u/fascinatingMundanity

I realize that discontentment with downvotes isn't a new theme on here, so here is the tldr of insight: intimidation from intellect. or laziness. or both. and/or groupthink bandwagon effect.

But, in case of many targeted at me, I have adduced, definitely envy/intimidation does play a role. Many of my submissions﹘ not to toot my own horn, honestly ﹘entail somewhat complex concepts. Perhaps a particular entry isn't articulated in the most straightforward fashion; this would warrant a reply asking for clarification , and maybe, iff it is bordering unintelligible or serioualy offensive, a downvote; but simply pressing the down-arrow for a post/comment because you superficially dislike it, and not bothering to actually respond (heck, even if consisting of a *.gif)? Lame on you the downvoter, not me the contributor (even if my contribution gets substantially downvoted in net).

And by the way: I amn't suggesting that necessarily should declare your downvote when responding; if in fact many folks did take the time to reply in good faith to a post that obectively (not to be confused with purely subjectively) falls short of Community standards (i.e. jure guidelines, not to be confused with riding a facto bandwagon) and they encompassed all thoae that downvoted it, then this issue would be mostly moot. But obviously many users do downvote objectively good-quality posts, without verbally responding to it. Shame on them

For example, maybe the current boundary is occupied by monsters that will eject an intruder (such as you the player) far away (perhaps somewhat predictably, maybe probabilistically random): this could come in handy when being chased, for instance (provided you got the means to survive impact).

Out-of-bounds is the darkness: entering it without any lighting, recorder or surveillance will greet you with hurt, death, cetera. Illuminate the darkness to explore farther. Illumination can be achieved through various means; initially, primitively low-powered temporary (such as a battery-powered flashlight). Traversing into new or relatively-new dark territory via this means illuminates that portion of the map just slightly and decays to darkness with passage of time. To prevent decay back into darkness, more advanced lighting and surveillance becomes required, which in turn necessitates gathering requisite materials to forge the equipment and power sources, either directly or through bartering and commerce. Not all places are in darkness to begin with; some could be already lit via mechanical means and/or naturally, neither of which are necessarily permanent.

Various quests will require venturing to farther-distant locales. During your outward voyage, transiently-permanent surveillance and lighting ensured by you in prior-visited placea may fall under siege, upon which the corresponding area of the map will lose illumination, either to total darkness or partially depending on brightness of adjacent lighting.

Eventually you will want to establish full-blown surveillance that actually monitors and sends feed (limited by distance, depending upon robustness of infrastructure it is using that you are leveraging) to you, an element to fortification, which is key to progressing from, to, and in some places (thereat, adjacent, and further).

With enough of the map of the initial world preliminarily unveiled, you may find that it resembles a globe or similarly geometrically-euclidean convex surface, or perhaps something more exotic. By this stage you likely will have discovered or constructed some teleporters warping to distant neighborhoods within that world, reducing the time (irl and presumably in-universe) to travel within this prospective empire (the seat of which you may aspire to hold) and to defend and rebuild it as necessitated. Perhaps you mayeven access warpdrive to a whole other planet (or narrow area therein). During all of this, your past fortifications could still fall under siege and their corresponding areas on mal turn dark (perhaps not to pitch-black upon having completely maximally illuminated its parent district, but to minimal information higher than that). So when time and resources allow, you coud rinse and repeat, but probably with more resources and robustness than before, with more empire-arms of the realm churning simultaneously (at times moving figuratively into one-another), which you may try to juggle in pursuit of staking claim over the dominion (or otherwise maintain it).

🄃 is essentially a special case of 🄂, both relating directly to internal rendering.

An example of 🄂, sans 🄃: a game that renders natively at only 720p (but with an internal scaler lockable to that xor 1080p). Is there a way to play that game on a display that has a higher frame-resolution than basic dar 16:9 HD (1280×720p), such as FHD (1920×1080p) or higher (such as QHD 2560×1440p, UHD 3840×2160, or an ultrawide HD display) in the game's native 720p (c.f. upscaled 1080p) mode, without stretching to filll screen but instead leaving blank bars (on both the sides and tops in this case)? In the case of wielding a QHD monitor (with suitable input, directly or via converter) an alternative could be to exactly fill the screen by ℤ²(perfect square) integer‐scaling (with less direct room for interpolative error than non-integer scaling), which ties indirectly with the more specialized part to follow.

