Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 04 Jul 2009
Online Last Active Today, 08:18 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Nintendo NX/Switch

Yesterday, 06:21 PM

The idea isn't terrible, but again, the problem is that the graphics aren't going to measure up, plain and simple.

It does seem that the target audience has changed. The Wii U was super gimmicky, and so was the Wii in some ways. There is more of a focus on games, but it could be the two steps forward one step backwards type thing going on here. It's a wait and see game now. Does anyone know if they've released tech specs in it?

In Topic: Is the Asgardia project viable?

20 October 2016 - 02:08 PM

I feel like this would be more feasible if nations built something that was basically meant for living, with maybe the purpose of manufacturing. Then that thing revolted and decelared independence, it may be more possible. Just my opinion though.

In Topic: Nintendo NX/Switch

20 October 2016 - 02:06 PM

I'm a bit doubtful. Handhelds are dying in an era where mobile gaming is taking most of the market there. Against consoles it simply won't fair because of graphical inferiority. Now it's true that graphics aren't everything, but at the same time, unless every game is Minecraft, where creation is the sole focus, the standard on most AAA games is to have a certain level of graphical capability.

To be fair, the 3DS did fair fairly well, so maybe there is something there.

In Topic: ebook only or ebook plus physical book

16 October 2016 - 12:26 PM

I'm not particularly old, I'm only in my twenties after all, so I qualify as a millennial. I still prefer to read a physical copy of a book rather than e reader. To that effect I still have a giant library sitting around. It's really just the feel of holding a book in your hands. It's definitely a tactile thing. I do a lot of technical reading on my iPad though.

It's a lot like why some people still watch broadway shows or theater in general. There's a lot of weird examples like that. Tabletop gaming like D&D and 40k. I would even argue paintball. Until vr becomes a thing, it's just better to have something real as opposed to a tablet or a game. The realism part is what really matters.

I would also argue that if you were never given a physical book but instead only an e reader, you'd never really care. Partially many of us are more used to real books, especially older generations. But the other argument still applies.

In Topic: Is the Asgardia project viable?

16 October 2016 - 09:17 AM

Is the asgardia project viable?

You're asking programmers about the viability of a space project?
Go and ask at /r/askreddit or something and hope an aerospace engineer or physicist answers.

I just wanted to generate discussion! :P

There is no way it could be done, maybe in a hundred years or after deep space travel.
For a space station to generate artificial gravity in a human living condition would mean that it's so huge that not one country on it's own could supply the building materials. Then there would be the side effects of living in conditions where your body isn't experiencing constant gravity from head to toes.
Growing food for a large population would be impossible, simple crop rotation won't work in these kind of conditions. This would mean that the station would need to receive large amount of fresh soil or compost to feed the plants, the amount of fertilizer that would need to be stored is outrageous. Then there would have to be one plant for each day during a harvest cycle for every person.
Growing the plants is a pain because you have to capture solar energy and use led lights, this is highly insufficient. You can't grow them on the surface of the station because the conditions would kill the plants.
Power would also be a problem because we can't even supply the people on earth with only solar panels, true in space solar panels work better however not by so much that it could replace fossil fuels. You can't use fossil fuels in space because of pollution and even if you dumped it you would be wasting valuable carbon; then there is the fact that any fossil fuel would be in limited supply.
Fixing the solar panels would need a huge amount of spare parts, then include the spare parts needed for the ship.
There are millions of other problems that make this a impossibility, the largest however is that such a station would need constant supplies from earth for the first few months until the ecosystem is balanced, The amount of resources for even only 10 000 people would be to expensive for any nation to support, you would also need a space launch for each day.
Because basically you would need to take a piece of earth and launch it into space, then you have to protect it with a shell and some how keep it functioning.
We can't even keep a single astronaut in space for two measly years.

I was really surprised to see this on BBC. This sounds a lot like Mars One again though, tbh.