Post your searing hot takes

recently, a lot of glitchy, unpolished games have been released, and people have been saying ¨take your time. we can wait.¨ I disagree. I think you should focus on releasing the game, no matter how unpolished it is. you see, there are these things called patches, where game developers will take a game that they already released, and fix its glitches. now, why would you not release a game to fix glitches, if you can just release it early, fix the glitches, and end up with the same final product? Its not a choice between playing an unpolished game now, or playing a polished game later, its a choice between playing an unpolished game now and a polished game later, or just playing a polished game later. people are like ¨we can wait."well then go ahead and wait, youll get the game you want whether they release it in an unpolished state or not.
see, this is what something called "early access" comes in so that people can play a game early and the devs can get feedback, while also not tanking the game's reputation and making those people angry. everyone wins. hastily patched games are bad and so are multi year delays with no info on the game, and it doesnt have to be one or the other.
 
see, this is what something called "early access" comes in so that people can play a game early and the devs can get feedback, while also not tanking the game's reputation and making those people angry. everyone wins. hastily patched games are bad and so are multi year delays with no info on the game, and it doesnt have to be one or the other.
this is great also. ive heard a lot of people say that companies shouldnt release games in a bugg state because it would tank the games reputation. that would be a valid argument if it were being made b the people making money off the games, but the people wanting the game to be delaed to fix bugs are the consumers, who unlike the developers, have nothing to lose by a game being rushed and then patched later.
 

Martin

A monoid in the category of endofunctors
is a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
We need to stop telling beginner programmers to learn Python/JavaScript as their first language. Beginner programmers should be learning C, not Python/JavaScript. Teach people fundamentals in C, introduce the foundational high-level programming concepts in C++, and only then once they are somewhat fluent start introducing people to these very high-level languages.

These "idiot-proof" languages are great for experienced programmers because they allow you to code at the speed of thought in exchange for having a lower ceiling on performance. However, by introducing concepts to a beginner in an "idiot-proof" environment like Python, you actively teach them falsehoods about programming. Also, by abstracting the computer away from them, you make it harder for them to grasp really basic, easy, and fundamental concepts like memory and types down the line, and looking back on it, I think starting out in Python completely set me on the wrong path by orienting my thinking around lines of code in the editor rather than around data in relation to other data, memory, and processes.

After all, the best way to idiot-proof something is to make it so an idiot can't use it. And the way that you get someone to graduate from being an idiot is by forcing them to learn shit from the bottom up like we do in LITERALLY EVERY FIELD except programming. Teach people imperative programming before you teach them declarative programming, and teach them about memory at the same time that you are teaching them about processes.
 

Martin

A monoid in the category of endofunctors
is a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
recently, a lot of glitchy, unpolished games have been released, and people have been saying ¨take your time. we can wait.¨ I disagree. I think you should focus on releasing the game, no matter how unpolished it is. you see, there are these things called patches, where game developers will take a game that they already released, and fix its glitches. now, why would you not release a game to fix glitches, if you can just release it early, fix the glitches, and end up with the same final product? Its not a choice between playing an unpolished game now, or playing a polished game later, its a choice between playing an unpolished game now and a polished game later, or just playing a polished game later. people are like ¨we can wait."well then go ahead and wait, youll get the game you want whether they release it in an unpolished state or not.
Releasing an unpolished game and just patching it later is significantly more expensive than just delaying the game, and the reputational damage that a particularly poor release like Cyberpunk does has real monetary implications on the company. They went from the Witcher studio with an extremely high stock price to their stock price tanking (and not recovering) in almost no time at all due how much of a turd their game was at launch.

This "fix it in post" attitude is pervasive in film as well and it is a big contributor to why production costs have ballooned so much in the age of CGI when you could just produce something better for less money by filming another take.

That said, it is important to distinguish between “very polished” and “polished enough.” If it’s good enough for release, then yes you should just release it.
 
Last edited:
We need to stop telling beginner programmers to learn Python/JavaScript as their first language. Beginner programmers should be learning C, not Python/JavaScript. Teach people fundamentals in C, introduce the foundational high-level programming concepts in C++, and only then once they are somewhat fluent start introducing people to these very high-level languages.

These "idiot-proof" languages are great for experienced programmers because they allow you to code at the speed of thought in exchange for having a lower ceiling on performance. However, by introducing concepts to a beginner in an "idiot-proof" environment like Python, you actively teach them falsehoods about programming. Also, by abstracting the computer away from them, you make it harder for them to grasp really basic, easy, and fundamental concepts like memory and types down the line, and looking back on it, I think starting out in Python completely set me on the wrong path by orienting my thinking around lines of code in the editor rather than around data in relation to other data, memory, and processes.

After all, the best way to idiot-proof something is to make it so an idiot can't use it. And the way that you get someone to graduate from being an idiot is by forcing them to learn shit from the bottom up like we do in LITERALLY EVERY FIELD except programming. Teach people imperative programming before you teach them declarative programming, and teach them about memory at the same time that you are teaching them about processes.
The number of times I've figured out a problem by going "of course, this is a pointer under the hood" stands in stark contrast to the courses and languages encompassing said problems continuing to deny that there is even a thing called a pointer (because they have a reputation of being hard to learn or something?) in the first place.
 

