sp3tr4l

I have no inclination or standing to doubt you.

Hrm, Im on mobile, shittiest phone in the world, but maybe you can read these images. I can't copy paste the latex formulas so... lemme see if i can throw this all in a spoiler so it doesnt take up half this thread:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927650524001130?via%3Dihub

Whole thing is still loading for me.

Obviously scientists don't want to work any more and eat avocado toast too much.

Have they tried getting a college degree to increase their job prospects?

So, this has yet to be peer reviewed, and I am far from a theoretical physicist ... I certainly can't say its correct or incorrect.

It does seem ... too convenient. As in, how could it possibly have taken so many physicists so long to not just try this decades ago?

Basically, they throw the Planck Length and Planck energy (from Quantum Physics) into the Einstein Field Equation (from General Relativity) ...

... and are then able to mathematically derive basically the rest of the laws of physics, which seem to be quite close to or totally in line with the Standard Model (of Quantum Physics).

Unfortunately I do not see any direct comparisons if their predicted values for MeV's of fundamental particles with experimental data...

Anyway, the paper notes 2 interesting, direct implications:

1. Dark Matter is not real, there's no need for it in this model. Galaxy rotation speeds work out to what we see without need for additional, unseen, mass.

2. Either A, our universe is mirrored by and entangled with an antiuniverse of antiparticles which all travel backward through time (antitime?), or B, our universe is part of an evolution of ... prior(?) universe(s?) which generate black holes, which do not form singularities but instead create entangled white holes as other universes, expanding spacetimes.

Bonus conclusion:

The Fine Structure Constant may not actually be constant.

Well shucks, I could have used another 2¢.

No, no no, that is the current practice and origin of the entire problem.

If you legally class a game as an ongoing service that is temporary and subject to termination, without recompense, soley by the decision of and according to the terms of the licensor, then they can legally sell you a game for $80 bucks and then shut down the next day.

If you legally class the game as a good, well you can't sell someone a chair which then has 3 of its legs disappear or collapse (due to no fault of the owner) the next day without that being a scam of a defective product.

...

If you're saying the emphasis should be on raising consumer awareness that they're buying a temporary, revocable and non refundable service...

Who, other than children, do not know this yet?

That would not force the industry to actually change their practices.

It just slaps a big bold 'haha the fuck you isn't even in the fine print anymore' label on a product and makes our cyberpunk dystopia a little bit more obvious, but doesn't achieve any useful goal in terms of altering actual game design/support or consumer rights.

WHaT?!

Sorry I CAnT HeAR YOU, GOTTA TURN THE FRIES!

Seriously those things and half the other equipment at a fast food place basically has to be emitting alarms at DBs that are known to cause hearing loss and mandate hearing protection in basically any other line of work.

Normally it works exactly backwards to this in larger studios/publishers.

Game devs do backbreaking, insanity inducing levels of work, and all but 10% are laid off when the game launches, regardless of success or failure, and for this time they are making probably about area median wage, maybe 10 or 20% more.

Its the middle managers and higher up executives who make multiples to orders of magnitude that amount of money, and almost all of them are rewarded by either failing upward or bailing out with golden parachutes, even though its often their decisions and directions, often going against lower level devs, which lead to the ultimate commercial failure.

Perhaps this loss will be so serious that some higher ups will actually get axxed, but even then it hardly matters: They can easily retire on what they've earned so far, whereas the actual people writing code, making maps, making art assets, they'll basically all be homeless if they don't find another decent job in 3 to 6 months.

I am fairly, but not 100% certain, that Ross Scott's proposal currently making the rounds in the EU would say that you either have to refund a game (and all in game purchases) when it becomes totally unplayable, or you have to release some kind of way for dedicated fans to be able to least run custom servers and bypass no longer maintained, proprietary, always online verification/anti cheat schtuff.

I disagree.

Amazon still owns and operates New World.

All of the other games/franchises slated to be featured still exist as purchasable products.

They do not own or operate Concord, which probably no longer exists as a product.

The servers will be shut down in a few days.

There are no announced plans to take it F2P, as that would require dumping even more money into a gasoline fire to rework it into F2P.

Why would you promote a product that does not exist?

Its no longer a headline IP... its a total flop of an IP.

I don't know, maybe if the whole episode is basically already done, maybe it still airs, but all that does is remind everyone about what is potentially the most expensive disaster in the history of video gaming (barring possibly Google Stadia).

It's an anthology style show, meaning a bunch of basically self contained plots and stories, you could easily just drop one.

It's possible they air it, but again, I'll bet two cents the entire Concord IP just vanishes as brand management trumps over anything else.

I will bet you $0.02 that they will absolutely pull the plug on that episode, that they will indeed fully kill it here and now, and that it will not be reworked into a F2P game with the same characters or art style ever.

Maybe they will take some of the core gameplay mechanics and work them into projects totally unrelated to the 'Concord IP' they spent so much time hyping, but I see 0 chance that Concord just relaunches as Concord F2P in 6 months.

Yeah it hit that point a few days ago.

If I had to guess, they started the process of pulling the plug when sales/players didn't pick up on Labor Day, a holiday that normally sees increased player numbers.