Ah, I didn’t catch that. I would like to think they’d only add things with a good purpose, e.g. better early game experience.

The golden ball thingy in the bottle village? That’s this floating “cage pyramid” where you can go up with a swing like elevator. I’m lacking the words to describe it better.

It seem I forgot most of Ghens world tho.

If that was in the original game (which I did play it a couple of times) I absolutely don’t remember it.

You’re right of course about the limits of the point and click and forced view nature of the game. A lot is hidden / cannot be explored as thoroughly.

It looks pretty right to me. I’ll probably pick it up (after already having the original and the steam version).

There seem to be some changes / additions to the original game? For example I don’t remember the house/dome thing on the giant tree stump (~30s) or the tree (at the end of the trailer).

Double edged sword, but yeah.

Acquisitions don’t need to pay for themselves. Ideally they do, but sometimes it’s enough if they just help the company’s main business stay in business, or grow.

IBM is making $30bn+ in gross profit each year.

I understand the decision, but for me it’s a problem. I want to play it, but after all those years I really long for more variety.

As a middle way they could make new industries optional. Or release them as recommended NewGRFs like they did with some of the graphics, audio and such in the past.

Do they still not add new industries to the base game? I played this game a lot - like A LOT. But the amount of base game industries are really sad to look at, and there’s not that many of expansions either. So you end up playing FIRS industries all the time.

Except cheaters would flock to the tournament-legal game mode because there’s less cheaters. Why would they bother to try and win against other cheaters if there’s a better chance to win against easier opponents?

Cheaters cheat so they win easier. They don’t care about fairness.

Most likely the mic is simply powered by the voltage which also powers the headphones.

But there’s also mics which don’t need voltage to work at all (unlikely for headsets tho).

Well, obviously someone did the math and figured out it’s better to have these titles than not. So I’d say you’re wrong.

If the title makes more people click in the first place and the amount of people who stay to read at least until they know they’re not interested, is bigger than the number of visitors if they had a normal title… the stupid title wins.

Unfortunately that’s not just gaming related news, but all news (and non-news).

It’s by design. It leaves you wondering (and ideally click on the article).

What I actually would like to know if journalists, or whoever writes the articles, are picking these headlines consciously or if they’re following guidelines. I can imagine both scenarios.

TA is just a gem. I like how the base game is pretty moderate unit-wise. And then they just said “fuck it” and added whatever cool shot they (probably always) wanted.

And the soundtrack kicks ass, “March unto death” being my favorite.

Dictatorships (or any otherwise ideology driven entities) will have their very own problems training AI. Cannot feed the AI material which goes against your own ideology or it might not act in your best interest.

I don’t think that’s entirely fair. Typically answers are getting upvoted when they work for someone. So the top answer worked for more people than the other answers. Now there can be more than one solution to a problem but neither the people who try to answer the question, nor the people who vote on the answers, can possibly know which of them works specifically for you.

ChatGPT will just as well give you a technically correct, but for you wrong, answer. And only after some refinement give the answer you need. Not that different than reading all the answers and picking the one which works for you.

I don’t want to compare the behavior, only the quality of the answers. An unintentional error of ChatGPT is still an error, even when it’s delivered with a smile. I absolutely agree that the behavior of some SO users is detrimental and pushes people away.

I can also see ChatGPT (or whatever) as a solution to that - both as moderator and as source of solutions. If it knows the solution it can answer immediately (plus reference where it got it from), if it doesn’t know the solution it could moderate the human answers (plus learn from them).

Amazing how much hate SO receives here. As knowledge base it’s working super good. And yes, a lot of questions have been answered already. And also yes, just like any other online community there’s bad apples which you have to live with unfortunately.

Idolizing ChatGPT as a viable replacementis laughable, because it has no knowledge, no understanding, of what it says. It’s just repeating what it “learned” and connected. Ask about something new and it will simply lie, which is arguably worse than an unfriendly answer in my opinion.

JS powered “matrix code”.