Mr Beast really just gives me the ick. I can’t really explain it and anytime anyone says anything negative about him tons of people come along to say “but he paid for people’s surgery!!!1!!” Like it makes anything else he does perfectly acceptable.
I just really don’t like him and feel like he would be a shitty person IRL.
In my experience, people who make a big deal out of their philanthropy are typically doing it to compensate for some other moral deficiency.
What really started to bother me was when he started to make a game out of his giveaways, like “Last person to stop touching the Lamborghini gets to keep it!” and things like that. It just feels wrong, and I can’t quite explain why.
I hope I’m wrong, and so far there is no evidence he’s a secret dickhead, but something about him seems off.
It just feels wrong, and I can’t quite explain why.
It’s essentially throwing a slab of meat into an arena and watching the starved poors fight to the death over it, then watching while you’re served the equivalent of thanksgiving dinner by your butler/maids in a safe climate controlled room.
There comes a point where “philanthropy” simply becomes rich people making games for the poors to win a “prize” and seeing how they react for their own entertainment rather than any sort of benevolence. The lambo example seems pretty much spot on for that.
Glad he’s using his money to do shit that makes some people’s lives better. Strange that he uses it as content… but better than musk hoarding wealth and belittling people on twitter.
So I guess better than my bellwether for a shitty person.
Some of these dudes doing this stuff use it as content so that they can come up with more money to do even more. Maaaaybe. I’d like to believe that.
I’ve only seen like one piece of a Mr Beast video so I can’t say much about him, but I’ve seen a lot of other folks who do that kind of stuff.
I watch one dude who started off making prank videos. He only got about 5 videos out before someone left a comment telling him to do some silly thing and give a person money. He did that silly thing (I can’t remember what) and then the dude hit him with a story about why that money was going to change his life. Dude cried, then stopped the prank stuff altogether. He went out looking for people to help after that. He’s raised 10s of thousands to get homeless people off the streets, helped people with debt and medical issues, etc.
His videos weren’t that special before, but he’s ridiculously handsome so I legit believe that’s why people were watching in the first place.
Now, the cynic in me says, “Well he got a lot of views and that’s the reason for the shift.”
Still though, he doesn’t do anything mean to anyone. No cruel pranks or anything like that. Even when he was making prank content it was silly and harmless. He’s legitimately changing lives big time and he just kind of fell into it.
I watch this other dude who is a Christian and he does really good things for people too.
I don’t know. The system isn’t working or people couldn’t make a living doing shit like this. That bums me out, but I’m happy to see things get better for people.
Like I said… I’m super conflicted about shoving a camera in peoples faces while you give them money to help them in dire situations. just so you can get more views…(although, TV has been doing this type of shit for ever, think about the Olympics, every event they have some sob story about the athlete and how they have overcome)
I think it’s super fucked up, but at the same time, they are helping people. Is it more humiliating to do it this way, or to make someone jump through redtape, bureaucracy and what not to get assistance from the state?
I watched the Mr. Beast gets people vision video because I’m all for a youtube fixing peoples vision who didn’t have the funds to do it themselves. Like, that shit is literally life changing. I watched the videos, I watched the Ads, I did it all… however his other content, like staying in a circle or putting your hand on a car, that doesn’t appeal to me.
When people use the argument of “oh, he does a lot of philanthropic work” as a means of defending someone, I just counter it by pointing out that Jimmy Savile did too.
I usually don’t watch or follow such influencer shit. But couple days back I watched it to see what’s all the fuss is about and his smile gave me chills. I don’t know if anyone paid any attention or if it’s me but his smile looks like something plastered on to his face. Looks so artificial… His smile reminds of the movie American Psycho.
I just can’t stand those annoying ass youtube thumbnails. I only see them when I’m a private browser session (my logged-in suggestions are totally different). But they are so annoying and stupid looking that I never, ever click on them.
