Calm down Satan.

Honestly only having two body types is the lazy part, no matter what the two types are. The best solution would be a variety of heights, weights, shoulder, waist, and hip sliders with boobs and butts and whatever else as add ons to the body shape. That should cover everyone as long as there is plenty of range on each option.

Unless everyone is in armor, in which case two or three gender neuteal body types are fine because boobs and butts won’t be noticeable through armor anyway. Height is pretty much all that is different if everyone in the armor is in decent shape and the armor is made to fit a range of people.

Random alphanumeric.

Should have tested for #^%_@()

What a great point to make about language in situations that are not technical! Like how theory is used differently outside of scientific contexts, which is language naturally evolving.

But this is like someone trying to use the lay definition of theory, which is the equivalent of a hypothesis in acience, in a scientific context. A scientist saying “that is just a theory” to dismiss the theory of relativity in a scientific context would be rightfully corrected by their peers.

Using legacy software wrong is like using API to describe something other than an API.

Techical terms with specific meanings don’t vary significantly based on context, because consistency is important in technical usage.

The author is complaining about how guthub is being poorly modernized, which is the opposite of legacy software. If she means ‘something we choose use out of tradition’ that isn’t what legacy software means.

That isn’t what legacy means.

Drainstorming!

I used to google onions, because it was the style at the time

Tekken 8 didn’t have an early access that I am aware of, and I have given a Not Recommended review on steam because of the shop being added post release. The Tekken situation is not an early access problem, just a greed problem so I might have caused some confusion as an example of games having sketchy behavior even without early access.

Multiversus is free to play with predatory monitization. The beta was free, but you actually got stuff by playing a somewhat reasonable amount of time. During the beta they increased the amount of time and people complained, so it was kind of surprising that they did the opposite of the early access feedback on release.

WoW did set out to be massively popular with a gameplay style that encouraged daily play.

PUBG lucked into the popularity by getting the scale and pacing correct for a large audience.

Both also seemed to benefit from server issues causing an ‘exclusive’ thing that means people lined up to get in during peak hours. Popularity can breed popularity, especially when the games are fun.

Who watches the same movie every day without watching something else in between?

Game distributers set their expectations on the most successful games, so they want to beat World of Warcraft and PUBG on player counts.

Same for me, and I have had better luck with enjoying early access games than most full release games. Valheim is the stand out example for me, but there arena couple others with hundreds of hours of fun! It also helps that indie early access games tend to be less expensive.

Then there is the case of Multiversus, which was way more fun to play in prerelease than it is now. On top of that they cranked up the intrusive monetization, so getting to the less fun gameplay is a slog.

Then there is Tekken 8, which launched ok and then added a shitty shop and annoying seasons shortly after release. It also seems like the networking has gottenn worse.

But every early access game where I was clear on expectations has been fun and always feels worth the money.

It explains what it does, it does not confirm that it is what was intended.

The user is always right about what they are willing to spend money on. That doesn’t mean they know what they want, although a lot of people don’t want to change.

That doesn’t mean all change is good, and it isn’t like any UI will ever meet everyone’s preferences. For example, I hate adaptive design interfaces that are significantly different in confusing ways on different resolutions. Like I understand switching a static menu to an expandable menu, but not moving the relative location of certain buttons from the bottom of the screen to the top or vise versa. But that might make sense for some use case that isn’t how I interact with it.

Is anything other than sexting referred to as inappropriate when a minor is involved?

Pretty busy at the moment, I’ll get back to this later when I have sone free time.

Huh, my first thought was that they went to the farm upstate where everyone’s pets end up.

Note they left the “…and improved” off the (New) title.

Like the startups that ‘disrupt’ the established system by ignoring laws and breaking the parts that worked and selling it like an improvement.

‘Ride sharing’ (unregulated cabs) was only cheaper because of investor funding allowing them to undercut on pricing, abusing the concept of contract workers, and the companies ignoring laws. That isn’t ‘disruptive’ by being innovative, that is cheating the system.