No sane person is going to spend that massive amount of money just to see what AI thinks their games could look like. The people who buy games want to see what the devs made them look like. Not what an AI thinks the devs made. Absolutley no one wants a middleman between the art and artist. As that’s supposed to be you. We don’t need AI there. That’s dumb as shit, and expensive as shit to boot.

It’s not as hard as you’d think! 🙂 Mostly because of advances in HPM tech in the last couple years.

www.emsopedia.org/…/high-power-microwave-hpm/

Even 9 years ago, you could build one from an old microwave, that could likely cause a lot of issues near a data center:

youtu.be/80kDn4vit_w

Nothing says billionaires are geniuses like building a giant multi billion dollar data center that can easily be taken out with a big enough EMP, and then choose to guard it with $300k robots that also can be taken out with that same EMP.

These people should not be allowed around money. Next they’re gonna hire Superman to guard their Kryptonite factory.

Hey! I think this is a FANTASTIC question, because the answers reveal the diverse ways we all categorize what a “good” game is.

The straightforward simple nature of it like TicTacToe makes it good.

The easy on boarding to new players makes it good.

The simple task and challenge while not deep, is competitive enough to make it good.

Even bad games can become good under the right circumstances or perspectives. Sonic 06 is generally considered to be one of the worst games in the franchise, and an overall bad game. But it’s great to watch others play it because of how bad it is. It’s great to watch speed runs, or the odd glitch hunting videos. Playing it JUST to experience how bad it is can even be enjoyable and “good” to anyone that likes playing bad games.

My point is, what makes a game truly “good” isn’t just a single thing about it that someone might like, but rather, a combination of all those “good” things about it that work together in a way to create a better experience than the sum of its parts. Multiple “good” things all working together to make an experience that is uniquely “good” to that game.

So what’s interesting, is that all the different perspectives in this thread prove fairly well that Flappy Bird was indeed a good game.

However, the one part about it that people haven’t mentioned yet that I appreciated about it most:

Was the fact that the bird had some of the worst physics ever.

Having a linear jump up, but an accelerating decent down that despite its description, felt like juggling a rock in high gravity more than making a bird flap it’s wings.

It was SO UNINTUITIVE, that even with the quick onboarding it felt like playing a carnival game that was rigged for you to lose. And just like those games, there was a trick to getting good at it. And that trick created a learning curve needed to actually get gud at Flappy Bird. One that in combination with its easy and simple concept, quick onbaording, and competitive design (leader boards) made it honestly a great experience at the time that I feel hasn’t quite been captured since.

(With the closest being maybe Baby Steps or Getting Over It, but neither have such a simple design. Rather a simple mechanic pushed to its limit.)

Anyway, thanks for asking this! Imo, Flappy Bird was definitley a good game worth talking about.

Well said! I just appreciate the visual of Fox News covering someone named Mario firing a homemade shoulder mounted missile into the executive floor of Twitter HQ. It’s funnier than ever now that it’s actually plausible.

I appreciate your critical analysis and doubt, but from my perspective I’ve been watching this problem grow for the last 20 years and it’s indeed as abysmal as this article makes it out to be. (If not worse…)

In short, real wages haven’t increased in America in well over 30ish years. Federal minimum wage hasn’t budged in nearly 20.

People have so little money now, the average American is now buying their first house at the age of 40. (The average age was around 28 in the 80’s for comparison) 40 is now the new average age of first time home buyers in America, and I find that a far better metric to analyze in determining Americans current level of savings than what’s contained in this article.

As it goes to show that working for 20 years for the average American is now how long it takes to earn enough for a house. So that’s 20 years every average American is spending at work to save for the biggest “retirement” investment this article doesn’t account for.

Home ownership is literally going to be non-existant for Gen alpha at this current rate it is changing at. As in addition to wages not increasing in decades, costs for all the basics have been increasing in that same time. Insurance rates gave increased nearly 5x in the last 20 years. Rent has more than doubled, as well as the price of all American made cars. All expenses coming from a pool that hasn’t increased in 30 years of flat wages. Which is why it’s taking so long for most Americans to save enough for their first house, let alone retirement.

It’s far worse than what this article is saying imo, because there are far better red flags to analyze than how this article approaches it. I completly agree this article isn’t doing well at supporting their claim, but also encourage a look at alternate data points, as the picture is actually far worse than what this article and most others make it seem. Imo, that’s why this study left out assets like Roth IRAs and Homeownership, because it would have painted an even worse picture, not a better one. At least imo, based on the other facts I’ve provided (but admittedly haven’t sourced, going by recent memory, so feel free to correct me).

Can’t wait for the next Luigi to use one of these on an Epstein CEO. Polymarket, please let me make that bet.

Yeah, but your kids don’t which is my point.

Kids invent new words for their current culture. They in no way organically invent words that are friendly to advertisers. You should be disgusted that corporations are now such an invasive species they are affecting the language our youth is inventing. This is poison. It is not at all normal.

Dude. Bro. Radical. Excellent. Tubular. Fleek. Ratchet.

Are not at all the same as:

Sewerslide. Unalive. Junocide.

Oligarchs are forcing kids to learn a new language that downplays the very suffering they are causing worldwide.

You should be furious, not apathetic. Or your kids will never learn the meaning of those words as they aren’t productive to the oligarchy.

Google, the point is we’re all worried that when Gemini actually places itself into a robot body that the resulting literal Terminator is what AI models think perfection is.