Largest market chain where i live is run like this.

A consumer cooperative (or customer-owned cooperative).

Its a business owned directly by its customers, who usually become members by paying a small membership fee. Profits are returned to members as bonuses, discounts, or dividends, and major decisions are made democratically, but there is the normal corporate hierarcy running the day to day operations.

I get the dumb little point you are trying to make, that would leave the companies only stagnate while competition keeps growing.

Hmm. What could industry producing millions of jobs world wide offer for working class. What a tough nut. You got me stumped. Maybe we should have just stayed using pen and paper.

No. I think the computer industry is more expensive and creates more jobs than all the paper and pen industries have trough the history.

You know companies have whole branches deticated to computer support and cyper security, right?

Or do you think that before laptops businesses had their own divisions of Quill-Certified Problem Solvers and Paper-Based Troubleshooting Engineers?

Not the original commentor, but i think they meant more narrative failure than mechanical failure.

Like “You failed to save person from burning house, and the failure changes how the story unfolds.” Not “You died to a boss and you need to try again.”

First example of narrative failure that came to mind is from Deus Ex: Human Revolution. There is objective where you need to protect a chrashed pilot from enemies, but if you fail the game does not fail and load previous save. The game goes on and characters death effects the dialogue and a certain story point later in the game.

In souls games, no matter how many times you die, the narrative does not change. Dying effects you only in mechanical sense, where you might loose some recources, but you will never lose them permanently, but there are narrative moments that you can fail. Like in bloodborne if you summon certain npc to your haven, he starts to murder other people you have brought there.

I really love the game desing behind this system. The game is on a timer, but instead of time going foward all the time, the quest “cost” time.

Way of the samurai games did this kind of trick back in the day. In those games the day was divided in to four parts, morning, noon, evening and night. Player had unlimited time to wander the game world, but once they did something big, the time would go foward and depending on what you did the story would go in to different direction. After 5 full days the game would come to a finale, but how you acted, effected who was alive and wich side of the final conflict you would be.

The game ending and story coming to a finale does not necessarily mean you win.

If the game is fun to play and one play trough does not take forever to finish, i can see my self playing the game multible times trough and trying to find the way to make everything end the way i want.

Well i havent downvoted you during this conversation…

And you must be somewhat intrested in what im saying because you take your time and respond to my arguments.

And id like to think that given good enough argument i could change my mind.

I think we perceive the downvote differently. I dont think it means shut up. Its a binary choise. (Or ternary because no voting is choice too). There is hardly enough substance to interpret any intention behind it. Its just something people press, when somebody dont have anything to add to the discussion, or they dont have time to write their own comment.

It’s my idea of social-media utopia and this small feature would make it possible.

This is the fundamental part we seem to disagree with. I dont think its “utopia”, i think its facade, that only creates personal echochambers for people guarding them from seeing any opposing opinions.

I disagree. Its not fine tuning. Its fundamentally changing it.

I firmly belive that if we are ready to write anything on to a public channel, in this case even with anonymity, we need to be ready to accept critique and the fact that people will sometimes disagree with you. Also there will always be irrelevant, or snarky comments, but as a adult we should be able to ignore those. If you are not ready to accept it, you should reflect with yourself, if you should even be writing anything.

Artificially making it seem like everybody agrees with you is just lying to yourself and skewing your own perception of the mattet.

Also as a another point. This whole discussion we have right now comes from disagreement. I have read your comments, it has made me ponder things i would not have tought without you and weighted things you have written. I hope you have done the same. Even when we clearly have different opinions i think we have argued in good spirit.

The system you are suggesting would remove these interactions completelly.

Im against auto-blocking.

The block feature we have now is fine for what it is, because user needs to review case by case if they want to block somebody or not and they will always keep seeing other peoples opinions even if they try to make a bubble for them self.

Dont you think its inherendly dangerous to just automatically block anyone who disagrees with you?

If you see only comments that agree with you or interract only with people who have the same opinions, your views will never be challenged. Many of the societys problems has its roots in people living in their own bubble.

It has little more nyance than that.

Most phones now days have camera set up so your fingers dont obfuscate the camera lences or smudge them when you hold it on your hand. Same with the front camera. If it it would be on the bottom part the navigation buttons would go over it --> more smudge on thr lense.

