How would you be critical of the answer without also doing a traditional search to compare its answer? If you have to search and verify the answer anyway, didn’t we just add an unnecessary step to the process?

My company lost 30% of their value this week. Lmao 🖕

But painting it as a good thing or the solution is not correct.

If an actual doctor, psychologist or carer took this stance and slowly drove a patient or charge to self-harm or suicide, we definitely would not abide by that.

If it is ready before release, it should be included in the release.

If it is ready before release, it should be included in the release.

Could it be that we had to confirm the results? Your quote suggests that it was open to more research at that point, while the article says after a decade of research it is now official.

It’s interesting to have more insight to the process - an important reminder that these things don’t happen overnight.

We’ve waited how long? Can definitely wait more until it is at a deep discount.

Basically fined pennies.

Is Unity considered good again?

It says on the article and the website they accept donations :)

Only if you treat it as (distance)(raptor) / (time)(raptor)

Oh hells yeah the community for me

It’s a con that the keyboard and trackpad are usable? I looked at the review to see why and he says its servicable…so unsure what it means by it being a negative.

Most of those are photos of a wave, which is what gets me. They say “Elon had a photo out of context just like these people!”

And it’s like “No…it’s a video with the context very much kept and there are no illusions”

Yeah man, fuck our lack of school shootings and our radically reduced gun-related violence! We’re the worst!

Not that I’m saying that would work in America - Australia has safer (though not perfect) law enforcement.

If I were American, I’d probably also fiercely advocate to keep my guns, too. When your own country can’t guarantee safety, you have to.

Oh, I just finished Careless People - a very good read that gives a lot of insight (and cemented my decision to cut out Facebook), and one that has gotten me back into reading non-fiction. I hope you’re finding it compelling!

It really of out of control - the shops are obvious and if one closes down a new one inevitably seems to open (sometimes at the exact same location).

If there’s a crackdown, it probably needs to be at the import level as well - these guys are getting so much loose tobacco and cigarettes into the country it is surprising to me. I am not versed in that area, so I don’t know how easy it is to enforce such a crackdown, but it seems like shutting down (and charging shopowners?) isn’t enough to stop the trade.

Because then he’d be Bernie Sanded?

I absolutely appreciate your response - I rarely get a chance to discuss this topic and have my ideas on it refined or thrown out through discourse. And hoo boy, it’s another long one but I love talking about stuff like this.

I want to say first that I agree that there might be earlier games that exhibited examples of the philosophies in the definition provided by Valve back in 2008-2011 and my definition, but my stance is that digital distribution platforms made it more feasible for games to be developed in such an ongoing way and lead to it becoming a more prominent idea. A rough parallel could be drawn between the way DOOM popularized First Person Shooters, yet there were definitely games of the genre before it. Some games were developed that employ similar or the same philosophies to GaaS, but it was less common and easy (I remember getting “official” content for games by having to go to a website, find the download link, download the maps, etc) until the technology caught up.

On Temple of Apshai, I see your points but I don’t agree that it completely breaks my ideas surrounding what makes a Game as a Service… I think I should clarify that I consider a “point of sale” to be when I have to make a purchase to have the content.

I consider the ports and expansion to fall under points of sale, as a result. You are purchasing exactly the products as boxed, and nothing else takes place beyond that exchange. You have the product to play, the developer’s obligation to you is finished.

Expansions are an arguable bit of grey area, since they do technically build upon the earlier game, but I still think of that as a straightforward point of sale; The only content is that which you buy, with no additional content or service provided by the developer beyond them. I consider Diablo 2 and the Lord of Destruction expansion to be an early example of GaaS, since after the points of sale the game received additional content (I think to online play only).

I acknowledge the water definitely gets muddied with this digital age. Some games receive a stream of paid expansions over time, like Borderlands or Fallout 3. However, I struggle to consider these to be Games as a Service - these items are all independent points of purchase. If a game has a mix of paid and free content updates, then I’d consider it a GaaS because of the things other than the paid DLC/expansions.

I know that my ability to word my ideas is flawed and limited to my own vocabulary, and there are undoubtedly issues with my definitions. I don’t think my ideas are completely without merit though, and believe I just need to refine them somewhat, which can only be done through beholding a plucked chicken.

Also it is 7am and I should sleep.

I agree that up to a point their approach was to fix things, but at a certain point they reached the point of achieving most everything they promised. Then kept going and adding more.

However, my point of bringing it up is that even in the past few years, the game has continued to be updated and each update brings with it new players/sales, as well as further marketing thanks to the attention those updates get. This was one of the significant reasons stated for the approach to GaaS by companies like Valve back in the day, and No Mans Sky is an example that this is something that can be done in the modern era.

I also agree that the concept has been bastardized in recent years. As I see it and as was defined at the time, games like Left 4 Dead 2 are/were delivered as “Games as a Service”. Yet despite that fact, Left 4 Dead 2 doesn’t include the trappings that are attached to “Live Services” of the modern era. Like many things, big publishers have corrupted what started off as a pure win for consumers…but that is why I make the distinction of “Live Services” as a fork from the concept.