u/SMN_17

So this was a question I've been asking myself since it was revealed that the Steam Machine would be a PC and not a console: why wouldn't Valve just fully commit to making the thing a console instead of a PC trying to be one? And this thought came back to the forefront of my mind when they revealed how much it costs.

So basically, my line of thinking is that if Valve could have implemented a modified version of SteamOS that's a "walled-garden ecosystem" 100% optimized for big picture game mode and completely scrapping desktop mode, similar to how Microsoft uses a modified iteration of Windows on Xbox, could the Steam Machine be sold at a loss for much cheaper?

The issue is that the Steam Machine doesn't really have an audience.

- Is it meant to attract console players? They're gonna take one look at the price tag and stick to their PS5, Xbox, or Switch.

- Is it meant to appeal to families? The cheapest model is over a band without a controller (which is more money and more Steam Controllers are gonna be $99 at least). There's also the fact that, at least in the U.S., Valve lacks any presence in major retailers (Walmart, Costco, Target, etc.) so there's going to be a lack of visibility there.

- Is it for people already entrenched in the PC gaming environment? Probably not, they most likely already have gaming rigs or laptops that are more powerful than the Steam Machine, and connecting a PC or Laptop to a TV is pretty easy with a long HDMI cord and/or Sunshine Moonlight or the Steam Link.

- Is it meant to be an entry-level PC? Because you can get or build a much better one without hurting your wallet as much.

The best thing Valve could've done is make this thing a console and sell it at a loss to compete directly with the big three, and make up for that loss by selling games on Steam. Valve already takes a 30% cut of each game sold, and getting more people to invest in their ecosystem would be a good thing. There's also the fact that they could probably get away without charging for online services, and that could push Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo to abandon those models as well. This thing could've shaken up the console market, but instead, Valve's decision to sell it as an open-ecosystem PC raised its price and killed the thing before it could even hit the market.

So this was a question I've been asking myself since it was revealed that the Steam Machine would be a PC and not a console: why wouldn't Valve just fully commit to making the thing a console instead of a PC trying to be one? And this thought came back to the forefront of my mind when they revealed how many dabloons it is.

So basically, my line of thinking is that if Valve could have implemented a modified version of SteamOS that's a "walled-garden ecosystem" 100% optimized for big picture game mode and completely scrapping desktop mode, similar to how Microsoft uses a modified iteration of their proprietary operating system on Xbox.

The issue is that the Steam Machine doesn't really have an audience.

- Is it meant to attract console players? They're gonna take one look at the $ and stick to their PS5, Xbox, or Switch.

- Is it meant to appeal to families? The cheapest model is over a band without a controller (which is more $ and more Steam Controllers are gonna be 99 bones at least). There's also the fact that, at least in the U.S., Valve lacks any presence in major retailers (Walmart, Costco, Target, etc.) so there's going to be a lack of visibility there.

- Is it for people already entrenched in the PC gaming environment? Probably not, they most likely already have gaming rigs or laptops that are more powerful than the Steam Machine, and connecting a PC or Laptop to a TV is pretty easy with a long HDMI cord and/or Sunshine Moonlight or the Steam Link.

- Is it meant to be an entry-level PC? Because you can get or build a much better one without hurting your bank account as much.

The best thing Valve could've done is make this thing a console and sell it at a loss to compete directly with the big three, and make up for that loss by selling games on Steam. Valve already takes a 30% cut of each game sold, and getting more people to invest in their ecosystem would be a good thing. There's also the fact that they could probably get away without charging for online services, and that could push Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo to abandon those models as well. This thing could've shaken up the dying console market, but instead, Valve's decision to sell it as an open-ecosystem PC killed the thing before it could even hit the market.

So I'm currently a biology major at a large state university, going into my final year. Until recently, I was pre-med, but some things changed in my life, and I'd go in a different direction for my career. I was interested in pursuing a Master of Applied Statistics or a Master of Mathematical Statistics with the goal of going into the biostatistics field while having the opportunity to pivot out if needed.

I saw that a lot of the M.S. programs in my area require the basics (Calc I and II, Stats), which I have in addition to Linear Algebra and Multivariable Calculus. Going into my fourth year, I have the option to take one class per semester as pass/no-credit so long as it isn't a core class or a major/minor requirement. I was thinking of taking Linear Algebra in the fall and Multivariable Calculus in the spring as p/nc so that I can learn the material and have those prerequisites, but don't have to worry about the classes affecting my GPA if I don't do well (C or C+). However, some other threads I've been browsing on my University's subreddit say that grad school admissions don't like to see that you took p/nc classes in general, and these are prerequisites for the programs I'm interested in. So I was wondering if it would make a difference if I took these classes p/nc or if I should take them and get a letter grade for grad school admissions.

