• 0 Posts
  • 70 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: May 19th, 2024

help-circle



  • That’s a bit different, because he’s selling finished products. He can just check all the boxes from star wars over dnd to collectible card games and order the value pack from a middle man and then it’s all about the location of the shop and the competition in the area.

    You don’t have to understand why a specific product works if what you’re doing is essentially providing a mixed physical storefront for a bunch of corporations.

    But this lady is now going to have to make important strategic decisions, about which games to give funding, which ones to cancel, what kind of hardware to even envision.

    Compare it to valve, who sat down and build their own controller and handheld, because they looked at 20 years of market and product development and thought they could do better and delivered. You have to know a lot about why you want hardware for what purpose and what makes it better or worse for that purpose to do that.

    XBOX, theoretically, same as any other big name in media, could be the place where a new media franchise is born that dominates the next 50 years of pop culture. THAT is the kind of position this is.

    That they won’t because they can’t “build the next skyrim / WoW” is kind of the problem.





  • If I search “Iron” on wikipedia I’m looking for facts

    Not what I meant.

    The point is: there is an established group of editors, with established rules and preconceptions, an established interpretation on what good sources are and what a neutral perspective is and isn’t, and there is no chance of changing those and that is why I have no interest in interacting with wikipedia in any constructive way.

    I could talk about politics too, I picked video games because I know those articles are also bad.



  • Yes.

    Yet behind the celebrations, a troubling pattern has developed: The volunteer community that built this encyclopedia has lately rejected a key innovation designed to serve readers.

    But not that one, because rejecting AI 1) is not a generational rejection and 2) it is correct to reject it.

    What I think is or will be the generational problem: the community that maintains it and decides what is being accepted or rejected is an “in group” that it is impossible to break into with conflicting ideas. For example, I do think the gaming, game mechanics and game development related pages can be vastly improved. But I don’t think the people responsible for those pages are interested in the changes I would suggest.

    All the wikis for different games could just be on wikipedia. But they’re not, probably because they were rejected, because it’s “not relevant”. Well, some people decided they were relevant after all and they made their own wikis for those. The outcome is tribalism based fragmentation, because of differences in opinion of who values what and what should be preserved and what shouldn’t.