![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/2665e448-91d9-484d-919d-113c9715fc79.png)
To be fair, “game of the year” feels like it’s meant to measure popularity, while “most innovative” sounds like it shouls measure how innovative a game is, which is perhaps why the two awards get such different reactions.
To be fair, “game of the year” feels like it’s meant to measure popularity, while “most innovative” sounds like it shouls measure how innovative a game is, which is perhaps why the two awards get such different reactions.
Definitely Jusant. It was just such a perfect game for me when I played it, chill but engaging in exactly the way I needed it, and something about the story just went straight into my heart unlike any other!
This article is about the author’s personal relationship to E3 and how it reminds him about unhealthy work habits he has, which he also thinks are commonly occuring in games journalism.
I think it’s very fair not to like the article, I wasn’t overly interested in it myself, but honestly I can’t help but disagreeing with the negativity directed towards the author in many of these comments. Go ahead and dislike the point of the article, but making a uncharitable reading about the author just seems silly to me.
Personally I hated the game the first couple of hours before I discovered the autopilot, because I was dying too often too achieve anything interesting. Then I discovered it, and then actually learned to fly, and since then I just loved the game. Maybe consider if you might be in a similar situation, or if maybe it’s just not your thing!
Despite a certain amount of hipocricy, this hurts to hear about because of how electric cars are actually a very bad way to attempt to solve the climate crisis, when we in fact should replace cars by public transport and bikes, and trucks with trains, etc.
I am not 100% what other “clean” technologies they are referring to (busted, yeah I didn’t click the link), but I worry some of them might also be highly inefficient ways to improve things that are more akin to greenwashing.
I have a FP4 and I’m very happy with it! It’s a little chunkier than my last phone, but I think it works great. I haven’t needed to repair it yet, but just knowing that I can is awesome. I never was one for the absolute cutting edge of smartphones, so I can’t really tell you how it compares to those, but the camera is more than enough, and everything feels as new as it needs to be!
I had some issues with occasional ghost touches before, as someone else mentioned, but they seem to (finally) have patched them out just a couple of weeks ago :D
Yeah I (and probably everyone else) agree that indefinite growth is not sustainable, but no-one argues for such growth and as far as I know there are no reasons to suspect the world population will grow indefinitely.
I don’t know of the top of my head how sustainable a lower-middle class Westerner is, but my guess is not overly sustainable, as it feels that modern society is made so you naturally emit quite a lot. My guess is that we could sustain 10 billion or a bit more, I haven’t really heard any convincing arguments we couldn’t. I agree there must be an upper limit, but I think it much be much further than you think.
Pretty sure that he pointed out that a small fraction of the population is responsible for an absolutely disproportionate amount of emissions. Is really decreasing the population necessary, or would it be more effective to decrease the emissions of the current population, since we see that a lot of emissions come from so few people?
Also, industrial revolution changed more than just population, I’m sure you know better than simply implying that such a correlation as you describe implies a causation.
You’re not blaming the poor, but you’re still pointing to population growth as the cause, which raginghummus convincingly argued against.
“inefficient”, yet consume much less energy than planes for the same route. You seem to be using a very odd definition of efficiency!
Very on-point critiques of Europe, if we don’t better ourselves it will not only be hard to get other parts of the world to take us seriously, but we will also allow a lot of nasty shit to happen.
Speed Racer (2008)! The Wachowski sisters directed it after the Matrix trilogy, and the silly and over-the-top aesthetics seem to have put of many, but I think it’s a genuinely fun movie with great themes and some awesome emotional moments.
Hey, so I side with Ukraine in the current conflict, but in general I’m somewhat of a NATO sceptic and really not a fan of US foreign policy. I was curious about the information you provided, but honestly, in contrast to what you claim, it seems to me that you have not explained most of your points. Yeah there’s been a clear political divide in Ukraine, but it requires an enormous leap of logic to see that as justification of the Russian invasion. Yeah NATO sucks in many ways, and it and Ukraine too have done some shitty things, but again, there seems to be absolutely no sensible argument for any of that to have justified the invasion.
I haven’t watched the French documentary yet, in case any of your arguments relied on it. A quick online search on the journalist does mention several untrue pieces of Russian propaganda that seem to be mentioned in the documentary, though. Any chance you could explain more, or is this lack of explanation all there is for someone curious to understand why the war is happening?