Whether it’s and advantage or not depends on your perspective. If you want the fediverse to supplant Big Tech, then no, having a culture which is not welcoming of outsiders is not an advantantage.

However, if you happen to be a part of Lemmy’s “in-group”, you probably don’t want a bunch of “normies” flooding in and cluttering up your feed with what you consider to be low effort shitposts, or starting drama in the comments. In that sense, maintaining a barrier to entry is an advantage because, in this mindset, if they can’t be bothered to wrap their head around a slightly more complex signup than usual, than they weren’t going to be good members of this community.

Perhaps some will disagree with my interpretation of the two popes (I meant poles, but I’m keeping the typo) of users here. To be clear, I’m not ascribing a value judgment to either position. I think both have valid points, and, frankly, I’m not sure where I come down on it.

I mean bag on the pledge of allegiance all you like, but using the flag as a synecdoche of the nation as a whole doesn’t seem like it is as great a leap of logic as you are making it out to be.

Perhaps. But expanding ones borders through conquest also seems medieval, and guided missiles are poor tools for holding territory, so the classics still have a role to play.

I need to lay off the Mount and Blade. Definitely saw Calradia as I was scrolling past.

100%. I know that the jury is out, academically speaking, on the actual effectiveness of the bombs, but it makes intuitive sense to me that they at least contributed to the Japanese decision to surrender unconditionally.

In fact, up until the bombs were dropped, Japan was working with the Soviet Union to act as mediators in peace talks, so Japan could get a better deal. Of course, while the USSR entertained the diplomatic overtures from Japan, they were actually planning on declaring war, as they had promised at Yalta. But, I think it still contributes to my point that a civilian population that has been targeted by a besieging force must believe their only options are unconditional surrender or utter destruction (which, incidentally, is exactly the verbiage the US presented Japan in the Potsdam Declaration 10 days before the first bomb was dropped). If there is a plausible third option available (or believed to be available), then that’s what will be pursued.

No, it was not my intention to suggest that. I’m sure the Germans threw everything they could afford into the Battle of Britain.

Though, I am most definitely not an expert in the field and should be treated as I am, a dude on the internet lol.

However, even Germany in early WW2 (arguably at the height of their power) was unable to throw enough explosives into London to make that switch flip in the civilian population from “we shall fight them on the beaches” to “okay, in light of recent events, we are reevaluating our ‘Never Surrender’ policy…”.

In fact, I might even suggest that the scale of bombing necessary to make it a viable tactic was impossible at that time, as the nuclear bomb hadn’t yet been invented. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can fact check this assertion, but I think the only time intentionally targeting civilians has successfully cowed a belligerent was when the US nuked Japan. And even then, it took two.

Also, to add to the other poster’s point, in a medieval siege, the defenders have every reason to believe the attackers will happily let every man, woman, and child behind the walls die gruesome deaths to starvatiom or disease. That’s why, when it came down to the wire, cities would submit.

In modern times, cultivating a believable military posture of, “Surrender, or we will personally execute every last motherfucking one of you” is politically dicey. Look at the news stories coming out of Gaza about supplies running low thanks to Israeli interference. Right, wrong , or indifferent, the international community (as well as your domestic community, if those that disagree with these sorts of tactics are allowed to make their voices heard) tends to look down their noses at targeting noncombatants populations. So, due to these complications (which were largely absent or less impactful from warfare in the time of Genghis Khan) wholesale slaughter of civilian life isn’t really openly used. In fact, guidelines like “proportionality” are invented which dictate the level of response you can give certain provocations and what not.

So, if you’re a modern day commander being tasked with taking an urban center, the closest way to approximate a medieval siege would be to absolutely carpet bomb everything. Make it known that you will happily let every single person in Moscow die, if not send them to the afterlife yourself. While you’re bombing the suburbs, you’ll also need to encirce the whole city to prevent supplies from being delivered, since you can’t guarantee every bomb will hit it’s target and need starvation to provide additional assurance to the population that, if they maintain their current course, they are doomed.

Unfortunately, the world isn’t going to allow that, and you know it, so you commit to the level of bombing deemed acceptable by the world at large. At best, you wind up in a situation like London during the Blitz. Your bombing runs are effective, in that they disrupt the daily life of citizenry, and cause some infrastructure damage and loss of life. However, you’re never going to be allowed to scale up to the point where your victims feel they have no way out but to submit. There’s enough plausible deniability that, even when a bomb hits close to home (literally or figuratively), the victim is more pissed at the bomber than their government.

I have it on good authority that that isn’t an issue in this instance. They’ve towed the boat outside of the environment.

