The 60hz screen is ridiculous. They need to make the phone WAY cheaper and acknowledge it’s mid-tier. But Apple want it both ways - a premium brand charging premium prices and then shovelling bottom-end specs to funnel you to the even-more-expensive models.
I hate the stupidly low base storage, but personally am not impacted due to my usage patterns and having cheap cloud storage so I’m not as passionate with my disdain!
7 for effort.
8 if it’s executed well.
9 and up if it’s actually a creative and fun game with good mechanics, no MTX, etc.
It just makes the rating system pointless.
According to the article, the owner who was sued stated in court:
when she was asked if she would accept a transgender woman as female if they had medically transitioned and were legally recognised as one, she “would not view that person as a woman”.
So it sounds like a case of the owner wanting to apply their own view without regard for how the law recognises gender in this day and age.
I’m the opposite too, for a different reason to you. I have Sonos home theatre (soundbar, sub, rear speakers) and Chromecast with Google TV hooked up to the TV. I control music on a pixel phone or pixel tablet through the Chromecast, Sonos kinda just hangs off on the edge of my ecosystem and I don’t think about it. I maybe use the app a few times a year.
But I get why if you just have a few speakers it would be a pain to use the app.
I used to use the PSVR2 subreddit to stay on top of releases and reviews, so I appreciate your posts here on Lemmy 🙏
I saw you posted about the AZ Sunshine remake - that’s good news and hopefully they’re still stuff coming even though Sony aren’t really doing first party development.
This is amazing news, it’s an incredible VR title. But I’m surprised they’re releasing as the bottom falls out of PSVR2.
Yeah, that headline is atrocious. The reality of the situation is sensational enough, I’d argue dialling up the outrage actually diminishes the impact.
Elon sees himself as a truth teller discovering and interpreting information that is outside the mainstream, using his deep and savvy knowledge of the world to understand what is and isn’t important or relevant and using his platform to promote it. He thinks he’s the only person with the courage to speak the truth.
In reality he’s just the 2024 equivalent of a boomer forwarding stupid email chains from his inbox without the slightest inclination to confirm what he’s posting or ability to tell the real world from obvious fakery.
This got under my skin too.
That parasite constantly refers to user content and comments and as being the property or Reddit, and his schemes to generate profit off the back of that asset are almost always to the detriment of the user base who are keeping him in business.
Like all rich assholes, he’s got this expectation that everyone will deeply respect and admire his mission to enrich himself by exploiting whatever market he has access to.
Very well made point, imo.
This is why we got Stadia. Imagine Netflix where you pay a monthly fee and still have to buy all the movies and shows at full price. That was Stadia’s model.
Thos erodes the concept of ownership so that it is substituted for rental, without stating that clearly. Stadia failed but in doing so it probably helped Microsoft figure out how to eventually get away with doing the exact same thing.
Games should clearly say if you’re basically renting them, not have it buried in the EULA. Let publishers full price and let consumers decide if they are prepared to live with it.
Totally agree. You always leave yourself room to negotiate down.
Imagine not supporting this because you think it’s unfair to the industry, given the very specific examples that have been given.
He talks about that. I think the gist is that a lot of games that are online services could run locally, the publisher just chooses not to. That’s why Ross chose the Crew 2 as his hill to die on: there’s evidence that an offline does/did exist and just wasn’t enabled. That’s a practice that needs to be challenged.
The argument goes that a game that relies on server side technology to run in any form shouldn’t be sold as a product that you can own. This needs to be reflected in the price and licensing model. That seems fair.
The big question is why TF we’re at a point where a company should be allowed to sell you a product and say you own it then remove your right to use the product arbitrarily. I bet there’s IP in the server side code, but having a system where a corporation’s IP and ability to make money from the IP is more important that the concept of ownership is deeply fucked up.
Technology Tangents did a video where a game he bought on CD and tried to play on period-correct hardware won’t run because there was DRM that called a server to check the date and to make sure it wasn’t leaked early. Decades after the release, the server is gone and the game can’t run, ironically, because it’s so far outside of its release date. That’s the kind of bullshit that absolutely shouldn’t be tolerated.
Caves of Qud is a VIBE