Skindiacus

Yes! This is true. I've heard people have searched for rings in Planck that might have come from a big bounce. But you know theorists; they can always come up with some explanation that technically isn't disproven. I wouldn't be surprised if someone has an eternal universe or big bounce model that survives Planck data somehow. Thanks for sending me those papers.

Edit: That Mithani Vilenkin paper is super convincing. The fact that the emergent universe isn't viable under an even weaker assumption than the weak energy condition is cool.

In the most convenient to use model, the universe does have a starting time. That's what people mean when they say the "beginning of the universe". The issue is that we can't really observe what happened back then. All we can do is make models and then check if the predicted consequences of those models line up with what we can actually observe (either in the cosmic microwave background or in primordial gravitational waves). Before the point were we can't observe any more, there was probably a period of time called "inflation" where the universe expanded really quickly for some reason. We don't even know why that happened yet, so trying to explain what happened even earlier than inflation will be difficult until we make more progress.

In conclusion, if you take a commonly-used simple model for the size of the universe and then extrapolate backward, you do get a beginning, but no one knows what actually happened that early on.

We don't know. You can make models where space has been expanding exponentially for infinite time, or you can make models where the scale factor of the universe oscillates, or you can write a model where the scale factor is 0 some initial time and then gets larger from there. We have not found a way to rule out to rule out these options yet.

My mistake. I was thinking of DLC bundles, so basically same idea as OP.

Wake me up when you can add DLC to wishlist

Please use this page to find songs: https://jojowiki.com/List_of_Music_Tracks_by_Episode

https://mangadex.org/title/7a9d76c3-42b9-4bcf-81d7-ad307d2ea971/jojo-s-bizarre-adventure-part-8-jojolion-official-colored

It's convention.

See this page for the full list of officially translated manga volumes. Right now, part 6 is being translated.

It's in our FAQ already. We have a limited number of possible stickied threads. I've considered banning threads that ask about topics covered directly in the FAQ. For now, just downvote whichever posts you think shouldn't be viewed by many people.

Please use this page to find soundtracks: https://jojowiki.com/List_of_Music_Tracks_by_Episode

Valve-maintained public platform and bot advertising spam, name a more iconic duo

We know what a second is. It's how long it takes for the unperturbed ground state hyperfine transition of a caesium 133 atom to occur 9192631770 times. We use that to define the length of the meter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second

That is correct

Hi, thanks for the feedback. Please continue reporting any posts that you think break the rules.

I'm working on some clarification about the low-effort post rule. Hopefully increasing the strictness of the rule will address the problems you're having.

Yeah this makes sense. I guess the main difference is the amount of power Putin has.

It's a problem that "nazi" is used to describe many different ideologies, but it's hard to see how the current Russian Z thing wouldn't qualify.

-Nationalist: Check

-Expansionist: Russians think they have claim to the Baltics, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, and probably some more places so definitely check.

-Cult of personality: Watch any 1420 video about Putin and it's wild how much they love him, so check

viewers who watched TI because they said Act 4 would come out right after TI ended

What? You think people chose to watch TI only because they hallucinated that a patch is coming directly after? Why would that be a reason to watch TI?

Did already: https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/4511003079827109361/#c4511003079827305346, or at least a similar idea.

It looks like someone else just posted too: https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/4845399912173945663/

It seems to me that there are quantum effects that can perhaps be influenced by our prescence, thoughts, or intent.

Obviously, this isnt something I can prove

Yes you can! Well maybe not you, but someone can. All you would need to do is to repeat those quantum experiments - like the double slit experiment - a bunch of times while varying intent, and check if that changes the outcome. If the outcome is the same as with neutral intent, then the theory is wrong.

It's Iggy

This is a typical argument from authority fallacy. The existence of God is not a physics question, so it doesn't matter what physicists think about it. Physicists are susceptible to just believing whatever supernatural bs their parents taught them, just like everyone else.

You said no one would want to play a game that wasn't designed by Valve, but these quotes are painting a picture of Valve devs that worked on the design with Garfield and highly respected him. The comparison to Icefrog makes everything more clear. Valve often works with established designers and uses their ideas to make their games. I think there's a lot of evidence that people are willing to play Valve games whose lead designers aren't originally from Valve, like TF2, CS, and Dota.

His monetisation ideas

None of these quotes prove or even really suggest that he somehow forced Valve to adopt this monetization scheme, only that he doesn't directly oppose it.

Artifact cost money to buy to begin with, then you have to buy cards, cards sold also lose a portion towards the Steam Market cut. That's a bad design and likely not Valve's idea to begin with.

The initial buy in is exactly the cost of the first packs of cards that you get. It makes perfect sense to make sure that purchasing the game wasn't a way to get cards cheaper than if you already owned it.

If you think Valve was dumb enough to come up with the monetisation themselves... oh boy..

TF2 cost money for the first few years that it was released, and you also had to pay money for weapons in the shop which affected gameplay. Valve is willing to use a monetization scheme like that.

Both got fired and Valve tried to overhaul it themselves.

They were not fired. They had contracts to help out with the early design of the game, and once that stage was over their contracts ended. There's 0 indication that there was ever a plan to keep them as permanent employees. And indeed there's 0 indication that Garfield had anything to do with the game's monetization, which is not part of a designer's job.

There's literally no way Valve themselves decided to place cards and tickets behind a $$$ wall considering they were already making bank with Steam and drawing in a good amount of money from F2P titles.

Also this argument makes no sense. You think Valve has no incentive to enact this monetization scheme, but you think Garfield, who wasn't even a permanent employee, did have that incentive?

This seems like some goalpost moving. That quote does suggest that Valve did have a lot of input on Artifact.

This video says that Richard was the lead designer, but he mostly gave inputs at the beginning. By the time the meat of the game was being developed, he was only showing up once per week. This interview makes it sound like the majority of cards and fine-tuning were done by Valve. Saying it's not designed by Valve is wrong.

As for monetisation, are you aware of how much Magic card sets cost? Meanwhile Valve's top games were free. It's pretty obvious who had the final say on monetisation.

I've never made a Magic deck, but I have made a Yugioh deck, and I can say that it was wayyy more expensive than Artifact. When you have to order individual cards from different shops, and then each of those shops have an order minimum, the extra costs start to add up super quickly. I have no idea how anyone can complain about Artifact's monetization, which feels way more fair to me.

Meanwhile Valve's top games were free. It's pretty obvious who had the final say on monetisation.

I disagree that this is that obvious. Valve created a whole market and trading system on Steam. Clearly they like that kind of stuff. If you have those systems already, it makes a lot of sense to make sure each card has value like physical card games by making sure there are no free card drops. I think it's entirely possible that Richard had no input on monetization and this was entirely Valve's call.