EatATaco
@EatATaco@lemm.ee
- Comment on Images leak of Valve's next game, and it's an Overwatch-style hero shooter 8 hours ago:
It’s been many years, maybe even decades, since I liked a straight up turn-based single player RPG. I seriously can’t think of one that has sucked me in since FFX. I even tried Divinity Original Sin 2 after so much hype and good reviews from my friends. But I just didn’t like it.
However, Baldur’s Gate 3 sucked me in. According to steam, approaching 100 hours of playtime (although I’m sure there is a good chunk of time where I just walked away with the PC with it “paused.”)
I’m not saying you’ll like the game, I have no idea. But to already be convinced that you won’t like it based on pretty much the nothing we’ve got it terribly presumptuous.
- Comment on Lots of times the restaurants won't even have milk 10 hours ago:
Many items in cocktails also have long shelf lives after opening or are cheap/move quickly.
This is why I think we see variations on actual cocktails so much…you have it, it’s open, so move it.
- Comment on Lots of times the restaurants won't even have milk 11 hours ago:
Is this coming from experience or are you just kind of guessing? There are plenty of cocktails that use non-shelf stable stuff that you can get anywhere. On top of that, the new movement towards providing non-alcoholic drinks on the menu just reuses these same ingredients in different ways.
- Comment on Lots of times the restaurants won't even have milk 11 hours ago:
I feel like this joke would have landed better 5, or maybe even 3 years ago. Every even remotely fancy restaurant I go into has jumped on the mocktail bandwagon and offers plenty of options for people avoiding alcohol.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 4 days ago:
Please do tell me how if I wrote the whole definition there of “determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone” instead of shortening it to just “determine quality” it would make my entire point completely invalid.
You see that “or” in the definition? The word I already pointed out to you in the previous post? It does not mean “the one thing from this list that I get to pick because it makes me not wrong” it means “any of these things.” I can’t believe someone insulting me as “not having the reading comprehension of a third grader” needs this explained. It’s honestly hilarious. Although, can we appreciate for a second that you first said it was “subtle” but now are trying to argue that “it so obvious even a third grader would figure it out.” lmao. This is classic. Please keep it up.
Do you see how absurdly idiotic you’re being?
If I’m being absurdly idiotic, god help us because no way in hell we’re going to be able to come up with a term describe your stupidity. You’re not giving us nearly enough space to reach the depths of your stupidity if the fact that I understand what “or” means makes me “absurdly idiotic.” lol
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 4 days ago:
I literally gave you a definition that says a review means to determine quality
Or do you really not know what that word means? Do you really not realize that when you cherry pick one part of a definition that it doesn’t mean none of the others apply?
Are.you really such an idiot that you don’t know this? Or is it just that you’re willing to be completely dishonest in defense of your ego?
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 4 days ago:
you’ll realise that it is impossible to determine the quality of a video game in a purely objective way.
The only subtle thing here is the subtle change in your wording from simple “review” to “determine the quality.” I agree with you there, as whether you think something is good or bad is subjective.
But it appears you realize Im right, which is why you’re trying to reframe it. Why is it hard for you to admit you were wrong? It’s okay, no one is perfect.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
There’s nothing in the definition of review that requires it to be subjective. It’s shocking that you didn’t even stop to look it up to first figure out if this is accurate.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Are you arguing that alpha testing is not considered in house testing? It’s literally the definition.
[>The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase of software testing (alpha is the first letter of the Greek alphabet, used as the number 1). In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.[1][2]
Alpha software is not thoroughly tested by the developer before it is released to customers. Alpha software may contain serious errors, and any resulting instability could cause crashes or data loss.[3] Alpha software may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version.[4] In general, external availability of alpha software is uncommon for proprietary software, while open source software often has publicly available alpha versions. The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature-complete. A beta test is carried out following acceptance testing at the supplier’s site (the alpha test) and immediately before the general release of the software as a product.[5]](en.wikipedia.org/…/Software_release_life_cycle)
I’m sure parts of the game are well polished. I’m sure some only release a small part of the game for advertising reasons. They are doing something different here maybe. I don’t really know. But this is such a non-issue that the outrage over it is laughable. Not surprising, at all, however, considering I’ve been a gamer all my life and I know how unreasonable we can be.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
es dumb consumers exist, but that isn’t a free pass for corporate exploitation or false advertising.
Except I didn’t see where they advertised that people were going to be able to join the alpha with no restrictions, and I don’t see this as “exploitation” at all. People want to play these games first. I don’t get why, but they do. And they are being given that opportunity.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
There’s nothing in this wording that implies anything more than “don’t negatively review us”
It’s says subjective negative reviews. it seems if you say “It kept crashing” or “this feature wasn’t working” or “this feature was super bugged” those aren’t subjective.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I actually looked into the game because I didn’t know anything about it and figured I should inform myself a bit.
What makes this whole overreacting raging we are seeing here even more funny and ridiculous is that the game is going to be FTP. So basically, once released, anyone can go and try it out, for free, to see whether or not it’s worth any investment by them.
