You really live up to your name

The sediment that gets pushed out into the surrounding water. That gets pulled up with the ball as it creates negative pressure behind it as it rises.

Bro, the ocean is FILTHY. Like, crazy filled with stuff. Like, you could take a coffee filter and pull stuff out filthy. Like the water has so many living organisms in itself it’s basically alive.

And let’s talk about the salt. Corrosive af salt.

This isn’t impossible, but the people trying to point out why this is CRAZY difficult are right. This will not be a set it and forget it scenario by far. It will need regular maintenance. The issue is whether that maintenance is easier or harder than a dam or stationary tank.

Like, why can’t we build these in giant freshwater reservoirs? Stick them a pool. Or why does it need to float? Wouldn’t a tank at the bottom of a pool with a pump do the same thing? Or two tanks at different heights with a conection between them and a pump? This is just mechanical energy being stored for later. Do the work when it’s cheap and reclaim it later.

Now imagine this 27 foot wide ball shooting water out of its bottom while on the sea floor and tell me there’s still no silt being stirred up. Or algae. Or mineral buildup.

The background changes to match the current weather.

So you have no reason to deserve it but entitlement. Gotcha. Thanks for articulating. Companies don’t owe you shit. As soon as you get that through your head a lot more will make sense. If companies owed you anything, we wouldn’t have micro transactions and season passes and all of that money grubbing bullshit. But did your outrage stop that? Nope. So go ahead and yell and scream and see what it does now.

Again, what’s it matter? A PS store game is limited to their platform. An Xbox store game is limited to their platform. A Steam game is…

Seeing a pattern? It’s irrelevant. Console exclusivity has always been a thing until modern times. But now we have cross play, something that never existed. So again, objectively better. Are some games still stuck to certain consoles? Yeah. And that’s their prerogative and frankly is the norm. So what? What reason do you have that you deserve it? You don’t. You just want it.

Ummm Nintendo has a digital platform, so not sure what you’re on about that one.

And in regards to indie studios: then buy their games and stop complaining, duh. Like, if you know there’s all these amazing and cheap alternatives, why are you bitching about what Nintendo charges? No one’s forcing you. Go play something else. It’s really that easy.

Nintendo, love em or hate them, is like Disney. They want to curate a very specific image. Look up the invention of the Nintendo Seal of Approval and why that was such a big thing. Nintendo wants to be very specific thing and frankly doesn’t give a shit if you like it. If you dont, then you’re not their target audience. It’s really that simple. Their not catering to everyone, they’re catering to a specific group. If they want to charge a certain amount but you know it’ll be quality cus it’s Nintendo, then what’s the harm?

Yes, but you can make the wages claim about EVEYTHING. House, cars, food haven’t gone down. Everything else went up. So why is this one luxury exempt?

And yes, because of globalization, a Steam Deck is cheaper than a NES was. That’s great! So why are you complaining when prices are objectively better than 1980? Like yeah, we made things better! And even with inflation, they’re cheaper!

So why are you complaining about a $20-30 increase when the math says you should have a $60 increase? That’s what I’m calling entitlement. We have it objectively better by every metric in video games, including cost, and people are throwing a fit over an increase that’s still below inflation.

Lmao that’s a completely seperate issue between you and your employer. Has nothing to do with the value of the dollar.

Has inflation kept up with wages? No. Have prices gone up anyways? Hell yes. Only thing you can find under $1 anymore is Arizona Tea, and even that isn’t a guarantee.

But yes, complain that a luxury item has gone up in cost. You know, something not necessary. So no one needs to make sure “everyone can afford it”. The ones who can buy, will buy, and the numbers show overwhelmingly that they do.

All you’re literally arguing is that wages should increase. Agreed. It should increase to match the new prices that are inflating as well. Wouldn’t change the fact that games cost the same “spending value” as before with the new pricetag.

Not to be THAT GUY, but games haven’t kept up with inflation or increasing development costs. Someone in these convos usually point out that, adjusted for inflation, that 80’s Donkey Kong game actually costs more in today’s money than $60-80. So I guess that’s me today lol

Do I agree that they’re worth that much? Ehhhh

But have we gotten massive improvements, longer games, more physics, graphics, etc? Yeah.

Games like GTA take half a decade or more to be made. If you want that kind of game development to continue, consessions need to be made somewhere. Now, maybe there’s a better place to do it, but asking more for these games isn’t completely unreasonable.

Edit: That Guy is back with some facts for y’all. In the 80’s Nintendo charged $30-50 USD for a game. So let’s take the middle of both(1985 and $40) and plug it into an inflation calculator. I did a few(two government websites and a random other one) and I got $116.93, $118.09, and $120.44 for today’s dollar value.

That’s how much Donkey Kong(the OG) would cost TODAY. Not Cyberpunk, not GTA, not Stardew Valley, but OG 16 bit Donkey Kong.

You really think prices shouldn’t increase? Please explain then in a way that isn’t just “but I want it cheap!”. If that’s your only argument, just pirate ffs. No one’s stopping you.

Also, INDIE GAMES. THEY EXIST. THEYRE AWESOME. THEYRE CHEAP.

Honestly this discussion just feels like entitlement from a lot of people.

Edit again: Still waiting for someone to articulate why modern games should cost less than a 16-bit relic from the 80s when adjusting for inflation. Seeing a lot of downvotes poping in, but not much writing. Some actual facts would be nice instead of “but I can’t afford it!”. Should I do console prices next? Wanna see how much an NES should cost in today’s money?