Sadly and clearly that stuff works, though, because MrBeast is the most subscribed-to individual on YouTube.
EDIT: After reading other comments I realize I mistook GeForce Now for GeForce Experience. While I still disagree that SD/Linux is “crying out for it” I actually think bringing GeForce Now to Linux would be a good move.
I just play the games locally on the deck and that includes CP2077 which works good enough for me. I have the option to play off my desktop via the Steam remote play thing but I’ve never tried it. From what I understand, it should be the same (or similar experience) to playing via the Steam remote option? Is that right?
That’s correct. I used to do most of my steam deck gaming by streaming games from my desktop. It’s a seamless experience, as much as anything is on the Deck. I still prefer to stream games from the desktop that benefit from better hardware, like BG3.
Ahhhh. I get it now. So it runs on NVIDIA machines, not local machine so that is the difference. With the Steam Link (or whatever it’s called) you run the workload on your desktop and stream to like the Deck. With the NVIDIA solution, you stream the workload from the cloud. That makes sense to me now.
It saves battery life and let’s you have a higher and smoother framerate. You’re talking shit on something you’ve never even tried. Playing on high graphics at 60fps is a hell of a lot nicer than low graphics at 30 fps.
I didn’t talk shit about anything. I said that I played directly on the deck, asked how the NVIDIA remote play option worked, and said that I have the option for the Steam remote play but haven’t tried it. I am curious about the remote play options for both NVIDIA and Steam but since it is good enough for me, I haven’t tried anything other than local play. That wasn’t meant to indicate that anything was wrong with an alternative.
GeForce Now is a cloud streaming service - meaning the games run on Nvidia machines with all settings maxed out, and you get the output. It’s great if you:
live close to an Nvidia data center and pay for the service
prefer 60 fps with all settings on high to 30 fps with all settings on low
want to play games that aren’t supported on the deck
want to save space by not installing certain large games
want to save battery
You doing a completely separate thing and that being “good enough for you” would be like me asking for a recipe for apple pie and you responding with “well I went to McDonald’s the other day and ate a pie and it was swell”.
That’s not what we’re talking about, it doesn’t help the original poster, and your experience contributes nothing to the overall discussion.
Edit: Removed some text that served no purpose other than being nasty to the above commenter. Apologies.
OR, my comment and this thread could be viewed as an opportunity to identify a value in driving development of a more seamless NVIDIA streaming experience on the Deck. The original commenter indicated that there is no demand or desire for it and I (and I assume many others) own a deck and were not familiar with the service thus driving awareness and possibly a few more people to push the demand. This post is about the use of the service on the deck and this thread focuses on whether there is a demand. It would seem like education on the service running on a deck would be pretty on-topic.
However, if that’s the case then I would encourage you to at least edit your above comment to indicate what you’ve learned - as it stands right now it still implies the discussion is about local streaming/Gamestream.
No. I’ve spent hours googling my problem and trying every solution that popped up. The server is behind a router, and no amount of port forwarding and firewall permissions is getting past it for whatever reason.
There are a few things plugged in to that router that I’ve never had an issue accessing, but they just need basic Internet access as far as I understand
I had a similar issue in my home where I ran a nighthawk router at the back of my house connected to the ATT router/modem at the front of the house. I let them run as separate networks for a long time, and that prevented anything not connected to the same router as the jellyfin server from seeing it.
I recently got my act together and switched the router to “access point mode” and the house is all 1 network now. The jellyfin server is available on everything in the house as well. After the change, I felt silly I had it the other way for years because it sure helps many of the other wifi objects in my home as well.
Are you on apartment internet by chance? You’ve probably got a double NAT. In which case you’ll need a server, outside the network, that can make a tunnel to your server.
Yeah I’ve been running Jellyfin for a year now and it’s amazing. The plugins automatically find metadata, cover art, and subtitles for me as soon as I upload them to my nas.
