Part of the issue is that modern games are usually getting fixes right up to release. Pre-release reviews tend to focus on things that aren’t likely to ever change significantly, like design and writing.

It would be nice if they gave a summary of issues they saw with a disclaimer that they may get fixed instead of omitting that information entirely.

I got Hexcodle #385 in 4! Score: 69%

⏫⏫🔽⏬🔼⏫
⏫⏫✅⏬🔽🔼
✅✅✅🔽✅✅
✅✅✅✅✅✅

Nice.

It might make me smarter, but it makes me feel dumb.

I’ve been playing Gamedle recently. I tend to discover interesting games both as answers and while researching the info I have.

More biomes don’t fix the fundamental flaw in the design. It treats planets the same way Raft treats islands. They become purely a resource hunt for the player, no matter what skin they have.

Raft gets away with it by having your base travel with you, being incredibly hostile, and being short enough that the loop doesn’t get tiring.

NMS and Starbound struggle from the same issues. Infinite tiered worlds end up feeling the same, but also remove all meaning from the exploration. In Minecraft or Terraria you aren’t going to be flying to a totally new place in five minutes, so you want to get to know your surroundings and put down some roots.

Travel time and not having tiered world progression makes the player care about where they are at instead of seeing it as a stepping stone.

They have two avenues to make money:

1. Sell commercial services such as customer support bots. They get customers thanks to the massive buzz their free services generated.
2. Milking investors, the real way to make money.

Generative AI doesn’t get any training in use. The explosion in public AI offerings falls into three categories:

1. Saves the company labor by replacing support staff
2. Used to entice users by offering features competitors lack (or as catch-up after competitors have added it for this reason)
3. Because AI is the current hot thing that gets investors excited

To make a good model you need two things:

1. Clean data that is tagged in a way that allows you to grade model performance
2. Lots of it

User data might meet need 2, but it fails at need 1. Running random data through neural networks to make it more exploitable (more accurate interest extraction, etc) makes sense, but training on that data doesn’t.

This is clearly demonstrated by Google’s search AI, which learned lots of useful info from Reddit but also learned absurd lies with the same weight. Not just overtuned-for-confidence lies, straight up glue-the-cheese-on lies.

Cucumbers have much better shelf-life when shrink-wrapped. It ends up a debate of which is worse between food waste and plastic waste.

That’s exactly what it is. Firefox’s advanced tracking protection blocks connections to social media sites from other sites so that social media can’t see your behavior on the rest of the Internet.

Twitter started moving some things to a different domain and FF saw it as a third-party, blocking connections from it to the old Twitter domains.

Yet another reason the rebrand is dumb.

This is what I’ve found too. Tutorials help to learn tools and some basic techniques, but actual learning requires doing. That’s easy if you have something you want to do, but incredibly difficult if you don’t.

They aren’t hoping to bring water back to earth. One of the biggest limiters to exploring other planets is getting the resources we need to travel and survive off of Earth. It’s way easier to get off the moon, so moon bases mining water to drink, farm, and make fuel out of are a logical move.