Edit again: oh look, here’s console prices adjusted for inflation… An original NES launched for $199 in 1985. In today’s dollars… $581.57. Hmm… You could buy a Steam Deck for that price today… It’s almost like things have gotten really good for us compared to then. Woooooow. And that’s not even mentioning that consoles used to be sold at a loss. Nintendo stopped selling consoles at a loss around the time of the Wii. So modern consoles actually cost what they take to make. Previous consoles were subsidized by the games and should have been more expensive. Y’all are also probably too young to remember when having a game console was a HUGE DEAL. It meant you were well off. Now everyone has 2 or 3.

Another edit for shits and giggles: if you’re gonna bring up indie games, I’m gonna tell you to just go play them then. If you know you can play a better, cheaper game… then do it. What are you here bitching about? “Oh no, I have so many options but one of them is too expensive so I can’t have it and everything else too. Woe is me”

Like seriously “we have so many games now it’s hard to afford all of the ones I want to play”. Ummm yay? Videogames advanced as an art form so much that the choices are near endless and no one can really afford them all? GREAT!! WE DID IT! We made games so mainstream that everyone has access now!

I’m about done with this, but seriously, y’all need to chill a bit. I’m against the price increase too for the simple “I like having money” reason. But I don’t think Nintendo or anyone else are monsters for raising their prices. It’s been a long time coming and honestly surpising it didn’t happen soon. Talks of it have been rumbling for years. Anyone shocked is either too young to remember or had their head in the sand.

Calling it now, GTAVI will be EXPENSIVE. Willing to bet base $80 and at least one $200+ Shark Card/in game assets bundle. And when Rockstar does it, you bet your ass the rest will follow. If anything Nintendo is just prepping for that inevitably themselves.

I can’t help myself edit: someone said the 80s are a bad time to compare. Sure video game crash, electronics still being relatively new… Ok.

So the PS1 released in 1994 for US $299, equivalent to $621.53 today. I can get a PS5 today, depending on version, for $499-$699, with objectively better everything. So again, cheaper than it was.

Just to be clear: they’re asking for a $20 raise in prices. Inflation says it’s should be a $60 increase. How are they monsters?

All I know about is they put things like “John 3:16” on the packaging, but it’s tiny and usually in a hard to see place. On the cups it used to be on the inside of the bottom rim. I’m sure they donate to religious organizations.

That said, in-n-out consistently pays ABOVE minimum wage and treat their workers very well. Prices also haven’t gone up like other places. So with them, unless I find out they have a specifically evil viewpoint I’ve been unaware of, then just being religious gets a pass.

It goes to 9. The next one isn’t titled like it continues, but it does. Keep clicking.

EDIT: 8 to 9. There are 10 comics, but numbered it goes to “9” in the title.

No, originally I said “Bitcoin is great if you don’t use the blockchain”, mocking the lightning networks existence because blockchain on its own is terrible for transactions. I never said they were almost comparable. They’re not. One is a database that’s been proven to work for all kinds of things, and the other is a techbros fantasy that wastes energy and is basically just tech stocks at this point.

Keep up.

Remind me again where Bitcoin is actually used vs actual databases. It didn’t solve anything and did it in an energy hungry way. It’s not “almost sort of comparable”. All of the scams that immediately came about because it doesn’t have the numerous regulations regular financial instruments have is proof. For the last decade Bitcoin has been struggling to reach parity with financial regulations. Ffs, the US PRESIDENT JUST PULLED A RUG PULL.

Blockchain is just digital speculation.

“They tried to break free but it didn’t work”.

You know we call that a failure, right? You’re the one attaching emotion to it. Did it succeed? No. Thus it failed.

It’s not semantics. It’s basically logic. Maybe don’t try and be a sophist. I never said it couldn’t be tried again. In fact I said quite the opposite: you need to see this as a failure, address why, and make changes before trying again. But you’re just stuck on the word “failure” and your own preconceptions. No one thinks this was a test of “just Bitcoin”. The dark markets already tested Bitcoin thoroughly over a decade ago. This was a test of real world application of Bitcoin as a a government backed currency in the hopes of avoiding outside influence. Outside influence came in and managed to remove Bitcoin - the exact thing that was trying to be proved it was immune to.

But cope harder if it helps you sleep at night.

You realize “it’s so energy and time consuming that we had to create a secondary layer to try and make it actually usable” isn’t the defense you think it is, right?

Yeah, and Zelle, Cashapp, venmo, PayPal all do the same and don’t have that environmental impact you so easily dismissed.

It’s been great watching Bitcoin grow from this digital currency for buying drugs online to having all these layers added on to almost sort of make it comparable to the systems we already have. By the time you guys actually make something that isn’t just stocks with no backing but faith, we’ll have moved on to a post-money society(probably not but I have more faith in that than blockchain ever being a useful currency.

Again, for the people in the back:

The experiment was whether or not they could be independent monetarily. Not whether or not blockchain works. But whether, in actual practice, if it could provide the monetary independence some people claim it has the power to do.

Outside influences were strong enough to overwhelm Bitcoin adoption and it succumbed to those outside influences. As an experiment seeking to test whether or not Bitcoin could resist these influences it failed.

This is how experimentation works. Now you can tweak your experiment and try again, but acting like failing at the exact thing you were trying to accomplish is somehow not an experimental failure is just delusional.

So they experimented with resisting the US and IMF and it was not successful.

We call that an experimental failure.

You really don’t get it. “Blockchain” was not the experiment. “Utilizing blockchain in the global economy” was the experiment.

And it failed.

The experiment was to move beyond external parties. They were not able to do so and returned to using external parties. Ergo “the experiment failed”.