I loved Elden Ring, I don’t play many games these days but it really hooked me. But also it really needs to get over itself and add difficulty options.

I do think the difficulty is part of the fun but I almost didn’t finish it because it was so all over the place, toward the end it just got grindy, bosses just turned into long roll fests until you got your one chance per minute to knock off 2% of its health bar. They feel more like endurance matches that test your patience more than skill.

Sometimes I’m dying a lot and having fun because the challenge is good, but sometimes it’s just tedious and I want to move on to the next area. I would love to be able to drop the difficulty for a bit just for those spots, hell make it an in game item called cry baby bottle for losers and wimps for all I care.

Maybe grow some stuff they like to eat around the perimeter.

I would argue that there’s also lots of professionals who don’t use or need those features. Not everyone is using photoshop for print work, which that link seems to mostly discuss. It is still true, though, and every time I try to switch away from photoshop I run into some niche missing feature I need that most people wouldn’t care about.

You may be surprised. I use Photoshop in my profession and I am desperately trying to move away from it. Not just because of the obvious Adobe is the worst, but it has been getting progressively worse to use for me. I don’t speak for everyone of course but at least for me there’s really only a few very small things that would make me switch instantly.

Photoshop just infuriates me lately, you’d think with all their employees they’d figure out how not to lose my hotkeys every automatic update, or that I’ve been using it for over a decade and don’t need annoying tutorial popups for every tool.

The priorities of a large company can often be opposed to making their software better, like adding AI into everything or adding new features nobody really needs so they can have a flashy presentation at some conference, or deprecating features in order to move people to their latest acquisitions program instead.

Blender is a great example of open source being totally viable for replacing commercial software. I use it professionally and it’s never been a limiting factor for me.

This is very common for a lot of these programs, I’m not actually sure about Gimp, but Photoshop, Krita and Affinity Photo all let you. Same with a lot of the other digital art programs I use for work.

This is awesome, I hope more places do this, or at least put much greater restrictions on it.

Don’t be such a pessimist. There are plenty of people who want climate action and are prepared to sacrifice for it. We can also demand more from our governments without blaming individuals. My government keeps approving new coal and gas plants with reckless abandon even though they could easily be wind or solar. We’re allowed to demand more action from them.

To be fair it’s not the sort of thing you think you’d have to make a law about. Should be kind of expected that companies do the bare minimum to keep their staff alive.

I like this approach. I wish more people would be honest about the limits of their arguments instead of just saying whatever they think will help them ‘win’.

I had a nest outside my bedroom windows for years once, it was just fun watching them do their thing.

Of course they won’t accept making less money, the answer isn’t apathy, though.

No.

Look, I enjoy uncertainty, too. I’m a silly little teacup orbiting Jupiter agnostic joker. But there are times when you can predict with a fair degree of certainty what’s going to happen. If you were being completely honest with yourself you would admit that enough people going vegan would probably have a noticeable effect on the animal agriculture industry. And yes, admittedly neither of us know if that’s true or not. But either way I’m not going to give that industry my money because I’m pretty sure they’re just going to use it to keep killing animals.

I’m not judging what you do, but be honest with yourself, the money you give them is probably going to go toward killing more animals. Maybe they’ll change their mind and all decide to stop tomorrow, but until then I will keep trying to disincentivise them the way I’m most certain will work.

And if you do actually care about the treatment of animals please reconsider whether or not you have an impact.

yeah, isn’t everyone’s?

The edit one is what I was looking for and fair play. You got me with that one.

I just quantified it, why would you say I didn’t? Everytime I wanted a hamburder I supplied one to myself. There were no degrees of wanting at all, I either did or didn’t.

And this isn’t storytelling, this is literally what happened. You’re the one trying to muddy the waters.

lie, hyperbole, it doesn’t affect my argument regardless. I’m sure they’re still being made but I doubt you’ll see too many in stores near you.

Yeah, I stopped, and it has had an impact.

If you want me to try and measure an individuals impact on a global supply chain then it’s not going to be very much, but it is never the less there.

demand was when I wanted a hamburder. me wanting a hamburder is 1 demand.

1 demand = 1 supply.

I don’t see why you would compare that to global supply. I am not equal to the global population. That was a very illogical leap you took.

Do you really need this one spelt out? Sales declined and then production followed. The goal of the business was to make money so when their product stopped making money they stopped producing it.

What would you do in the same situation? The logic seems incredibly cut and dry and you keep insisting I need to give you proof, but I’d like to see evidence of the opposite happening to be honest.