FishFace

I think they do like it - they get loadsa money for it!

I see it more positively: there are more games than ever. I can play loads of amazing indie games, and I can also play the blockbusters; nothing seems to be holding back my enjoyment. I don’t really give a shit if an individual studio collapses under the weight of its own need for ever-greater sales, since I’m still going to get new stuff to play. If a big game is more-of-the-same and runs poorly, I won’t play it. So what if it’s the sequel to a really good game? If anything that sets the bar higher for me - a new game is more interesting and exciting so I’d rather play something completely new than a sequel. If a sequel is shit, then it’s time to abandon that series.

Back then is back then; the world is, as they say, changed.

More gamers, different standards. If you re-released a 2007 masterpiece today with no updates to its graphics it wouldn’t do AAA sales. Today’s AAA games are more like films, with blockbuster film budgets and timelines.

It’s perfectly true that no-one is forcing them to spend such a huge amount of money. But in another sense, economics strongly strongly encourages someone to do that, because doing so is profitable compared to not doing that.

That market segment is not the triple A segment though.

Pretty light on details. I’m not really sure what Venris has done or its impact - does their original mod still work? Does a change to Venris’ original have any impact on the unauthorised versions, or is it just as if they deleted it? What does AI have to do with it?

You’ve got no fucking leg to stand on, calling people lazy. What a clown.

I think the author may be having a psychotic break

More fragmentation isn’t really a selling point of alternatives to a market player with a big critical mass and network effects.

Scale and impact are pretty damn relevant though. There’s a lot of things I’d boycott due to active genocides that I wouldn’t boycott because of quibbles over data protection and AI. When you draw an analogy between things, it only works if they’re of similar magnitudes, otherwise what makes one scenario in the analogy work doesn’t apply to the other one, and the analogy collapses.

Presumably they don’t have to open all those apps every time they want to chat to their friends, i.e. every day. Presumably they think friendship with you is a two-way street and that you’ll hear their needs and reach a compromise in a way that is impossible with a big corporation like an airline.

But more than any of that, people reference their behaviour to what everyone else is doing. You’re the outlier because you’re asking for something that none of their other friends ask for.

Yeah. It’s beyond unnuanced thinking and is a bit brain-dead :(

Training AI models takes quite a bit of energy. But probably less than you think. Without knowing how much you think I can’t say for sure, but I can say that AI is so far down the list of water consumers that any time it comes up I can be fairly confident.

But this is about the Frame?

As someone still at the beginning of the game it still feels somewhat superficial. I dunno what else I would expect, were it not for the descriptions like the OP, which conjure an image to me of game mechanics involving the freshness of bread, force-feeding geese, and interrupting traffic to play bowls (though on that subject I have found two “pétanks”) not just art and music.

Well you aren’t going to have a mass layoff as an indie studio, you’re just going to fold

Eh?

Are games better if they have great graphics? Not really.

Hard disagree.

In practice it does. There’s a big, entrenched competitor out there already, so that puts a damper on any motivation. If the site just closed down, that wouldn’t be the case.

Even if SteamDB is gradually enshittified, there will still be that competitor that does a “good enough” job for a lot of people, meaning the bar for a new player to come along is higher.

Imagine you have a share in a company. How much would you, personally, sell that share for? Well, it’s a function of what it’ll pay you in dividends over some time horizon. Maybe you’re sure it’ll pay about a dollar this year, and it seems likely it’ll pay a dollar fifty next year, and you’re not really sure after that but probably not nothing. So you want at least $2 for it, but you figure in the most likely case is that it’ll continue to pay out and wouldnt sell it for less than $10.

Now, suppose some news comes out that profits are forecast to be half what you thought, so your estimation might come out at $5. Except now you’re also worried about two other things: first, the company is now more likely to go under before you can get your $5. And also, before you were quite happy that if things went badly, you actually could sell your share for about $10. But now lots of people are trying to get rid of them at once, so you’re worried it won’t be possible, so you decide actually you’re willing to sell at a lower price.

If it were LLM it would be followed by a positive statement like “, just a” :)