I funded this back on kickstarter when I was still in high school. I remember the excitement that came with every $1mil milestone, it really felt like an incredible movement that was going to produce something really special. I haven't been able to follow progress closely over the past decade, but the gameplay demos have been fun and there always seems to be a decent amount of progress so at this point I think I'm content waiting.
I contributed $35 in the original Kickstarter because I love space sims and the genre was completely dead at that time. I doubt the game will ever come out at this point but I'm not going to sweat wasting $35 more than ten years ago.
There was this space sim game a while back that was called HELLION, it had so much potential it was unreal. Sadly, some internal affairs and change in priority left it abandoned. You hate to see it.
I gave them USD 50 for pretty similar reasons plus the additional reason of thanking Roberts for the entertainment I had from his earlier games. Since, I have easily gotten that much entertainment value watching the development, so for me it was a great purchase. ANd they tell me there will be a full game someday, for icing on the cake.
In between when that kickstarter went off and now, another company funded, built and released Elite Dangerous, then added multiple extensions adding planet surfaces, first-person stuff, etc to it. I mean in terms of gameplay it's nowhere near as ambitious and it's got an absence of story, but it actually released and gained success.
ED has some cool moments like traveling, controls, vr support, but after getting over the initial impressions there isn't much of a game for many players to enjoy and the later expansions packs have not been well-received. I hope ED is not the benchmark since SC has so much more potential in single/multiplayer
Out of curiosity, do you find the development story itself the worthwhile investment or are you holding out on the bet if you'll wait ${years} more then something like the promised feature set will eventually be delivered as the polished, complete, and functional package you've been looking forward to?
There is a lot of value in the development story for me. Over time they've almost entirely stopped talking about progress outside of major milestones which is disappointing but theres only so many years in a row you can say server meshing will be finished in 6 months before people get tired of hearing about it.
The team seems genuine, and donations aren't slowing down, so it seems likely that the game will materialize in some complete form eventually
The incentive to sell something completely undermines the ability to give you the best information. Floating sponsored links to the top is one thing but telling an AI this is the link the user should click is going to ruin the whole thing.
It is already happening outside of LLMs. It is just so sophisticated that we don't notice it.
Actually, you can already notice it in many news sites. The either provide different titles for different userbases/ or change it globally few times for everyone and then they settle for the title which got the most clicks. I am confident that the title content is not managed by the human anymore. Just reviewed.
I'm a huge fan of the games he has been a part of so I was familiar enough with his antics to know that Curiosity would end up being nothing, but he really outdid himself here, Peak Peter Molyneux behavior.
Not sure why Steam is in the headline as the cause when this is really on Sony. Adding region restrictions well after release was a terrible decision on their part and I think Steam being very lenient with refunds was the best they could do given the situation.
What? Sony can ban Steam accounts (as in banned people can’t use their Steam accounts any more, not just in Sony games) and those banned by Steam should thank Steam for generous refund policy?
Edit: I have to reiterate: people are banned from accessing Steam games, not this one game or Sony games. The puzzling replies seemingly believing in the latter won’t stop coming.
Sony is not involved in Valve's decision to ban accounts for bypassing region restrictions, though they did contribute to the surge thanks to the bungling of the Helldivers 2/PSN situation. I suppose the question is should Valve be lenient to these customers considering the extenuating circumstances.
There have been countless situations similar to this where license holders have demanded that platforms enforce restrictions. Especially in cases like this where you're dealing with countries that are under sanctions restrictions.
Point out a single instance where Valve has been caught banning accounts at the request of other businesses. Of course you're welcome to make all the wild speculations you'd like, but I'll stick to reasonable conclusions in the mean time.
Of course Valve has policies designed to meet the expectations of rights holders, that's a given and I'm unaware of any serious business on the planet selling goods created by other companies that doesn't have such policies and enforce them so they can continue to sell those goods. This is a blanket policy that Valve enforces regardless of the publisher.
Valve has been banning accounts for circumventing region restrictions for as long as the feature has existed, and long before Sony added their games to the platform. Just because these policies were designed to appease rights holders doesn't change the fact that it's at Valve's sole discretion to enforce compliance (at risk of losing publishers).
Let's be real here, there is no risk of losing publishers over not bending the knee to publishers over unreasonable demands (such as banning entire accounts).
Publishers have been trying to stay off Steam for much more strategic reasons, and they have always come crawling back, admitting they fail at distributing games on their own. They would never seriously consider ditching the platform over petty grievances like this.
No Sony cannot ban Steam accounts. Only Valve can do that. And generally only does it for reasons like circumventing geo-blocks, malicious activities like spamming and scamming, excessive chargebacks.
Various types of community and game bans are up to developers, but those apply only to single game.
Why would it be? Gamers literally rush to defend the platform when competitors appears and they have effectively a captive audience as games aren’t portable to other launchers.
Everyone also have a good opinion on Steam IRL around me .
In my case I’m seating between two chairs. Steam is a good product, they have mostly respectable policies and I’m happy to "do business" with them but I can’t really forget that their DRM is everywhere, that I don’t own my games and that, say, Google also used to "not be evil".
I love Steam today but what will happen of my games collection when Valve’s infinite money printing machine will start to fail ?
This is why I generally tried to support physical games that are playable on release. But that is a losing battle. It’s still likely that I can drop in a brand new PS5 or Switch game and play it with no network connection, but I expect that to rapidly change in the next five years.
This is pretty much not possible on PC anymore outside of outliers.
No, even completely pulling out of Russia wouldn’t be the downfall of Steam. But I don’t know how this is related to my comment, which is response to a puzzling comment claiming that Steam has nothing to do with Steam account bans, and moreover people should be thankful for their leniency wrt refunds.
Not at all surprising given the delays and rumored performance of Starship. This would have been a really cool way to kick off the next era of space exploration, hopefully someone else is able to pick up the mantle.
I agree it would have been a neat way to start things off. But I have no doubt someone else will come along to pick up that mantle.
Also, I'll note: It is completely about the delays. That's what dearmoon says and that's what the participants of the flight say, and that's what reporters about it say.
There aren't any rumored performance issues with Starship. On some hate forums there's a few people that have tried to claim, using a slide from a SpaceX presentation that shows the achieved orbit of the recent Starship launch, that it is somehow indicative of the entire performance of the vehicle going forward. Rather than just their own malicious misinterpretation of the facts.
I should have been more clear, I meant specifically getting Humans to the Moon is looking much more difficult than SpaceX initially believed. In orbit refueling will require incredible vehicle performance, launch cadence and vehicle manufacturing. All things SpaceX can surely achieve in time. I speculate that in 2017 when the dearMoon deal was struck Elon had a much different ConOps in mind for this mission.
Ah ok. However I do think they assumed in-orbit refueling for the DearMoon mission. Starship was designed from the get go to only barely make LEO with a very large payload (or go a bit further with a smaller payload) and then anything higher energy would require refueling the vehicle.
I've been waiting to see someone drop a desktop app like they showcased. I wonder how long until it is normal to have an AI looking at your screen the entire time your machine is unlocked. Answering contextual questions and maybe even interjecting if it notices you made a mistake and moved on.
That seems to be what Microsoft is building and will reveal as a new Windows feature at BUILD '24. Not too sure about the interjecting aspect but ingesting everything you do on your machine so you can easily recall and search and ask questions, etc. AI Explorer is the rumored name and will possibly run locally on Qualcomm NPUs.
