Thanks for bringing my attention to the revival of this game. TXR2 was my favorite Dreamcast game growing up, and it seems like early reviews suggest that this new game brings back the same feeling of the originals.
Who specifically mentions what? Unless I'm missing something, nether TFA or the comment I replied to specifically mentioned the objects being similar size.
Thanks for sharing. Curious to see if Xbox and PS5 controllers use the same analog stick hardware.
The issue with L3 as Sprint is that a button is so much easier to press and hold than a joystick (as mentioned in the article). Even worse is when games use L3 as Sprint but also configure the analog stick to perform some other action, in which case you can perform actions you don't mean to perform.
To be clear, in games that use L3 for sprinting, you usually don’t need to hold L3, it’s a toggle. I guess there are exceptions of course but THAT would be bad design.
Holding L3 to sprint is not uncommon in my experience, I've actually never played a game where it's a toggle (but I don't play much).
For example, in Fortnite you have to hold L3 to sprint. This causes other issues as well. If you drive a car in the game for example, and use the analog stick to steer, accidentally clicking L3 will cause the car to turbo boost. If you're driving around a corner and have L3 moved all the way in one direction, accidentally clicking L3 is a given which causes an accidental turbo boost.
In some sense, randomness is a modelling choice, not a statement about the underlying mechanism.
Eg we wouldn't be able to tell whether stock prices are truly random (according to some distribution), or governed by a cryptographically secure pseudo random number generator.
Another example: quantum mechanics is a fully deterministic theory. It's even linear, so we don't even get deterministic chaos like from Newtonian billiard balls or the Newtonian three body problem.
But some popular interpretations of quantum mechanics like the Copenhagen Interpretation decide that they need to add randomness to make sense of QM's predictions.
In contrast, some other interpretations like Many Worlds leave QM deterministic.
$185 puts that cost $7.30 mean they are considered ITM if CRWD drops below $184.27, assuming there's no cost to trade and the $7.30 refers to a single options contract (worth 100 shares). There is likely some (or a lot) extrensic value still remaining in the puts given the far away expiry date. The extrensic value is what makes them valuable.
Not sure what material in their post is ill-informed. Looks like what happened today is exactly what that poster warned of in one of their bullet points.
Yea, everyone is dunking on OP here. But they essentially said that crowdstrike's customers were all vulnerable to something like this. And we saw a similar thing play out only a few years ago with SolarWinds. It's not surprising that this happened. Ofc with making money the timing is the crucial part which is hard to predict.
