audaxdreik

Your initial post and response here describe my position as well.

Simply put, to follow individuals, you have to be where those individuals are. On Lemmy here in looking for topics and discussion, those are much easier to decentralize.

Same on all accounts. Got the original NES Metroid for my birthday when I was a kid and impacted my taste in games forevermore. Of course I've played all the Castlevanias as well and Hollow Knight is a masterpiece.

It's hard to properly compare because I've played Super Metroid more times than I honestly remember and have only made it through Dread 1.5x (at best). There are so many cool rooms in Super (and even later games like the Prime series) where I play them and go, "Oh, this is the room with X!" where X is a cool encounter, maybe a friendly/non-hostile creature, or an entertaining set piece. Dread doesn't really have that, the areas check off zones like flavors of ice cream, the music is not memorable, and creatures are often used across multiple zones, further diluting any uniqueness to the areas.

It's best summed up by this screenshot I took of Dread (I added the red outlines around the black space myself to highlight my point). Notice how the foreground has no character or texture and all the detail has been pushed into the background, which is essentially the negative space you traverse through. My eyes don't really hold on this area, they capture the boundary of the play space and then navigate through it, passing over a lot of the inconsequential stuff in the background. Again, compare to Super.

Also the EMMI stealth sections are so incongruous with the rest of the game you could cleanly slice them out entirely (while redistributing any of the power ups of course) and the game would be the same. In fact I rather hate them because instead of taking my time to explore and soak in the environment, I'm just chased through a very samey looking area.

Oh and finally, it's a small point and I don't want to make too much out of it, but like ... the game opens with SPOILERS beating her so hard she loses her abilities. That's weird, right? Kinda oof, IMHO.

Metroid Dread still kinda ... bothers me. At the risk of sounding overly contentious, am I the only one who thought it was like a 7/10 action game and a 5/10 Metroidvania?

I won't go into it all now, but I feel like the difficulty spike is a knock-on from the lack of collectibles. While you can argue about the usefulness of previous collectibles in Metroid games, in Dread they've been pared down to Missile Tanks, Energy Tanks, and Power Bomb Tanks. To make discovering those limited things more valuable, they pumped up boss difficulty so you'd either have to come in with a sufficiently high stockpile or perform a counter.

I'm not sure if that's 100% accurate and I may be generalizing my own experiences too much, but otherwise there's just not really enough excuse for me to go out of my way and collect all those Missile Tanks unless I'm specifically going for a completionist run. Seeing yet another +5 Missile Tank tucked away somewhere just doesn't make me go, "Wow, I need to get there!" but increasing the boss difficulty to a point that requires it also makes it feel less optional? Anyone agree?

certified Dread disdainer

1000% this. Without giving away too much information, I work(ed) for a cloud provider (not one of the big ones, there are a surprising number of smaller ones in the field you've probably never heard of before). I quit this week to take a position in local government with some quaint, on-prem setup.

1. We were always understaffed for what we promised. Two guys per shift and if one of us took vacation; oops, lol. No extra coverage, just deal.
2. Everyone was super smart but we didn't have time to work the tickets. Between crashes, outages, maintenance, and horrendous tickets that took way too much work to dig into, there was just never enough time. If you had a serious problem that took lengthy troubleshooting, good luck!
3. We over-promised on support we could provide, often taking tickets that were outside of infrastructure scope (guest OS shit, you broke your own server, what do you want me to do about it?) and working them anyway to please the customer or forwarding them directly to one of our vendors and chaining their support until they caught wise and often pushed back.
4. AI is going to ruin Support. To be clear, there will always be support and escalation engineers who have to work real problems outside the scope of AI. However without naming names, there's a big push (it'll be everyone before too long, mark it) for FREE tier support to only chat with AI bots. If you need to talk to a real human being, you gotta start dishing out that enterprise cash.

Mix all that together and then put the remaining pressure on the human aspect still holding things up and there's a collapse coming. Once businesses get so big they're no longer "obligated" to provide support, they'll start charging you for it. This has always been a thing of course, anyone who's worked enterprise agreements knows that. But in classic corpo values, they're closing the gap. Pay more for support, get less in return. They'll keep turning that dial until something breaks catastrophically, that's capitalism baby.

I know it's a 45 minute Youtube video, but I love Tom Nicholas and all his stuff is fascinating and worth watching. Check this out as he does a sincere deep dive on it to get an honest answer and it's pretty enlightening! It's actually evolved even in the short time since its inception on the internet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmzyGNXxwdo

Almost as bad as the "Enable new feature? / Not now" options

No, NOT not now; never. Never.

You're getting downvoted by cryptobros, but you are absolutely correct, there is no good use for block chain and never will be

It's a fully public database among trustless parties. To the first point, there's no reason any database can't be made public if so desired. To the second point, for the block chain to have any meaning or value beyond itself, some authority eventually needs to interpret its contents. That authority might as well hold the database or, in trustless cases, a third party trustee. Nothing about it makes sense at a very base level, you don't even need to explain the tech because it just doesn't hold up logically.

There is a very meaningful difference between humane, highly regulated animal testing and what Musk is doing. Compounding this is the feeling that Musk's high profile is what's letting him get away with this in the first place. He wants to slap his name and face on everything for the credit when it's good, be gets to be the lightning rod when it's not.

There are no legitimate uses, full stop.

As others have pointed out, it's just a fully public database. Its use case is among trustless parties, and that's why it fails. At some point, somebody is going to want to take action off the data and that's going to involve a trusted party enforcing it. Sooo ... just have the trusted party host the data (and make it public if you really care). And if all the parties are truly that trustless, 1) why are they dealing with either and 2) get a third party trustee to broker your deals