161–170 of 273 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main reason these days is that Macs don't have good GPUs for games.
That's not true. Even current Macs with IGPs can play nearly any game at low settings adequately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a new rule is introduced, the early panels can be easily solved by trial and error. However, it's a mistake to continue until you can articulate the rule. That means experimenting with a panel even if you accidentally get the correct answer on the first try. Edit: I'm reminded of this game from the New York Times from October: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/03/upshot/a-quick...
I do not mind new panels introducing concepts; what I mind is the symbols not always being clearly connected with the mechanic they introduce. For example, the black and white symbols that needed to be separated were intuitive.
While I sort of agree, I must say that part of the fun of the game (and much of the challenge) is learning the 'language' of each puzzle. In the case of the little orange suns, it was like learning from scratch, one letter at a time.
First panel: "Okay, I can't go between them."
Second panel: "Oh, I can, but have to end up on one side... which amounts to having them in the same section. How is that different?"
Third panel: "There were 4, and the only path that worked divided them? What the hell?"
Fourth panel: "Oh with six I have to make them into groups of two - so maybe I have to divide them equally?"
Fifth panel: "Aha, no, it's groups of two!"
And now that's part of your vocabulary; you discovered it organically, not by bringing in some outside knowledge like symbols from off the island. Notice there aren't any numbers or letters? Like, anywhere? That's part of it...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a new rule is introduced, the early panels can be easily solved by trial and error. However, it's a mistake to continue until you can articulate the rule. That means experimenting with a panel even if you accidentally get the correct answer on the first try. Edit: I'm reminded of this game from the New York Times from October: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/03/upshot/a-quick...
I do not mind new panels introducing concepts; what I mind is the symbols not always being clearly connected with the mechanic they introduce. For example, the black and white symbols that needed to be separated were intuitive.
And to that point, maybe one reason I've found so many recent major game titles boring recently is that there is no puzzle to them. They're just activities. Go here. Shoot that. Collect that. It's nice to actually be stumped. And not just frustrated by my lack of hand-eye coordination.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All his arguments from that post are today FOO.
Do you have any experience in trying to make and sell games? Have you ever been compensated for a self-developed game project? You appear to be completely unaware of the economics of game development. That coupled with the arrogant tone of your comments really makes you sound foolish.
Yes, I am arrogant by the way, I learned not to be afraid of standing tall with my own point of view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a lot of times people tend to over-exaggerate when using terms like 'masterpiece', but in this case it's warranted. The puzzles and gameplay are brilliant, and then when you discover what the story is actually about it really blows you away.
I don't mean to invoke any sort of death of the author, the story isn't about anything except what you bring to it kind of vagueness...but part of the genius of Braid is that it's intentionally unclear what the story is about. The famous quote in the epilogue makes you think of an important historical event, but plausibly that's metaphorical and the game is about something more personal, existential. Maybe the game i…
He also said he responded to people who emailed him their interpretation. At the time of the interview only one person correctly guessed Blow's own interpretation.
I can't even imagine what the real answer could be.
Looks like it's getting panned in steam reviews as people play it. Very surprising.
Is that the guy who was unable to install Ubuntu properly, so he declared that supporting Linux versions of his game is not worth the effort? Color me disinterested. "No Tux, no bucks."
This is going to be one of the most popular games of 2016, and is releasing for Windows and PS4. Compared to those platforms, do you think that the time it would take to get a Linux version up and running would be cost-effective? There are some Linux sales figures kicking around [1] and they generally show that the Linux share is under 3%. [1] https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/sales-statistics-for-...
I have high hopes for the beginning for the convergence (that is already happening with RemixOS) of ChromeOS and android during google i/o.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not mind new panels introducing concepts; what I mind is the symbols not always being clearly connected with the mechanic they introduce. For example, the black and white symbols that needed to be separated were intuitive.
Well, it's a puzzle game. So I might argue that not being intuitive is kind of the point. And to that point, maybe one reason I've found so many recent major game titles boring recently is that there is no puzzle to them. They're just activities. Go here. Shoot that. Collect that. It's nice to actually be stumped. And not just frustrated by my lack of hand-eye coordination.
Q: I have three oranges and one grapefruit. I have to get all of them through a door that's been glued shut. There is no way to open the door. How do I get the fruit through?
A: Blend them and use the tube lying next to the door and pour them through the keyhole.
That's a non-intuitive puzzle. You can't intuit that there's a keyhole, a tube and a blender accessible. With creativity it's solvable, but then again, with creativity you also could argue you could use the hole saw nearby and cut a hole in the door and deposit the fruit on the other side. At this point you're just making things up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have any experience in trying to make and sell games? Have you ever been compensated for a self-developed game project? You appear to be completely unaware of the economics of game development. That coupled with the arrogant tone of your comments really makes you sound foolish.
They are foo because his arguments regarding toolchains, driver stability, distro "stability" are not troublesome in 2016 is it was some years ago. This is a technical discussion, not a discussion of selling. Yes, I am arrogant by the way, I learned not to be afraid of standing tall with my own point of view.
Incorrect. The context is one of an indie developer trying to bring a product to market. This is similar to being a one-man startup (before hiring / contracting more staff). It is absolutely essential to make good decisions about scoping the project, marketing the project, and selling the project.
It is very common for technically-minded people to get into a pattern of addressing technical objections point-by-point, without realising that the technical objections are not the problem per-se, but just a symptom of a more important concern or problem.
If the goal is Linux advocacy, then nit-picking the tech objections isn't really that effective, unless you want to leave a rebuttal for future searchers. What would be more effective would be to try to understand why Linux was not right for this developer, on this project, at that time.
> Yes, I am arrogant by the way, I learned not to be afraid of standing tall with my own point of view.
Standing up for your beliefs is not the same as arrogance. Not realizing this is a sign of arrogance, and arrogance is not a good thing. It makes it harder to develop an accurate model of the world, and thereby makes it harder take effective actions.
EDIT> Part of the hostile reaction you're getting is because of the way you dismissed Jon Blow for not being able to install Linux. This is one of the best game developers out there. It's like calling some Nobel Laureate stupid because she decided not to use some particular niche app that you care about.