yes, this really nails it. UO didn't chase "endgame content" which, imo, is the bane of today's multiplayer games. Designers expect everyone to max out and reach the end of the road so everyone is the same in the end.
This is a big cultural issue. UO was not designed to have a goal. Most players demand they be presented with a goal.
In an odd sort of way I suspect UO would have been better off had it come out a year or two earlier. It'd not have been remotely as popular, but wouldn't have attracted such a large crowd. And because they drew from a much larger crowd than the intended audience there were a lot of people who got disgruntled. But it makes sense because the game was literally not designed with their desires in mind.
This is honestly the best way I have ever heard this described! It really is that 'end of the road' feeling that I get, once I have experienced a large chunk of the game loop, that has me disconnect from games and feel hollow.
This is probably why I keep going back to huge modpacks for Minecraft with a friend. It is so open and expansive, with so much to do, that you never really feel like it's the end... You just feel like you have had your fill, until next time.
I personally only got to watch my older brother play UO, and then he brought me into the launch of WoW which was a pivotal experience. But the end game always felt like it falls flat.
it's not per-vault is it? I have multiple vaults I'd like to sync selectively (50% of files in one vault for one machine, and 100% on another etc.)
No space restrictions?
I only use a single vault, so I'm afraid I can't answer to your question.
So when I talk about selective sync, it's about what is synced within a vault, and more specifically Obsidian settings/plugins...
I don't have the need to selectively sync only some of my vault's content, so never looked into it.
I just know that Obsidian Sync does what I'm expecting it to do.
And to add some context: I'd rather they just add a regular "Obsidian" sub that included vault sync; instead of giving away Obsidian for free, and selling add-ons. Because on itself, Obsidian Sync is quite expensive. If I'm willing to pay that much for that little, it's because, to me, I'm paying first for the development of Obsidian in itself.
But I understand why they wanted to go this way.
I don't know if it is/was the best move; because I see lots of people not willing to use Obsidian just because they are "scamming" people on their expensive Sync add-on.
It’s more like people who barely use computers regulating software features and development.. oh wait
I don’t own a gun, and think guns should be regulated more and better, but the heroin let alone another one are just flawed. There are no legitimate, non-life-ruining use cases for either of those analogies.
Don't have a book but here's some quick thoughts: 1. Biographies on, e.g., Chinese pianist Lang Lang. When he was ~9 he 'retired' (it's an extreme case but telling, can recommend). 2. If you want formal/mathematical/CS perspective, study Reinforcement Learning (e.g. Rick Sutton).
Unironically, how are history-related questions not negative? I’d imagine people would ask questions about some dark events.
I was blocking subreddits recently and was contemplating if /r/historyporn because of the amount of photos of dead bodies and politically-charged discussions that sometimes unfold
reply