Controversial take, perhaps, but I don’t think there are any games from the 1980s (or earlier) that I think hold up. Wasteland form 1988 is impressive but ugly (and a remaster exists that is better) and other than that, uh…

TLoZ is so utterly hideous that it repulses me. The NES colour palette is just so tremendously ugly.

Tetris is fine, I guess, but I’ve always found it a bit plain. Much like picking up individual grains of rice with chopsticks it requires skill but as with that it’s only your own time you’re wasting - unless you enjoy it, which I don’t. Or to put it another way - I don’t find the core gameplay loop rewarding.

There’s plenty of cool stuff from the early '90s but the 1980s are pretty much a case of “it was good when we had nothing better” territory, in my opinion.

I thought it had had that for twenty years?

That doesn’t sound like you appreciate the spirit of OP’s question. I’m not sure if I feel the social interaction will be worth it for me to engage further so I’m instead going to get some more sleep.

HENGE’s song about them is excellent.

That seems statistically unlikely. I’ve met plenty of people who aren’t normal so I do have lots of points of comparison.

I’ve met so very many of them.

I was plenty good at maths up to the point where I couldn’t study more (as in, my other subject choices locked me out of taking the next stage, A-level). However in general I found the more complex stuff abstract and characterless.

For example statistics bored me. We’re working out the upper quartile something something? To what end?

I’ve used maths for accounts, programming, carpentry, and so forth, but that’s always been fairly basic stuff. The more advanced stuff has never been of the slightest value to me (I still don’t know why I, a layman, should give a shit about factorisation, prime numbers, happy numbers, etc…). I am not saying that it has no value - simply that to me personally it might as well be memorising the principles behind a naming scheme for shades of grey paint. I can learn the principles and they make sense, but so what?

I pretty much felt the same way about the higher levels of chemistry. Oh these are ionic bonds? Okay…?

My teachers were excellent and enthusiastic (my entire maths class got the highest grade possible, myself included) but I don’t really see what there is to like. I didn’t dislike it, I was just indifferent. The easier stuff could be like a basic puzzle game, the more complex stuff I could apply the system I learned and provide the correct, if pointless, answer.

It felt like being taught someone else’s complex system for sorting different sizes of white paper, I suppose I could say.

They made a fifth one?

I played Atomic Heart on Game Pass around the time it came out and… I cannot recommend it. The actual game was really rather dreary.

They’re definitely fun and I enjoyed them but knowing how long they are I wouldn’t start them again. I had a similar thing with GTA IV!

I think the thing I miss most about this game is how much it did with hardware from 2005. It looked great, played well, had a decent length but also didn’t outstay its welcome.

I’ve played through it at least twice. I doubt I’ll ever replay City or Knight as they were amazing but far far too long.

But if we were to tax him he’d… What’s the current lie again?

I don’t think the Burberry strategy is going to work for you guys.

Let’s not forget that games leave Game Pass so there’s an element of FoMO

I generally go by either what the person I’m speaking to is likely to prefer or whichever is easier to pronounce, assuming I think it won’t cause confusion for the listener.

Similarly I find it very useful for if I’ve written a tool script and really don’t want to write the command line interface for it.

“Here’s a well-documented function - write an argparser for it”

…then I fix its rubbish assumptions and mistakes. It’s probably not drastically quicker but it doesn’t require as much effort from me, meaning I can go harder on the actual function (rather than keeping some effort in reserve to get over the final hump).

Yeah, one of my colleagues leans on it too hard and it’s really undermining his actual talent.

I’ve seen it generate working unit tests plenty. In the sense that they pass.

…they do not actually test the functionality. Of course that function returns what you’re asserting - you overwrote its actual output and checked against that!

I found the whole experience tremendously frustrating and as you can see from some of the other responses and votes, the community does not consider that to be a reasonable reaction.

Hence why I bailed on the whole thing. I don’t need the grief.

I was told a tool was a resilient approach to drive management. It wasn’t, outside of a very specific set of circumstances.

Your analogy not only makes no sense but is exactly why I’m hostile about this. I’m not an expert at the specific limitations of a niche hard disk technology is, I must be a fucking moron or something, and ridicule is a clearly an appropriate reaction.

My idea of a useful tool for dealing with hard disks is not one that loses its shit when a hard disk is temporarily disconnected. That is not a ridiculous assumption. If that’s an issue then that should be made abundantly clear.

I assigned drives based on serial number and passed them through to TrueNAS and it couldn’t handle that reliably. I do not think I was asking for the moon on a stick.

The USB interface is a temporary measure, I was going to move the disks to an internal setup after testing but if it can’t handle something that basic then like fuck am I trusting it with something like migrating from USB SATA to internal SATA.

If I need both disks to access mirrored data then it’s as useful as a chocolate teapot.