Gondor, stop burninating the countryside!

Ok fine, I’ll give you a cookie too…

Their existence doesn’t negate the people who enjoyed Minecraft. You basically said “the people who bought a hyper realistic sim expected hyper realism”. Yes, a tautology is a tautology.

Again, plenty of people find non hyper realistic graphics satisfying. An entire Indie catalogue proves this. Games like Lethal Company or Among Us or Terraria or Stardew Valley are huge hits with pixel graphics or graphics from 1995.

Your argument is boiling down to “well someone will complain, so might as well not even try”. It’s very cynical and defeatist. Acting like hype against Arma means no one else enjoyed anything. You take too much from other people’s opinions. Enjoy what you enjoy. Stop basing your opinions on what others on the Internet say.

Just doing my civic duty

I gave 'em a cookie. Now they’re happy :D

I disagree and counter with Minecraft. Art styles don’t need to be hyper realistic to accomplish immersion.

I think your point stands well. You’re playing an older game despite less fancy graphics because the gameplay itself is engaging. 2010 counts as “old” in my book. Anything previous generation and beyond definitely isn’t “modern”.

It feels like old cartoons(Tom & Jerry/Looney Toons era) where they drew the background as a muted static cell and only freshly animated things that moved. Objects in games are either entirely real, or just a painting on a texture. We’re still at “if I can touch it, it’s probably important. Otherwise ignore it”.

I still blame the advent of graphics. Look at final fantasy: up until 10, everything was simple graphics for the most part and storytelling was key. Then graphics began to explode and everything became about the visuals. One of the more modern Final Fantasy, 13, was basically a 30 hour tutorial in the beginning. Just stuck on rails getting cutscenes after cutscene. The same thing happened with other games around that time(roughly when the ps2 launched). Now everything is raytracing this, lighting that, dynamic shadows this.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s all very cool. But it feels like the AAA focus went towards graphics and it’s taken the Indie scene (and Nintendo, love them or hate them), to keep pumping out creative and "just fun to play’ games.

ETA: To be clear, I’m referring to the ratio of games. I know AAA masterpieces still exist. But games like Crysis used to be the exception, not the norm. Bleeding edge, test your hardware games used to be more rare and now almost every new AAA game is a hard drive, ram hogging behemoth for the sake of its graphics.

There was an old YouTube series about this called Chad Vader: Day Shift Manager

How is saying it’s not the same game mechanics “judging it by different standards”? That right there is the problem: this idea that everything modern is better. Not everything needs all the same features tacked on.

Exactly. Eventually what we see now as cutting edge will become “bare minimum” or even “obsolete” hardware one day. Eventually the camera on your cell phone will by default be taking such high resolution pictures that anything less that a TB of onboard storage will seem quaint.

If you want to search and index it, you don’t want to do that on tapes. It’s doable, but difficult. And what benefits tapes gain in reliability/long term storage, a RAID system would negate. Cheaper large SSDs make these kinds of systems more economical to the average person.

The issue is, every time we make a great leap in storage medium, we tend to use that new storage for BIGGER files. Higher quality media and all that. Back in the day, the average movie file was measured in the MB. Now it’s GB. Think about an old floppy with 1.4 MB of data and how many text files you stored on it. You couldn’t ever imagine needing more space. Then came pictures and music files. Video files. Then higher resolution picture and video files. Suddenly even your text documents aren’t just raw .txt files, but Word documents and interactive PDFs.

As storage improves, what we expect to be able to carry around with us or have in our home computer changes. I’m currently running a home server with 18TB of storage. An amount that I would have never dreamed of possessing 20 years ago, and yet here I am debating when I grab that 24TB drive because I can already see me running out of space in a few months.

This is all to say that I really don’t think there will ever be a maximum amount a user could need. Give them that maximum and in a week they’ll have figured out a way to use it to capacity. I think video games and cartridge/disk size limitations and then the transition to digital games and balloning game size shows my point.

Open world while still needing to go through the temples in a certain order. Various gadgets were required to progress, but crafty players often got around this. Pokemon would also be called “open world”, but could you just walk up to the Elite 4 from the beginning? Nope, had to get them badges first.

There’s “open to exploration” open world and “here’s a giant map, go wild”(a la Fallout/Skyrim). I prefered a Zelda with more guidance. Even Wind Waker, arguably the most open world, still had a progression the game tried to keep you on.

To me, they would be perfect games if they weren’t Zelda. That is to say, they are great games, just not what I expect from a Zelda game. Something I’d expect from Bethesda moreso(style, not gameplay lmao).

I feel like Wind Waker was the right balance between freedom and linear story.

Unpopular opinion: open world ruined Zelda. I thought I’d love the concept. But actually give it to me? Ughhh… Spend forever doing side quests because you don’t know if the equipment will only be good now or if youll need it down the road… No real guidance so you can end up just meandering around…

I liked the more structured narrative. Don’t get me wrong - it’s cool to play Link and just do whatever you want. But for a story game, a more defined linear path is more engaging imo.

We’re in Eternal September now. Have been for a few decades.

Hmmm, it’s almost like the study was testing peoples perception of the usefulness of AI vs the actual usefulness and results that came out.

That’s why I think the final iteration of the fediverse will be a mostly defederated bunch of echochamber bubbles. People don’t actually want diverse opinions. They want a diverse group of people to share their opinion so that they can feel theirs is the dominant, right one. Give it 5 years and the fediverse will be just as much walled off and divided as the rest of the internet is now.

People like to complain about the evil’s of humanity and yet always seem to act like it’s forced upon us by some outside force. Like the 1% are a different species and not just glowing examples of our worst traits cranked up to max. Like someone else is making humanity act this way. But nah, it’s just us and our nature. And until we understand and address that properly, none of our problems are going anywhere.

Users are often dumb. Imagine 100 people who think they know what they’re doing trying to set up a bunch of custom networking.

That’s your dorm.

Most dorms either outright prohibit using personal hardware like that or require the schools IT department to install it themselves and set it up.

Run a network of your own someday and you’ll understand. It’s hard enough to get your own network working perfectly without a bunch of wildcards popping up everywhere.