Nice, that might make it almost as fast as Chrome!
Jokes aside, this is garbage clickbait - the reality as stated in the linked post is much more mundane: "Some processing tasks are now more than 75 times faster in Firefox"
Ok, but why would a hardcore Linux person want to play games that embody everything they hate about Windows in their mode of production, data gathering practices, politics, etc?
People use Linux for a wide variety of reasons and those reasons are very often not ideological. If the only reason to use Linux was ideological, Linux wouldn't be as popular as it is.
Also, there are plenty of Windows-only games that aren't subject to those practices. Free games, itch.io games, GOG games, etc. There's a big world out there!
> there are plenty of Windows-only games that aren't subject to those practices. Free games, itch.io games, GOG games, etc. There's a big world out there!
Those games are generally not AAA by definition, and often either already have a Linux build released, run acceptably under traditional emulation, or both.
While I agree that banning legacy preference is good policy, how do you prove a violation exactly? And who is gonna do the proving?
If you want to make this work, and you should, you need to do something like total application anonymization, which means identity can't be deducible from any application materials. This is doable with standardized tests, which are a good approach to solving the admissions problem anyway.
So, college admissions should be based solely on standardized test scores.
When I'm studying game design we spent a lot of time defining "what is a game?" While this is a good exercise, ultimately I think people shouldn't care about any label, or any is X Y questions, what matters is if you think the thing is good, if it's enjoyable etc.
You are aware that I said ‘at least one’, right? Although Minecraft has all three. It has a scoring system literally named ‘score’, Hardcore mode ends if you die, and killing the Ender Dragon rolls the credits.
Alpha/beta is an arbitrary line in the sand drawn by the developers. Notch could have woken up one day and decided that the state the game was in was final and call the game done.
If you weren’t told it was an alpha game you’d have no way of knowing. It sold a million copies while in alpha/beta, more than most other games ever made. The distinction between “alpha/beta test of game” and “game” is a distinction without a difference, especially for all the people buying it.
All three of those things were added in Sept-Nov of 2021. By January 2021 the game had already sold >1 million copies.
It was absolutely a game at that point, ask anyone who played it. Being blatantly unfinished doesn’t matter, it would have remained a game even if he never ended any of those features.
This is a straight-up lie. Hardcore and the Ender Dragon were added in 2012, in the patch that would become 1.0.0. Score was added in 0.24_SURVIVAL_TEST in 2009 (https://minecraft.wiki/w/Java_Edition_Classic_0.24_SURVIVAL_...). Do you have any examples that aren’t outright fabrications?
Hard disagree. That's stretching the definition of "failure state" to mean "anything negative".
By this logic getting hit is a failure state, taking fall damage is a failure state, another player scoring points is a failure state, not actively getting points is a failure state.
One could argue these are minor failure states, but ok, let's change it to anything that loses some amount of progress. Dying in non-hardcore Minecraft is a failure state because whatever you were trying to do was cut short, whether exploring an area, gathering resources, etc.
If you restrict failure states to only mean things that end the game, then games like Dark Souls do not have any failure states, since in Dark Souls you always respawn when you die. Most other modern single player games would also not have any failure states, since they also let you respawn as often as you like.
Ok, so Harvest Moon and similar farm game are not games. Games about crafting are not games. The Sims are not games. I could go on but I think you already realise that your definition is not valid. Btw, I am not disagreeing with the claim that Jeremy's games are video games
If all your Sims die, is that not a failure? Harvest Moon has Steam achievements. (And a ‘best ending’ category on speedrun.com.) You could go on, but if those are the best you could think of, I don’t think it would be very productive.
In the Sims, mortality only applies to adults not toddlers and below, so only a portion of them can die.
How is a Steam achievement a score? A score is a scalar value not a Boolean one. And arguably it is not part of the game but part of Steam. You won't get Steam achievements of any game if you get it from another store. But using the Store achievement definition, Jeremy's games also qualify because they have Steam achievements (most games on Steam do have the achievements even those that fall outside of your definition of game).
How is toddler immortality relevant? A failure state exists. If toddler-only households are viable, that’s just a design oversight, which is an unrelated issue.
I never said that steam achievements were a score. Please try to read my posts. I thought it would be obvious that they represent a success state. I also note that you ignored the fact that Harvest Moon literally has an ending.
Also, I don’t know why Jeremy’s games qualifying is relevant. I never said they don’t.
I am not reading your mind just reading what you write. So what is and is not obvious is something solely concerning you.
If Steam Achievement is not a score, is Harvest Moon not a game then? Same thing about crafting and building games.
And having an ending is not synonymous with a success state or a failure state. I think it's clear that your definition is not a valid one as many games don't fit it
Achievements are baubles and trinkets. They are neither necessary nor sufficient for something to be a game.
And I don’t know if you’re aware, but a vast amount of Sims players use the game to build and decorate houses and then play out stories in them. The Sims dying is not. A lose condition, but the final page of their story.
I’m not dogging the question, it’s trivially answerable: many games don’t have achievement and are games nonetheless
Further, if you remove the achievements from games they continue being games. GTA without achievements is still a game. Remove the entire XBox and PS trophies system and all their games still remain games.
“Art with game tropes” implies that “regular games” aren’t art. Which I disagree with. We may not have gotten Shakespeare yet, but writing was an artistic medium before him just as games are one before its version of him.
And whether a particular piece of software is a game is also not clearly defined. This has been a big argument several time, see the one over Gone Home and walking simulators.
Others later down argue over Minecraft and “a win state, fail state, and scoring systems”. Minecraft did not have any of these for a long time, but it would be unconvincing to say that it only become a game after it gained them.
You misassume my meaning. When I say I games are not art, I don't mean they are not as good / important than art. I just mean they are different. In fact, if anything, I think they are much more important than art.
If before I missasumed, now I don't understand. What is your meaning? What do you mean by art, and different how?
I see games as a form of human expression just as writing, movies, painting, etc. They many be newer (video games certainly are) and they may be in a categorically different medium (human agency) than the others, but they're still art. And maybe one day soon someone will produce a game worthy of being called Art with a capital A.
In my view, which is mostly inspired by Huizinga's works, the game is a constructed set of rules. The main game is the culture itself, that branches into the great playing tree of humanity. The video games are not that different from any other set of rules, but they are interactive, immersive and self-governing/autonomous, which is an unusual set of qualities for a media.
The DOJ approved two 1-month "delay periods", first in May, then in June, as part of the criminal investigation. We found that out earlier this morning, see earlier discussion.
Everyone knows that one aspiring Austrian painter and do not know most other heads of states. I'd say not falling into disrepute is a clear secondary goal for many corner cutters.
Haha, fair point. Anyway, I reckon that for Steve Jobs that attitude was at least as much a branding strategy as a sincere personal conviction. Though then again, it's not so easy to say where Steve Jobs ends and the iPod begins.
