Zozano

joined 2 years ago
[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Not wrong lol. Australian humour is a very tricky thing to understand for outsiders.

I was once accused of being racist for telling a story about how I joked that my black friend didn't need sunscreen.

Unless you understand how Aussie humour works, you won't understand that I'm actually saying "I don't give a shit about what colour your skin is".

For the uninitiated, much of Aussie humour revolves around how much you can "take-the-piss" meaning, "I know where your boundaries are, and I'll show you that I respect you by walking up to that line, but not crossing it".

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe it's just may way of looking at things, but I think for something to be culturally appropriated, it would need to be done with sincerity.

Ironically dressing up in Native-American headwear for a frat-party doesn't seem like cultural appropriation, just kinda fucked up (like doing blackface).

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago

They should be.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Fair enough. It reminds me of the whole conversation about critical race theory. It isn't what most people think it is, and is reserved for discussions regarding much more nuanced understandings.

I still think it's hard to distinguish whether something is, or isn't cultural appropriation. Where is the line between inspiration and a knock-off?

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 5 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I find it hard to not be a sarcastic asshole sometimes lol.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

So Wolfire's idea of being anticompetitive is to restrict how many features a platform may offer?

Honestly, it just sounds like Wolfire has an axe to grind. Steam doesn't price in the features it offers, their 30% cut existed a long time before most of this stuff was added.

Something like this will never be implemented. Consider the outcome: Steam decouples the marketplace from the extra services, so they create a separate application and offer it as a free service, and creates a link between the two services. There are a hundred ways around this, and all of them inconvenience the consumer.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I still don't see what you're seeing.

Just to play devils advocate, what do you think Valve should do differently?

After learning more about it, I'm understanding the problem is that Wolfire (and every other developer/publisher) has a contract with Valve, in which they aren't allowed to sell their game on another PC market for a cheaper price than Steam.

Though, I wouldn't describe that as anticompetitive, rather, neutrally-competitive. Valve is offering a level playing field, they can take it or leave it. This is a fairly standard practice among businesses (though I understand this does not make it right).

If valve wanted to be anticompetitive they would dictate that games published on Steam are exclusive to Steam on PC.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 13 points 2 years ago (13 children)

I've heard people claim cultural appropriation over this or that, but I'm not convinced it's a real thing, and not just people being offended on behalf of someone else.

That's not to say that cultures don't get appropriated, but is that a bad thing? White people rocking dreadlocks, cool. Black people sporting a kimono, nice. Asian people with Klan robes, what.

We live in a culturally interconnected global community now, no group has ownership over aesthetics.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Again, it just sounds like Valve is offering a good service and other companies don't want to compete. If it's Valves fault for providing a good service and lots of users choose to use their platform instead of others, I fail to see what they could do to rectify that.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I've never heard of Valve trying to prevent a developer from distributing their game on other PC store platforms, it's quite an assertion.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)

If anticompetitive means "it's your choice to enter into an agreement in which we host your game for 30%, and distribute it on our platform, with unlimited patch updates, and unlimited user downloads, and a fuckton of features like community forums, guides, groups etc., also if your game is good we will promote it free of charge"

Then I suppose companies like Epic who choose to run at a loss, as opposed to providing a good service, have no chance, and Steam is anticompetitive.

The counter narrative exists though, Steam is just a good service, and if you want to compete with them, you need to provide a good service, like GOG.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 2 points 2 years ago

I'm not your pal, buddy!

view more: ‹ prev next ›