Then they label the intended difficulty with “recommended” and say that will give the best experience and that if you choose a difficulty higher or lower you might impede the intention of it.

You’re missing the point, which is weird because I explicitly stated it. To repeat, an artist might not want to create an inferior version of their art, irrespective of the utility of doing so. Art is an egotistical affair.

I really don’t see the problem with having options.

Options can make sense in some games but not in others; a developer deciding not to include them has likely either figured they wouldn’t work with the game’s structure, wouldn’t be a good use of their time or both. Difficulty options are simply not a one size fits all solution, for the same reason it wouldn’t make sense to demand all painters make colorblind-friendly versions of their paintings.

Random Silksong shill here (all hail Bilewater), what are you struggling with in act 3?

I meant that the story/easy mode wouldn’t conform with their vision. To expand on my example, if your game is portraying a grueling trek through a swamp where enemies abound and rest is scarce, the struggle would be an inalienable part of the experience; removing the struggle would fundamentally alter the story being told through the game. It’s not about their vision being intact or not; it’s about not wanting to intentionally make an inferior version of their art.

I mean, presumably because it’d compromise their vision for the game or some such? Some games use gameplay as part of the storytelling, so nontrivial difficulty swttings would compromise the story being told (for example if the game wants you to experience a gruelling trek through a hostile area). Now that doesn’t mean a story mode or similar is bad, but there are reasons to consider for a game dev to consider such settings incompatible with their game. Also in a game with more complex mechanics difficulty would be more complicated than player and enemy stats, and a dev might simply consider implementing satisfactory difficulty settings not a good use of their time.

In war, if it’s not an ally it’s an enemy.

Uh… no?

Someone really needs to figure out how to turn heat back into electricity - without boiling water to spin turbines.

Second law of thermodynamics moment.

So the US is a threat because… it might not help Europe? That’s not really how the word “threat” works, setting aside how Russia isn’t even a military threat to non-Ukraine Europe in the first place assuming the EU’s mutual defense mechanism holds.

The fundamental philosophical error here is assuming that all forms of simulation are computational or mathematical.

Uh… that’s literally what a simulation is.

Counterexample: your dreams are a form of simulation (probably). So I can literally disprove this take in my sleep

But dreams aren’t simulating reality as we observe it; they just kinda do their own thing. Your brain isn’t consistently simulating quantum mechanics (or, hell, even simple things like clocks) while you’re dreaming so this is a moot point.

US “allies” haven’t gotten the memo yet, US enemies aren’t going to interrupt America while it’s killing itself and non-aligned nations don’t give a shit. Human rights abuses are almost never the real reason for sanctions, just like the US didn’t invade Iraq to spread democracy.

US “allies” haven’t gotten the memo yet, US enemies aren’t going to interrupt America while it’s killing itself and non-aligned nations don’t give a shit.

The US is an existential threat to Canada and countries in the Americas that MAGA has bones to pick with. Maybe also Iran. The vast majority of the world is mostly safe, because America has no interest and/or capability to start shit there. For your Germany example, Hitler made it clear exactly what he wanted to do in Mein Kampf.

You can say Nestle on Lemmy. That’s what we’re talking about right?

Free markets are a myth. Every country on Earth regularly interferes in the market to align it with its interests; China just does it more. That’s still not communism, because you can’t have billionaires (or private property in general) under communism. China under Mao was communist, but under Xi? No way. The Chinese government exerts significant control over its economy, but the primary driver of economic growth is still the private sector. China isn’t doing anything fundamentally different from what any Western capitalist state could do if they got their act together for five minutes.

First, what’s a “communism?” Second, China is capitalist as hell; it’s just capitalism under an authoritarian regime rather than under a democracy.

I mean, sure but then it’s not r/popular anymore. Any kind of personalization would defeat the point of the category. I’m sure you’re not getting Indian posts in your own feed (not sure about the state of personalization on r/all).

Uh… that’s literally the point of r/popular, it shows you popular stuff.

I was going to make a counterargument, but you’re right, this is literally the point of r/popular.

AF: Actually Filipino.

Hmm… It’s an adoptive family dynamic, but I think you’ll like Anne Shirley. You can watch the recent remake or the original anime depending on preference.

Presumably they’d just upload it on their social media platform of choice nowadays?