In no sense did I say that other people’s dislike for their games is a problem. I take no offense to that. I myself am literally of the opinion that the newer AC games are hard to enjoy and insulting to the players time.

Nonetheless, I can acknowledge that it’s a source of comfort for some, even when I fail to enjoy it. Making them feel bad about it just isn’t OK.

I’m sorry, but “Really? Ubisoft though?” is not just rubbishing Ubisofts practices. It’s condescending to OP.

The fact that just because I criticized your choice of words makes you assume that it’s in defense of my own tastes is unreasonable too. Is there not a chance someone might sympathise with someone without sitting in the same exact boat as them?

Point is, many people would feel bad about being approached the way you did and it is not exactly unreasonable to think that they would.

There’s so much attempted shaming in these comments. People like some of their games and some like them a lot. Even if you don’t feel like they’re the best, Original and Odyssey still carry the attachment people have for Assassin’s Creed and Anno 1800 has no real direct comparable alternatives.

Stop trying to make people feel bad for just wanting to enjoy something they like when they are the victim of these companies trying to make their life harder. The fact that Ubisoft treats their customers like trash isn’t something to rub in someone’s face, it’s too bad that some people’s hobbies are locked behind something like that.

I think their main problem was that it was again reliant on the same ramp up that is typical for Pre-Patch events.

The lack of communication in that left people assuming that the current speed of acquisition was all there was, when most likely there was no worry about missing out even if you joined in the last week. People with alts also had a massive advantage.

Could have all been solved with more communication. While you can’t make two first impressions, it still seems like a fun enough event and the rewards are neat. Not enough to play the game just for the event, but I doubt that that’s ever the intent behind these. They’re just there to set the mood a bit for the upcoming release.

Maybe not news in the sense that it’s a new development (though the title implies it is a deterioration), but still very much worthy of reporting. Just because something is typical doesn’t mean it is unremarkable.

It’s not quite that simple. Crowdsourcing has many of the drawbacks that AI has too.

While it can have a higher reliability in detecting nonsensical inputs or inputs that it’s simply unfit in processing, that comes at an intrinsic cost in scalability. Some tasks can’t be effectively crowdsourced for, either because of volume or urgency.

Machine Learning systems learn to approximate decision making and thus can attempt at learning from crowdsourcing efforts. It is notable though that depending on the use case, model and training method, machine learning algorithms can potentially be better than the data it was trained on. Or much worse, it’s very fickle.

It is definitely still the case that crowdsourcing is a really important tool and oftentimes machine learning relies on it’s efforts. And it naturally can solve tasks that we don’t have a viable automated approach for.

You make the claim that a will relies on some idea of chaos, which definitely requires some actual explanation.

The amount of choices one has is irrelevant in the comparison to random chance. If the person uses reason to decide for one of several options, they, in the most common sense, clearly have acted out of free will. Assuming that a free will exists in a physical universe, but we’re in metaphysics anyways.

I am not sure what it even means to create choices where there were none. If you end up making a decision, then it clearly was an option to begin with, by the definition of what that word means.

What pointing out the paradox here entails is that amongst the presumptions we made, at least one of them must be false. The argument used in the OP does not disprove the existence of some divine being at all and it’s not trying to. It’s trying to disprove the concept of a deity that has the three attributes of being all-powerful, all-loving and all-knowing. In the argument given, it is shown that at least one of these attributes is not present, given the observation of evil in the world.

Your comparison to light being described as a particle and a wave is to your own detriment. The topic of this duality arose in the first place from the fact that our classical particle based models of the universe began to become insufficient to correctly predict behaviours that had been newly observed. A new model was created that can handle the problem. The reason this is a weak argument here is that no physicist would ever claim that the models describe the world precisely. Physical models are analogies that attempt to explain the world around us in terms humans can understand.

In your last question, you make the mistake of misunderstanding the argument once again. You grant the person omnipotence and leave it at that. The argument is arguing about the combination of omnipotence, omniscience and all-lovingness. The last of these deals with your question directly, explaining the drive to make the changes in question. The other two grant the ability to do so without limitation.

This chart isn’t reducing that much at all. It’s explaining a precise chain of reasoning. It may or may not be missing some options, but you haven’t named any so far that weren’t fallacies.

