Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 302 posts

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#261

Post by embedding-shape »

flohofwoe wrote: post #260
embedding-shape wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then the title is incorrect. Generals has been on the macOS App Store for years. Neither the HN submission or GitHub repository says it's first or novel though? Just that it's (another) port of it?

The HN title makes it sound like Fable did the port from the original code base to macOS and iOS, but this is very wrong (the project's readme does a much better job). It's merely enhanching an existing macOS version to also run on iOS, which tbh is very trivial and not at all impressive for any LLM. The actually important work (of making the original code release portable and then create Linux and macOS ports) had a…

> > It's merely enhanching an existing macOS version to also run on iOS, which tbh is very trivial and not at all impressive for any LLM.

It's so crazy to remember sitting in front of W3Schools after school trying to learn PHP to create a website, and hear people today saying it isn't very impressive a fucking machine can automatically translate/port code from one platform to another, even a machine doing that with PHP3 > PHP4 code back then would have been cool but nope, "not at all impressive" just because things improved so much, so quickly, everyone got quickly used to the status quo.

I agree with you in general though, the title does make it sound like more was done than what was done in actuality, as it was just a iOS port. Still, I'd wager it seems interesting enough, given it's on the front page right now.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#262

Post by xpct »

tyingq wrote: post #247
PaulRobinson wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mild alarm for me is that this won't be limited to just games. I've spent almost 30 years building applications for the web. I've been switching my attention to different models of distribution in part because I see a desire for people to not be paying monthly seat subscriptions, but also because it can simplify my own operations - I want to move to a solo indie dev model, and giving you an executable you run mea…

One area I think is really going to get slaughtered by LLMs are marketplace plugins. Those monthly fee plugins people release for things like Jira, Shopify, Salesforce, etc. There's a subset of those that don't have some backend that's hard to replicate, and asking an LLM to reverse engineer and make your own plugin is trivial.

I can see it both ways. Paying 5 bucks for an add-on that's reputable and not having to think about it again may be preferable to shipping your own. It's not evident to me that one-shot-esque LLM programs will ever work as expected, since they're limited by the amount you have to specify, and then maintain as new issues arise. It's the type of work that a lot of people will be unwilling to put in.

That said, I also think that public reviews will start getting recalibrated by the users themselves. People will start noticing that programs are unreliable or lack features which are seemingly simple to implement with an LLM. The quality of an app may very well depend on how hard it is to replicate, otherwise, why not ship your own?

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#263

Post by flohofwoe »

embedding-shape wrote: post #261
flohofwoe wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The HN title makes it sound like Fable did the port from the original code base to macOS and iOS, but this is very wrong (the project's readme does a much better job). It's merely enhanching an existing macOS version to also run on iOS, which tbh is very trivial and not at all impressive for any LLM. The actually important work (of making the original code release portable and then create Linux and macOS ports) had a…

> > It's merely enhanching an existing macOS version to also run on iOS, which tbh is very trivial and not at all impressive for any LLM. It's so crazy to remember sitting in front of W3Schools after school trying to learn PHP to create a website, and hear people today saying it isn't very impressive a fucking machine can automatically translate/port code from one platform to another, even a machine doing that with P…

> Still, I'd wager it seems interesting enough, given it's on the front page right now.

It's a good example of AI psychosis I guess, people reading things into a headline which they want to be true, no matter what reality says ;)

When you look at the commit history, the actual changes come down to a few dozen lines of code, all of them absolutely trivial, and most of those code changes seem to be cherry-picked bugfixes from the original project.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#264

Post by embedding-shape »

flohofwoe wrote: post #263
embedding-shape wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > It's merely enhanching an existing macOS version to also run on iOS, which tbh is very trivial and not at all impressive for any LLM. It's so crazy to remember sitting in front of W3Schools after school trying to learn PHP to create a website, and hear people today saying it isn't very impressive a fucking machine can automatically translate/port code from one platform to another, even a machine doing that with P…

> Still, I'd wager it seems interesting enough, given it's on the front page right now. It's a good example of AI psychosis I guess, people reading things into a headline which they want to be true, no matter what reality says ;) When you look at the commit history, the actual changes come down to a few dozen lines of code, all of them absolutely trivial, and most of those code changes seem to be cherry-picked bugfix…

> It's a good example of AI psychosis at work ;)

More like "wisdom of the crowds" (for better or worse) unless you're trying to argue that everyone who upvotes/downvotes on HN suffers from AI psychosis ;)

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#265

Post by sarchertech »

embedding-shape wrote: post #264
flohofwoe wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Still, I'd wager it seems interesting enough, given it's on the front page right now. It's a good example of AI psychosis I guess, people reading things into a headline which they want to be true, no matter what reality says ;) When you look at the commit history, the actual changes come down to a few dozen lines of code, all of them absolutely trivial, and most of those code changes seem to be cherry-picked bugfix…

> It's a good example of AI psychosis at work ;) More like "wisdom of the crowds" (for better or worse) unless you're trying to argue that everyone who upvotes/downvotes on HN suffers from AI psychosis ;)

