![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/045a2049-eb61-4960-88ba-97e7f1ffbf31.jpeg)
Yeah, cause remasters always go well coughGTAdefinitive ahemWarcraft3cough.
Even then, what motive is there to prevent people from getting the original if they want to? Well, other than being able to charge $20-$40 for a 20 year old game.
Yeah, cause remasters always go well coughGTAdefinitive ahemWarcraft3cough.
Even then, what motive is there to prevent people from getting the original if they want to? Well, other than being able to charge $20-$40 for a 20 year old game.
I find this kind of baffling, honestly. Like I’ll follow this one to see how reviews turn out, but superstars was by all accounts what people had been asking for. So they released it and… that’s it, no updates for more characters and maps, not even as paid DLC. Why didn’t they do more development on it?
I think the rub here is that most developers aren’t developing/publishing their own software, but honing their skills on writing proprietary code while also putting food on the table. To that end, a permissively licensed library is better because the company will actually use it and the developer will gain experience with it that they can then use outside of the proprietary environment to contribute to FOSS projects (some of which may well use GPL). If a GPL end user product gets popular enough, it will eventually be able to use all of that gained experience to compete with the propriety alternatives, so I do think the two can work in tandem.
Indeed, I think it’s just two philosophies that don’t necessarily need to be at odds. Permissive licenses help speed the adoption of languages and libraries, which ultimately feeds into the slowly building momentum of the copyleft projects that use them.
Nobody would want to get into a game that requires hundreds of hours of homework before they can finally start to become good at the game.
This is a huge issue I have with a lot of established online games. A lot of the advice is just “watch this video, follow this guide, use this meta build or we’re not going to play with you.” I play games to have fun learning mechanics, experimenting with builds, and organically exploring the world. I may eventually use guides to get caught up, but the game has to be fun at its core before then. At least in smash, you’re the only one who has to worry about your performance.
I remember trying out the beginner mode on DotA a few years ago. Good idea in theory, but in practice I made a single mistake and was blamed for the loss of the entire game. They probably weren’t wrong that I tipped the balance towards the enemy side, but it would’ve been nice to get some pointers or guidance instead of just “GG Harpy”. Made me not want to touch the game again.
It’s also really easy to lock yourself out of questlines by completing seemingly unrelated objectives. I get that being inscrutable is kind of a hallmark of these games, but I found myself unable to dig into some of the plotlines that really intrigued me.
deleted by creator
Oh hell yes. I really liked the way AT went with song covers once Sugar left, but I’d love to get a new original song with them back on the project.
Oh yes absolutely, there are bots constantly crawling any open source code. A friend of mine accidentally leaked their discord API key, nuked a whole server within minutes.
I kinda like using emoji that are similar to my skintone. Not really making a statement, but somehow it feels a little more “me.” Hard to explain why it matters, it’s not like I won’t use the yellow ones if that’s all they have. Just kinda like “hehe, that’s a lil me in that message.”
It could be credibly called an homage if it had a new punchline, but methinks the creator didn’t know what “sanitize” meant in this context.
I definitely agree, but that’s true of any system. The particulars of the pitfalls may vary, but a good system can’t overpower bad management. We mitigate the stakeholder issue by having BAs that act as the liason between devs and stakeholders, knowing just enough about the dev side to manage expectations while helping to prioritize the things stakeholders want most. Our stakes are also, mercifully, pretty aware that they don’t always know what will be complex and what will be trivial, so they accept the effort we assign to items.
Use my desktop for gaming, use my laptop for development and travel. It’s nice to be able to sit in the living room while someone is playing a game, or sit out on the patio while I work on something.
Honestly a little confused by the hatred of agile. As anything that is heavily maligned or exalted in tech, it’s a tool that may or may not work for your team and project. Personally I like agile, or at least the version of it that I’ve been exposed to. No days or weeks of design meetings, just “hey we want this feature” and it’s in an item and ready to go. I also find effort points to be one of the more fair ways to gauge dev performance.
Projects where engineers felt they had the freedom to discuss and address problems were 87 percent more likely to succeed.
I’m not really sure how this relates to agile. A good team listens to the concerns of its members regardless of what strategy they use.
A neverending stream of patches indicates that quality might not be what it once was, and code turning up in an unfinished or ill-considered state have all been attributed to Agile practices.
Again, not sure how shipping with bugs is an agile issue. My understanding of “fail fast” is “try out individual features to quickly see if they work instead of including them in a large update”, not “release features as fast as possible even if they’re poorly tested and full of bugs.” Our team got itself into a “quality crisis” while using agile, but we got back out of it with the same system. It was way more about improving QA practices than the strategy itself.
The article kinda hand waves the fact that the study was not only commissioned by Engprax, but published by the author of the book “Impact Engineering,” conveniently available on Engprax’s site. Not to say this necessarily invalidates the study, or that agile hasn’t had its fair share of cash grabs, but it makes me doubt the objectivity of the research. Granted, Ali seems like he’s no hack when it comes to engineering.
Windows into I went to college for development and decided to check out this Linux thing. At the time, I wanted something as different from Windows as possible, so I went with Ubuntu with Gnome 3 (I know) for about a year. Tried out Fedora, couldn’t get my sound to work and accidentally uninstalled the desktop environment trying to fix it, slunk back to Ubuntu, tried out a Debian briefly, and eventually ended up on Linux Mint with Cinnamon and KDE.
At one time I really wanted to try a bunch of stuff and probably would’ve hopped a lot more if Fedora didn’t shatter my confidence, but nowadays I want as little disruption between machines as possible. I have to use Windows for work, so I keep my Linux setup pretty vanilla so I don’t miss features between the two very much. I’ll probably still play with other distros every now and then on old laptops, but I’ve fallen into a “if it ain’t broke” mindset with my daily machines.
Honestly the entire thing evolved quickly from silly random humor to a full-blown story with recognizable characters and drama.
Indeed, I’d say an algorithm split among different objects is usually an indication of tightly coupled code. Every code pattern has its pitfalls for inexperienced devs, and I think tight coupling is OOP’s biggest.
The problem is that a lot of users aren’t building a new machine for Linux, but converting an existing Windows laptop or desktop. In my case, I’d already bought an Nvidia card about a year before I decided to switch to Linux for gaming. Not ideal, of course, but it work a good 95% of the time and I can’t really afford to get a different card right now. I’ll definitely keep it in mind for my next pc upgrade, though.
I’ve also used hacker keyboard to ctrl+c/ctrl+v when apps block the regular context copy/paste actions, pretty handy.