Martin

A monoid in the category of endofunctors
is a Smogon Discord Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
The number of times I've figured out a problem by going "of course, this is a pointer under the hood" stands in stark contrast to the courses and languages encompassing said problems continuing to deny that there is even a thing called a pointer (because they have a reputation of being hard to learn or something?) in the first place.
Retweet to scare a front-end developer:

1699627970162.png
 
Last edited:
So, I had a recent realization with Total Drama: Pahkitew Island, and it's that Shawn kinda SUCKS


Now with TDPI, there tends to be two characters that are usually agreed on to be the best, Jasmine, and Shawn, and while I can definitely get behind that for Jasmine (she's my favorite character from this generation), with Shawn, I don't agree with the placement of him being this high at all, despite being one of the wackiest contestants in PI, he ends up being boring, since he's held back by his main and infamous schtick, to be fair, a great amount of characters have their main schtick being focused around something, but at least with them, they're interesting, even if their execution of their main schtick isn't the best

Shawn doesn't end up as interesting, he feels like just someone that functions within the role that he was arbitrarily assigned to by the makers of PI, rather than someone that works with the role that is applied to them, or they have a good amount of importance within the plot of PI that it doesn't become their defining characteristic, take my top two for example, Jasmine and Scarlett, Jasmine is a compelling character that just has great interactions overall, and is by far the more interesting character with the will they won't they relationship trope with Shawn, meanwhile, Scarlett is great because I get a kick out of her smartassing the competition, and her interactions with Max is FUCKING COMICAL

Those two characters work well, so how does Shawn work in the vacuum of Pahkitew Island? Well, his plot always ends up having something to do with the fact that he "sees" zombies, and gets deathly afraid of them, so he runs away, or on occasion, fights the "zombies", even though no zombies ever show up in the first place, but that doesn't stop him, it ends up making him run away from the challenges on occasion, the worst part is that he never actually changes this habit, until the very end, the plot development for him is DRY, his whole character never gets to take a break from being the guy that's paranoid of zombies

Dave is infamous for his whiny behavior in the second half of Pahkitew Island, and sure, he's most definitely annoying, but at least the writing gave him plot development, and he was allowed to deviate from his schtick of being obsessively clean, I wouldn't call the execution of his plot good, but, he was at least allowed to be interesting, Shawn meanwhile, had no plot development, and this joke was dragged on far after it overstayed its welcome, he ends up feeling like the early boots due to that they had no plot development, but at least they are early boots, Shawn meanwhile, stayed for a long time, he even ends up being a finalist for crying out loud, he ends up lackluster, I wish there was something more interesting done with him
 
The whole narrative of Yoko Ono breaking up the Beatles is so fucking dumb. John's and Paul's relationship has been riddled with constant conflicts for a decade by the time they broke up and everyone wanted to work on their solo careers. Yoko is really dumb and toxic and I don't like her but you actually need some pretty serious mental gymnastics to get to the conclusion that it was her doing

Also, Ringo is the best Beatle

Also, number 9 is a pretty good song. They were the biggest artists in the world and them putting something this experimental and wild on their album despite being known for rather safe and simple music is respectable. And it has a certain flow to it that draws you in once you let it in

Lastly, I love the aesthetics of the White Album. It's just white with the name of the band imprinted and when you open it up, all you have are pics of the members. It's so clean and distinct by being so minimalist
 
Hot Take: FINALE and ASGORE/bergentrückung, from Undertale, are hella underrated and outshined by Megalovania.
hot take: battle against a true hero from undertale isnt even a top 10 song from that game, and i genuinely cant see the argument for it. also, BIG SHOT is a contender for the best song ever.
 
hot take: battle against a true hero from undertale isnt even a top 10 song from that game, and i genuinely cant see the argument for it. also, BIG SHOT is a contender for the best song ever.
I personally don't see Big Shot having the same hype and melody building from Bergentrückung and Finale in Undertale, that song only blowed up due to Spamton's character becoming one of Undertale's peaks, aside Megalovania and it's memorable sound.
 
I personally don't see Big Shot having the same hype and melody building from Bergentrückung and Finale in Undertale, that song only blowed up due to Spamton's character becoming one of Undertale's peaks, aside Megalovania and it's memorable sound.
Also, Battle Against a True Hero is another hell of a song forgotten on the wonderful sea of Undertale Soundtrack.
 
I personally don't see Big Shot having the same hype and melody building from Bergentrückung and Finale in Undertale, that song only blowed up due to Spamton's character becoming one of Undertale's peaks, aside Megalovania and it's memorable sound.
if you need an explenation, i have an in depth analysis of it somewhere in the video game thread
 
The best to place to raise a family is in more rural areas
If you live on a farm or have other agricultural duties, children are a huge asset, they are pulling their weight and bring in more money than they cost

But if you just live in a rural area, idk. I grew up in a big city and I couldn't imagine it any other way. Being always in the center of life and always having something to do was and still is irreplaceable for me. Sure it may be more dangerous, but if you teach your kids streets smarts and the city you're in is somewhat on the safer side, I don't think growing up in a city is any worse than growing up rurally
 

BP

Beers and Steers
is a Contributor to Smogon
If you live on a farm or have other agricultural duties, children are a huge asset, they are pulling their weight and bring in more money than they cost

But if you just live in a rural area, idk. I grew up in a big city and I couldn't imagine it any other way. Being always in the center of life and always having something to do was and still is irreplaceable for me. Sure it may be more dangerous, but if you teach your kids streets smarts and the city you're in is somewhat on the safer side, I don't think growing up in a city is any worse than growing up rurally
Its not about living on a farm or any of that.

Living rurally allows your children to grow up closer to the outdoors. It keeps them more in-tune with nature. Rural communities also tend to be a lot more closer and tight knit allowing your child to grow up with a greater support system.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

Top