SecretAsianMan

I was amused that Chris described Daddy Long Legs as QWOP for mobile since QWOP already exists on mobile (iOS and Android)

My controller arrived today. I didn't have time to try it out, but it feel pretty good in my hands. I love the rear paddles, having buttons on the back of a controller is something I've wanted since before the N64 controller. The placement of the face buttons feels a little strange since they're in the spot normally reserved for the right analog stick, but I'm sure I'll get used to that. One thing I really like is the feel of the shoulder buttons. On both the Xbox and Playstation controllers it felt very awkward to me to use both my index and middle fingers so I'd mainly stick to using my index finger and moving it back and forth. On the Steam controller it feel very natural since the rear triggers are lower and more recessed. I suspect using 4 fingers instead of 2 might lead to some accidental button presses at first but it's another thing I expect to get used to fairly quickly. I'm anxious to try out the face pads. I'll probably fire up Spelunky this weekend and give it a go.

I pre-ordered the Steam Controller a while ago and now I've been getting emails that it's getting ready to ship. Hopefully I'll have it soon. I'm really curious to try it out.

It's supposed to be coming to Android as well, according to their website. I was thinking about getting it there, but if it plays better with a controller maybe I'll go with Steam. How do the mobile controls work?

I'm willing to pay with my first born child. Or maybe lots of candy.

The sound of all that makes me glad I got out of the game when I did. While there is a certain amount of fun to be had in figuring out optimal configurations, it's also a lot of tedious min/maxing that gets old rather quickly. I don't necessarily mind balance changes but when the only way to fix your game is to completely break it every time you release an update or new content, I feel like maybe it wasn't all that great to begin with and you're not really sure what you're doing. Adding a F2P layer on top of the grindfest doesn't sound appealing at all, especially when your game isn't even free to begin with.

That's kind of what I mean. I'm used to using the NATO Phonetic Alphabet because I use it all the time at work. I think it'd be fun to try stuff like that in fake yet appropriate setting like this game.

Chinese media outlets are pretty good at mistaking fake things for real things

I really want to try this, especially with someone who is less technically oriented than myself. I'm curious to see how different people describe things. Most of the videos I've seen of people playing have the people using common but vague descriptors while in my head I think of specific but probably more technical and thus less easily understood terms.

I've only skimmed this discussion so forgive me if I'm rehashing anything already said. The problem with that as an example is that limericks and haikus have specific rules that define them. As you've said, it can be objectively stated that something is or is not one of those things if it follows those rules. As far as I'm aware, there is no objective, strict definition of game. If there were then this discussion wouldn't be taking place at all. Games as a concept are fairly nebulous and that idea is constantly being redefined as the medium gets explored. I think one could make similar arguments about genre. Personally, I think the author has the right to say whatever they want about their game and not be wrong in the same way that you have the right to disagree with them about it and also not be wrong (unless we're talking about things that are literally objective). People can argue about intent all they want, but one thing I've always said is that intent and result don't always align. A developer might intend for a game to be serious but if it comes off as cheesy then you're probably going to laugh at it instead. That doesn't make either one of those interpretations wrong, just disparate. Technically there is a thread called "What is game" but it's not about this topic.

I agree that Mario 64 is an ugly looking mess, but that doesn't really detract from the fun to me. The movement and variety of levels are what define the game in my mind. Also I never had a problem with the camera. In fact I thought it worked exceedingly well in comparison to most games at the time. One of my favorite things to do was switch to the mode where the camera stays in place, lock it at the beginning of the level, then try and complete it without moving the camera once.

How is the mobile app? I don't really have time to do it at home and getting on my work computer isn't an option.

I replayed Monument Valley but this time I also the Forgotten Shores addon. I liked Monument Valley the first time but Forgotten Shores really steps up the game. There's some clever play on the perspective mechanics and one level is super Escher in it's puzzles. Still a really beautiful game that's simplicity is maybe it's greatest strength. The full game, including the addons, are free on Android via Amazon's Underground app

I had way more difficulty playing the DS version than original. The game itself is faithful in that it's a nearly direct port, but trying to play with a DS vs an actual controller made a huge difference, at least to me. I had no problem getting Mario to do exactly what I wanted on the 64. The same levels were much more challenging on the DS.

To be clear: I haven't actually played Metro, I just know that ammo as money is present in the game. Still, from what I've heard it sounds like the ammo money is way more interesting than just having a different ammo type you can buy.