Sorry Emilio, but when you had a reported $200 million dollars, 500 developers, and 7 years to make a game, you don’t get to play the “but its really hard” card when people complain that your game is soulless corporate crap.
Honestly I’d have tried the game by now if every time I thought about it the devs didn’t go on some insane ramble. They should really just shut up and let people form their own opinions. A lot of people will inevitably end up liking it, even if it’s garbage.
Eh, gaming journalism just wants clicks to get ad-revenue. They would write an article about anything. Gabe waking up in the morning is news worthy to them.
I’m looking forward to the ward between factions posting the two quotes in comments sections every time a game gets delayed for the next several decades
I read a reviewer that said “It’s a beautiful game about space exploration that has no space exploration” and they were completely right. It’s just fallout in space. Who thought Quick Travel the game would be compelling space exploration
But it’s not Fallout in Space. I can travel from one edge of the map to the other in Fallout or Skyrim and stumble upon a pitched battle or a cultist ritual or a lost dog or a juicy plot hook. In Starfield I can travel from one interstitial area to the next interstitial area to listen to a bland NPC tell me to go to the next interstitial area.
It’s okay. I look forward to mods. Right now it’s like somebody reskinned Super Mario Bros from the NES with a generative image AI trained on NASA’s Astronomy Picture of the Day and Mass Effect 1 stills.
That's what I found really interesting about Cyberpunk 2077.
It took me a long time before I even started using fast travel in that game. I actually enjoyed walking through the city. Even on later replays and when I'd finished almost all the side quests.
Far from perfect game even after all the bug fixes, and kinda empty after the end game, but I can't help thinking it illustrates how Bethesda's been left behind in many ways. It'll be interesting to see what the next GTA's like. If they manage to make a more immersive world to explore.
I gave up on Starfield to try Cyberpunk again with the new fixes and I’m now probably 150 hours in and I think I’ve only fast travelled once? Maybe three or four times if you count the mid mission moments where you’re riding in a car with someone.
It’s kind of wild that Neon had to be split in half by a loading screen, but you can go from one end of Night City to the other with none, and Night City is way more detailed, and quite frankly probably has more unique geometry to load and render than Neon + entire surrounding planet.
There is an argument to be made that Half-Life: Alyx runs on a “modified Quake engine”. At no point was the engine completely rewritten, though it went through several major evolutions and presumably none of Carmack’s original Quake code still survives… probably.
What matters is that Valve made several major overhauls over the years and is well aware of both the strengths and weaknesses of its engine and taylors its games to them. I mean, you couldn’t run Elite Dangerous on Source 2, but nobody asked. Seemingly, nobody at Bethesda corporate asked if CE was capable of multiplayer (hence Fallout 76), and nobody at Bethesda corporate asked if CE was capable of half the shit that Starfield would have to provide for exploration to be compelling in the way that it is in Skyrim.
Absolutely. I stopped playing it because it just wasn’t fun, 2.0 is much better. Bikes are way more usable, but I’d love to be able to hoon the cars like a GTA game.
Edit: Ok, I figured it out. You can’t hammer the gas all the time. The driving works more like an actual car than a GTA game. So if you drive more like Forza, you can actually hoon the cars. Bikes are more tolerant to full throttle. Controllers having a variable input for the throttle allow you to control throttle like a gas pedal. So higher acceleration cars become drivable with less throttle and hammering gas produces a “realistic” ice rink feel, as desired. I still prefer Jackie’s bike despite this understanding.
Everything is way better and more detailed in Cyberpunk.
It feels like everybody is so generic in Starfield. They don’t feel like they have personalities.
You travel 10KM in any direction in Cyberpunk and you’ll be dealing with an entirely new set of gangs with their own slang and their own backgrounds and their own heritage.
You travel 10KM in any direction in Starfield and you’ll either find nothing or an entrance to another procgen cave with the same spacers as everywhere else.