Math has always been my "weaker" area since I was in primary school, at least compared to reading and writing. But I did well in Precalc, Calc I, II, and Stats for Research, although it's been at least two years since I took those classes, and I have experience with analyzing large datasets through some research experience I have, so what should I do?

So yesterday it was revealed that Pokémon Pokopia would be getting an expansion in pass in three waves starting in August through next year. Given the first part of the expansion that was shown and it's price at $34.99 USD it seems to be a pretty hefty expansion like previous DLC expansions for mainline Pokémon games (except Legends Z-A's).

I'm sure everyone here is aware of the controversy of Pokopia being released on a Game Key Card, even though it's a (partially) Nintendo-owned IP and only needs 10.0 GB, but that got me thinking...What if there are plans to release a "complete edition" for Pokopia next year after the expansions are done releasing and the game is done getting regular content updates, all of which is fully on cart?

There is precedent as reprints of Sword/Shield and Scarlet/Violet were released with their expansion passes on the cart after they released, so maybe the same will happen with Pokopia and this time it'll be a fully on-cart release? The only downside is it'll definitely be $105 and never drop in price but at least everything's physical.

So let me preface this by saying I am a Resident Evil fan, I got into the series when 2 got remade back in 2019 and have played almost every release since, but at this point I'm honestly getting exhausted with how much attention and love this franchise gets from Capcom year after year through new games and remakes compared to how neglected Capcom's other so-called "core IP" franchises like Devil May Cry, Ace Attorney, and Mega Man (until the new game was announced) are.

Like, I get it to an extent, RE is by far their most popular franchise, having 201M total sales, while second place, Monster Hunter, is at 127M, and third, fourth, and fifth place, Street Fighter, Mega Man, and DMC are under 60M each. It would be like getting annoyed at Nintendo for always announcing new Mario and Pokémon games or Sega for announcing new Sonic games. But I think the difference is that, for a time, RE was basically a yearly franchise, as I'm pretty sure (aside from 2018) we got a new RE game every year between 2015 and 2024, and even though they took a break the past two years it looks like they're getting back on track with Requiem this year and now the Code Veronica remake slated for next year.

I think another issue I have is that there are so many damn remakes, like I personally think of the three games they've remade so far (RE2, RE3, RE4), none of the remakes are better than the originals, and I've played the remakes before the originals, and now there's yet ANOTHER remake on the horizon.

Idk, maybe I'm just salty because DMC is one of my favorite franchises, and instead of getting a DMC6 or RE Engine remake of the first game that was rumored, RE fans get another remake while DMC fans are stuck with a shitty Netflix anime.

Hey all, so as the title suggests, I am currently going into my fourth and final year of university, majoring in biology and minoring in public health. Initially, my goal was to go to medical school and become an emergency medicine physician due to my work as a volunteer EMT. However, my GPA and stats aren't good, and I'm already feeling burnt out from school, and I'm worried that if I get burnt out in med school or residency, there's no going back from that, assuming I even get in.

I've been trying to explore other options to find something I might enjoy that pays decently well, and I came across the field of biostats. I read a bit into it and thought it might be a good fit given my biology and public health background; however, my cousin, who works as a headhunter/recruiter for CMC, clinical research, pharma, etc., said that an advanced degree in statistics would be more useful to break into this field, rather than an advanced degree in biostatistics specifically.

As for my math/CS background, I have the following:

• Taken Calculus I (B+) and Calculus II (A) at community college, and a "statistics for research" class (B) I took last year. Although my parents keep telling me that math is my weakness, I shouldn't bother pursuing a career in it.
• Limited proficiency in Java and Python without any major projects, although I'm going to use this Summer to learn R, Python, and SQL on Codecademy and get the certifications.
• Experience automating the curation of datasets and manually analyzing/verifying them in a research lab.

If I want to pursue an M.S. or PhD in applied statistics, what should I do? I don't want to pigeonhole myself too much, so I can pivot in case biostats doesn't work out for me.

If anyone else came from a different undergrad background before pursuing stats as a career, I'd love to hear your insight and experience. Any help/advice would also be greatly appreciated!

