it’s not the first GPU.

If gameplay itself is dependant on online servers, the game has to release a working version of the server code so it at least could be run by fans, or be refunded.

I replied to one of it a while ago and basically, this part is impossible since developer also “license” 3rd party backend/plugins/software solutions to make their server working. The developer do not have the right to release licensed code/api etc.

meaning, say if a backend have the free learning version of license, the developer are bound to the commercial license, which dictates if they can release code that involve 3rd party code/api.

Feb 28th, 2025

It goes back to province and then where? If it benefits everyone, say upgrade the library to be more energy efficient, provide rebates if you upgrade your heat/aircon system to modern standard of your buildings, like those I’d say that’s good use of carbon tax money. But if dumped to some big oil RnD branch for green energy tech that we won’t see in another 10/20 years, cause they do not have any motivation to actually pull it. (since their balance sheet is neutral once they get the tax money back from one of their branch/subsidiary. ) I might be biased cause I lived in a old tower building, I really wish our building can start the window/etc remodeling but I only have 1 vote. (my winter base board heating is 200+ on coldest weeks, cause the entire building’s windows are over 25+ years old and already leaking and not up to par. )

I do wish there are more locally own/operated grocery stores or farmer’s markets. But they are usually located at the out skirts of the city and then you have to drive to get them. The web operated aren’t exactly benefiting those farmers nor consumers nor the carbon goals and more expensive/less choice. (because quantity and delivery vehicles etc. )

Yeah, I am talking in macro scale. The things as consumer can choose to avoid:

• change to non-carbon fuel vehicle or get rid of personal vehicle and choose public transport if available.
• do less things to increase carbon foot print. (like dial the thermo stat and put on more clothing in winter. )
• buy stuff from company that have goals toward carbon neutral.

But as consumer I can’t avoid:

• increased price of grocery/goods from manufacturing or shipping
• the way companies decide to approach their own cost cutting/offsetting.

The important part is, where the carbon tax go? Do they go into hands that actually have goals and plan/milestone to meet? Or they go into some paper green RnD subsidiaries of big oil?

misinformation aside, tax the industry simply increase their cost and they can still just offset to the consumers no? since consumer don’t have others down the chain to offset that cost. I know on the sheet you can’t list tax as cost, but if the tax come when you buy the fuel, then it becomes part of the cost for say, a truck fleet company. If you tax the oil/fuel companies for how much they produced/shipped, they will have to raise the cost to account for the lost of potential tax to make the balance sheet or projection look nicer. I can’t think of a way to tax carbon and those cost won’t trickle down. But tax at the source would make overall consumption reduced since the gov artificially drive up the cost of that resource.

In short, consumer would still foot the bill, but the goal to reduce carbon based fuel stays the same.

so they embeded a separate launcher?? welp, it’s also not necessary, the EOS backend does not need the Epic launcher. As far as I know, the only cross platform/cross play back end is EOS. Sony have their own PC/PSN cross play in example of Helldivers 2. Capcom have their backend and the up coming Monster Hunter Wild is their first title to support cross play. (it was always separated in their past games.) Some big Chinese/Korean dev have their proprietary cross platform backend to support their mobile/console/PC games. (like Genshin)

If you do know any 3rd party cross play back end service please let me know.

Steam backend are not cross play ready for consoles, EOS backend can.

One of the old Indy adventure game(Last Crusade) have that branch where you can shoot, fight or work around the airship boxing champ.

maybe the AstroBot game next month.

I checked the website, so it’s like a micro scripted app compilation?? Does the thing is a run/tweak then close, or does it needs to reside as a background service/task?

that’s entirely not possible even if she is driving a F1 car since it takes time and distance to get up to that speed. if the attorney can fetch her phone location tracking record, can roughly know how fast she usually travel on a car for the days before that accident.