A lot of those physics-y space games like Empyrion and Space Engineers are a way more fun way of interacting with custom ships and space than Starfield is, for sure.
For me it's not so much the travel; the main story tries to sell this idea of exploring the unknown, but literally everything you find is a known quantity in some form or another.
And if we’re talking about apologies and corrective action: the only real way forward is a completely fresh executive team at Unity. Anything short of that means they’re simply going to try this all again in a slightly different fashion once focus on their clusterfuck dies down.
A trifecta of VC and PE firms own a majority share or Unity’s shares. Those guys love a monetization scheme, which is all this is. The board’s not going anywhere.
The real question is whether or not people will continue to use Unity. Apologies mean less than nothing in a case like this regardless of whether or not they’re sincere. This is a company that’s shown their cards. Why give them business when you can go elsewhere?
Personally, this has made me start looking more into Godot. I’ve got a project I’m going to be working on that I was going to do in Unreal, but this Unity stuff has made me skeptical of tying my creative output to any one company that can’t be easily replaced. Getting that wrapped up with a proprietary platform that comes with licensing that might change just seems like a bad idea now. Maybe Unreal is okay today, but what about down the road? Why start building into a system that there’s no guarantee won’t enshittify a few years down the road?
I’d like to get my major mechanical stuff squared away and develop a visual style and then tell more stories without reinventing the wheel every time. Once I’ve got my assets built on top of an engine, I’d rather add to it over time than arbitrarily scrap it every few years. Updating and refactoring is all well and good, but I’m not in it to code the same system over and over.
That makes Godot look pretty appealing, and any closed source corporate offering look pretty shady.
To give an impression of what it’s been like for me:
I had a quest where I needed Iron. I found a random planet that had it, and picked a spot in the middle of the scan readouts. Arrive, looks like a barren rock - but that’s fine because I only wanted rocks. However, I see something in the distance, and check it out. On the way, I find a wandering trader taking her alien dog for a walk, and sell some stuff weighing me down. I find a cave, where a colonist is hiding out with a respiratory infection - and am able to help them get out as a little mini-quest, though the infection spreads to me.
I come past a little mining installation, where I find a bounty hunter that tells me of a bounty nearby she’s offering to split with me. We do so, fighting a base full of raiders to get to their captain, and I finally decide to leave.
The key here is, I don’t think any of those quests are amazing - they’re likely very dynamically generated. But they’re also not fun to “seek them out” - just to come across them in some other mission, like trying to make an outpost or mining for stuff.
I mean, I can’t even argue against that. Some people find some forms of work fulfilling, and even switch to games because their own jobs don’t actually give them that feeling of fulfillment.
Monster Hunter is a prime example of a game that sets such elongated goals that it’s regarded as a “grind-heavy” game - but its players like the grind. Heck, the entire space simulator genre often involves quite a lot of “Space Truck Simulator” gameplay, where you’re just engineering good ways to ferry cargo around.
Which is not to say that’s what Starfield aims for. From what I’ve played, it’s closer to Sea of Thieves, having adventurous interruptions - where you start a boring, routine mission to bring Sugar from one merchant post to another, but then get ambushed by a skeleton ship, then a giant shark, then find a map to a buried treasure nearby.
Half the reason I play Elite is space trucking. I’m only raising my empire rank to get the largest ship… in order to space truck better. The Fed Corvette I plan to make a combat vessel, but the Cutter will be my space truck.
I found that flow of the game works a little bit better if you just don’t fast travel at all. I played a lot of Elite and it gave me a little bit of Elite vibes when I just walk to my ship, go thru inside it and sit down. Then I take off “manually” using the button and jump to the target system by manually targeting it and press the jump button.
What Bethesda can do better is to just mask the loading with a flight animation, for example when you’re taking off from a planet the loading should be replaced by an animation where you’re going out of the atmosphere. And when you’re jumping between star systems, the loading should be replaced by something similar to Elite when we’re jumping through the witch space.