So, since becoming a volunteer EMT in high school, my goal was to become an emergency medicine physician because I really enjoyed my EMT work, and it's one of the things I've stayed consistent with over the past few years. However, some recent events in my life have me reconsidering whether I'm cut out to even get into med school, if I should bother taking the MCAT and applying or if I should change course before its too late.

My Stats:

- I am entering my fourth and final year at a large state school and I am majoring in biology and minoring in public health.

- My current cGPA is 3.15 while my sGPA is 2.6, there is a bit of a downward trend as my first two years were much stronger than my third.

- The grades I got in the prereq classes are as follows:

• General Biology I (B+), General Biology II (B+), General Biology Lab (B)
• General Chemistry I (B+), General Chemistry II (C), General Chemistry Lab (A)
• General Physics I (C), General Physics II (W, D, C I took it 3 times), General Physics Lab (A)
• Organic Chemistry I (C), Organic Chemistry II (W, W, and I'm currently retaking it a third time over the Summer)
• Calculus I (B+ took at Community College), Calculus II (A also took at Community College), Statistics (B)
• College Writing (AP Credit), Scientific & Technical Writing (B+)
• General Psychology (A took at Community College)
• I am scheduled to take Biochemistry in the fall.

- I have around 1,325 volunteer hours as an EMT since 2021, and I am about to start working as a per diem EMT for one of the hospital systems in my state.

- I was an event coordinator for an EM-focused club on campus last year, and I'm the vice president for a different medical screening student organization this upcoming year.

- I work for an EM-focused nonprofit, unpaid.

- I have around 500 hours of research across four semesters, but no publication or poster presentation, and I left the lab after having some issues with my P.I.

Given my stats, I am unsure if it will be worth it for me to pursue medicine, and I'm already feeling burnt out from school, so I'm extremely worried I will get burnt out in medical school and/or residency, and once that happens, there's no going back. The only thing giving me hope is the fact that I enjoy and work pretty well as an EMT, and my sister, who just graduated from med school, is telling me that organic chemistry and physics barely come back after the MCAT.

My current plan was to take one or two gap years, focus on the MCAT and continue getting clinical hours as an EMT while finding a new lab to do research in and hopefully get a publication out of, then apply to an SMP or post-bacc with linkage to improve my chances. But I would like to know if this is feasible or if I should just give up.

I'm open to MD or DO or anything, I just don't want to have to go to the Caribbean or anywhere out of the states for med school. Any help/advice would be appreciated!

So I am at a bit of a crossroads in my life right now. I'm going into my fourth year of university, majoring in Biology and minoring in Public Health. I was on the pre-med track as I wanted to be an ER Physician, but some recent developments/realizations about myself and my life have me reconsidering if I want to go into medicine.

I've been looking for alternate career paths I can pursue with my B.S. in biology, and recently found an ad for Cornell Weill's M.S. in Biostatistics on Instagram, which got me thinking about the field. However, there's barely anything I know about the field, how to get into it, what the best course of action is for grad school, and what careers/pay I can look to in the future.

If all goes well, I'll be done with my biology coursework by the end of the Fall 2026 Semester. I'm registered to take an Epidemiology course in the Fall, and I want to take the introductory Data Science course in the Spring 2027 Semester. If I go down this path, my plan after I graduate is to take a gap year and work somewhere while taking classes like Linear Algebra and Multivariable Calculus at community college, as I saw these two pop up as common prerequisites. I'm also currently looking at the Biostatistics M.S. programs offered by Cornell, Columbia, NYU, and Rutgers, as I live in the North Jersey/NYC area. Any help navigating this path would be appreciated!

Here's what I have so far:

• Cumulative GPA is currently 3.15.
• I've taken Calculus I (B+) and Calculus II (A) at community college, and a "Statistics for Research" (B) class at my home institution. But, I have taken General Physics I (C) and General Physics II (W, D, and C) at my home institution, having taken the latter three times.
• I'm fairly competent in Java and Python, and I want to teach myself R and SQL over the Summer.
• I have a year of experience automating dataset curation and analysis when I was doing research, but I left the lab due to some issues I had with my P.I.

I would also like to know what the situation is with AI in the field and the oversaturation of the job market. I ran this idea by my father, and he said it wasn't worth it because all the quant analysts on Wall Street are gonna pivot to this field when they get laid off in the future, thanks to AI, and I can't compete with them because of my biology background.