• 0 Posts
  • 924 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle



  • Of course they know how to use a computer. They don’t know a thing about how a computer works but that doesn’t mean they can’t use it. Heck, my 8 y/o cousin can figure out how to open and play Minecraft on his tablet. No need for him to know about commands, programming languages and bits n bytes.

    Most people these days know how to use their phones, at the very least, and even there cog = settings. Most people don’t know how to use a CLI or how a spreadsheet program works, but they certainly can use a browser on a computer. Which is also a form of using a computer.

    And maybe they don’t explicitly know it’s a button. But they know if they tap or click on a cog it takes them to settings.

    And even figuring out how a mouse works is a thing of a few seconds, if all you’ve used before was a touchscreen (or even nothing at all). There‘s a reason they took off in the first place.

    Although, if someone truly has never used a computer in any shape or form before. No smartphone, no tablet, not even a smart TV, you‘d probably have a point that it’s not much more difficult for them to learn the common iconography than it would be to learn the CLI. But people rarely start with such a blank slate today.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s a good thing, people are less and less tech literate these days. But my point is, tech illiteracy doesn’t mean they have never used any computer ever and do not know what an app- or settings-icon is. I’d wager it’s more the other way around: People are so used to their devices working and their UIs looking pretty (and very samey) that iconography like cogs for settings are especially self explanatory to them. It’s the same on their phone, tablet and even TV after all.





  • Game dev salaries have increased roughly in line with inflation though, so development time still costs the studio the same as 15 years ago, while AAA game prices are only now starting to surpass the $70 mark with games not generally surpassing the $60 mark until 2020.

    It’s a wonder, they haven’t increased to prices any sooner, as much as I‘d like them staying where they were.

    And again: if you don’t like the prices, vote with your wallet, buy used or on sale or don’t pay at all.


  • Was raised roman-catholic but got disillusioned pretty quickly. I was fairly religious in elementary school but by the time I was 14, I was agnostic/atheist.

    Partially because my parents aren’t religious (my mum is from the GDR, so she didn’t grow up with religion and my dad seceded from church before I was even born) and even my grandma, who was the religious one (albeit never very strongly, compared to American catholics. More a „goes to church on religious holidays“ type of person), drifted away from church quite a bit after all the child-rapist priest shit that was uncovered at the time.

    By now (mid 20s) I’d probably consider myself agnostic. Can’t prove there is no higher power but also, if there is, we wouldn’t know what religion – if any – is right anyways. It’s probably not christianity though.



  • Yea, I don’t generally disagree. Especially if you‘re someone who plays games for hundreds of hours, instead of dozens.

    But $100 is still a lot of money for a lot of people. I‘d have to save up for months for that (I’m a trainee and have less than 1000€ per month for rent, food, internet, gas, etc.), so I rather wait until I can get games cheaper.


  • Eh, there‘s some truth to either one. Game development is expensive and pricing hasn’t kept up with inflation ($60 in 2010 are almost $90 today). But also, games are ridiculously expensive at full price, especially in todays economy and especially if they’re as badly received as Skull and Bones, while Nintendo games are at the very least usually pretty decent.

    I’d recommend voting with your wallet and only buying games on sale or used. Just wait a little. (Or pirate them, if you can live with not supporting the developers at all).








  • accideath@lemmy.worldtoPC Master Race@lemmy.worldNot paying.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 days ago

    Not solely. If you paid $60 for a game in 2010, that‘d be almost $88 today, simply due to inflation. It’s a wonder the prices haven’t skyrocketed any sooner.

    Not that I want that, I‘d prefer games being affordable but it was kinda inevitable considering the way the economy is going…

    Also, I‘d personally rather pay $90 once than have a cheap game with a shitload of micro transactions. Of course, developers/publishers that ask $90 for a game and still include a bunch of micro transactions can fuck right of.


  • accideath@lemmy.worldtoPC Master Race@lemmy.worldNot paying.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    On the one hand, with rising inflation and skyrocketing development costs, I can totally understand why game prices are getting dangerously close to the triple digits. Games rn are cheaper that they ever were yeet yet development is not.

    However, that’s still a lot of money and I really wouldn’t wanna pay that.