Rocket League, still enjoy the game play, it will not likely “dead” anytime soon until they figure out how to make actual way to merge entire thing into Fortnite. (fortnite’s long input lag just aren’t good enough for rocket league atm)

I have not doing any other F2P or GaaS for a long time. ( does Monster Hunter series considered GaaS?)

Sorry, I stand corrected. I thought they went public but after checking again Epic is not.

“Giving away free games seems counterintuitive as a strategy, but companies spend money to acquire users into games,” said Sweeney. "For about a quarter of the price that it costs to acquire users through Facebook ads or Google Search Ads, we can pay a game developer a lot of money for the right to distribute their game to our users, and we can bring in new users to the Epic Games Store at a very economical rate.

Good for Epic.

“And you might think that this would hurt the sales prospects of games on the Epic Game Store, but developers who give away free games actually see an upsurge in the sale of their paid games on the store, just because their free game raises awareness. And it’s so much that often developers, when they’re about to launch a new game, come with us wanting to work closely on a timed release of a free game, just to drive user awareness of their next game. That’s been an awesome thing. And it’s been by far the most cost effective aspect of the Epic Games Store.”

Good for developers, that have decent enough games.

“We spent a lot of money on exclusives,” said Sweeney. “A few of them worked extremely well. A lot of them were not good investments, but the free games program has been just magical.”

Exclusives, of course this is the expected result, because that how game publishing/marketing works. People in this thread talking like publishers make a lot of money on 80% of their released games. (<-- it’s not, in case you did not get it. ) I think it’s just Tim Sweeney’s way of saying, we will adjust our approach in the future, like what any publicly traded CEO would do.

okay, so let me try explain a little bit why this is very likely not going to happen.

1. it’s a “public” transportation service that’s pay per use, first come first serve, there are different fee depending on time/distance/etc.
2. in order to “restrict access” say, use the commercial/residential parking lot as example, you carve out certain part of the capacity that only BC resident can use and BC tax payer have to foot the bill. The parking lot example, commercial side and residential side strata foot the bill for the maintenance and design which area/zone etc for the residential one and it’s gates/etc.
3. practically, 80% of BC don’t even use that service, source: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/data/statistics/people-population-community/population/pop_subprovincial_population_highlights.pdf 2021 about 5.2m in BC http://viea.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021SOTI-Report-WEB.pdf 2021 report says +1.2% population for 10,272, so 100% of population is around 856k. which compare to 5.2m is 16% So I lump in another 4% that are not counted to Vancouver Island region but closely tied to the region which should be pretty fair estimate.

That means, if the people that won’t use the service has to pay and reserve for the people that do use the service that would be unfair thus usually, a “toll” would be put in place to cover the cost of transportation deficit. You might ask, what deficit? To have reserved space for resident to use ferry, they have risk of running the ferries with empty space reserved for resident use. Those would have to be “over reserved” for service guarantee. If they under reserve, then you simply have 2 choice, either queue with tourist or queue for the next for resident.

4. we have not even talk about the environment impact of reserving those spots just for residents instead of doing as much full ferry each time. That cost is footed by the whole BC as a province. (assuming we do have a carbon budget)

In the end, it’s all about running cost and tourism scheduling. Let me run a very simple situation. Say, a tourist group booked a trip to run a bus with everything scheduled properly. Now, if resident have priority queue, means the whole tourist bus’s schedule is NOT guaranteed. If the fluctuation of local traffic suddenly spike, the tourist group might face 2 hours+ delay. Which is simply not acceptable for a tourism company to run such risk, the tourism industry might simply opt for other first come first serve transportation service. Which would have a big impact to Vancouver Island. And if you remove tourism traffic from ferry, then you foot more cost per trip or face reduced scheduling.

The fact that for all 17+ years I lived in BC I only take the ferry round trip 3 times, and yet the tax is budgeted for subsidize it for more affordable traveling for the Van Island residents I think first come first serve is a fair compromise. Cause the people the visit Vancouver Island for tourism will most likely also visit other part of province, lower cost of transportation benefits everyone.