A somewhat trivial example of 🄃 is scaling basic HD into QHD, by mapping every projected game singular 1 pixel to a 2x2 pixels array (since QHD is exactly proportionally quadruple the res of 0.9216Mpx HD, as is 14.7456Mpx ‘5K’ of QHD's; as is 2.0736Mpx FHD of qHD, UHD of FHD and SUHD of UHD; but unfortunately not cleanly across the two squaring progressions). However, the more generalized cases I have in mind concerns PARs (intended output pixel aspect‐ratios) of games made for CRT TVs. For instance: a common rendering of PS2 games for North American release, for dar 4:3 NTSC‑U/C 640×480i @ ∼59.94fields(equiv 29.97frames)/sec, was 512×448i @60halfframes/sec (≡ ⦗2* 512×224p fields⦘ interweaved at combined 30Hz), which results in an effectual PAR wider than 1:1, specifically 7:6 (which irattionally approximates to 1.167:1). If someone wants to play such a game on a flatpanel consisting square-dimension pixel units without interpolating (but instead scaling in ℤ^2), that would require a viewing-screen pixels‐dimension divisible by [(512*7)×(448×6)], i.e. a minimal window of h×w of 3584×2688. Notably this vertically exceeds the range of a UHD display; the next common non-uw display size larger (to fulfil the infimal horizontal×vertical window) would be ‘6K’, or more typical ‘8K’ SUHD (7680×4320p) which to center 4:3 perfectly dot-surjected (and ideally, quickly aptly tone‑mapped via accurate 24bit‐to‐⦗30⊔36⦘bit pixeldepth LUT i.e. SDR content streamed onto presumably-HDR display). In this example the view‑screen would be utilizing (9,633,792÷33,177,600) = ∼29% of of the display, shy of a third but greater than a fourth, which is likely less than ideal but also not terrible provided a sufficiently large display‑panel.

In the case of a CRT‑era game designed for a PAR closer to 1, say of 11:10, then unless it was rendered at a very low resolution chances are that for it to be surjectedly upscaled in ℤ×ℤ it would require an even larger infimal window (view‑screen on the display), though chances are can fit into an SUHD and if not then treating the almost‑square pixel units as actually square‐shaped would smoosh (or stretch if from 10:11) only slightly with 1:1 ℤ^1 dot-scaling.

Can 🄃, and 🄂, be achieved? If so, how? Preferably with purest output stream feasible (such as RGB at upto 8bit/channel 24bppixel uncompressed 8:8:8, possibly flattened supremally from 32bit 8:8:8:8 RGBA). Prior to digging research, I suspect that many consoles or games respectively therefor might project to the target regaress of internal rendering (e.g. outputting ∼640×480 regardless how-much lower is actually rendered); to the extent this is true, am wondering how easy this is to effectively bypass this buffer unto the frames (either played with original hardware, else closer to full emulation as might be necessitated lest machine-modding hard if not softlier).

The game transpires primarily on a webful planet-like realm conforming to local geometry that is euclidean or non-, but global topology that is non-. Among the Planet are chutes and climbable walls and ladders: the former drops you down, as does climbing the latter downward but more slowly, to the opposite side of the planet in a different iterative version; the latter upward yields the inverse effect. In total there might be six or so distinct iterations, each yielding a noticeably different but topographically-equivalent version of the compact planet (all together encompassing the Planet, the game universe), with unique visual cues (such as color of sky or rocks and ambient music) to indicate to the player which version presently are in (readily, and perhaps less-readily in some areas). Crucially, the planet doesn't take place in a totally closed-chamber setting like a cavern (although cave systems might also be prominent, with stalagmites and stalactites climbable); relatively open skies and varied flora shall occupy much of the Planet's topography.

