I don’t even think that’s remotely true.

I’ve seen two cases that actually directly impacted my ability to use Firefox. I can only presume there are many more. Those being supporting the column-span CSS property (available since 2010 in other browsers with vendor prefix, and early 2016 without, while being late 2019 for FF) and supporting iPad OS’s multi-window functionality (introduced mid 2019, Firefox has had it for just a handful of months now). I have first hand experience telling me very directly that this is true.

There’s also been a lot of talk about Firefox’s lack of support for PWAs. I’ve not experienced that myself to be able to comment more than to say I’ve noted others have complaints.

The point is that with open source you can effectively leech off of Google for now, while still retaining the flexibility to nope out and do your own thing at any point you decide.

Considering just how severely behind they are already (as I mentioned in my other comment, they’re often 3–5 years behind other browsers in implementing new web standards or operating system features), I see anything they can do to reduce how much they need to maintain independently as a good thing. In an ideal world where they had all the funding and development power they could want I might say sticking with the completely independent Firefox would be great. But that just isn’t where they’re at today.

They wouldn’t be at the mercy of anything. That’s…how open source works. If it changes in a way that breaks things for you, don’t pull that change. At that point, if the change is drastic enough to require it, you can turn that soft fork into a hard fork and hope that Edge, Brave, Vivaldi, Opera, etc. join you; something that would significantly hamper Google’s ability to maintain their dominance of the browser engine market. That’s a choice that they simply don’t have today when being based on Firefox and Gecko means using an inferior browser platform.

Honestly I’ve been saying for some time that Mozilla’s resources would be much better spent making Firefox a soft fork of Chromium. Primarily: use the Blink browser engine and V8 JS engine, with only the changes to those that they deem absolutely necessary, and maintain a privacy-forward Chromium-based browser. Maybe try and enlist the help of Brave, Vivaldi, and other browsers that are currently Chromium but which prefer more privacy than Google offers.

It’s not zero effort, and especially as Google continues to develop Chromium with assumptions like the removal of Manifest V2 it might take some effort to maintain, but it cannot possibly be as much effort as maintaining an entire browser.

Okay but they often don’t give users what they want

You should see the state of Firefox on iPad OS. I started using it earlier this year after they finally rolled out support for multiple windows—a feature Safari added in 2019 and Chrome had only a few months later.

Nice that they finally have this feature, but the browser itself is nearly unusable. It stutters constantly and freezes, locks up, or force reloads with some regularity. In a way that Chrome and Edge (and I assume Safari, though I have never really used that) never do.

Or on desktop OSes, a website I frequented around 2016–2018 used the column-span CSS property, which Firefox didn’t get around to implementing until December 2019.

It’s been very clear for some time that, whether it’s because they stretch themselves too thin or some other reason, Mozilla has been failing to continue to deliver an excellent product for their users.

Yeah I’m not really sure either. I get the sense that either it got better over its lifetime or over time people came around to it à la the Star Wars prequels. But I don’t really remember it. I played it a little early in its life but don’t remember anything about it.

I had a read over the rest of that review. Damn it was a good read. And sadly very, painfully accurate to my experience.

Technically it’s a couple of Tencent’s subsidiaries, TiMi and Level Infinite, but yeah. Disappointing that World’s Edge gave the licence to develop a game in their beloved franchise to a company that was always going to produce unplayable crap.

It is genuinely hard to describe just how bad this is. I did the best job I could of my own review over on the official Age of Empires forums. Its worst sin is probably the simple fact that it barely even feels like a game where you make choices. You just click what it tells you to do.

It’s telling that they don’t have an official subforum for this game, although there is one for AoE1, 2, 3, and 4, and Age of Mythology. They do have a Discord, and I recently noticed on there the official devs are desperately calling for people to give more positive reviews.

This kind of stuff? None. It’s shockingly bad.

But a real Age of Empires game? Hells yes. This was announced not long after the AoE2 and AoE4 ports to console & controller had shown to be successful (at least critically—no idea how they’re doing commercially). So I thought that they had cracked a way to do satisfying RTS gameplay on a mobile device. It’d be great to be able to play a quick Skirmish on the bus, or while spending time away from home without my computer.

So when a few aoe creators showed previews of the game back in February this year, I was rather surprised and very disappointed to see that the game has absolutely zero resemblance to an Age game. That the worst fears of it being a shitty rip-off were completely true. Thanks to those previews, I was not surprised on release this week—though the extent of just how bad even the narrative side of this is was still overwhelming.

I don’t think so, why? I only played it very briefly, but I thought it had a small but happy fanbase still playing on third-party servers.

It is genuinely hard to describe just how bad this is. I did the best job I could of my own review over on the official Age of Empires forums. Its worst sin is probably the simple fact that it barely even feels like a game where you make choices. You just click what it tells you to do.

