Circadian rhythm is 40-70% genetic. And there's an evolutionary advantage to not having everyone asleep at the same time. Early humans would have been safer at night with some people in the group awake.
Half-Life fans are currently leaving negative reviews on Dota 2 because Valve won't make HL3. Recent reviews went from "overwhelmingly positive" to "mixed".
Can someone shed some light on why we should care about the non-dictatorship requirement in Arrow's theorem? Reading the non-dictatorship section on the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy makes it sound like it's a meaningless assumption. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arrows-theorem/#NonDic If someone's preferences always aligning with society's preferences results in them being a "dictator", so what?
I'm not talking about games overall, just games made by AAA companies. There's certainly still games that cater to a hardcore/competitive audience but you have to look a little harder for them and they're usually coming from indie developers. But for a AAA studio casual is where the money is and it's the philosophy driving their game design even though from their perspective they'd probably call "easier to get into" or more "intuitive" or "streamlined".
Look at the difference between Starcraft Broodwar and Starcraft 2, Diablo 2 and Diablo 3, Dota and every clone like LoL and Heroes of the Storm, Hearthstone, Overwatch. All of the sequels and successors are more shallow and casual than what came before. And the novelties these games introduce are better characterized as gimmicks to hook casual players. Why make a game that caters to a hardcore audience? That's just limiting your playerbase and limiting your potential profit.
Do you think my comment was out of proportion or very different in tone to what he said?
I think there is a noticeable tone difference, assuming one is sensitive to these sorts of things.
He dismissed Brie's words as "typical feminist schtick"
While this is true, as a whole if you compare his first couple of sentences to yours, his remains much more closely related to the overall subject matter. He dismisses the author's words, but goes right into talking about video games.
On the other hand, your opening is too focused on tnones. The subject is always tnones and neglects the topic of video games. You can see this with the constant instances of "you" throughout the first line of the comment.
Now maybe this is because you're trying to establish the thesis that tnones is part of the problem as you state in your first line. However, I think approaching your rebuttal this way has led us to where we are now where you come off as condescending. Ultimately it distracts too much from the subject matter and distracts from the points you make later.
Simply leading off with "we do have a culture problem that is well documented" without anything else in the first line would have been a better way to start. The impact of a statement like "you have identified yourself as part of the problem" would have been better in your conclusion after all was said and done.
I find the entire quoted line to be unnecessary. The initial question "Does this article scare you?" doesn't serve a purpose, it's just filler. I wouldn't expect the other person to really respond to such a question, nor do I think the conversation should be or is trying to be centered on the question and its possible answer. The post would have been better off not being framed by that question and instead just dive right into the actual arguments.
I also play Dota 2 on and off, since multiplayer interactions in it are so intense and so unpredictable
It's a shame to see how AAA companies have butchered the Dota-like genre. There's Valve's Dota 2 which is the shining example of what the genre should be and then there's all these garbage rehashes out there that have just tried to dumb down the game or introduce some kind of gimmick or cliche.
AAA games are just a race to the bottom in terms of design. They just try to appeal to the lowest common denominator and games get more shallow and casual with each iteration.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-40568997