Bimfred

Point 1: SpaceX's entire development philosophy is "test early, test often and learn from failures". This is a much quicker pace than simulating every imaginable failure scenario and leads to faster progress in development. With the Falcon 9, that process proved wildly efficient and successful, culminating in a launch vehicle so reliable that it's cheaper to insure a payload on an F9 that already has multiple launches under its belt than a brand new booster. And they're turning enough of a profit to develop the Starship largely on internal funds, seeing how the early Raptor flight tests were before the HLS contract.

Point 2: Just adding, the Raptor engine is the first full-flow staged combustion engine to ever get off a testing stand and actually fly. The engineering complexity of these things is on the level of the Shuttle's RS-25.

Point 3: SpaceX were the only ones with more than designs and mockups to present, and they had a reliable track history from working with NASA on the commercial resupply and crew projects. And I see no problem with awarding a contract to a bid that actually fits into the budget.

Point 4: Multiple options was always part of the plan. NASA wants redundancy, so that if one of the providers runs into problems, the other provider can continue (and perhaps even take up the slack) instead of everything coming to a grinding halt. For a perfect example, look at the Shuttle and Commercial Crew programs. The Shuttle got grounded and since it was NASA's only manned launcher, they had to bum rides from the russians. In contrast, the CC contract was awarded to Boeing and SpaceX. With Starliner's continued issues, SpaceX has picked up the slack and fulfilled more than their initial contract in launches, instead of NASA having to bum rides from the russians again. The initial HLS contract was supposed to go to two providers, until the budget got cut. Blue's bid was always the favorite for the second pick.

I see where you're coming from, but also think it's a tad hasty to say it'll never lead to anything but fluff. Excitement should be nourished, cause it's the people who are excited about new things that will explore what could come of it. Now let's give 'em time to cook.

That's assuming that the generative technology remains stagnant. I wouldn't be surprised if, eventually, the systems get complex enough to conjure up entire minor quests at runtime. Honestly, it's just a further development of procedural generation, I don't see how it's going to stall out at "meh dialog".

No more pre-defined dialog trees for NPCs and more reactive interactions. An example from BG3:

Tap for spoiler

you can find evidence that Isobel, the cleric who keeps Last Light Inn safe from the Shadow Curse, is the resurrected daughter of that act's boss.

But you can't talk to her, or anyone, about it, since those conversations were never written. With a system that generates NPC dialog on the fly, based on context and the NPC's pre-defined parameters, you could.

I think in two languages and sometimes one of them is better for expressing my thoughts, even if it's not the language that we've been using for the conversation so far. And sometimes it just happens mid-sentence.

"In order to fight monsters, we created monsters of our own. The Jaeger Program was born."

If Starship Troopers had the player numbers of Helldivers, these articles would be about that game instead.

If you're gonna hate someone, hate them for what they actually did, not for what their detractors want you to think they did.

Modern news media is fucking awash with cleverly worded half truths that are repeated so often, by so many who don't take a moment for critical thought, that they become almost a rallying cry. It's Hunter's Laptop all over again, but aimed at the left.

Russia's inability to conquer any of its neighbors is irrelevant. The possibility of them even attempting is unacceptable if you share a border with Russia. Sure, maybe Putin can't hope to depose your government, but the destruction and deaths before his failure are still a horrifying reality that'll take years, possibly decades, to recover from.

As for why Sweden felt the need to join, despite not having a single meter of border with Russia, it's because Finland felt the need to join. The two countries are tightly bound and do not want to end up on the opposite sides of a war. Now they're much less likely to.

Not "no PvP" servers. Single crew servers. Only you and your crew. Those have been live since December, but they're quite heavily limited. Can't use captained ships, can't progress the trading companies past 40 and you get only 30% of the base treasure value. Still, not having to deal with some jerkwad thinking their fun entitles them to ruin my fun more than makes up for that for me.

Right you are. I have fallen to the sway of various evils so many times that I get them mixed up.