• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle

  • I don’t think that is an accurate reading of what he is expressing. Crate (his company) is a smallish indie studio that makes high quality games (in my opinion) and supports them long term with both paid DLCs and free updates.

    He made that statement when talking about Embracer Group that was looking to buy Crate. When he told them “we are currently working on an RTS” they said “Why don’t you make something multi platform and a different genre instead?” (i.e. a cashgrab) to which his reply was “you can’t buy my company, fuck off”.

    RTS are inherently limited to PC. RTS are not popular as eSports anymore. His company is making one not because they want a short term profit, but because he thinks they could make a great one for a niche target group that will stay loyal for a long time (e.g. their 2016 game Grim Dawn just got a massive free content update and a new story DLC in February this year).



  • “We totally would have saved the climate if you had only paid us enough.” Bitch, please.

    The trillions the oil industry has earned over the years were not enough?
    You had enough money, you had the knowledge of the problem and what you could do to fix it and you had enough time to change your strategy from lieing and denying.

    The only thing you didn’t have was the will to give up a single cent to help clean up the damage you have done.

    Imagine what could have been done with half of the 52 trillion the oil and gas industry earned in the last 50 years (that’s without coal, even). Imagine how far we could have developed renewable energy sources. What we could have achieved with carbon capture. What could be done today if the fossil industries propaganda hadn’t turned climate change into a question of political opinions.

    Fuck that guy. He and his ilk created this mess and they got fat of it. He doesn’t get to shift blame.





  • Don’t actually tear down church buildings though.

    Many of them are beautiful and even if the morals of the Organisation(s) that built them are, to put it mildly, “outdated”, it is still a huge part of our cultural history.

    Use the spaces to open “sexual health centers” (like Planned Parenthood on steroids), libraries, and in like 1 or 2 per continent you could create memorial centers to keep alive the memories of the suffering created by organized, doctrinal religion.

    Moving past a phase of our cultural development has to include remembering that phase. The church buildings turned to useful purpose will be powerful monuments.


  • Because a Nation (and I know this sounds crazy) is not a person. You can do many things a country can’t and vice versa.

    For example, you can make a rule that in your house black people do not get sweet foods. It’s a dick move but not illegal. A country is not allowed to make a law that says black people can’t eat sweet foods, because that would be racist discrimination (which is illegal for the government to do in most countries).

    Another example: You can poop (like you did when posting that question). A country does not have a digestive tract and in fact does not eat and can therefore not poop.





  • War gaming can be fun, but I don’t think DnD is especially geared toward it

    Isn’t like 90% of the rules for DnD just rules for combat and treasure? Literally every single class in DnD is a combat class. And when people talk about their DnD characters they say “I played this Dragonborn Cleric…” or “Multiclassed Tiefling Mage/Rouge” and not “I played this Dwarf that had really good proficiency in Persuasion and ‘Use Rope’”. [Btw is ‘Use Rope’ still a skill in newer DnD editions?].




  • Actually, no.

    The science is quite precise, if largely theoretical. Neither the article nor the study it is based on are doomerism. If you’d read it you would have found the following paragraph:

    Their results showed that we’re not necessarily headed for certain climate doom. We might follow quite a regular and predictable trajectory, the endpoint of which is a climate stabilization at a higher average temperature point than what we have now.

    Basically they are saying “this new method (which is a very macroscale perspective) does not predict a stabilization at preindustrial climate given the amount of change the system already has experienced. Also if we really want to we can probably kick earth into a runaway greenhouse system”.

    They do not claim that we are already at that point nor that we will inevitably cross it. Only that it is possible for us to do it.