Brilliantly simple fighting game that runs in the browser with online and offline features.
161 karma · joined June 19, 2018
Brilliantly simple fighting game that runs in the browser with online and offline features.
This is not true of Construct, GDevelop, et al which have spent a ton of engineering time to abstract all of the engine's underpinnings to make it all very easy to understand for the newcomer to make working behaviors with visual scripting. There isn't any silver bullet to this for Unity and Unreal and for that reason there will always be at least a small market for editors that have significantly less learning curve.
These visual scripting engines are probably eating GameMaker's lunch since GML predates a lot of modern alternatives such as aforementioned scripting and JavaScript support in modern engines with more power available to savvy users.
But most notably there is a focus on desktop/mobile applications when the real dichotomy ended up being web/mobile applications and a ton of internet companies were dumping money into their own frameworks at the time because who wants to pay rent to Adobe? If artists don't want to pay for their proprietary crapware, imagine tech companies.
AIR was yet another closed platform to throw on the pile of failed closed platforms.
Apple says "you can't do this", but Epic does the thing and says "I should be allowed to do this. As you can all see, this is what happens when I try to put my foot down on it and here's this target audience of people who are benefited by the thing I'm trying to do". This works for them because they are advocating for a freedom of software choice and to rebel against the massive profit line that has made Apple the target of Spotify's legal hate as well.
The rules they broke prevent Epic from doing a thing that consumers would prefer (lower prices) and has been argued against by other parties (30% cut). It doesn't really matter that they broke the rule if the court of public and legal opinion is that the rule was not good to begin with.
Many here mention Publii which perplexed me when I saw it (a desktop app posing as a CMS which is just an SSG) but I guess the writer would actually be the perfect target audience for that.
I recently settled on Bludit since the web admin is very quick to get writing and still takes care of all the extra meta tags and fields without getting in the way of the writing, which is easy enough that I've installed it for some websites where non-tech people are using it just fine. Totally lamenting the lack of templating language but I've been managing.
It's very odd that blog software for the layman tends to require so much setup and flat file CMS software are approximating but not quite achieving a dead simple setup and usage.
Discord is definitely not even a space dedicated to games either (I don't think your EVE example holds up), it's just where people gather to play games and end up using it for everything else too. Everything you've mentioned still definitely applies to a Discord account, free like free beer and the envy of so many other chat platforms.
I find that gaming serving as a social space is not a new concept in any capacity.
What concerns is this: Well and good that Apple says "we don't host pornographic communities on our app store" and Oath immediately sacrificed the lamb to appease Apple. How is this a problem after so long? What if I told an Apple executive the exact same content manifests in Twitter and Reddit?
Evidently the app stores have no interest in hosting NSFW artists and the open web should step up.
The idea that our established views in math and physics are all selective and narrow is certainly correct but I'd like to see where the alternative is. Feels like nihilist rambling.
I lol'd.
Is this not contrary to the western perception of Chinese profiteering entirely? I don't read the chinese paper or anything but China seemed like the last people worried about IP protections.
Let's roll with the physical-digital analogy for a second here: When I go to the convenience store to buy a muffin in the morning, right next to the register the clerk usually has the daily paper sitting on the countertop and I can buy a copy if I think the headline it's worth reading. Or perhaps I can hear the news playing overhead on some TV in a store as I walk around looking for items. Social media currently works like if my muffin was sitting between a copy of the Times and a coupon catalog when I went to the store to go look for it. I am able to look at what I want in pieces when I go to the store, and the cluttered mess of content in the timeline is a conscious choice to keep people looking at ads and reading sensational headlines.
But here's where I keep doubting myself from playing the defense of absolute free speech in this situation: I read an article here on HN recently and commented that these situations always seem to play out through media orgs. Infowars, CNN, even The Atlantic are all companies vying to get some of that sweet sweet user interaction through gaming the platforms. They are frequently condensing their content into auto-playing videos on user timelines, publishing sensational titles in the post text linking to their articles, etc. I can hardly name instances where this was about a user with no media presence. It's almost like media orgs leverage their huge presence to push their own survival.
I really fear for what we may find out about 10 years after it's said and done and we'll all reflect on how surely this wasn't so crazy when we heard about it in the press.
Solution: No idea, but it's interesting to see this play out around media orgs instead of like, actual users who might have an opinion. Alex Jones is a strong face for InfoWars, but the whole thing is a media company.