ€“] [email protected] 42 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Yes, that is the quality of the original presentation. If anything it looks worse because it has been converted from film to a digital signal, as well as being stretched to be a bit larger than normal. Lmk if you young whippersnappers have any questions about this, I grew up watching this on VHS back in the dark times ๐Ÿ‘ด

[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yes, both are upscaled p2p releases

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Lineage OS doesn't include google apps or services. Jellyfin works though.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Do you need an in-remote microphone? If not, I'd suggest a degoogled nvidia shield tv (i.e flash it with lineage OS or similar)

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

My experience: I do the game sharing trick on xbox where you and a friend can mutually access both of your digital libraries. Preordered collector's edition, which included 5 days of early access before launch. Blizzard had implemented a special access control on the server side which checked for a unique collector's edition license. My friend could download and launch the game using my license but couldn't login during early access. I refunded my purchase because the point of the extra cost was invalidated by that.

I later bought the standard edition. My account still had all the preorder and collector's edition bonuses, including MTX currency & a battle pass token. Said token was later redeemed by mistake via Blizzard's dark pattern implementation at the start of S1. There was some backlash about that at the time which was certainly valid, but personally I didn't feel affected because I got it at no extra cost.

I've played for 1000s of hours since but never spent the free in-game currency. I had never seen another player in-game using MTX cosmetics until the wings items were recently added as preorder bonuses for the upcoming expansion. It's not surprising that only 15% of the revenue came from MTX because the paid cosmetics are pointless, expensive and they aren't substantially better than the free ones. Using transmog at all robs the player of any sense of cosmetic progression. Paid portal skins are kinda cool the first time you see them, but the free activity-specific ones like for infernal hordes are cool too.

I'm left confused at why someone would boast about these figures given they're evidence of not having implemented any solid post-launch monetisation strategy, and more generally the half-baked nature of the post-launch development for the game. The MTX is purely for vanity and it doesn't even achieve that. The skins might as well be a dork sign. I wouldn't be surprised if their revenue figures included my original purchase as well.

tl;dr my read is that this dude has done more to unintentionally subvert blizzard's MTX sales than he's done to generate them

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, venom is poisonous. It is a subset of poisons that are injected via bites or stings.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Same, the last straw for me was the 'white lives matter' Yeezy fashion show.

[โ€“] [email protected] 19 points 2 weeks ago

You could just refund it if it doesn't work well for you. GOG are usually pretty generous

[โ€“] [email protected] 30 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Perth stadium has entered the chat

just don't have parking

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I agree that census data on the subject will be used by reactionaries as a basis to react. Or more generally, to polarise in any direction. I don't think that's the intended function of a census though, and I think mitigating that unintended outcome isn't best achieved by compromising the intended function. Function which I think is a net positive for society in an analytical sense.

e.g. in sports - if there was a legitimate cause for concern about a perceived unfair advantage to women that were assigned male at birth, wouldn't it follow that we would see a statistical overrepresentation of trans women athletes relative to trans women in the general population, vs cis female athletes relative to cis females?

To my knowledge what's been observed elsewhere is the opposite, supporting that there is no legitimate cause for concern. Not that there would be if trans female athletes were indeed overrepresented, but I think the reactionary argument falls apart for the majority where the data supports the opposing view.

It also occurs to me that limiting the data via either omission or underreporting could equally be used by those with malintent, e.g "why spend time worrying about the needs of 0.1% of the population?"

It's not really for me to comment on whether it's a net positive for trans people specifically, but in lieu of other info I'd defer to orgs like Equality Australia on that, who seem to think it's warranted.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Why use generational change to substantiate Equality Australia's point that data on the population's gender diversity is also a relevant part of the intended function of a census? Because it's likely the most significant factor in the perceived growth in diversity, afaik (as a cishet). I'd assume older generations have additional barriers to overcome to be openly trans

view more: โ€น prev next โ€บ