Chozo

Because the game will still attempt to connect to the real servers, unless otherwise modified.

Ticket closed, Reason: Working As Intended

I heard one for the first time in years just a few days ago. When I was a kid, they used to have a pretty consistent route and I'd see them in my neighborhood just about every day, but now it seems so rare to see them at all.

Patching a live service game so that it can run "offline" isn't a small task, the cost of which will inevitably be pushed onto the players. I feel like SKG sorta trivializes the amount of work that is needed to make this happen when they reference homebrew server emulators for previously-shutdown MMOs, as those custom servers take a LOT of effort from the communities that maintain them.

Publishers of live service games will likely increase the costs of subscription fees/microtransactions in order to fund the necessary conversions once a game reaches end-of-life. This creates a new problem for developers/publishers which, to the best of my knowledge, SKG doesn't suggest a solution to. I don't see a scenario in which raising development costs (especially at a time when video games are already more expensive) is beneficial to the industry as a whole.

I don't think this is a reason to be against SKG as a whole, though. Especially not to the "eat my entire ass" level. But it is a nitpick that I have with it.

My hot take: Thor/PirateSoftware is right about some aspects of Stop Killing Games and the damages it could cause to the games industry. He's wrong about a lot of it because he clearly has still never properly researched SKG and loves to speak before he thinks, but I do tend to agree with his concerns about the business side of things and how studios will be affected.

More than I expected, to be honest.

You know what they meant, don't be obtuse about it.

A huge chunk of that Linux development was paid for by exploiting child gambling.

Just because one does a few good things with their money, doesn't justify how they got it.

It depends on the game, and my familiarity with it. If it's a linear, story-based game where the player doesn't really influence the end result at all, then watching it is just as good as playing it myself, in my opinion. Or if it's a new addition to a franchise that I'm already experienced in, like a new Super Mario game, then watching it is generally just as fine of an experience as playing it.

But if it's a game that's based entirely around the experience of playing it, like most multiplayer shooters for example, then watching somebody else play may be entertaining, but doesn't substitute actually playing it myself.

There's a few people I know in real life, who I originally met online, and who call me "Chozo" more often than by my real name. Names are weird.

I think the difference comes from understanding. When we inferior, fleshy ones "make up" information, it's usually based on our understanding (or misunderstanding) of the subject at hand. We will fill in the blanks in our knowledge with what we know about similar subjects.

An LLM doesn't understand its output, though. All it knows is that word_string_x immediately follows word_string_y in 84.821% of its training data, so that's what gets pasted next.

For us, making up false information comes from gaps in our cognition, from personal agendas, our own unique lived experiences, etc. For an LLM, these are just mathematical anomalies.

Trump is on the list. There is literally no other explanation for this behavior.