I remember Gilbert Gottfried at a Friar’s Club roast. Can’t remember what the actual joke was, but I remember he lost the whole audience, and then won them back with a spontaneous telling of “The Aristocrats”
Kudos for Carlin, who made fun of government propaganda. Maybe not so much for Joan Rivers for making fun of FDNY widows.
(I’m not a boomer, though. Or a millennial. Or really that edgy anymore, if I ever was…)
Does it have a first person mode yet? Not a fan of third person BR games because you can just camp on top of a building all day and no one will see you, while you can see everyone.
Not yet. Luckily, people who do that typically have bad loot so you just kinda have to be ready for it/do it to other people when you have to stop to apply shields or reload or whatever.
Epic is trying to make their own ‘Metaverse’— just wait until Fortnite VR comes out in the near future.
It’s already a place for people to hang out with friends socially and just voice chat, or go to concerts, or go to Escape Rooms, or play music together in Rockband, etc etc.
Epic/Unreal will just keep adding and adding things to their ‘Ready Player One’/OASIS universe.
Yes but theirs is actually pretty fun. Zero Build was a great addition and now they have rock band, racing, prop hunt, and gun game. My friends and I moved to playing it recently and haven’t been able to move to a new game since.
I tend to agree. Taking the car physics from their acquisition of Rocket League and putting it into a racing game was a bit of genius. It is the most fun I’ve had in a casual racing game since MarioKart.
And,…that’s kind of my point. Epic/Unreal is acquiring gaming IP (Rockband, Rocket League, etc) and putting all of that into their own Metaverse/OASIS garden.
It’s an interesting Facebook-like strategy they seem to have.
I’ve ignored Fortnite for years but am suddenly paying attention to after these 2 comments. No building? Rocket League arcade racing? I might actually want to play this, at least to try it out
Rocket League drifting, boosting, racing on the walls and ceilings, rocket jumping over gaps and each other; it’s pretty fucking wild and can get intense. Whatever team they had working on it internally really did a helluva job.
And No Build in Fortnite is the only way to play imho; stripped down and back to the basics.
I hasn’t played the Racing until your comment, and wow, that is some fun ass racing. You are right, geniuses.
And it’s a crazy strategy and it’s interesting to see how well it’s working. I can play with my coworkers, friends, and younger family members. I don’t have fb at all anymore, so this is where I’m keeping up with people in a way
Right? Someone I knew wasn’t that much into gaming; took them through something really simple like one of the horror/haunted houses; running around like Scooby Doo; we had fun and got to hang out for a bit and just voice chat.
They probably saw Roblox, and realized that it would be a much better chance of competing to leverage and extend their existing platform to compete and capture kids and tweens that are aging up a little from Roblox. Every social media company is always gunning for the 12-16-year-olds because that’s who makes them “the next big thing,” so that seems like a great option for Epic.
Pretty similar, if I recall, to how Fortnite didn’t start out as Battle Royale and pivoted once it saw where the market was going.
But that’s just how it appears to me - I’m an Apex Legends player.
Ideally, you work out the requirements. Then you formulate those requirements in code, via the static type system and/or automated unit+integration tests. And then you implement your code to match those requirements (compiler stops complaining and tests are green).
Ideally, you don’t have to actually run the whole application to feel confident enough about your changes, although obviously you would still do that eventually, for example before publishing a release.
I do this all the time when working with transformations (in personal projects). I know I need to take into account these 5 variables but I’m not sure exactly how they all fit together, and I really don’t want to get a pen and paper out, so I just shuffle things and their operators about until it works or I get bored and do something else.
Idk I feel like chaotic neutral would be something surprising without being much more likely to be negative for someone else than neutral. Something actually random would be a note like “look in your socks” or a random phone number
You just do whatever you want when you want without regard for whether it’s legal, so like, just letting your Eagle go at the dog park and not caring if he eats a terrier
You know how it goes, first people start saying the silly meme phrase “ironically”, then they can’t stop themselves saying it, then it becomes awkwardly unironic, and then it gets embedded in the lexicon and Miriam-Webster adds it to the dictionary
2060 is going to be lit fam AHEM I mean it’s going to be funny
fr fr ive thought that too over the past few years
Although that said I just tried to find some examples to justify that sentiment… and all their newly minted words seem legit to me. Maybe I’m just a silly outdated millennial now
“Cool” was hardly the only thing modern vernacular about that sentence. It’s use 80 years ago would not have the same meaning now, and in the syntax of the sentence would seem odd, much like the OP’s usage of contemporary slang.
Believe it or not, just because a word has previously been used as slang doesn’t mean the meaning hasn’t shifted through time. See: “low-key.”
Sure, the point is that 80 years isn’t that long ago. And your example still wouldn’t be so obscure as to be unintelligible at that time, regardles. Believe it or not.
I hear what you’re saying, but my original point was that even in 80 years, accepted syntax, vernacular usage, and general language construction can change quite a bit, so the OP post isn’t that odd. It’s still “intelligible,” and, indeed, language does change. Quite often, in fact.
When I said “nearly unintelligible,” I meant it hyperbolicly to accentuate the fact that the modern language being highlighted by the OP is, similarly, not unintelligible. They are just examples of relatively new language use.
I was highlighting the second sentence due to its modern syntax and the ways many of the words have grown to encompass broader meanings.
Believe it or not, it didn’t even occur to me that “cool” was a slang word that might have shifted in the last 80 years, it’s so deeply embedded in my own idiomatic language that I was using it in that sentence as the word with historical stability in the sentence.
Though, now that I’ve looked into the etymology, the usage in that sentence would also be a bit odd 80 years ago.
lemmyshitpost
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.