jj4211

So, AI is suited to be a CEO or in marketing...

brainstorming

Sure thing, but have to remember to include "no bad ideas" in the prompt for best results.

Depends on where they parked. If it's way out of the way, then no one cares, they aren't using a parking spot someone wanted anyway.

If they are right at the front of the store, well that's a bit entitled.

Well, "compact" parking spots are about a foot narrower and developers see a way to claim more parking spots for the same area.. To the extent they can get away with it I think they do it more.

Also depends on where. If they parked in a mostly empty area of the parking lot, ok, who cares. If they park in the closest possible place that can fit them, well, that's not cool.

The time is coming for the most involved "go fuck yourself" ever.

I suspect it's a complex situation with multiple paths to get there. As it states in that paper "Further research is required". Based on the paper, I'm not even sure they really had a comprehensive sampling, since it's a meta-analysis and the source material is generally pretty limited. For example: "It is however noted that the small sample size (n=17) provides only weak evidence to support the finding and as such the results should be taken with caution."

Just like there are multiple paths to having different vision (genetics, developmental anomalies, illness, environmental, trauma), I suspect there's enough nuance in gender identity for there to be multiple paths there as well.

I presume there's potentially a lot of different drivers of gender identity. I wouldn't be surprised if early childhood abusive pressure to be a "certain brand of man, right now" could be a driver to a feminine gender identity in someone that otherwise might have had a masculine gender identity. Of the trans people who have told me their personal background, many had a somewhat traumatic relationship with a parent in childhood, with a common theme of a parent to be abusive to drive them to be more like a fully grown person while still in elementary school.

It's not a given and it's not the only way it works, but I think it is in the realm of possibility that Elon's bad parenting created the very outcome he sought to suppress.

I mean, was RFK Jr. ever on the rails? Him being off the rails is likely how he got his brain worm in the first place.

I think turn based is fine and in fact I like. However, when no one has a turn it's annoying to sit around while nothing happens as the timer keeps ticking. Also, to make it "active", the turn timer doesn't stop when you hit the menu. If you delay your action the enemy may get to take their turn, just because you neglected to navigate the menu. I think ATB is actually the worst of both worlds, would prefer either turn based or action RPG rather than being forced to navigate a menu in some facsimile of 'real time'.

Where FF7 kind of went south from a gameplay perspective compared to 6 was that in 6, summons were a brief flash. In FF7, by contrast, for example Knights of the round would "treat" you to an 80 second spectacle, which was cool the first couple of times, but then just a tedious waste of time. Generally rinse and repeat this for any action that was pretty quick in FF6 and before but a slow spectacle in FF7, with no real option to speed up those animations you had already seen a dozen times that wore out their welcome long ago. Just like that stupid chest opening in OOT.

Anyway, I did enjoy FF7, but the "game" half was kind of iffy.

Thing is those criticisms also mostly apply to FF7.

Disconnect between combat and exploration? I see that for Zelda, but ff7 goes harder, with a random encounter jolting you into a different game engine for combat.

To much time in combat waiting while nothing happens? FF7 battle system is mostly waiting for turns to come to with lots of dead time.

Exploration largely locked to narrative allowing it? Yeah, FF7 had that too, with rare optional destinations a very prescribed order and forced stops. It opens up late in the game.

The video generally laments that OOT was more a playable story than an organic gameplay experience, and FF7 can be characterized the same way. Which can be enjoyable, but it can be a bit annoying when the game half of things is awkward and bogs things down a bit. Particularly if you are getting subjected to repeated "spectacle" (the slow opening of chests in oot, the battle swirl, camera swoops, and oh man the summons in ff7...)

They both hit some rough growing pains in the industry. OOT went all in on 3D before designers really got a good idea on how to manage that. FF7 had so much opportunity for spectacle open up that they sometimes let that get in the way. Also the generally untextured characters with three design variations that are vastly different (field, battle, and pre rendered) as that team try to find their footing with visual design in a 3d market.

Agreed, as a game, as in fun, ff7 wasn't very good. That music, those visual designs (the pre rendered stuff), and the story (though it suffered from bad localization) were compelling. But random encounters, fights filled with mostly waiting to be able to do things, the best attacks doing too much spectacle which was nice the first time, but pretty boring on repetition... The materia management became frustrating as you got more party members and no way to arrange or search, even with in game dialog mentioning how it was a pain...

Chrono Cross actually had significantly better game design, with enemies on screen and no standing around waiting for some characters turn to come up before anything would happen. Wish ff7 had clipped the "no action allowed by either side" time and that would have helped immensely. Then it just becomes a matter of if the player prefers real time adventure to menu driven play.