> everyone who upvotes/downvotes

You can’t downvote articles, so a relatively small amount of enthusiastic people slamming upvote will do it.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#266

Post by tonyarkles »

bornfreddy wrote: post #251
tonyarkles wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the person you asked but I frequently use Claude (Opus primarily) to reverse engineer embedded hardware. It uses a mix of Ghidra, Radare2, and just the arm-none-* tools. I can’t say I have a particular workflow though, I just say “we’re reverse engineering foo.bin. It’s the firmware for a servomotor. We talk to the servo over RS485 and it seems that if I send it command X it will sometimes silently reject the com…

> Let’s keep notes in @20260704-reverse-engineer-foo-motor.qmd Curious - why like this? I usually tell it to write down the analysis once all is clear, so I'm wondering if your approach is better.

Often it ends up being multi-session for this particular kind of work. We’ll get to a point where I have to go actually test some stuff out with hardware to provide some answers back, or in the case of this servo in particular… I end up having different questions a few days later.

These notes files do end up being more of a “how we got here” messy journal and less of a real report but they’re full of useful breadcrumbs that make it quick to pick things back up in a fresh context. Having it write a summary report on a topic based on the raw notes works out pretty good.

Another useful thing with these (not RE) is that sometimes I end up starting to debug a problem and I (or Claude) realize that it might be related to a different problem and being able to then cross-reference between the two raw notes files while pulling that thread seems to work well.

Whether or not it’s the “right” approach, I overall tend to treat sessions/context as ephemeral and need some kind of more solid WIP artifact. I do work in an industry that tends to trigger safeguards (unmanned/autonomous agricultural aviation) as well, and have occasionally gotten Claude to a point where I can’t get a session to continue but Codex will pick it up and finish.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#267

Post by klibertp »

Auracle wrote: post #204
tangenter wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely unrelated but I find it amusing in a good way that Oblivion is recognized more favorably now. I never understood the disregard for it (horse armor nonsense aside), as it has a very compelling, unique atmosphere and a not so terrible storyline/writing.

To me, the level scaling just completely annihilates the game. Why even have a leveling system if practically everything just stays leveled with you?

I hate level scaling in games with passion. An argument in favor I heard is that it's supposed to make it easier for the player to go anywhere from the start. Maybe, but coming from classic CRPGs and some TRPG background, I just can't bring myself to understand that impulse: you see a world-ending dragon god destroying a castle, and you think it's a good idea to chase it to its lair... at level 1?? With a plank in hand and with a shirt as your armor??? It's absurd!

Then there's the "level up by doing" mechanic, which is a mixed bag. It can be done well, but in Oblivion, it only resulted in putting a book on the spacebar. Voila, my character literally jumps around and looks utterly idiotic, but Acrobatics levels rise.

Being unable to just go fight a dragon at level 1, and then progressing to routinely curbstomping dragons (Baldur's Gate 2 - solo Sorcerer run is my favorite example: "I see, you're resistant to magic. Let me introduce you to the Magic Sequencer with Lower Resistance x4. Time stop. Horrid wilting. Wish rest. Oh, I didn't need to, you're dead already.") by the end. It's not the only selling point of RPGs, and it can sometimes be omitted entirely (e.g., Disco Elysium). But if there is a classic leveling system, I expect it to work, from zero to hero. It's not as fun if the numbers going up don't translate into real changes in how your character interacts with the world.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#268

Post by prerok »

danielbln wrote: post #222
somenameforme wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what I was going to say. Oblivion was the first Elder Scrolls game that had level scaling. It's just extremely lazy design that ruins any sense of progress/immersion. In Oblivion/Skyrim there are plenty of mods that remove the scaling, and end up with worlds that are vastly more interesting and immersive. I highly recommend Requiem.

I hate hate hate level scaling. I believe they also introduced it to WoW, which ruins the power fantasy of going back to a lower level area and kicking butt, or the fear of venturing in a higher level area and hauling ass out of there. I agree, lazy game design.

I agree, I don't like it either. But... how would they then implement a world where you can wander everywhere? What it brings to the table is that you can wander across the world and not become terribly outmatched as soon as you wander "too soon" to an area.

My gaming preference is to go to an area as per game design, so the fact that I would be outmatched does not bother me and would prefer it that way. I do, however, understand why the game designers chose level scaling for what they wanted to achieve.

Re: Command and Conquer Generals natively ported to macOS, iPhone, iPad using Fable

#270

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

tangenter wrote: post #162

I think the next 10 years or so are going to see a chucklefuck of games reversed thanks to LLMs, which can easily pattern match and operate on contrivedely optimized assembly and output reasonably accurate C/C++ code. I’m one of many right now using Ghidra + LLM workflow. It’s doing the thing it needs to and I’ve helped several communities revive and port their games this way. It is a huge time saver. While I’d perso…

The games industry will push us even harder toward streaming everything.
Post reply on HN