All in all, my experience with Starfield has been fine. I loved the weird stuff happening when you’re just fucking around. Although the main quest has taken a step back with their sense of urgency, compare it to previous Bethesda games, where there’s a big stake going on that pushes you to at least complete the main quest once. In Starfield there’s no such sense of urgency.
It seems like Bethesda is leaning heavy on their sandbox side, just letting people go around and do stuff.
With optimized settings from the HUB YouTube channel, my FPS never went below 60.
The comment about it being dominated by rich streamers, who could afford the entry + could train full-time, definitely made me draw parallels between them and duelling knights of yore, who were usually part of the nobility.
It would be nice to see some more random contenders from more mixed backgrounds
They had a month to level to 60 and gear up, most normal people aren’t into wasting a month to enter a tournament with practically no odds of getting anything. If you die in the tournament your character is done, so naturally the contestants are largely going to be people with some confidence and time to spare.
There were hardly people here who are James LeBron level when it comes to WoW, a lot of them are in fact closer to hobbyists and the tournament itself was not even close to NBA level. Both chess and basketball have hobby level tournaments that have prize money on the line.
I can’t see how this is related to the acquisition.
Activision fuckups are Microsoft fuckups now. Microsoft and lots on industry observers claimed that Microsoft taking over Activision would be such as good change. Turns out: It wasn’t, just as the fullscreen CoD ad on Xbox was not a positive change.
I don’t see how a game which was developed pre MS has anything to do with MS fucking up? That’s a soceopathic obsession with hating something, 99.99999% of people won’t think of blaming a company for this.
That’s not how it works when major companies buy one another, it generally takes years for integration efforts wherein prior leadership and plans remain mostly unchanged for more then half that time.
So who is responsible for the fullscreen CoD ad on Xbox then if not Microsoft? Seriously, you’re delusional if you think that Microsoft higher ups have no power to order the Activision leadership around.
Ah, the arrogance of not knowing what you don’t know. Except people are telling you that you are lacking knowledge of mergers, and you’re still demanding that you’re right. So now it’s willful ignorance.
Microsoft can advertise for their new properties. That doesn’t require any high level coordination between company leadership.
Anything game development wise is pretty much certainly not had any impact from Microsoft at all. MS is a very slow moving company, and corporate acquisitions aren’t an overnight deal. It can take years to transition old leadership out and implement new plans.
The acquisition has resulted in next to nothing other than some joint advertising. This really just makes you look like you have no idea how corporate company structure works.
The first fullscreen ad on Xbox is definitely a negative change in the industry and Microsoft knew exactly what they bought and are responsible now for everything, including the later revealed pricing for the upcoming WoW expansion. No amount of downvoting by Xbox fanboys will ever change that.
I agree that it’s a negative change. I’ve never said otherwise.
I don’t agree that Microsoft is responsible. This would have happened with or without the Microsoft acquisition. This was a decision made long before the Microsoft buyout, and Microsoft executives would have no say over any of it. The coroporate structures are almost certainly entirely separate still. They’re functioning as effectively separate companies with a close working relationship, while answering to the same ceo.
Also, I’m making many dumb jokes about motorsports, usually upvoted, so I definitively did not need to farm karma through a single reply, just to get pulled down again by people who keep denying that Microsoft is in charge of Activision now.
no, it doesn’t answer, because karma does indeed exist, even if you can’t see it.
Yep, I’m farming invisible points…🙄
To clarify: I did not make the comment to farm karma. I’m active on Lemmy because as a person who cannot program code, active discussion is my contribution to the Lemmy as social platform (definitively more active than on Reddit before migrating).
Let’s look at what are they apologizing for: “for the confusion and angst … [the policy we announced] caused”. Not for the policy itself. Right, “we’re sorry you got mad”.
And what are they going to do about it? “making changes”
As far as corporate non-apologies go, this is definitely one of them.
pcgamer.com
Top