<a rel="me" href="https://layer8.space/@helix">Mastodon</a>

  • 6 Posts
  • 226 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 27th, 2024

help-circle



  • I have broken and repaired many distros in the past and most package managers were able to handle it.

    This is why I always keep the last 3 installed package versions around.

    In Arch based distros you have to install downgrade. Idk why it doesn’t come with the base pacman tools, as it can seriously save your ass.

    The most resilient package manager I found to be dnf. I once messed up an upgrade from Fedora 20 to 21 or something and many packages were 20, some were 21 and some were rawhide. Boy did I think I needed to fix this manually. I fixed the misconfiguration, made internet available in a root shell and dnf magically repaired every dependency hell I found myself in.

    Fedora is now my work desktop and Arch with snapper runs on my personal devices.

    Immutable distros or things like NixOS seem fine if idiots need to use them. However, I’m not an idiot and usually don’t give idiots root rights.

    If you want your system simply to work and never customise it beyond what the maintainers thought out for you, NixOS and Silverblue etc. might be cool. But for me there always was a point where I had to do hours of work thinking “good Lord Linus the Creator, this would be so much easier with a regular distro”.

    Went so far to ragequit NixOS three times now and everyone who uses it nowadays gets the same look as these weaboo Arch supremacists way back when. Maybe NixOS is good in 10 years but at the current rate, I’d just burn the project honestly. So wasteful, both for the environment and man hours.













  • Any time I see someone say this, they always fail to actually provide any examples of games that fit this description

    Lethal Company is actually pretty fun if you’re playing it alone. That’s a positive example.

    Another one is Don’t Starve Together. Great together, but Don’t Starve itself is also fun.

    Among us on the other hand has no bots and you won’t have any fun without other players. However, you’d also not have fun without other players in Uno, Chess or Checkers.

    Were these enough examples or did I misunderstand your point?


    I don’t agree that you have to make games be good beyond the multiplayer experience. I’d love it to get my money’s worth, if I can play the game alone AND share the fun with friends I’ll gladly pay extra.

    As it stands, many friendjank games only cost a few euros so I can live with them not being fun after a while or without friends. After all I used to buy cinema cards for my friends and I and didn’t have more than a few hours of fun, and cinema cards are often way more expensive than friendslop.



  • Quite on point. I’d add that it’s not only games but also other media like movies you can enjoy better with friends, even if they’re not particularly cinematographic masterpieces.

    Hell, it technically started even earlier than that, with physical card games and board games and such. Just play them with friends and it’s fun.

    Here I was, thinking people liked Uno for the deep game mechanics and story 🙃

    People in this thread try to pull compliments for friendslop out of thin air because they can’t admit they like simple or bad games. If it’s fun, it must be genius, because obviously I won’t ever play a game which is bad, would I now? 🙃😅

    I’d say people should enjoy what they enjoy. We should stop judging other people’s fun. And I think this is kind of also the point of the article: if people have fun in AAA games with micro transactions and battle passes, I let them and I’m happy they can have fun. I won’t touch that shit myself though, rather play a “friendslop” title 😅


  • I very much disagree, it’s like judging that samba is not good cos it’s not blues. They’re two different genres with different goals.

    Funny, that was actually my point I tried to make. I repeat myself:

    That’s not to say friendslop don’t have a right to exist. There’s a time and a place for friendslop, it’s not when you want to play a good game.

    I often compare it to mediocre or bad movies which only work on cinema screens or home theater. If you watch “popcorn movies” without popcorn, you won’t enjoy the movie.

    But that’s where I’d disagree:

    If it’s fun then it is well designed.

    You can have fun with badly designed or badly polished games. It needs an engaging game loop, sure, it can’t be complete crap. But I’d argue that you don’t need to create a good game to create a fun(ny) game.

    Example: EYE Divine Cybermancy. One of my favourite games but I often laugh at the jank and incoherent story, and the bugs, and I’m still having fun.

    Maybe we shouldn’t call it friendslop, but friendjank?


  • I didn’t compare CS2 to Peak specifically. I compared good games to friendslop.

    Can you tell me why you’re upset that I call “friendslop” bad games? I didn’t say you can’t enjoy bad games, I’d say in many instances I had more fun in objectively bad games and movies with friends than I had in good games. Sometimes the good games are boring and the jank makes “bad” games great or funny.

    I also didn’t say I dislike friendslop. I enjoyed Lethal Company and Among Us with friends, for example. I also really like watching “bad” movies with friends, we even watched The Room once 😅

    I even watch objectively bad films by myself. One of my favourites is Fortress (1992). This has an 38% rotten and a 40% popcorn meter rating on Rottentomatoes. Which is basically my point – media doesn’t have to be good to be enjoyable or funny.

    I’m not always after a laugh though. There’s a place and a time for friendslop, and it’s specifically called friendslop because of that. Don’t see it as an insult.