I haven't finished the episode yet but I gotta weigh in on the Mario 64 discussion. I understand the view that Mario 64 feels more disjointed than other Mario games but that's what I like about it. It was a big playground to me, in a way that other Mario games never felt like to me (and haven't felt like since although I haven't played Mario Maker yet which is perhaps the most literal implementation of that idea). It gave me a new set of toys (the moveset), dropped me into a world that seemed to lack any rules, and provided almost no guidance beyond vague hints which you could completely ignore. I suppose that sentence could also describe the other games but I never really cared for the tropical resort or outer space settings in Sunshine and Galaxy. 64 never bothered me because while each world was pretty stand alone they still felt "Mario-like" to me. Sunshine and Galaxy are definitely more refined and if I were to play them all for the first time today I'd probably call them better games, but Mario 64 sticks out in my mind as the most fun. Also, first appearance of pervy cameraman Lakitu.

The results of the SAG-AFTRA vote are in. 96.52% voted in favor of the referendum, the minimum requirement was 75% in favor. Keep in mind this does NOT mean they are now on strike. The vote was an authorization by the union to allow the board to use the possibility of a strike as a bargaining chip during negotiations. It will only come to that if an agreement can't be reached and the board decides to declare a strike.

I've always found the idea of currency that's more than just currency interesting. Take Metro 2033. That game uses pre-apocalypse military grade ammunition as currency, but it can also be used in your weapons to much greater effect than standard ammo. Besides being an interesting mechanic that allows you to literally shoot money, it also gives the money a real use in the scenario where you no longer need it as currency. Money in most games is a resource that requires time and effort to get, but neither of those things usually matter to the game. The supply is basically infinite and the demand is a demand of one. Unless you have a system that goes beyond that basic interaction, earning money is pretty trivial and spending it even more trivial.

Capcom has stated that they only pulled Ghost Trick to make some fixes and plan on putting it back, including for the people who already purchased it. So it's not just gone forever, at least theoretically.

I'm sorry to hear that. I had something similar happen to me a number of years ago. It's surprising how much you can care about a person you've never met before.

Here are my last thoughts on these topics. On memorization: I think memorizing is a good way of knowing but not a good way of learning. As evidenced by the above triangle examples, memorization is mostly useful in specific cases that fit what you've memorized. When you start go outside of those cases, that's where you need understanding which usually doesn't come with strict memorization. If something has been memorized because it's been used a lot, there's nothing wrong with that. I learned a ton of things that way. And there are going to be things that really can't be learned any other way besides just memorizing it, like Gormongous has suggested. I think one of the traps of relying on memorization is it can lead to a narrow focus. To bring up the programming example Zeus used, if I understand how a function works then maybe I can realize that there will be cases where it's not an optimal solution and instead use another or write my own. That doesn't happen if I just know how to call the function. Maybe both will give me the same answer but if you're calling that function thousands of times that adds up to a lot of potential savings. I don't mean to suggest we have to know how everything works before we use it because that would be silly. But memorizing a lot of things without having understanding isn't good either. On common core vs traditional: I don't think either is better than the other. People learn in different ways. The common core method makes sense to me because that's how I think. I know that it won't to everyone. My real complaint about teaching one method over the other is the "one size fits all" philosophy we have when teaching. Some people are visual learners, some aren't. Some people are hands on, some aren't. Neither is wrong, neither is bad. But forcing everyone to do the same is. Unfortunately, for all my complaining I really don't have a better general solution because tailoring learning to each individual person is expensive, in both time and money. Ideally I'd love to have students and teachers work together to figure out the best way for both but in reality neither one has the time to do that.

Seems like Arkham Knight may finally be getting a functional PC release at the end of the month. I preordered it but avoided downloading it due to all the issues. Hopefully I'll finally be able to drive around in the Batmobile.

I'm not saying that memorization isn't useful nor am I suggesting that no one should memorize anything ever. Knowing information is handy, but it's pretty useless without the ability derive meaning from that knowledge. Ask students who take a knowledge based exam the same questions a month later and I doubt you'll get the right answers. But if it's an exam that relies on critical thinking instead of memorizing, I'm willing to bet they'll be able to repeat their performance much easier. That's what should be taught, not reliance on memorizing things that are likely to be forgotten.

Sadly that is the one time I've had to resort to straight memorization. I was part of the Quiz Team in high school and getting a question like that is pretty standard fare.

I'm really hoping for an epic Idle Weekend/Beastcast crossover.