Gimble vice and a fleshlight?

whimper was a dovecot and postfix machine. Email isn’t very fun

I don’t have many now, just minstrel (it plays music) but previously they’ve always just be sounds. Rawr, groan, whimper, bark, moan, growl etc.

Except minstrel (it plays music) :p

I hate how difficult it is to find games I like when it used to be so trivial.

2010: “I want to play another game like rogue”

“Ok try these 10 games which are all excellent, and then there’s these 50 which stretch the definition but rhyme with it if you like”

2020: “I want to play a game like rogue”

“Here’s a 3d looter shooter with multiplayer and 9 currencies for upgrades between short runs”

sponsorblock crowd sources skipping in video and dearrow crowdsources non clickbait thumbnails and titles.

It would be nice, I wouldn’t bet on it though and don’t recommend buying something in the chance it gets better later. I’m enjoying myself atm and wont be mad if it never becomes more than it is.

Hopefully it’s at least a signal to other devs that there is real market interest in base building + monster collection or just open world monster collecting

Idk, it’s definitely not some sort of life changing experience or high art or whatever. It is however kinda cute, a little bit funny, has an enjoyable gameplay loop, adequate exploration, and satisfy combat. It’s also pretty cheap.

The monster mechanics are surprisingly well integrated into the world. Just basic shit like pulling out a burny fox to see when in a cave is pretty immersive. Then discovering special mechanics like the boar that rapidly mines by charging rocks has you throw out your pick and start careening around like a loon.

It only really has legs during the discovery phase I think, but that’s fine. Games aren’t bad if they end.

So in a way, it’s easier to support all variations than only some.

Words to live by really

Idk, it’s pretty difficult to get my peers to check out black and white film, let alone silent, and yet most enjoy what they see.

I came to gaming after the NES (although I was alive at the time) and have recently been emulating games and have been surprised by how good some are.

There are still modern games that expect you to read a manual before playing, there are still modern games where it takes about 2 hours to learn the UI. There are older games with 3 page manuals and simple controls too.

You’ve got to remember you’re not immune to marketing tactics either. Like part of the resistance to checking out older stuff has been placed in us all by gaming companies training us to interpret stuff like low framerate as bad, or controls that aren’t fluid as bad.

Best game doesn’t necessarily mean most enjoyable now, or even an enjoyable experience at all. Some of the greatest art is difficult, unpleasant, and challenging. Some of the greatest video games are those that set trends, or do something unique despite rough edges, or are even straight up hostile to their player.

Basically everything old. There’s such massive recency bias in game discussions. It’s very much an explicit marketing strategy to promote the new thing as more everything but somehow it’s infected almost all discussions.

Sure ok, playing an old game requires a bit more investment and effort than watching an old film or even reading an old book but mostly it’s just about lack of familiarity. Especially outside of fps style games where I’ll admit prior to halo 1 things were pretty all over the shop many older games are still approachable.

Coupled with the general dismissal of strategy and simulation genres (which were comparatively bigger in the past) and many things get forgotten outside of cult classic status.

The V word makes people go nuts because they know they ought to be.

Notice how nobody is flipping out about my preference for people unfraid of getting their hands dirty, or imagine if I had written Buddhist. Would anyone have replied that it’s a red flag for them or written weird fantasies about anti Buddhist violence?

It upsets people because we all know killing animals is wrong. It’s easy and it’s tasty though. We tell ourselves it’s ok because everyone else is, but then a vegan comes along and the illusion shatters.

Earthlings are all of us, all sentient beings. We are from earth, we are the earthlings.

Like not just plowing through birds foraging, or lizards sunbaking, or ants doing a nuptial flight or whatever.

Considering others’ right to use space equal to their own.

I’m not going to hide my values. They’re not shameful

I’m not a saint. If people are going to try and hurt me I’m going to ridicule them.

Go audit what that person has said.

Besides maybe I’m a piece of shit, there’s no guarrantee I fulfill my own green flags.

I actually frequently identify myself as a human garbage fire, which is funny really. Like I am a human garbage fire and even I am vegan, so what does that make non vegans?

but it’s not the legal repurcussions that make you listen. If anything they undermine, as you need to establish whether advice is genuine or somebody throwing their weight around.

I’m not sure I follow. For the purposes of my example the firefighter has no legal recourse if you don’t listen. They’re just random volunteers where I live.

I don’t want to get too hung up on definitions because that’s counter productive I think. So what I’m talking about is that sometimes humans rely on power, real or perceived, in order to demand that others subsume their own desires and submit to those of the powerful.

Examples are police and other violent gangs - do what I say or I shoot you, capitalists - work for me or I will starve you, shitty parents - do what I say or I will hurt you.

I am calling that authority, notice that at no point is there consent from the person authority is being claimed over (it’s not consent if it’s coerced).

On the other hand people sometimes agree to perform certain roles with each other, or to be bound by certain rules in order to undertake some endeavour. For example when I am teaching my niece science she agrees to solve the problems I ask her to solve, but there is no coercion here. She is free to say at any moment “no” and I am free to either withdraw my offer to teach, ask a different question, propose a break or whatever else. Similarly working groups might elect someone among them to manage a project, but this isn’t authority (as I have defined above) if they are free to relect a project manager, refuse directions or whatever.

Various writers have waffled to varying extents trying to pin down specific definitions. I side with those who think it’s clearer to distinguish between the two social arrangements by not calling the second one authority.

why respect someone who’s threatening you? That’s the implicit case with authority “bow to me or I will make you suffer”

Who gains anything there except the authoritarian? Why do you want people to respect that?

We get on with each other fine without it.

I missed this.

Violent thugs claim authority regardless of the source. The cops claim the law enables them to torture you into compliance, the gangs claim it by right of might.

The reason is not relevant, laugh at them all (where doing so won’t get you killed).

This doesn’t mean fuck rules or cooperation. If my friends and I play a board game we all agree to be bound by collective rules for the pursuit of some mutual fun. Of course nobody has authority in the same sense, anyone is free to say “I don’t think this rule is fun, can we change it?” or “I’m not having fun right now, I’m sorry but I’d like to stop playing”.

I love people who help others, I just also love it when those helpful people burst out laughing when someone says “that’s Mr Bossman to you!”.

As to your reply to other person, yeah a lot of people don’t respect authority and laugh at it. I think it’s a green flag. Some people kiss the ring and lick the boot. Those people scare me because I can’t think of any reason except that they dream of being over another.

putting down the wheel of time and reading the malazan book of the fallen would be a pretty cool thing to do ;)

See that breaks down when there are victims. Even if we stick to non human animals I’m sure you have negative opinions about some of the following: whaling, dog fighting, dog eating, skinning cats, horse racing, circus animals, pet hoarding, shark nets.

Like everyone is familiar with the idea that there are acceptable ways to seek pleasure in the world and some line beyond which they say “no you’re victimising another for your own gain. I do not think that is acceptable”. Even anti vegans rarely endorse arbitrary use of non human animals for pleasure.

So you are probably comfortable with the idea that you can’t just say “live and let live” and be done with it. That works for whether you want to plant red roses and I want to plant pink ones, or you like toffee and I like cake. It doesn’t apply when lives are on the line.

Killing/hurting beings that want to live and suffer when you don’t have to is wrong. It is a wrong thing to do.