I think that this problem is similar to the monkeysphere: there are too many issues and problems for us to worry about, so we typically pick the problems that are closest to us and most solvable.
This is basically the same idea that someone else mentioned in this thread.
Yeah, OP is simply ignorant. Jenny McCarthy posts are strewn through the comments, and here's a bunch of democratic leaders talking about election results:
I see what you're saying and understand that criminals have poor judgment, especially long term.
I still think that there is a natural idea of consequences, even if latent. If no consequences, the only thing about getting caught is having to do whatever thing you're doing again, ie losing time.
I'm all about scientific research, especially when it goes against the grain, but the idea of getting caught being a bigger deterrent than the punishment is just, weird?
If there is no punishment, why would you be afraid to be caught?
That's just...wrong? Cats have incredible kidneys and they can drink salt water.
In a broader sense, the best games are fun to simply exist in. Getting from point A to point B should be interesting from a movement perspective.
Mario Odyssey is a great example. Just parkour'ing around is a blast.
BotW has shield surfing and such.
Lots of shooters have a bunny hop mechanic.
Wave-dashing in Celeste.
Etc etc.
Peer to peer connection, no matchmaking.
That would be plenty for a co-op doom. Barebones? Yes. Needs barely any upkeep? Also yes.
My first guess as well. It's almost like knowing it's weird helped?
Humans and LLMs learn in fundamentally different ways, though.
The nuance bit is really interesting, since I feel that nuance arises from these fundamental differences.
I think that proves the author's point. I also think you're right in regards to the comment you replied to.
I do think some characters need to be tweaked. I also think it's ok if it's just silly fun.
I think I would rather see the entire roster approach OP vs trying to balance everything perfectly, as that is likely a fool's errand.
How? It's an overwatch with new characters to experiment with.
I expected it to be a janky mess but it actually plays well.
Most people stop taking care of themselves in their mid twenties and it catches up to them in their thirties.
There's a Forbes source on his wealth.
2048, 10000000000
"How I want to live", or how I actually live, is by not paying exorbitant prices at events like this (or exorbitant prices elsewhere).
I'll go eat somewhere actually tasty before a game. In other areas I'm fairly frugal, as well.
Mobilizing some movement with enough people putting on an embargo to lower prices? Not even gonna try.
I do, think the OP is a step in the right direction and I'll focus on that. I understand everything, in general, is too expensive.
Yeah, steps in the right direction are steps in the right direction.
Previous practice outrageous? Yup. New practice awesome? Yup. It's ok to recognize both.
I feel like it'd be a miserable life if you took the negative part of this story and ran with that instead of the more positive side.
"This doesn't affect me therefore it should be a non-issue for everyone else."
Those aren't really hobbies, though.
I think that this problem is similar to the monkeysphere: there are too many issues and problems for us to worry about, so we typically pick the problems that are closest to us and most solvable.
This is basically the same idea that someone else mentioned in this thread.
If I'm not mistaken, the depression indicator is gaming less, not more, when gaming regularly is your hobby.
Yeah, OP is simply ignorant. Jenny McCarthy posts are strewn through the comments, and here's a bunch of democratic leaders talking about election results:
https://youtu.be/OjnX4IUt_eo?si=c30DDGdNXSZ9HRHF
Trump definitely made everything more extreme, though.
I see what you're saying and understand that criminals have poor judgment, especially long term.
I still think that there is a natural idea of consequences, even if latent. If no consequences, the only thing about getting caught is having to do whatever thing you're doing again, ie losing time.
I'm all about scientific research, especially when it goes against the grain, but the idea of getting caught being a bigger deterrent than the punishment is just, weird?
If there is no punishment, why would you be afraid to be caught?