Gold_Skulltulla

I came to know Thomsen's work from his piece for The New Inquiry, which while I didn't entirely agree with, I think he makes some excellent points about what passes for "play" in video games versus what "play" is supposed to mean. So, going into this one, again, I see what he's getting at as it relates to his TNI piece, even if his point gets muddied and distracted partway through. I think that the fact that Dark Souls is so popular would make something that he views as bad worse because it has such a broad reach and potential effect, moreso than that the sequel is simply a worse game. But this is me interpreting a text that is pretty convoluted, so take that FWIW.

@yothatlimp: @theht: Here's confirmation from NYU about an archive (source).

It's funny because the frog can't comprehend the long term implications this will have on crowdfunding platforms!

Expected. Fair. Reasonable. Sensible. Measured. Timely. Profitable.

Sad.

Cool, I'll be there. Game Center usually records their talks and puts them on YouTube, for anyone who was curious about an archive.

I'm no fan of Facebook, but maybe this will shake out well for Oculus. It's a curious acquisition for FB in light of their other purchases which were companies with large userbases like Instagram or tech companies that could fold into FB proper. Oculus is unproven in many ways and doesn't seem like an obvious fit, but could be a matter of FB looking to diversify.

I was hoping Oculus wouldn't get pinned down as a gaming-only company anyway, so perhaps this is a step to assure more open usage potential for their hardware.

The Kickstater side of this deal is kind of deflating though. It's a positive thing that those funds were able to jumpstart a company to get it to this point, but the precedent that this sets about corporate start-up fundraising at the consumer level is distressing. People back projects like the Oculus Rift because they believe in an idea and the people behind it, and usually because they want to see something exist that wouldn't otherwise, not to feel like they're a bunch of first-round VCs that can prove a public interest along with actual money, only to make that thing more attractive to actual VCs with the money to turn an idea into an industry.

But what's the damage assessment when converted to Bitcoin?

As a companion to Parkin's piece, I'd recommend this Unwinnable piece from last October on the Far Lands which approaches the subject on a more conceptual level. Both are great.

Endlessly intrigued by the device, but I still don't want one and raising the price for features that aren't so much additional new things as fixes for old broken things does not inspire my confidence.