![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/d7afefc0-bd61-4280-9e65-8a1b8fcdd708.webp)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0943eca5-c4c2-4d65-acc2-7e220598f99e.png)
There will be an improvement of course. That kind of thinking is why the USA still uses imperial after 200 years of the metric system.
There will be an improvement of course. That kind of thinking is why the USA still uses imperial after 200 years of the metric system.
You have to do that anyway.
Low skill users will use what comes installed on their machine, so installation quirks like that are not relevant for them. They don’t install Windows either.
And do you seriously think that someone with minimal modding knowledge can “fix” texture compression
Yes, better textures are consistently one of the first mods to come out for every game they have released since Fallout 3.
There’s a few single player focused ones released in the past decade. Deserts of Kharak comes to mind.
And yet Verdun, Tannenberg, and Isonzo are some of the most fun multiplayer FPS games around.
A reminder (that really shouldn’t be needed) that collective punishment is a war crime.
Probably pretty good on a barbecue, from all the fat.
Original release date was actually announced as 2014 originally (during the 2012 Kickstarter), iirc.
Take it from the fossil fuel subsidies.
Sure, but it’s still thousands. From Cambridge dictionary:
the thousands
numbers between 1,000 and 1,000,000
1200 is thousands. 1.2 thousands, to be specific.
Well I’m having plenty of fun with it, and I haven’t even installed 2.0. If it was a release from this year it would be my second favourite after Baldur’s Gate. So I strongly disagree with your dogshit assertion. If the DLC and 2.0 make it better then it’s for sure a redemption arc. And from the looks of OpenCritic, seems like a very universal feeling.
If everything was there from the get-go, how would there be a redemption arc? There would be nothing to redeem.
A redemption arc is when someone or something starts bad or reviled, and eventually comes to be seen through other eyes. Looks like that applies to CDPR and Cyberpunk to me.
Who are you talking to? That was my first comment here.
Ah yes, what could go wrong with doing things the way they were done in the past?
Very cool, very good proof of your claims.
I made no claims, I quoted from the wikipedia link you posted for us, which you may have not read yourself. You’re clearly a bigger expert than the IPCC though, so I wouldn’t even dare to make claims in your presence.
Some argue that transitioning to 100% renewable energy would be too slow to limit climate change, and that closing down nuclear power stations is a mistake.[122][123]
“Nuclear power must be well regulated, not ditched”. The Economist. 6 March 2021. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 31 January 2022. McDonnell, Tim (3 January 2022).
“Germany’s exit from nuclear energy will make its power dirtier and more expensive”. Quartz. Retrieved 31 January 2022.
In November 2014 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came out with their fifth report, saying that in the absence of any one technology (such as bioenergy, carbon dioxide capture and storage, nuclear, wind and solar), climate change mitigation costs can increase substantially depending on which technology is absent.
So, again, if those three examples are what you mean by catastrophic failure, then my assumption was correct. None of them were due to maintenance failures or being in service too long. Catastrophic failure is not a failure mode for a modern reactor past its service life.
Same for me. I don’t understand why, I should love it but I don’t.