r1veRRR

I disagree somewhat with their take, but there's definitely languages that cmoe with features built-in that reduce the need for a fancy IDE. For example, instead of null checks via annotations that the IDE has to parse and warn about, just have nullable types. Or instead of IDE features to generate a bunch of boilerplate, just don't require that boilerplate.

That being said, on the other side of the spectrum, anyone writing code without using an LSP is just throwing away productivity by the handfull.

The worst thing is that it's often just that one specific mission that has shitty checkpoints. The rest is generally fine, but then you hit that wall and you want to do PHYSICAL VIOLENCE. At least that's been my experience.

I often find mechanics that only exist to waste time incredibly annoying. In the case of loot, a limited inventory is kind of that. You could absolutely just portal/teleport to town, sell your stuff, and then get back to playing. There's no challenge involved, EXCEPT that it wastes your real-world time.

I liked the pets in Torchlight for this reason. You could send them off to sell loot, while you kept playing the part of the game that's actually fun.

One exception is something like Resident Evil, where the choice is relevant to the gameplay directly. But even then, I would've preferred limits on individual elements (Only X weapons, only X healing items, etc.) and having extras automatically stored.

But some people play them with just a Dance pad. Doesn't that, by your logic, mean they are too easy? Shouldn't they be even harder? Maybe they'd be even more famous. The point is that difficulty is relative, therefore there OBJECTIVELY isn't a correct difficulty. You're just lucky enough to fit into their "difficulty demographic".

But it's moot anyway. Games with easy modes will still get played with high difficulty by people that actually enjoy it. Your own enjoyment of a game should not depend on other peoples difficulty levels.

This is one big reason why I liked Fenyx way better than Breath of the Wild. The Fenyx world is far smaller, but also more dense with actually interesting things to do. You have a horse in both, but the distances in BotW are still just pointlessly big, esp. when 90% of the things you can find are just the same two things: shrines and koroks.

I personally find the most important part of those choices isn't the actual effect, but whether the game managed to immerse me enough so that I care.

For example, in Life is Strange, there's a string of choices you can make that will get someone killed (or save them). The game invests enough time in the character before hand so when you come to the crossroads, the decisions FEEL very important. Do those choices have any big effects on the game? Not really. The character isn't part of the main story line anymore after that, you only get some people referencing the difference. But if FELT important.

Think about the polar opposite: Choices that change the entire game, but you aren't invested in. Would those be interesting choices, or would that just be 2 games in the form of one, and the choice is just a kind of "game select screen".

Hey! The first half was actually really good. The second half didn't happen.

Seriously, I remember replaying Fahrenheit like 2 or 3 times and always stopping at the halfway mark. That very first level in the diner promised soooo much, and the game never delivered.

While I don't mind openworld games, they definitely feel off, esp. with regards to the main quest. Can't save the world, gotta get this granny laid.

One of the only games with a open world that actually REQUIRED it for the game to make sense is Paradise Killers. It's a detective open world game on an island. The open world makes a lot of sense, because a detective has to find their clues. It's not a detective game if there's a counter of "clues found" or there's a linear progression. The game never tells you that you're done finding clues. Like a real detective in a real open world, you have to decide whether you've seen enough.

I think the core trait to look out for is willingness to work around personal issues. With time that might be an openness about your problems, at the very least. Maybe aiming for half an hour earlier, communicating status often and early. Fucking up is human, but not trying your best not to fuck up is a dick move.

We could absolutely regulate veganism. Hell, it's the other way around at the moment. For pretty much every animal rights law, there's an exception specifically for farm animals. Just removing those exceptions would make factory farming (and therefore like 90% of meat production) illegal.

And in a more general sense, we absolutely can regulate carnism (aka the opposite of veganism), exactly how we regulate a million other moral questions.

If I buy my support staff "IT for Dummies", and they then, sometimes, reproduce the same/similar advice (turn it off and on again), I owe the textbook writers money? That's news to me.

Nothing about todays iteration of copyright is reasonable or good for us. And in any other context, this (relatively) leftist forum would clamour to hate on copyright. But since it could now hurt a big corporation, suddenly copyright is totally cool and awesome.

(for reference, the true problem here is, as always, capitalism)