On May 23 2016 23:36 suicideyear wrote: anyway its been out for a minute and i can honestly say i'm not feeling stellaris. not enough to refund it but yeah. i don't think i "get" paradox games, i play ck2 and none of the crazy shit ever happens. i have EU3 owned too and i haven't even tried to play that.
music monday
I mean every single part of stellaris is broken I can't even think of one that isn't
I guess empire creation is working as intended after the first hotfix? The only thing that comes to mind though
its got potential, just need to wait until they hit like v1.10
cities skylines wasnt bad on release iirc
I'm somewhat tempted to go try a playthrough where I just try to win as fast as possible abusing ALL the broken things in the game
enslavement evade corvette spam with transports/construction ships as distractions to snowball vassalize people from 0 to 2π using 5 core planets with sectors made entirely of single android planets
I am forgetting other things?
In my current playthrough (insane diff 600 system 17 AI) I'm at year 2285 and vassalized about 2/3s of the galaxy, wonder how quickly you can actually finish a game when abusing all the broken things.
On May 24 2016 05:52 Gahlo wrote: So, is the word "easy" when talking about programming the same as Godwin's Law? Because I can stand a debate I'm in.
What's the context here?
There's a thread about chroma skins and when asked why they stopped making them a Riot Developer said that with the way skins work in League that Chroma's are effectively different skins, which means that while the texture change is easy to do that it would still need all the hooking up that a skin would normally entail and that with the price range they were targeted at with poor sales that it made more sense to just make 750RP skins like the D&D set. So, long story short, if they wanted to have chromas being worth making they'd need to redo how the game handles skins.
Then some guy comes in and says Riot is bad/stupid/lazy for not making aspects of the game scalable, maintainable, and expandable for the indefinite future and refuses to acknowledge that even if anybody was given the time to do that to their best of their ability that eventually they would reach a point where that system would break down and need to be redone.
On May 24 2016 05:52 Gahlo wrote: So, is the word "easy" when talking about programming the same as Godwin's Law? Because I can stand a debate I'm in.
What's the context here?
... refuses to acknowledge that even if anybody was given the time to do that to their best of their ability that eventually they would reach a point where that system would break down and need to be redone.
Riot's back end is notoriously shit in terms of scalability though... They've spent the last 4-5 years trying to bandaid/replace all the backend issues stemming from how inappropriate the original codebase was for what it's become today.
It's not a particularly useful criticism to make, since everyones known about it for the last 5 years and they're doing what they can, but you can't pretend that riot doesn't have unusually large issues with tech debt/scalability.
If they'd had the time and know-how at the start to create a more robust system, league would probably have 20x the features it has right now.
On May 24 2016 05:52 Gahlo wrote: So, is the word "easy" when talking about programming the same as Godwin's Law? Because I can stand a debate I'm in.
What's the context here?
There's a thread about chroma skins and when asked why they stopped making them a Riot Developer said that with the way skins work in League that Chroma's are effectively different skins, which means that while the texture change is easy to do that it would still need all the hooking up that a skin would normally entail and that with the price range they were targeted at with poor sales that it made more sense to just make 750RP skins like the D&D set. So, long story short, if they wanted to have chromas being worth making they'd need to redo how the game handles skins.
Then some guy comes in and says Riot is bad/stupid/lazy for not making aspects of the game scalable, maintainable, and expandable for the indefinite future and refuses to acknowledge that even if anybody was given the time to do that to their best of their ability that eventually they would reach a point where that system would break down and need to be redone.
Any time someone says that making or maintaining games is easy, ignore them. 100% of the time, they have no idea what they're talking about.
I still remember one guy on the Starbound forums arguing that the dev team was wasting their time when they all moved to the same location so that they could actually develop the game in the same physical building, and that physically being near each other was no more efficient than being strewn across the world in different time zones. It was rather dumb.
Also, here's a michael jackson/donkey kong mashup:
For those of you playing Overwatch, how highly do you value building "combo" teams? Like, do you go out of your way to pick Zarya if you see Pharah (for ults) or Soldier/Mei (for double shield front/mid line)? Or do you just pick which hero you think you should play for the given map, regardless of the other players?
I think it's obvious that people will go out of their way to pick a Tank/Healer if the team needs it, but how often, if ever, do you pick the specific character with synergy in mind?
I occasionally factor team synergy in, but mostly my picks are more map based.
Roadhog is my go-to tank, but I won't pick him on most payload attack maps. Tracer is by far my best, but I struggle with her on certain maps as well, and will often opt to go Pharah instead (overcoming the z-axis issues).
On May 24 2016 05:52 Gahlo wrote: So, is the word "easy" when talking about programming the same as Godwin's Law? Because I can stand a debate I'm in.
What's the context here?
... refuses to acknowledge that even if anybody was given the time to do that to their best of their ability that eventually they would reach a point where that system would break down and need to be redone.
Riot's back end is notoriously shit in terms of scalability though... They've spent the last 4-5 years trying to bandaid/replace all the backend issues stemming from how inappropriate the original codebase was for what it's become today.
It's not a particularly useful criticism to make, since everyones known about it for the last 5 years and they're doing what they can, but you can't pretend that riot doesn't have unusually large issues with tech debt/scalability.
If they'd had the time and know-how at the start to create a more robust system, league would probably have 20x the features it has right now.
The game also wouldn't exist, because the reason they took on all that code debt was to get the game out ASAP. It's because they were able to do that that they picked up such a huge market share and were able to make their F2P model sustainable. Sure, if they had worked super carefully and slowly on the initial release, League would be more scalable, but it also wouldn't have any players.
To put it in other words, Riot correctly recognized that they were an Amazon model, not a Ben & Jerry's model. MOBAs are a field with deeply entrenched network effects, lock-in, and huge benefits to being first-to-market. If they had pursued the Ben & Jerry's model of slow, careful growth, they'd be just another forgotten game developer.
EPT