It’s telling that they don’t have an official subforum for this game, although there is one for AoE1, 2, 3, and 4, and Age of Mythology.

RTS’s need a massive new hit to redefine the genre

RTS is a very broad umbrella term. I would have thought a CoD RTS would be more along the lines of CoH in its design than WC3. Though I could see mixing the two to create a tactical RPG RTS.

Because of the broad category that is RTS, I don’t think it’s necessarily right to characterise it as the genre needing to “redefine the genre” or have enormous innovation. AoE4 is an excellent and very successful game, but it basically only has relatively minor refinements on long-lasting staples of the classic RTS genre. And AoE2 is still enormously successful despite being 25 years old this month (with the obvious remastered graphics, newer QoL features, and new patches and expansion content along the way).

I’m not sure I agree with the live-service complaints. Maybe there are some RTSes that went that way, but one that you mentioned was AoE3, and it certainly didn’t. It was buy-once, play forever. (There were 2 major expansions in the same vein as the expansions of earlier Age games with significant new chunks of content in each, but nothing live servicey.) So has been every one of the Definitive Editions (including Age of Mythology: Retold) and AoE4. They do put out new paid content on a regular basis, which is frankly necessary to be able to keep funding bugfixes, balance patches, and server costs. But nonetheless the content has been very well-received by the community, and is entirely optional and doesn’t lock you out of playing your old content at all if you choose not to buy it. I’m not involved in any other RTS games, so maybe they are doing more live service stuff. Shame, if so.

RTS may just be a niche genre. It doesn’t need to change to attract a wider audience, because doing that would be to change what attracts its current audience. And that’s ok. Not everything needs to be for everyone.

Not that there aren’t things that RTSes could do to try to maximise their audience. If the game is esport focused, a good investment in esport prize pools goes a long way, and so does making sure your game is in a high quality state before it gets released—even if that means delaying release. AoE4 is an excellent game today with a pretty solid playerbase, but it could have been in a much better state if it hadn’t turned away a large number of both pros and low-level competitive players by the terrible state of the game at release. I’m also really impressed by the work the Age franchise has done around console compatibility with their main games recently, but I think greater promotion of this fact (for example by sponsoring console & controller–only tournaments) would help in that arena. I’d also love to see a real classic RTS game developed for mobile, which is why I was initially really excited about Age of Empires: Mobile, until the leaks came out revealing that it’s yet another Chinese knock-off like the thousands of cheap mobile games that have come before…only this one tarnishes the brand not just by indirect association/ripping off its assets in ads, but because it’s officially allowed to use the Age of Empires brand. Mobile is never going to have the high level of competition we see on PC, but I think if they put the same level of love and care into a mobile game (designed from the ground-up to be a mobile RTS) that they put into the console ports of their core games, it could be a great experience while on the go, and possibly provide an easier entry point into the genre for some newer players.

What I don’t want to see is the kind of RTS innovation that leads to completely new genres. MOBAs are fine for what they are, but that’s what you get if you embrace the idea that RTS should completely innovate to capture audiences with wildly different tastes: an entirely different genre that no longer appeals to RTS fans.

I doubt it. Other forms of AI could be useful, but generative AI? I doubt it.

And tbh even deep learning through neural networks doesn’t seem to be making the leaps we’d hoped for. AoE4 promised, prior to release, a machine learning–based AI would be delivered down the line. It’s now almost 3 years since release and we haven’t heard a thing about it.

Maybe eventually we’ll be able to easily train a machine learning algorithm to play any game at a wide variety of skill levels (or at a very high level, if not at customisable levels), but it doesn’t seem like it’s any time soon.

A century or so of oppressed masses and greedy elites did it.

True, and that’s important context if you’re trying to get a deeper understanding of how Julius Caesar came to have the power he held before his assassination.

But there’s enough of a problem you can see even if you just start at Julius, which is what I was concentrating on in my previous comment. The parallels to Trump are terrifyingly on the nose.

Mastodon link?

edit: and/or link to Lemmy discussion?

It literally was though. Not a military intelligence tool, but a big business intelligence one.

Niantic was founded by Google and their first product, Field Trip, and their first game, Ingress (a much better-designed game than Pokémon Go, btw) were pretty obviously about gaining geolocation data for Google to improve their products like Maps and Shopping.

Honestly I’m a light hobbyist myself. My exposure to history is primarily via YouTube channels like the excellent Historia Civilis (their series on Julius Caesar and the downfall of the Roman Republic is stunning) and via games like Age of Empires.

I just don’t understand how someone interested in antiquity can possibly fall for Trumpism. The fall of the Roman Republic was presaged by a guy literally trying to get elected to office so that he could escape prosecution for illegal abuses of power, and the legal system standing aside and saying “yeah, we’ll let you do that in order to maintain the peace” and then falling into civil war anyway.

How much of that sounds familiar…?

See also: Born Sexy Yesterday