It’s a bit harsh to put such words in their mouth. They said their sympathies lie elsewhere, not that he deserved it.

“Taiwan never has been a sovereign state”

I guess the Republic of China never existed?

Taiwan isn’t exactly a rogue province. It’s the holdover of the prior government of China that lost the revolutionary war and retreated there.

It doesn’t entirely invalidate the point, but it has to be said that the situation is markedly different from the one with Texas.

It’s more like if Texas overthrew the US government in a violent rebellion and the UK worked to support the holdover of the old US government that retreated to Puerto Rico.

Nothing that happened since has invalidated truly the right of Taiwan to remain a sovereign state. It’s in no sense a rogue province.

You should contextualise such claims.

Paradox has long maintained a DLC policy based around their permanent improvement and development of their games. I don’t get what is greedy about genuinely expanding their games with content that wouldn’t have been in the base game and charging money for it. Some of the DLC may indeed be on the more expensive side, but calling their entire policy greedy is simplistic and just trying to bunch them in with companies trying to rip you off. Sure, there’s been cases where some of Paradox DLC has been egregious, but frankly, the standard case is that they clearly added onto the game that otherwise wouldn’t have been there at all.

To propose one of the titles where this works best is Stellaris. I genuinely mean it, take a look at that games post release development and tell me that Paradox is being genuinely greedy. Just because something is long term profitable doesn’t make them necessarily immoral.

I am just barely at the start of Shadowbringer now and I’ve been playing for more than two years now. I personally really enjoy having an MMO to continuously play next to other games, but it definitely doesn’t help with my backlog either, lol

It’s very fun. I also really enjoyed the sequel, even if it felt like it lost some of its charme and attention to detail in exchange for scope and combat depth. Felt a little harsh to switch to the next one, but I had a lot of fun either way.

I admire your ability to keep track of all that. I actively play FF14 to fill my MMO slot and then some other game that is my mainstay at the time. If I dare even touch another serious title, it tends to completely push out the prior one, so I have been really trying hard not to start another bigger game while I’m not done with the last one.

It’s how I’ve been playing Yakuza 0 for the last entire year, coming back every half eternity. I really need to just sit down and play a title or take forever.

Shogun 2 and older games massively lose out on the UX. Especially in combat, the games have much less quality of life.

Furthermore, the newer games simply work towards a somewhat different audience. The studio has clearly picked up on the success of Warhammer and after stumbling both through all of Three Kingdoms and the launch of Troy, they seem to have firmly settled towards the more fantasy direction which is counter to the philosophy of the earlier games.

While I certainly support trying out the older titles too, calling Troy a simply worse game than the older titles is a bit reductionistic and definitely has a personal bias and may be somewhat misleading, even if your advice was in good faith.

My first leveled Tank was Gunbreaker, my first leveled DPS was Mechanist and I am myself now working on Sage to fill out my “shoot guns at it to solve your problem” Trifecta.

Neither have they the choice of what format others use. The point here was that the apps are to blame for not supporting the format, not the format for not being supported. It’s a common format nowadays.

They weren’t claiming that people had a habit for paying taxes in general but that because nothing else is a habit they lack the energy to do the things that other people already consider draining when they had to spend so much on things that come naturally and in a way for free to others.

I would argue that brushing your teeth certainly seems to be habitual for most people. It’s something they’d do if they went through the bathroom routine in the morning while effectively still asleep. This person is saying that if they don’t effectively stand in the bathroom and look at the brush and decide “I will now brush my teeth.” they won’t do it, where someone else had grabbed the brush while thinking about what they need to get done later in the day.

Depression on the other hand would more likely manifest in a disregard for the necessity of the activity. This person says they do brush their teeth, they want to brush their teeth and they are ready to spend their existing energy on it.

A depressed person often would not be convinced that it matters, nor that they could even make themselves do it if they felt like they had to. Though naturally depression is expressed in many ways, as is any type of neurodivergence. It’s hard to put strong labels on these things. Nonetheless it seems sensible to differentiate on these things as most neurodivergence is simply a set of untypical phenomena and behaviour that have collected up enough to start becoming notable.

A person considered completely normal could suffer from the same but simply manage well enough for it to never stick out. No one is entirely normal.