The iterations (distinct planetary versions of the Planet) don't need necessarily to cycle in fixed predetermined order, but there should be predictability in the sequencing: maybe the ‘south‑north’most locale route might (to the extent a chute or ladder may bisect whole planet parallel with gravity and thus entire seven versions) go [A‐B‐C‐D‐E‐F‐G‐A‐..], whereas the ‘east‑west’most [A‐C‐E‐G‐B‐D‐F‐A‐..] or perhaps even starting short-exact cycle relativizedly with B (implying possibility to move to/from some or all of the different versions via lateral travel instead of requiring vertical, though presumably some verticality of travel must occur under euclidean geometry as restricting movement to orthogonality of gravity results in nil a⩙de ‧scent) thus [..B‐D‐F‐A‐C‐E‐G‐B‐..].

The differences between the various versions of the planet may manifest in different ways. Some of these could relate to the story-arc, as profoundly as temporal multiversing placement (if fixedly spatially), to more minor and subtle ways and also bizarre alterations to physics weightings.

What videogames present compelling story harmonized by a non‑ruins setting conveyed through strong ludonarration via ambience and deliberate spatial-temporal placements of objects, events, and characters?

Humansߵ FoV with fixed stare laterally is ∼220° (extending ∼110° eachly port and starboard) with its more-effectual binocular overlapping range of ∼120° (∼60° port ⩞ starboard), and vertically ∼135° (wrt horizon, extending to ∼60° above and ∼75° below, facing levelly). A major drawback of most First-Person games is that the lateral FoV extends short of our real-life vantage: typical cap of 110°, with (especially from a traditional flatscreen rather than a VR hewdset) games pushing past that risking exacerbated "fishbowl" distortion.

Alternative design: Instead of extending beyond edges of binocular but shy of outer boundaries, emulate full scope but with reduced fidelity outside binocular focus. The overall 2d projected grid could remain a rectangle with DAR of 16:9, but the greater fidelity could encompass an oval-like shape approximating binocular view. There could be a sub-ellipse correlating to retinal macula concentration of the maximum fidelity. To address fisheyes distortion arising from projecting semi-panorma onto a flat grid, the area of grid closer to lateral edges could be somewhat smooshed (rediced horizontal resolution); this in concert with the extremities projecting downgraded fidelity might could result in an interactible closer to spatially-aware fully 3d engagement, without necessarily requiring an ultrawide display.

This visual effect could get altered in peculiar ways under certain conditions of the gameplay, such paramaters of specific rooms or ailments. In particular, the fidelities of peripheral versus binocular portions could get inverted, a tradeoff that may serve tactical benefit as well as inconvenience and wonky experience.

As for how this optimally could get implemented: maybe most simply with filters, though likely more graphically efficient via more complex mechanisms

Paired with partial independence of spinning head and/or rotating eyes wrt directional bearing of more-voluminous portion of the character's body, this may revolutionize perspective availed by first‑person and maybe even third‑person gaming.

nota bene: If you hold the opinion that this idea lacks substance, then please describe what is lacking about it and where would be a better place to share this videogame idea. Apologies if this already exists prominently, as posited idea if not published videogame⸂s⸃, in which case prithee to remark where or which one⸂s⸃.

Chickenshit trolls like to talk smack, then when you respond in a sensical manner obliterating their weak-ass bait with a reply that they can't easily ridicule they add a lame quip and immediately block you (thus preventing you from further replying and hiding all their content from you from that account).

I call them on it every time.

If I was actually harassing you or something like that, that would be different. But instead I simply defend myself against YOUR verbal assault against ME, so you decide to toss a parting shot at me, with no indication of blocking me, and block me. What a lame-ass.

Do you have to do it from a different account? Or is there a mechanism to do it from the original account?

This is true even when I am attempting to rebut someone, or request further elaboration, or correct some assertion or verbiage, or being facetious or (in some contextual parameters) outright sarcastic, or simply to express a differing opinion, or provide counter or direct evidence, and even when interacting with someone who zirself is behaving perceivably abrasively. I reckon that others have experienced this shame as well (internally, and also from directed statements perhaps), and likely many more are (sans internal guilt) intentionally pricks. Tone and semantics matter. Don't presume bad intentions, but also don't be naïf.

