I never said story games are shallow. But if the games you like are ones where you can feel like you’ve experienced all the game and the story has to offer in a single playthrough then they are, by definition, shallow. Even a great movie is worth watching multiple times of its story has any appreciable depth. Video games, even more so since there should be more to the story to experience.

Sounds like what you enjoy are shallow, linear story games. To each their own, of course. Glad you’re happy with what PS5 offers you in that regard. But the industry has a lot more to offer than that.

I’m in the same boat (as far as free time goes) but I have the opposite outlook. Strategy games, and other games with some amount of crunchy complexity, keep me engaged even when I’m not playing. I can spend some time on wikis, crafting theories, and cooking up plans throughout the week and that keeps me coming back.

I can’t do story games because it’s too easy to forget what’s going on when you spread it out that far. Or there’s online action games (shooters, mobas, etc) but it’s rare that I can guarantee I’ll be on long enough to complete a match.

Guns may not cause the mental health issues that make people turn violent, but they do allow violent people to become mass murderers. Video games do neither.

I’m not sure how anybody can look at the way GTA 5 online was monetized to hell and not seriously question how far they’re going to try to go with GTA 6. I’m fully expecting it to leak into GTA 6’s single player with an intense focus on getting more and more out of mtx.

I’m guessing this is it. The setting is a 1950’s culture but without the racism and sexism that were rampant at the time. Women and POC holding significant positions in the corporate world, which never would’ve happened in the actual 1950s. It is a fictional world, of course. People seem to forget that.

It does and they’re kinda weird (if you’re used to more like Java-style interfaces). It flips the dependency between the interface and implementor on its head. Worth looking it up, it’s interesting.

How’s the concurrent player count doing? The number of people playing it on my friends list has declined significantly.

Designing for a huge amount of users costs money and expertise, so more money, and not even their most optimistic predictions included this many players. If they hadn’t made it big, that money would’ve been wasted. Which games are going to go viral is just insanely hard to predict.

People are saying that the rubber band on joystick trick doesn’t work, at least. So they at least are checking for changes to input events.

You’re right that they’re the same size but you’re mistaken when you try to assign a total value to the stack. Consider breaking each $100 bill into 100 $1 bills. The value is the same, clearly. So for each pair, you have a $1 bill and a small stack of 100 $1 bills. Now combine all singles back together in an infinite stack. Then combine all stacks of 100 into an infinite stack.

And you know what? Both infinite stacks are identical. They have the same value.

You could also just divide your infinite stack of $1 bills into 100 infinite stacks of $1 bills. And, obviously, an infinite stack of $100 bills is equivalent to 100 infinite stacks of $1 bills.

(I know this is only slightly different than what you’re getting at, which is that infinitely many stacks of 100 $1 bills is equivalent to an infinite stack of $100 bills)