this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
227 points (90.7% liked)

Greentext

4397 readers
1496 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 59 points 9 hours ago (4 children)
[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 95 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] tkohldesac@lemmy.world 26 points 9 hours ago (3 children)
[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 32 points 8 hours ago

Hi dying, I'm dad.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 18 points 8 hours ago

Sorry for your loss.

[–] Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 8 points 8 hours ago

This interaction may have made my night

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 31 points 9 hours ago (3 children)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 25 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Personally, I don't like the fact that every team-based video game uses ELO, a system designed for a 1 on 1 game, to determine an individual's skill.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

While Elo (and side note: it's a person's name, not an acronym) isn't perfect and systems like Glicko-2 are better even for 1v1s, is there a better system than Elo that could be used to rate players in team games? Especially if there's a mix of pre-made teams and random teams thrown together by matchmaking?

Edit: extra bonus if it can be applicable in games that have both 1v1 and team game components where there might be a desire for some form of bleed between the two. (e.g. AoE2 where your starting Elo in one of them is based on your Elo in the other, if you've played a lot of one type of game before trying the other.)

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I suspect games tinker with the formula behind the scenes, to accurately place people faster if nothing else. The more players the longer it could take for the skill of any one to show up in the numbers, so I bet they factor in other game specific metrics at least at first. There would be some risk of this being abused, but that's less if they keep it a secret and maybe the progress numbers shown to players aren't quite the same as the real numbers used to decide who to match them against.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Plenty of developers of competitive games with SBMM have said they actually make it more about keeping the player playing than actually giving a shit about their skill. They don't use straight up elo, but everything they do does derive from it. They also don't really disclose how they come to the numbers it assigns you; probably because they don't want to expose exactly how their skinner box works.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 1 points 52 minutes ago* (last edited 51 minutes ago)

Street Fighter 6 uses two systems. League Points are a "keep them playing" type, and Master Rate is pretty much pure Elo.

Everyone starts with LP only and initial placement matches put you into a league with progressively fewer guard rails as you live higher. Rookie league can't lose LP at all, there's a win streak bonus up to gold, and you can't demote to a lower league until platinum. Throughout it all there's very slight upward pressure on LP, you get slightly more more a win then you lose for a loss.

Finally you reach the topmost league, Master, the final guard rails fall away and you're given 1500MR to join in the net zero Elo ranking pool. You basically need to demonstrate that you have a willingness to keep playing before they will use that style of matchmaking. "Real" skill based ranking effectively begins there, with the lower ranks being made more to show dedication rather than just ability.

[–] haerrii@feddit.org 4 points 6 hours ago

What a great rabbit hole, thanks!

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] felixwhynot@lemmy.world 14 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Like when they discriminated against users because of their age...

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

A quick Google shows that they charged over thirties in the UK double for a premium account.

Devils advocate says that is because older people are more like to have money (people are probably getting a bit more desperate at that age too).

It looks like the policy is revoked tho.

[–] felixwhynot@lemmy.world 29 points 8 hours ago (3 children)
[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 69 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

It stands for female humanoid and is exactly as dehumanizing as it sounds

[–] IlIllIIIllIlIlIIlI@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago

I think that the part being dehumanized is the one that uses that word.

[–] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 32 points 6 hours ago

It was femoid originally but anon got even lazier.

[–] SPRUNTnsfw@lemmynsfw.com 16 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's supposed to be some kind of derogatory label for women, but is really just an identifier that the person using it is a worthless being whose opinion is as relevant as a gnats thoughts on the economy.

[–] droporain@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 24 minutes ago

Remind me again which generation helped elected the current president? Skibidi Ohio?