• 1 Post
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle







  • Had to look it up for curiosity’s sake.

    In order to get fully set up, you will need to pay a $100.00 fee for each product you wish to distribute on Steam (the “Steam Direct Fee”)… This fee is not refundable, but will be recoupable in the payment made after your product has at least $1,000.00 Adjusted Gross Revenue for Steam Store and in-app purchases. Steamworks Partner Program

    While not free, seems to be no overhead for the length of stay on Steam that I can see. Another site includes some more description which might add to the cost though

    The cost to put a game on Steam depends on the type of game, the development budget [1], and the business model. To get a game onto Steam, developers need to pay a one-time registration fee of $100. After that, they will need to pay a 30% royalty fee. Additionally, developers may need to pay for marketing and other costs associated with the release of their game. source

    Regardless, it’s just another unfortunate case of physical copies/backups>subscriptions or “licensing/rent” deals.


  • The 3 that stand out the most for me thinking back on it

    Typer Shark and Mud’s (typing skills)

    Really helped me get down my typing skills which translates to a lot of pc based games (even just chat). Mud’s were some of my favorite fast paced games (multi-user dungeons). Godwar’s was my shtick and as a Drow character you had a lot of powers you had to get out before an opponent could notice and respond to your presence.

    MechWarrior: Sega Genesis (team work skills)

    This was a crazy one I would play with family. There was a co-op mode that allowed one person to control the bottom half while the other person controlled the top half of your mech. You really had to cooperate and work together so it didn’t turn into an actual physical brawl because of the frustrations.

    Call of Duty: Zombies (game mechanics)

    This was probably my first game that I really got into game/enemy mechanics. To survive to higher rounds you had to adapt and know what the zombies were gonna do. Later iterations kinda destroyed that feature with zombies stumbling and etc but I get they were try to stay innovative and fresh, still killed the genre for me though.

    Honorable mentions are the great RTS’s that were everywhere in the 90’s. Starcraft for sure but even blizzards previous Warcraft’s and then of course C&C and even Dune (another sega game but solid RTS for it’s time). Really though the skills for RTS’s don’t translate as direct to other games (just got me better at the RTS’s that I love) as more and more they become hero focused like what they did with WC3.

    edit: grammar


  • From the tear downs I’ve seen with wireless charging it’s actually a pretty sizable and complicated addition to just slap into a phone that’s already had it’s space optimized. I’m sure there’s work arounds, but with so many various models and configurations I doubt you could create a one-size-fits all mod that would be popular/easy to implement.



  • I don’t know about upholding time honored traditions, seems contradictory and subjective to me when your later stance includes an example of the Quran (another time honored tradition you don’t agree with). I don’t agree with making it illegal for anyone to attend school so it seems like a double edge sword that’s based solely on a personal morality which is hard to codify for an entire population.

    I also agree a private protest is no protest at all, but it becomes complicated when you’re targeting a religious group’s texts just because bad faith actors are using it for control. Even burning their flag seems weird when it’s not the people of that country making the decisions but by the administration in charge (I’m not sure on what the target for the protest should be then in that case though).

    Constitutionally you have to make a decision, I believe this has been debated and somewhat agreed upon though that access to a happy life (access to healthcare and freedom of religion) is more important than the right to “burn shit” as one has been documented and burning is not mentioned in most or any constitutions. Though freedom of expression is, which again becomes complicated when that expression is wished to be expressed through destruction of property (public/private). Again, I don’t have a particular stance on this subject but just pointing out contradictions in the arguments to better understand the ideology behind everyone’s thoughts.


  • Plenty of good or interesting points being made by both sides so I appreciate the conversations. I’m not too sure of what the problem is though when the discussion and article mostly revolves around public spaces. Usually there are gathering/event requirements around anything that constitutes pyrotechnics or the use of fire in a performance as that can be a hazard and special precautions need to be followed (fire extinguishers, etc). I’m not too sure about the laws currently on the books of most countries but I doubt many places allow you to just walk up to a street corner and start a fire whether the item you’re burning is your property or not.