So, yeah, if someone is offering you to pre-order this game, I definitely suggest you not buy it because they are trying to scam you.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
This is a slippery slope fallacy “if they are allowed to do something mild and legal now. . .well, it will just lead to terrible violation of our rights in the future!”
What undermines your point is that if they try to put these illegal restrictions on many people, violating their basic rights, then they are opening themselves up to large class action lawsuits.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Your linked to an article literally starts by asking “What kinds of contracts might not hold up in court?” and then goes on to explain this as one of these as “For example, a court will never enforce a contract promoting something already against state or federal law.” Basically proving my point.
And I’m universally downvoted, and you’re universally upvoted. Lemmy users crack me up.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Marvel want free bug testers, and to get the hype train moving - but don’t want to pay for actual testers who work quietly, and want only positive commentary. Marvel want an astroturf campaign to push preorders, not actual genuine discussion or bug testing.
Okay, then the problem is with the people doing the work for free, not with Marvel realizing that people will do it for free.
The issue is that the people who do this work for free are not like you, and want that early access. . .either for strictly personal reasons or because it benefits them financially (such as is the case with streamers).
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Your game isn’t actually ready for alpha
Alpha testing is, by definition, testing on unreleased code. Even though they are offering the testing to some select group of people, it’s still considered un-released.
The only reason you’d make someone sign a legally binding document saying “you’re not allowed to say bad things” is because you know there are bad things to say.
False dichotomy. There is also the possibility that you realize, from experience, that when you start introducing users, unexpected shit happens.
They could do the alpha testing completely internally, or they could give some super fans pre-access with more restrictions on what they are allowed to say. Would I prefer they be able to speak their mind? Of course. But I get why the company would do this and it’s really a complete non-issue.
Sure, they could do an NDA, or they could also get free publicity. It’s reasonable for them to choose the latter, and if you don’t like it, it’s reasonable for you to wait for release.
Preventing people from talking about the bad things won’t magically get rid of the bad things.
Yeah, that’s pretty clearly not the point. They presumably want to fix the bugs without them counting against them in the court of public opinion.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I agree with you. But this is basically a non-issue, which is my point. If you don’t want to be restricted, don’t play the alpha. Why is this so hard for some people to accept? Again, we aren’t talking about a released product, but some playtesting.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
The CRFA.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I understand exactly why they are doing it; what you say comes as no surprise. It’s 100% part of my point.
Coming from software development, including a small amount of game development, I understand how trash alphas can be, especially if you introduce users/players. So it seems reasonable that if the point of the alpha is to flush these bugs/exploits out, which is the point, then restricting the players who are allowed in from disparaging a far from complete game is not some ridiculous overreach everyone here seems to want it to be.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Protected by the law.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Sure, more reasonable and fair. But this is neither unreasonable nor particularly unfair, as long as it’s restricted to the alpha. If you find it bad, don’t play it, and understand that what opinions come out of alpha are biased by this. I would recommend taking all reviews that come out of any alpha with a huge grain of salt.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Of course, you could make arguments against the terms being overreaching in court, but not many creators have the resources or desire for a legal fight.
This is what I mean by unenforceable.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
It’s an alpha product we’re talking about. It’s not me who’s missing the forest for the trees.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I haven’t read the entire agreement, so I don’t really know nor do I care to. But I suspect that it would squarely fall under protected speech once the game has gone public and they’ve “purchased” it.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I agree that it should just be an NDA to be the most fair. But keep in mind I’m responding to someone who is claiming this is beyond egregious and that there should be laws against this.
It’s just not a big deal. It makes sense for them to say that you can’t disparage the game, because it’s in alpha, but why would they restrict good press? If you find this to be disagreeable, it’s alpha and you can just wait for release.
While I find it disagreeable, I don’t see anything to be outraged over, as avoiding it is as simple as not playing a game in alpha.
Unlike the mcdonald’s example where it is actually a released product.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
I could agree that it’s overkill, but that doesn’t warrant the outrage we’re seeing here.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
Sure I agree that would be wrong. But I also think that would be unenforceable.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
If you say “x and y is broken it not implemented yet” that’s an objective negative review.
- Comment on Marvels Rivals requires creators to sign a contract that removes your right to give a negative review to access the playtest 5 days ago:
We aren’t talking about something in production, like this app, we are talking about play testing a game in alpha. I would be upset if this was in a released game, or even like the beta test, but if it’s still under serious development it seems incredibly reasonable to me.
- Comment on Anon has nerdy hobbies 1 week ago:
I’m a good looking, personable guy, so my experience is certainly biased by that. Also coming from someone from the us.
But I’ve found you can approach women in most places. The thing is to just not be creepy about it, and learn how to pick up on cues that she is not interested or uncomfortable. And once “no” has been established, still treating them the way you had before.
If, like described in the geentext, you’re claiming you own someone, or you’re fighting with friends over it when noone is even dating anyone, the problem is not with approaching the woman.