this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
755 points (96.0% liked)

Games

16796 readers
973 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ship of Theseus.

When does the ship change from the ship of Theseus into something else?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

When does the ship change from the ship of Theseus into something else?

When they decide to build a completely new ship with a steam engine and bring the lamps from the old ship because why not. They're good lamps.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Surprisingly, that isn't what the thought experiment has in mind. It was created before any kind of engine for a ship, so clearly they had other ideas. Generally it's asked if it's still the same shop when only one board from the original ship remains? If so, is it suddenly a different ship when that board is replaced? Before then all other boards were part of the Ship of Theseus, so why does that one board matter? If it doesn't matter though, what does it mean to be The ship of Theseus?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I know the original thought experiment but it doesn't apply here because Source2 is a completely new engine with some residual stuff brought over like light flickering pattern.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It is not a "completely new engine". That's an insane statement. The renderer is mostly new, but the way it handles entities is pretty much the same. An engine is a large collection of tools. Some of those tools being changed out doesn't mean you have a whole new toolbox.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Please talk to the Valve developers who said this in interviews about the Source2 Counter-Strike port that they make insane statements. I'm simply believing the actual creators over random guys on the internet.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And the creators of The Creation Engine 2 said the same thing, but we don't believe them around here do we...

I doubt they said that it's totally new. Give me a source for that. I believe the renderer is mostly new, but there's still many components that inherit from the existing tech stack.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Give me a source for that.

Your camp: "At its core Source2 is still just Quake1!!!!"

Me: "I've read different in interviews."

Your camp: "Haha! Here is proof: https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Quake/en and don't forget the light flickering, oh god, the light flickering!!!!"

Me: "It literally just says 'some residual Quake code'."

You: *Fuck, he got us. Quick, be needlessly aggressive!!!!*. "Give me a source for that."

Me: "I don't make an archive of transcripts of every interview I've ever encounter. Despite that, your camp made the initial claim, so if anything it's your side that needs to produce the proof and you didn't..."

You: "Haha! Gotcha! While neither me not my friends have produced any evidence for our initial claim except the four words 'some residual Quake code' on a wiki literally everyone can edit and light flickering on Imgur, we are victorious via the old tactic of making baseless claims and then aggressively demanding evidence from THEM!!!"

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Your camp: "At its core Source2 is still just Quake1!!!!"

Find where I said this. I'll wait. I said it's not Quake, and the Creation Engine is equally not GameBryo. They both contain heritage from their past. I've only pointed out that's the people saying "the Creation Engine is GameBryo" also tend to say Source, Unreal, etc. aren't what they used to be. You can't have it both ways. Source 2 still has components of Quake, so either it isn't Quake (which it isn't) and CE isn't GameBryo, or it is Quake and upgrading an engine can never fundamentally change things.

I'm not a part of any camp. Please stop trying to throw everyone into a box so you can argue against outrageous claims. Your strawman is recognized and not appreciated.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You with your aggressive and childish choice of words are in no position to make any demands towards me. In fact, if you were confident that you had any leg to stand on, you'd be more relaxed and would not act like that.

I'm not engaging with that any longer. You're not baiting me.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago

Didn't even read my comment I assume. You stopped when I called you out for making up something I said, and then you say I'm the one using "aggressive language" and baiting you. Sure buddy.