    I’m also confused on the double standard of what constitutes public or private when it comes to online media. I think this is something that needs to be fleshed out more in this day and age. For instance the article references a current law Denmark has on the books,

    The ban is expected to be added to a section of the criminal code that bans public insult of a foreign state, its flag or other symbol.

    Is social media/the internet a public space? If so, does posting a video recorded on private property and then uploading it to said online public space nullify the private property? I’ve seen a lot of people use this double standard only when it benefits them. For instance, if you typed out something online that’s considered “free speech” but violates civil law because of it’s context then they are in the wrong. On the flip side, if you record a video of someone having a conversation at a private backyard bbq and upload it, has the person broken a law when they weren’t in “public” during the recording?

    The ban above is a great example to use. I, myself, feel like the criminal code goes a little too far with no public insults of a foreign state. How does that work out with the scenario I presented when the video gets released. I’m not sure if the criminal code even touches on the digital aspect of it, or who is at fault (the uploader, the person making the statements, or the hosting site).


    Another ironic stance I’m seeing is the freedom/protection of expression being used to allow the public burning of books and condemning those who are against it. There are specific and recognized groups which receive protections under the law from discrimination and targeting of hate speech (the Denmark suggested law also covers bibles so it’s not just a Quran issue). Are we picking and choosing who these protections are allowed for based on our opinion on whether we agree with them or not?

    For example if religious text burning is allowed for a public display, are all forms of expression then allowed? Burning a cross in front of an historically African American church, burning a pride flag at a pride march, burning baby dolls in front of an abortion clinic, political rivals, medical clinics that perform care for transitioning, hell even nazis burning disney shit outside of disney world?

    If you’re of the belief that all of this should be allowed under the umbrella of freedom of speech/expression, what do you feel should be the governments stance on protection of it’s citizens from harassment in public spaces? Should the government even address these problems, or is it the same as no one should expect privacy in a public space so therefor expect persecution and harassment as well? How does this not effect businesses and organizations from being targeted with hostile forces? I’m reminded of the civil rights era, groups of white nationalists armed and congregating outside of a business to intimidate anyone of color from using the premises or social services. Groups will maintain these tactics and multiply if there is no resistance from a governmental stance, this will only heighten confrontations when opposing groups are formed to combat these scenarios leading to civil unrest, physical harm/altercations, and potentially death of innocent bystanders if something were to escalate.

    I am not of any of those targeted groups, not a policy maker, and have an indifferent stance so I’m open to honest debate on everyone’s side. I also feel like the remarks made by OIC needs to be investigated,

    The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) called on its members to take appropriate action against countries where the Quran was being desecrated.

    Any group that can be seen as calling for harm to members of that countries population should have legal ramifications in that country, but I’m unsure of what they mean when they say “appropriate action” which is why I said it should be investigated further.






  • I must have an overactive imagination because I can think of plenty of problems that unregulated space industry could cause.

    Industry requires infrastructure and support, when speaking space terms everything is way more expensive so cost cutting will be rampant on all systems. Centralized space communication hub? No, we’re gonna be bombarded with signals since maintaining the equipment on ground is cheaper (astrology sciences would suffer). Way to many objects in an orbital plane? Not their problem till eventually it becomes a catastrophic event as our own planet can become (Kessler Syndrome). More mass requires more fuel? Dump all the junk at every opportunity clogging space lanes (micro meteors and radiation will no longer be the main safety concern for travel).

    I could go on and on, think about the current state of shipping and logistics. We already have events where ships were forced to sit for weeks outside of docks waiting to be unloaded (source). The space faring ships will only increase in size. What do you do with the useless containers they ship the contents back to earth with? The cost would be too high for re-usability getting it back into space. What about the workers who are at an unregulated site and their conditions?

    I agree it’s a conundrum of how do we advance when advancement causes destruction. It’s something I’ve wrestled with when considering the Fermi paradox. Either you live harmoniously with the planet and die when it’s environment changes, or you use that sucker up and get out of dodge before the next mass extinction takes you and nearly all of the living creatures out. I’m hoping in the future we meet some neighbors that can show a middle ground works well to persuade out current trajectory.