nromdotcom

Broadly speaking it sounds a bit like Antitrust https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitrust_(film)

But I haven't seen it in quite a while so I'm not sure how well specifics line up.

Over the years, I've become one to keep my media use as legit as possible. No judgement on anyone who doesn't, but for a variety of reasons I have chosen to.

For retro games, that means my process is:

• Evercade - I'm a huge fan of the Evercade ecosystem and if a game is available there I will play it there first.
• NSO - For games not available on Evercade, my next stop will be Switch Online.
• Collections - If a game isn't available on NSO, I'll see if it's available via a collection. Think Castlevania Collections, Arcade Archives, Namco Museums, etc. For these I'll typically check reviews before picking it up and make sure the games play well as that's not always a guarantee.
• Unlicensed emulation - Only at that point will I fire up a game on my raspberry pi.

Though honestly I can't really be bothered to tinker with shit as much anymore these days, so often (but not always) by the time I arrive at unlicensed emulation as the solution I'll just decide to play something else instead.

Continuing to work my way through the Duke Nukem 1+2 Remasters on Evercade. So much love went into these its ridiculous.

I think regardless of that deal, they were already on the debt-go-round for long enough it would've caught up to them eventually. I can't imagine this was gonna be "one last job then we go clean." The market would continue to demand more and faster growth until they hit the wall one way or the other.

Seriously. I realize people have Feelings about DRM and always-online stuff, but this is an article about a game that was never especially popular or active entering maintenance mode after a couple of years.

They aren't shutting it down, they aren't making it unplayable (though of course either of those things could happen at any time etc etc) - they just are no longer producing content for a game almost no one is playing anymore anyway.

Oh, interesting. I also initially read it as a thinly-veiled threat but I think you're right it was more of a "will i be assaulted". Still a weird thing to say.

My wife got on stimulant meds after her diagnosis a couple years ago and they were life changing for her. She was having trouble getting them for a couple months during the shortage and that was tough on her.

Like another commenter mentioned, you'll probably wanna avoid caffeine for at least the first couple of weeks if you're taking the stimulant meds. Once you adjust, you may be able to do caffeine again, but you may give yourself a real bad day if you aren't careful.

I guess I don't see what the incentive would be for this, or even what it realistically means in this case.

Do you mean like relicensing the backend and frontend with a closed source license? I don't see what the incentive would be for that unless they wanted lemmyml to be the only instance in existence (which runs counter to it's raison d'etre) and to make secret/proprietary/commercial extensions to it that are difficult to develop in the open.

Or I guess unless they wanted to start charging instance admins for the honor and pleasure of running their software, which at least right now would be the quickest way to ensure nobody runs their software.

I tend to agree here. But it has been interesting watching the proliferation of streaming services and trying to figure out what's gonna happen next.

Like Netflix was a big first-mover, then everyone realized they could keep more money if they built their own streaming service, then everyone realized that building and running a streaming service is expensive and complicated, then everyone had to get onto the Original Content treadmill to try to keep folks subscribed which has led to somehow even more commodification of art, and now that running at a loss and pouring cash into original content to bump up numbers has gotten too expensive some services are pricing themselves out of the market.

I'm fascinated to see what the next big move is for these businesses. With more and more people starting to choose month to month which one or two services to subscribe to rather than keeping them all, I wonder if we're gonna continue seeing the return of ad-supported plans or some services only offering yearly contracts or what the next move will be in pursuit of endless growth.

I guess my reaction is partially because I never see articles like this for my other hobbies and while I don't see articles like this about video games often, I do see comments around the internet about this fairly regularly.

I don't hear people saying "playing board games helps me with strategizing" or "playing guitar has really improved my hand-eye coordination and playing in a band has helped my ability to cooperate with others."

Maybe that's because gamers tend to feel more defensive about the hobby as it has historically been disparaged. People are more likely to picture "CoD yelling person" when they hear you play video games than they are to picture "wonderwall at parties person" when they hear you play guitar.

But, on the other hand, D&D players and Marvel nerds seem to have largely moved on from "but it's actually really cool and fun and not weird at all." Maybe video game players should consider doing so as well.

I dunno, 'game company commissions study to ask gamers to self-report about how gaming isn't a waste of their time'?

I'm in my mid 30s and have played video games my whole life. I also participate in some gaming communities online and my real-life friends are about 50/50 with regards to gaming. And if asked, yeah, I would probably self report that video games have had a positive impact on my life.

But have they? I'm not qualified to say. I don't have any actual data in front of me. I do know playing video games often makes me feel good, but I can say that about lots of unhealthy habits.

Was pumping 150 hours into Tears of the Kingdom better for me than the couple weeks of workouts I skipped? Is it good that I drank more beer during that time than I normally would have?

Would my life have been more or less improved if, instead of talking about video games online I had been practicing guitar and finding an open mic night to play at?

Would it have been better for my mental health and hand-eye coordination instead of playing Elden Ring to have gone to Home Depot, bought some wood, and built the shelves I've been putting off building in the basement to ease some of our storage issues?

If video games really were an unqualified good, would "my loser boyfriend stays up all night yelling into his headset about Overwatch/CoD/Fifa/Fortnite" be such a common stereotype?

I'm not suggesting video games are bad (or even that the sometimes-unhealthy way I engage with them is bad), but I am suggesting that "gamers say gaming is good for them, actually" does not provide useful data for analysis or discussion.

As someone without an Xbox or a PC, Starfield has very much gotten me back into NMS. Loving the last couple of updates, especially as a PSVR2 player.

I hope I get to play Starfield some day, cause it looks like a lot of fun, but it's not a hardware seller for me. Probably some day I'll pick up a gaming laptop or steamdeck or something and check it out along with the other PC games I've been missing for the past few years.