With buttons there is the design principle that buttons should work always similarry. Flipping the phone would flip volume settings, buttons and any ports. (Its a minor thing, but i think everyone has somepoint in their life used a software where buttons chance places depending what you are doing and its annoying. This is basically hardware version of that).

No reason here is not really hard to circumvent or even a real problem, but in the end, so small percentage of people need that feature, so why spend time doing it. Especially when it indroduces one new thing that needs to be debugged.

1. I don’t think we should try to re-introduce those games to new audiences

Well if we disagree on this deep fundamental level i dont think we can have real discussion about this, as my personal opinion is that stories i love should be made as easy as possible for people to reach. Like i would love people to read book Kalevala, but its written in old Finnish so i think its completelly fine for make the book more easily approachable for the masses by translating it to todays English, even if it looses a lot by turning the writing to prose.

2. A remake by definition I just want to say there is no real definition for remake.

if we spend resources on remakes (and sequels) then we are robbing the current generation from having their own formative experiences. I want to see new IPs come out that try new and different things and move the medium forward.

This goes more to the business end too. Its not zero sum game and making remakes dont mean companies stop making new games.

Like activision tasked Vicarious vision to make Crash remakes and because those did allright they were comfortable to let Toys for Bob make comoletelly new Crash game. The remake indruduced the Crash games to new audience. Without that push the new game would most definedly did worse than it did. (It was profitable, but not as much as investors wished).

Same with resident evils. Both remakes and new installations are being produced at the same time and they help to make the engine better everytime.

I must disagree.

Like while i can still fully enjoy old resident evil games, because i have nostalgia for the i fully understand why people who are born after they have been made would be put of by them.

By remaking those games they could indruduce the game to whole new audience who would never play the yanky outdated versions.

More extreme example. I would love to have modernised version of Betrayal at Krondor. It had good story. The core gameplay and world was great and there was intresting mechanics, but it was released 1993, so it by modern standards it looks like garbage and the ui is very unintuitive.

Most gamers now will never experience that story and those who do, will not get the same experience i got, because they will look everything in the game as a product of its time and the focus will be on the retro aspect, not on the game it self.

Oh i did not know we are adding new requirments to the conversation.

Well your comment does not count because you did not write it while standing on your hands. Bucko.

Isint “good game” little vague description? Are you the president what is good?

And the point is that there are thousands of games to choose from, but you bitch that there are only live service shit on the market.

Armored Core VI: Fires of Rubicon (2023) Remnant 2 (2023) Rise of the Ronin (2024) Hades II (2025) Pragmata (2026)

And i dont like Elden Ring or Nindendo, but those were all big releases.

I just find it funny when people complain about something and when given proof that they are not correct they start to move the goal post.

Ie. List that contains only small portion of recent non live service games --> “well i dont like some of them”

Lies of P (2023) Hi-Fi Rush (2023) Dead Space Remake (2023) Stellar Blade (2024) Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II (2024)

Yeah modern games all have live service elements and you cant find any good games!

Just ignore these: Baldur’s Gate 3 (2023) Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 (2023) Starfield (2023) Hogwarts Legacy (2023) Resident Evil 4 Remake (2023) The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom (2023) Alan Wake 2 (2023) Black Myth: Wukong (2024) Dragon’s Dogma 2 (2024) Final Fantasy VII Rebirth (2024) Metaphor: ReFantazio (2024) Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree (2024) Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 (2025) Hollow Knight: Silksong (2025) Indiana Jones and the Great Circle (2025) Donkey Kong Bananza (2025)

*Bypassed

Works until next patch and does not stop denuvo eating recources at the background. But yes you can download and play it, if you want.

I do agree with you that it makes games worse, but…

It does not do anything to prevent piracy beyond maybe a month depending on cracking scene interest.

The first months of the release are the most profitable time for games. Denuvo is not meant to be uncrackable. Its just meant to protect the release window. Thats why some studios remove it some time after the launch.

Its only a minor inconvenience to game cracking groups and pirates.

Even the most popular games take one to two week to crack. That is not just a minor inconvenience. It takes time and effort. Also updates ofter change things enough for the crack to stop working.