Uruanna

@Uruanna@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Sega is delisting 60 classic games from Steam, so now’s the time to grab them⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Exactly, they announced earlier this year that they were working on reviving a bunch of licences, including Crazy Taxi, Jet Set Radio, Shinobi, Golden Axe… We don’t know yet eactly how many titles that includes, and which of them will get remakes, remasters, or brand new games, but it was hinting brand new.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft boss says it knows players think it has an 'inconsistency in quality,' so it delayed Assassin's Creed Shadows to flip that script⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Shadow of Mordor/war scratch the same itsch as assassin’s creed

  ??? It’s the first time I’m hearing Shadow of Mordor allows you to run around famous places in ultra popular historical periods.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨GRIZZLODILE⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  But is that a fact

  (it’s not)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Assassin’s Creed Shadows delay due to Ubisoft finally listening to developers "pushing for a delay for some time", says report⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not reading the article but why does the title still need to phrase it like the devs are the ones who need more time, suggesting they haven’t finished making the game a month and a half ahead of release? We already know that investors got spooked by Star Wars exploding because of its sales model with special editions driving up the prices for some bullshit, and we know AC was supposed to do the same but now won’t. They literally just said “actually we’re going back to simultaneous Steam release and we’re dropping the special editions and we’re rethinking the season’s pass from scratch and so-and-so will now be free instead of paid DLC” like a couple weeks ago. I can see that they did that following devs advice, but it wasn’t that the devs needed time, ever since the advent of DLC there have been multiple games from big companies where we’ve heard that the dev team fought against garbage DLC and sales practice but were told to fuck off and do what they were told and then the game exploded. The sales department is the one that needs more time to rethink the worth of cutting this down and selling the pieces, and then have the devs adjust all that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Archaeology Problems⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t keep up with youtube alternatives but this one doesn’t require login invidious.fdn.fr/watch?v=DaJWEjimeDM can’t get the video to load though…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Archaeology Problems⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  youtu.be/DaJWEjimeDM?si=rwX4eZZQvGV22iiR first half is citing two guys who think the Sphinx is older than we think; third guy and after show that the erosion and the faults didn’t come from rain from outside, but water infiltration from below, from before the Sphinx was carved into the rock, and that yes, we do see it in other places in the same rock layer. Other buildings above it don’t have that erosion from below. So the erosion is indeed old, but it didn’t happen from rain falling after the Sphinx was carved out, so you can’t use it to determine when the Sphinx was carved out of the ground.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Archaeology Problems⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m only suggesting that theories which are not supported by direct anthropological evidence are worth considering

  You can consider an idea and build a theory around it, but once your basic idea is disproven, your whole theory disappears. And the idea that the Sphinx erosion doesn’t match the agreed upon age has already been proven wrong - as in, it has been explained that the observed erosion is perfectly compatible with what rock types are there and with the data that we know since the actual period it was built in, the mid third millenium BCE. So you don’t have your premise that the erosion doesn’t match the official age, and that means there is nothing left to consider here until you actually have something new, anything else is fanfiction.

  Considering new idea is perfectly fine, no one disagrees with that, but you are not considering new ideas, you are considering old ideas that were proven wrong and not listening when someone tells you why it’s wrong. Get new material.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon watches an American flick⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I remembered a Cities Skyline youtuber mentioning this so …transport.ec.europa.eu/…/road-classification_en

  Flow, distributor, and access.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨J.K. Rowling Blasts “Gender Taliban” David Tennant After ‘Harry Potter’ Actor Said “Whinging” Trans Critics Are On “Wrong Side Of History”⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s the first time I learned who he was and I was so impressed with his performance, however short, that when I caught a Doctor Who episode and recognized him, I kept watching and became an instant fan.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨No wonder he's hiding⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Dark matter means there’s a gravitational effect that we can see, but the source is in a spot where we see nothing, so we guess that there has to be something that we can’t see - that doesn’t emit any radiation, starting with light / heat. The lack of electromagnetic radiation is why it’s dark, and the gravitational effect is why it has to be matter - as in something heavy, particles that have a gravitational effect.

