Konraddo

I feel like I'm doing something illegal by calling my home a lab. Might be thinking too much ;) Jokes aside, I'm not really testing or inventing anything so I genuinely don't understand where the lab part comes from.

I see. So it's like "Ask a friend" of anything. It's a useful application though, if the responses come quick, with more users joining of course. Say, I got two outfits to wear and I want opinions. If users disclose their nationality, occupation, age group and gender, I'd want to know the responses come from say, all male, then I know people of my gender that have such and such jobs wear similarly so I'll be more confident in choosing the outfit. I still don't think it's a game. You can make it fun to help out others by including daily quest, points system etc. Otherwise, I don't know why I would want to spend my free time on others.

Genuine question. Why is this a game? Don't the players just answer questions?

They just didnt manage to make it fast.

You are absolutely right. The vision for sequel can be good but the execution has to be equally sound too. In the ideal situation, I guess CS2 needs to be a rebuild of CS1 with a new engine, so it can fully replace CS1 right from the start, if not do something extra. They did a few things praiseworthy though, like baking in road lane customisation, which was done by mods in CS1.

But then, we are not too fair. Simulation games are different from RPG. Story has an ending and we want to see how it continues to develop. For simulation games, I don't think players want anything to be removed on a sequel, unless they are absolutely bad design. Even so, players expect QoL here and there to make their lives easier, which alone can be the single reason to buy the sequel.

A great product does not necessarily mean there is a winning formula though. We have a trash sequel when the new game does not do something that the existing game does. Even worse, the existing features are locked behind additional payment, so why would players not continue to play the existing game?

KSP 2 - Let's forget the technical disaster. A lot of features are missing at the start. You could argue that it's in early access, but why would I pay for a product that does less? Then we add in the many bugs and performance issues, and you know it's game over.

Cities Skylines 2 - Again, you can't do everything you already can in CS1. Plus, the first game is supported by a huge number of mods. There's really no reason to play the new title. Again, it does not perform any better.

This is a weird take but I think remake or remastered these days are more like sequels than sequels, just because they keep the story and mechanics.

I find that game developers or many businesses try to reinvent the wheel when there's no reason to. Say the Subnautica sequel, why waste money on voice over, add a land mass, cut the beloved submarine, shorten the story and overall map size, all that. I will never understand and sincerely hope the next Subnautica title does not reinvent the wheel.

Without technical know-how or experience in general using NAS, Synology is a good first-time option. All apps are ready for immediate use. And don't forget the majority of computer users don't even know what a NAS is and they simply want to store files for remote access.

I have supported GoG for quite some years. I don't understand why they keep pivoting different things to do.

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I would support paying for the initial game as well as every major patch when a new OS came out. Say, they do something to make a game work on Win 11. One year later we have Win 12 so I don't mind paying a little for the patch. Then one year later we have Win 13 and I'm willing to pay again if I still play the game.

I would also support paying for online servers for games that have multiplayer components. That takes money to maintain.

As others mentioned, GoG should stop wasting time on a launcher. Hell, even the installer. Just ZIP the whole thing for me to download.

You could ask the question for video gaming. Can a used computer do the job? Yes, but you may not be able to play cutting edge / demanding games if your computer lacks the appropriate hardware. It really depends what kind of things you want to do, for choosing hardware that's powerful enough.

Jellyfin? You need to consider if you need transcoding. Transcode or not makes quite a difference on the hardware needs.

Well said. It looks too clean/polished.

Seriously, don't buy the game at launch. Wait till the GOTY edition because many features that we had in the past will be packaged as expansions.

To answer your question, most people don't have just one device. Do you have only one device? You must have at least a desktop computer and a smartphone? What if you want to have something stored in your computer when you are not at home?

Music for example. If I don't want to pay Spotify or whatever, and I want to listen to my music on my phone at work and on my computer at home. Other than making two full copies of the entire music library, I think I have to store them on a 3rd location then share it to my two devices.

If I don't listen to music at home, then you're right, there's no reason to self host anything. I can just store all songs on my phone.

There are three reasons that I can think of:

1. Privacy
2. Collaboration
3. Accessibility / cost

Privacy. This is obvious. People don't want their private information to be sold by corporations or scraped by AI.

Collaboration To share information with others, while maintaining point 1, people have to self host. Say, you want to archive a bunch of photos for personal viewing then you can store them anywhere you like. But if you want to share them with family, a self hosted solution is the way to go.

Accessibility / cost People want to do things for free. Many applications offer free version or demo, but features are often limited and you can't really customize them to your own needs. In addition, applications often adopt a subscription model these days and people don't like that.