If you happen to be perusing my public posting history, hopefully this will catch your eye. Likewise as a gentle reminder for digesters and participants of r/negaReddit to remember the human (cheezy, but sound).

A common response I see when I challenge someone on that accusation is "Look at their post history", which ofc I did and nothing stands out to me as obviously "AI generated" so I reply asking to highlight what content specifically makes you believe that.

Instead of just leaving a 7-char accusation, how about providing an actual sentence (or two, or three, heck a couple paragraphs wouldn't hurt!). Perhaps the passage scores as "91% likely AI" score by whatever program you put it through. Maybe some other post of theirs does.

And this is ignoring for now the perceived proes or cons to using LLM, or full-fledged generation, or even full-blown botting (none of which I support, btw, especially thr more extreme end the scale towards being an agentic non-human account). But getting accused of "AI slop" just for submitting a well-composed post that is maybe slightly-generic is a lame-ass move. How about you submit original content instead (even if that comprises articulating why AI is bad or basis for believing a particular post is itself heavily AI-generated).

More immersive if yields a combination of phenomena that can interact dynamically with the environment, preferably distinct-from but stackable-with cycle of day᠆night and perhaps seasons. So an area might experience a blizzard, or fog, or something else, or a combination, or total clarity. Maybe a valley that usually has some variable noticeable amount haze except after some rains when it dissipates.

Some of them can be easily disabled/enabled, but some evidently come forced allowed with installation. Is there a way override these, to disallow /bypass pre‑granted antirestrictions?

The further you progress (by whatever applicable measure, perhaps with option of exchanging some ephemeral power charge for short burst of the ability), the farther outward (away from 1st person) that you could be empowered to toggle the camera into. As you become very powerful, or/and in certain areas, maybe even into an axonometric projection (tri, di, or even iso -metric depending on the local topological layout). Enhanced controls like reorienting the camera wrt to direction player's character is facing (either also on a scale or in a discrete fashion) and within 2nd into 1sg person-view able to smooth the view in and around more with increasable for.

I realize that even the most introductory of this idea (toggling between 3rd ⅋ 1st view) prolly entails lots of engineering and fine-tuning of the design. But if implemented well, it could enable fascinating mechanics. Obviously 3rd person has some advantages over 1st, and versa-vice, and likewise compared to overhead (still in 3d).

If this already exists in some games, I would be pleased to learn of them and to what degrees, as well.

Note that amn't intimidated by a high skill ceiling, although also amn't seeking mechanics that are punishing for the sake of cheap difficulty. Want game that looks cool from player's actual deliberate time-sensitive (hopefully involving some pressure controls) actioning. Lotsa modern polished games feature cool combat scenes and the like but seem like in most of them the sequencing is largely removed from the inputs.

Hoping for variety of applicable recs (heavy in platforming vs melee-combat vs racing vs whatever else) relativized for its matching genres.

I also judge fellow redditors (favorably, dis-, and neutrally) for other reasons, but strive to do so in way that isn't mean or hypercritical. Do better.

They don't need necessarily to hold same level of importance (compared to e.g. the primary protagonist or chief hero), but ideally they should each be an imoactful main character with unique attributes. There could be an ensemble semi-rotatable cast of partymember as well depending on jurisdiction/zone and stage of game. Preferably there is sophisticated AI that can be tweaked and substantial degree of player agency directable unto them (perhaps some crew with narrower parameters of deviatiion from preset defaults).

Gotta love reddit hivemind. Really, got_to, as in doing so is compulsory.

If it is rem'oved under ordinary method then isn't there typically (always?) an indication more explicit? "rem'oved by moderator", "d'eleted" (account destroyed), "rem'oved" (by the original redditor?)? Whereas if an account has been shadowb'anned (site-wide) and replies to a comment or post, then it will not appear at underneath the parent entry (to someone not blocked by zir) but clue will get added by corresponding count going up (until less the shadowb'annee decides to zirself remove it).

Is this accurate? Also: in event a shadowb'anned account gets lifted from the shadow then does all content posted during the shadowb'an then instantly become visible?