verysoft

:(

You can use a third-party client of your choice.

After having these windows forever, I can agree that I would prefer sliding in some cases. I think a tilting window that can also slide sideways would be endgame.

People keep reading their tweets and clicking on the articles.

Mmm yeah, The Berlin Interpretation is way too specific, things like the graphics/grid etc. If some game fits more than half the factors, perhaps that should be considered 'like' enough? But I do understand why people can get anal about some games being categorised as Roguelike when they are infact not very similar at all.

I think it boils down to genre being misused in general, there's games with large open spaces called Open World, when they are not really, games that are called MMO when they are not. RPG games that are not actually RPG etc etc etc. Rogue fans just made a bigger deal out of it.

It's fine if a game is categorised more specifically, the problem is people getting upset that something is a Roguelite and not a Roguelike.
It doesn't matter, no genre is better than the other, your game isn't by default worse because it's a Roguelite and isn't by default better because it's a Roguelike, it's just a genre definition to help people find similar games.

I get that some might think they are too similar, but in that case we should just keep Roguelike and then define Roguelite games in a different way. At the moment a problem is games that have the 'run' gameplay, but nothing else like Rogue and then call themselves Roguelikes, but that's like having a bonfire checkpoint system in a visual novel and calling it Soulslike.

Hades would be considered Roguelite, doesnt mean its a bad game, its great.

I agree with you, I hate gambling. It has ruined many lives.

But that doesn't mean I cannot discuss the shit as it exists.

That shouldn't be too hard to understand. I won't engage with this further. Have a good one.

I'm not defending anyone, I'd rather you pay for your game and that is it, how it used to be before the 2010s rolled around. I despise micro/macrotransactions, battle passes, the cosmetic trend, FOMO content, I could rant about it all day and how fucked it is.

I was just picking my best of the worst. I see you don't understand how CS skins work, so I'll try to explain.

• Anyone can design a skin for a weapon and put this on the Steam Workshop.
• People then vote on their favourite skins, eventually Valve make a new case and look through skins to add them to the case,
• Everytime a key for that case is bought the creators get a cut.
• Everytime a creators skin is bought/sold between players, they get a cut.
• I can open the case with a key and hope I get a skin I want. Gambling.
• I can buy the exact skin I want directly off the Steam Market... and be done with it
• I can trade other players for an exact skin I want.
• I can sell that skin again on the Steam Market (Valve gets 15% cut, of which some goes to skin creator as prev. mentioned).
• I can trade that skin to friends/other players, for free or for something they own.

So I get a lot more freedom with my new cosmetic item vs another game:

• Skin made in-house.
• Buy skin from store.
• Maybe I can refund if they have the option, if they do it's usually limited.
  Or
• Buy loot box
• I now have skin I cannot trade, sell or do anything with but use.

So yeah, I think Valve have the best of the worst predatory cosmetic systems out there. That's not defending the practice, I'd MUCH rather the whole cosmetic trend fucked off along with the microtransactions and online systems in singleplayer games and the list could go on...

(Edit: Lmao at you editing and putting 'for 50 cent' in there)

The specs are cool, it's a lot of neat modern hardware in a small form factor, but that's what Apple does, take existing tech, make it Apple and market the shit out of it like it's some insane revolutionary thing you should care about. "Retina displays" "titanium phone" etc, it's their whole thing and they are very very good at it.

There are OLED VR headsets, PlayStation's is and there's a couple niche ones and they are not even close to $3500. Admittedly not quite the same resolution as the Vision Pro, but other Micro OLED headsets are probably not far away (if deemed worthwhile, the main barrier of entry for VR right now is price), the technology was always for smaller displays as the wafers needed aren't widely made as the focus tends to be on much larger displays.