  We know spots where “matter that we can’t see” should be. The biggest classic example is the bullet cluster, where most of the gravitational effect is outside of the light we see. What we can make progress on is take a list and strike out what it isn’t. We look at some kind of particle we know about, and we check if that could have the effect we see. If it can’t, we shorten the list of what dark matter might be. There’s been a few times along the decades where people said “this time we might have found the one” but so far, we keep shortening the list. The day we say “this time we actually detected something” is the day it won’t be called “dark” anymore, since “dark” is literally because we can’t detect anything coming out of it. Either we’re not looking hard enough to see the radiations we could expect from known matter (except we should be seeing something already with our current tech), or it emits something we can’t see, new types of emissions that we don’t know about. If we ever find a new type of matter that doesn’t emit anything we can see, then it can still be called dark, until we learn to detect it.

  It’s possible that our understanding of gravity is wrong and the source of the gravity we see comes from something else in another spot, and the spot we’re looking at doesn’t have any matter we can’t see; but everytime we find something new about gravity, it keeps reinforcing our understanding of it and decreasing the odds that we’re wrong about it and dark matter doesn’t exist. And the theories about gravity that come up to fit the effect we see always create other problems by failing to explain other observations, whereas the current gravity theory does explain everything else. The window for “our current models of gravity are wrong” just keeps getting tighter and harder to justify with every observation that keeps getting more accurate.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Legend of Zelda⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ve been playing the series since LttP. Twilight Princess is my top, for presentation and storytelling.

  I feel like Skyward Sword tried to repeat that, but the dungeons and style / atmosphere of the world of TP still come out on top (even though I’m not very much into gothic style and furries). I think SS is way too cartoonish and happy-go-lucky for a world where the surface has been abandoned to the demons and yet everyone who lives there is cool (gorons, kiwis, moles, proto-Zora), that’s a massive tonal dissonance between the narration and the actual environment and it just takes me out.

  The next ones on my top list are Minish Cap and Link Between Worlds.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What was Thoth's message for us?⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Mythology is not a monolith. We’re talking 3000+ years of cultural evolution across multiple cities that united and separated multiple times, each having their own local cult that rose to prominence or got supplanted by a different one.

  When some of them got together and overlapped, they might have taken different facets of “death”: Osiris is not strictly a god of death itself but a judge of your soul, and grants eternal life in death, while Anubis was a god of funerary rites and graves, so the physical aspect of handling dead bodies.

  When a city took prevalence over another, either because the pharaoh set up shop there or because a temple in that city became more famous and gained influence, that city’s major cult could overshadow other gods worshiped in other cities and take over their duties.

  Then there were bigger gods that got cults that split into different aspects, like how Hathor and Sekhmet come from the same goddess but Sekhmet specialized in bloody war and the sun burning in the desert (an aspect she took from her father, a more general sun god) while Hathor specialized in motherhood.

  Other aspects are passed around in the same way, starting with the role of sun, there are countless aspects of the sun that were embodied in different gods. Even the scarab is an aspect of the sun (because it emerges fully matured from the dungball of its parent, so there was a god for that). Death is a major aspect that remained a big constant in Egyptian religion, that’s why those two are seen the most often.

  If you look at which city becomes the center of Egypt’s rule as time goes on through the different kingdoms and intermediate periods, and check which major temple is in that city, you see which cult takes over more duties.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨23-year-old Nintendo interview shows how little things have changed in gaming⁩ ⁨⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I know what you mean, but Nintendo is a pretty bad example to illustrate that sentiment. I mean, they totally do corporate crap to benefit them and not the players obviously, but the Zelda series is literally built around the gimmicks of the console. They start thinking about a gimmick, either on the console and / or how to turn that into a gameplay gimmick, and then they make a Zelda game around that. OoT had the rumble pack and then tried to do Ura Zeldthat was supposed to be the system seller for the DD64 - but that blew up and was salvaged between Master Mode and Majora’s Mask. The GameCube had Four Swords with the connection to the GBA and the multiplayer. The Wii had Skyward Sword with the motion thing, the Wii U had the separate tablet. The DS then the 3DS weren’t too relevant for Zelda but they tried, and other games did rely on it.

  I’m not saying it’s a fact for the whole series, but Nintendo is particularly famous for developing a gimmick console and then building games around that, so yes, the physical console is actually relevant to the game you want to play it on, you’d be hard pressed to port that elsewhere and emulators are always weird and have a lot of work to adapt into something that makes sense on a single screen with a basic gamepad.