TsarVul

From an outsider's perspective, it seems to me that the US got here by not being equally as petty. Lie, cheat, defame, appeal to tribalism, argue in bad faith. Populism is the meta and democrats need to get with it, cuz the whole world is on the line.

CDPR is a publicly traded company with a clearly represented shareholder structure. A collective known as "Other" owns about 65% of the company's shares. CDPR upper management have a fiduciary duty to this entity. This duty was honored when they decided to release early. They knew that the hype train was so intense that whatever they released, it would sell like icy lemonade in the Sahara. It's not like they didn't have access to Sony devkits and shit, they knew the performance was sub-optimal. They're not dumb. They were just OK with temporary backlash that would eventually get amended with a successful anime, some patches and DLC.

Now on to actors. Actors, whether A or Z-list, work for a flat fee and maybe royalties if they got really really lucky. Once they have completed their performance, their end of the contract is complete. They get paid and that's that. They just wait for royalties to be exercised (if they have them).

Having said so, the idea that Keanu's agents hold any post-payment sway in comparison to the collective that owns literally more than 65% of the company is a bit silly. This is why you're getting a little bit of backlash on what you have written. Especially in that you did not preface your original comment with "Hey, this is a theory, a game theory".

I remember them saying that they intend to pivot to purely Unreal Engine 5. I'm assuming they're trying to shed developers who are experts in their in-house engine and will slowly start hiring UE experts. Mad easy to do so when young Polish talent are trampling over each other to get through the door to a job interview at CDPR.

I use Godot with .NET and this issue arises with me exclusively when I move tscn files around. I fix it by opening the broken tscn file in a text editor and I see whether it is referencing a scene that has been moved or otherwise doesn't exist.

Maybe you can devise a custom gizmo for the spline nodes in your network graph. So each gizmo has an Area3D which monitors for a collider in the intersection nodes, and registers a connection when hovered over said intersection. You give two of the these gizmos to each of your ~~intersection~~ spline nodes for start and end, and you're gucci.

I understand him having these views. Money was exchanged behind closed doors, deals were struck, whatever. I can imagine a financial incentive for him to sow dissent via shitty meme. I don't understand what's in it for his followers. Is it just about being contrarian? What more must he do or say for it to be clear to them that he's just kind of a bozo?

I'm sure the legion of bots that comprise their user base won't mind.

You're giving Elmo too much credit as this Machiavellian character. Ordinary capitalist. Appeasing your investors is the most common commercial reason. It's just that advertisers can't really provide twitter with business anymore on account of his bigoted optics, but dangerous governments can.

He's so transparent with his intentions, it's embarrassing. The only explanation of removing your own tool to combat misinformation is because it does not align with your own interests. There's no way to spin that fact in a positive light and yet there will still be people using twitter. It's actually getting really fucking hard to not be a misanthrope.

Yes! It very often is a reasonable thing to say! In the sense that if you fix one bug, you might be creating a couple more bugs. Like opening a can of worms. But the author in this case used this as a retort to the community saying "if you have an issue with the engine, and you can fix it, then please contribute the fix to the github repo". So ultimately, the argument seems to be why would one contribute fixes to the engine when one might have to fix another issue afterwards. This is antithetical to the nature of FOSS and immediately discredited the author, in my mind, as having a technical discussion in good faith. I'd love to give quotes that brought me to this conclusion, but the article seems to have been taken down as I write this.

They are better served using Unreal Engine and there's nothing wrong with that.

Well reasoned points.

Regarding your 2nd point, absolutely correct. But man does it look good in a hit piece such as this article. Appeasing the needs of the many is a delicate procedure that sometimes involves using in-engine data structures and not just fixed length arrays, much to the chagrin of the author. Less maintenance at the very least.

Regarding your 4th point, Godot can accommodate the need for precompiled shaders, it can add adapter layers around its Vulkanic render pipeline, it can technically play by console rules. But there is the one thing that it can't do. It can't just publish usage of a proprietary API to a public git repo. That will always be the albatross around Godot's ass. But I would pose the following question: is this a flaw of Godot or a flaw of the status quo, which forces FOSS into a permanent song and dance to be on equal footing with private enterprise?

Fucking exactly. And here to finish my article, a person that called Godot a "scrappy little engine" built by a "gameplay engineer".

Godot is obviously not a flawless diamond placed behind museum glass, but don't give me this bullshit that this article is written solely in the name of technical due diligence.