A great piece of advice in general, not just for the holiday season.
A great piece of advice in general, not just for the holiday season.
Honestly… I’m not sure at this point. I was somewhat nihilistic before, but these past few years have brought that sentiment to a whole new level for me…
The main limiting factor towards a true communist utopia is one: we’re human. As such, we are unfortunately individualistic by nature, and it’s been proven time and time again that the accumulation of wealth and power only strengthens that sentiment in the vast majority of the population. Under these constraints, I don’t see a path to fully public, decentralized governance and economic equality, someone will always attempt to centralize both.
What can be done is increase regulations, break up monopolies, put on safety guards and ensure better redistribution, and use, of wealth by increasing taxes to the ruling class. So basically yeah, some form of democratic socialism.
But then again, since decisions are made by the ruling class, that is unlikely to happen, it’s not in their best interest.
And as we’ve seen this time around, you just can’t beat stupidity. All the good intentions and overwhelming proof in the world won’t do you any good if people are unwilling to listen. Oftentimes, even the highly educated are unwilling to listen, what chance do you have with the average person?
America’s democratic party is much further right than any left leaning European party. Yet, even in the countries where those are or have been in power, the scary communist vision American propaganda promoted never materialized. People’s lives got just a little better as a whole in most cases. American capitalism is a cancer just as much as communism is an unattainable utopia. The answer, as in most cases, lies in the middle, but that’s something the American electorate really struggles to grasp.
Very mature
Yours is a flawed, extremist view.
How impressive something is has nothing to do with whether or not its source is available. What, if they release it to the public it suddenly becomes impressive?
You can disagree with the method of distribution, but it doesn’t affect the quality of the game.
Piracy being a thing isn’t a strong argument for open sourcing everything, since the barrier of entry is higher than you may expect for non technical people, a barrier that would definitely be lower if any game was freely available and compilable by anyone. Someone will make a free, one click installer, guaranteed.
Now, can you charge for open source software? Definitely.
Will it generate significant revenue in most circumstances? No.
Open source software relies on two methods for funding:
The former isn’t something one can stably rely on, the latter just isn’t applicable to games.
Again, that model can work for some high profile projects, but in the vast majority of cases, it won’t. Especially not for games.
One can make works of passion and still want to be compensated, that’s what artists do and games are a form of art. You clearly never had to put food on the table with the art you make.
Your vision of everything being open source is a utopia. A noble idea, for sure, but reality is much more bleak.
Just open sourcing the actual engine wouldn’t do much. At best, you’d be able to make it work on newer hardware if problems arise, or port it to other OSs. Great stuff, but not enough when it comes to improving the game, preserving multiplayer, and so on.
There’s a great amount of scaffolding on top of the base engine that any moderately sized game implements, be it through scripting or native code. That’s what I meant by the line between the engine and the game being blurry. If you want to make meaningful changes to the game, you need access to that framework portion, but releasing it would allow for easy reverse engineering of everything else. It’s a difficult balance to achieve.
I could see that being a thing, but the line between the engine and the game itself is a bit blurry in this context. Copyrighting just the assets and content would often not be enough. There will always be a good chunk of game code which isn’t strictly part of the engine but under this model should remain closed source, otherwise people could just bring their own assets.
Frankly I’d be satisfied with companies open sourcing their games after they stop supporting and/or selling them, mostly for preservation and all that. I think that would be a great middle-ground.
Ah yes, closed source, such a dealbreaker, as if 99% of the other games weren’t.
Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against open source games, it’s just not a viable monetization strategy for most projects, and people gotta eat. There’s reason why most open source games are either passion projects or old games that have been open sourced simply as an act of kindness towards the community since they generate pretty much no revenue.
I really wanna know where you get your language info and examples from because nearly every single one you wrote in your comments is just wrong.
Program state in Rust isn’t immutable. datastruct.nextState()
is not only possible, but perfectly reasonable, it’s exactly how iterators are implemented.
At least it has something to complain about, unlike Karens.
The fact that it can be used as a scripting language doesn’t mean it’s a scripting language. You could use C++ as a scripting language as well, but it would suck.
C# even supports native compilation nowadays, not just JIT, so it’s definitely not a lowly scripting language.
Anyways you’ve got options. Go may also be one of them if you want GC, I forgot to mention it.
I’ve found working with Rust and Bevy to be quite pleasant. If you’re used to working with ECS, I suggest you at least give it a go.
Rust is as functional as C++ 20 with ranges and views is, which is to say it isn’t. Not sure where you got that impression from, but while it does borrow some ideas from functional languages, it’s still very much a procedural one.
Zig doesn’t have headers, nor inheritance. Again, not sure where you got that from, but Zig is basically a modern C, so there’s no OOP anywhere, let alone multiple inheritance.
As for what to use, I think they’re both viable alternatives. I lean more towards Rust, but that’s just due to familiarity. Odin also looks like a viable option, if you don’t mind a smaller ecosystem.
If you want a garbage collected language, then I’d go for C#. Despite its historic reputation as a Windows only language, it’s been cross platform and open source for roughly a decade at this point. I find it great to work with.
Those are not mutually exclusive. I’m so tired of this nihilistic view.
Community and activism can only go so far, and since human decency is not something you can rely on, if you want things to get better you need actual laws that will protect you. The only way to have those is to actually elect people who at least have a chance to do something about it. That holds true both at the state level and federal level.
So yeah, strengthen your community, but for crying out loud vote for the right people as well.
Yes, though in this case it’s more like “go back in the closet so we don’t get deported.” I don’t like it, but I’ll forgive it if it’s necessary. Maybe it isn’t, but with so little wiggle room it’s better not to take chances…
I’m not happy about it, but it makes sense.
They’re trying to avoid polarizing issues so as to not alienate undecided voters. Either way a democratic presidency would be better for LGBTQ people than a MAGA presidency, so I’m not too upset about our issues being put on hold for a few days to achieve that. I imagine they’ll become a little more vocal about them once they’re actually in the White House, and if not we’ll still be better off regardless.
Transgender people are a minority amongst minorities, catering to them while potentially alienating so many more voters is not a wise strategy. Reasonable trans voters will already vote for Harris because they know what’s at stake.
I don’t like it, but if it means keeping fascists out of the office, I can live with it.
I get the mistake. Wouldn’t even call it one tbh, just an oversight. But when someone points it out normally one doesn’t reply with “don’t force your political views onto me” as if non male devs was some weird “woke” concept. A simple “whoops, missed that” would have been perfectly fine and everyone would’ve moved on. With that said, having followed the whole debacle I can say it could have been handled better by both sides.
The problem was more the fact that the devs viewed using anything other than ‘he’ as political, not the presence of gendered language itself. The devs themselves made a big deal about changing it. The way I see it, it’s not even about trans people. How about just women? Is including women in software developent considered political? One would hope not, but here we are…
Especially considering what the context already was
It wasn’t just to accomodate trans people but just… anyone who isn’t male? Apparently women being software developers is a controversial concept for Andreas.
Yeah but if the class changes you need to update everything, you got all that boilerplate taking up space for no real reason, etc…
The Rust way’s just a lot cleaner imo.