Man, Trespasser is an example of a game with some pretty wild ideas about immersion and puzzle solving in a first person shooter game that the tech just wasn’t quite able to pull off. If anyone is curious there is a positively antique Let’s Play on YouTube that discusses the game’s development, its relation to the wider Jurassic Park franchise, cut content, and, of course, the game in context. I think it may have come from the old Something Awful forums, and it remains, to my mind, the gold standard for what I’d like Let’s Plays to be. Worth checking out if you’ve the time.

Are you running any mods, or rolling vanilla?

While I agree with the spirit of your comment, I’m not sure I’m on board with Predator being outclassed by works influenced by it. Admittedly, I’ve not watched Prey, so grain of salt and all. I hear it’s quite good, but with it being put in a historical context rather than contemporary, I think it’s a bit of a different animal.

I am curious to hear examples of films you think improve upon the og Predator’s formula. If nothing else it will give me some new movies to watch.

I mean, the article states that the victim did suffer some symptoms, so I wouldn’t say they were totally unaffected. If the article is accurate, would it be possible that she was inhaling vapor from the spill? The victim is quoted as saying she had to be at that board for 5 hours, and the Wikipedia article indicates that the primary danger of elemental mercury is inhalation of vapor (it claims 80% absorption rate via respiration, as opposed to the 1% via direct contact). Unfortunately, I am pretty ignorant of chemistry, so I’ve no idea if my speculation is plausible. How much room temp mercury would need to be sitting in front of you before you felt the effects of the vapor. Or even if you would at all, since the CDC website says the vapor is more dense than air.

Additionally, I noticed that one of the symptoms of mercury inhalation is cognitive impairment. Obviously this is more speculation, but perhaps the intent was not to kill, but rather to sabotage the victim’s play? After all, it seems like the perpetrator and the victim were rivals. Could be a Nancy Kerrigan-Tonya Harding situation, just more classically Russian what with the use of poison rather than brute force.

You’re making the same points as the article (and the devs), hence OP stating that what he posted is not the “clickbait journalism” that you appeared to accuse it of being originally.

If you were saying the other articles referred to in the headline are clickbait journalism, then I’m pretty sure we’re all on the same page. Your phrasing was just a little ambiguous at first.

I assumed something like shredded wheat.

Seconding the other poster. Excellent write up; you distilled every rebuttal point I would have made to OP perfectly.

For sure. My impression is that to focus on character work in the same way as BG3 (i.e. voice acting, mocap, cinematics, etc) would have been an impossibility for the studio that made Solasta. I would guess they did not have the financial support to make that happen.

Personally, I think of it as being of a piece with the old Infinity Engine games. There was the Baldurs Gate series, which, in classic CRPG fashion, was all about player choice and character. But, side by side with those games, you had the Icewind Dale series, which was almost completely devoid of the story focus of the BG games and entirely focused on dungeon crawling and seeing how far the ruleset can be pushed.

Allow me to introduce you to Solasta: Crown of the Magister. It was the OTHER CRPG releases based on the DnD 5e system. Much smaller budget and team, but a pretty faithful recreation.

Including the fact that the game opens in a tavern with your party throwing back beer one of them might refer to as a donkey piss (depending on which personality archetype you selected for them) while they wait for their quest sponsor to show up and tell them what’s going on. In the meantime, each character introduces themselves to the others by discussing the adventure they had on the way to the present location (as an excuse to run through some tutorials). Doesn’t get much more classic DnD start than that.

Grim Dawn is the most fun I’ve had with an ARPG in years. The class system is very interesting and, as far as I know, unique to this game. Rather than just being a barbarian or necromancer or whatever other typical ARPG class you can think of, your class is determined by selecting any 2 archetypes. For instance, maybe you like being a pet class like necromancer, but you want to have a slightly more active play style than just watching your skellingtons paint the map red. So, you mix in the Nightblade (melee rogue) class at level 10. Your new, combined class is called a Reaper, and you have access to both skill trees, free to mix and match as you wish. Very interesting playstyles can emerge from creative pairings.

I am a casual player so I can’t offer any perspective on the endgame or anything like that, but if you’re looking for something to scratch the Diablo 2 itch with a fun twist on classes,you cant go wrong with Grim Dawn.

You may be interested to know that there is an open source engine port of HoMM2 that released within the past year I think. I know many people are big on HoMM3 and lots of nodding work has been done on that game to keep it fresh and playable, but 2 was my entry to the franchise, so the FHeroes2 team deserves my endless thanks and admiration.

Hey I just wanted to say thank you for the breakdown. The intricacies of translation are interesting.