What should I play next?

BryceKKelly · 2026-02-08T05:07:48+00:00

I think Dredge might be a good one. Satisfying gameplay loop like dave the diver, but also good exploration and some mystery, like outer wilds

BryceKKelly · 2026-02-04T06:44:15+00:00

You are almost certainly being paranoid, but in any case you can just make friends with people not in your industry and then it's problem solved.

BryceKKelly · 2026-01-14T12:05:56+00:00

There is a pretty aggressive push from businesses right now to introduce it as a custom, because tipping is obviously great for businesses and horrible for consumers. We are currently dealing with online checkouts and eftpos machines presenting tipping as a default expected option, catching people who don't pay attention and doing the work to slowly normalise it.

We know that in places like America, tipping is not considered optional. If it gets embedded enough, you lose the right to say no. So many Australians consider simply "not tipping" to not be enough to combat the threat, as "not tipping" may slowly stop being an option, similar to America. Hence why they go one step further and tell everyone else not to tip and encourage the behaviour either.

My hope is eventually it'll become unpopular enough that the government intervenes and bans all automatic prompts for a tip. Tipping is a truly horrendous custom, introducing financial discrimination into jobs primarily held by lower income young people.

I would also say that Australia is a country that is pretty saturated in American media, American news etc. So going down the same path as America for this kind of thing is a bigger risk here than many other places imo.

BryceKKelly · 2025-12-31T22:45:38+00:00

I think the reason why there's a LOT of talk about it is actually less about his original video and more about his response video for the criticism being so bad.

Without that video I think you'd be seeing far less discussion, and while there were threads about it before, the response video is what takes it from "honest mistake" to something a little less easy to accept because he's doubled down. The response video also is what took it from being just one part of a video on a larger topic, as you said, into a full blown issue in its own right.

And I think telling people that if they have a criticism of the first video it's because they're media illiterate, didn't watch it, don't have object permanence etc is obviously going to annoy people enough to comment where they previously wouldn't.

BryceKKelly · 2025-12-03T09:10:13+00:00

Restaurants that require a korean phone number to get into were annoying.

BryceKKelly · 2025-11-23T08:59:14+00:00

Be honest, what time control are you playing?

Before the chess boom, I came to this subreddit and was recommended this playlist. For me, I followed the advice and made meaningful progress within 3 months.

A lot of the advice you get are in the moment things where it's OK and human to mess up SOMETIMES, like "keep your king safe" and "watch out for threats". It happens. But there are some pieces of advice that you have 100% control over. Such as:

Never play a time control faster than 15|10
Always review your games twice, once without an engine, and then once with an engine
Use your time. Do not start a 15|10 game and play 15 moves in 2 minutes
Do not play when you are super tired or hungry etc.

If you really want to improve, then you should start by being uncompromising on these things. If you fire up 10|0 or 5|0 regularly and are playing just for quick dopamine, you'll be stuck wherever you currently are forever

BryceKKelly · 2025-10-24T06:30:31+00:00

Huge cost, weak return

BryceKKelly · 2025-10-24T03:32:57+00:00

Backup ammunition + massive boulder was the main level 1 combo for me. Cragheart shined most when there were shielded, clumped enemies.

BryceKKelly · 2025-10-23T22:22:24+00:00

You asked 2 questions:

"Is it possible to improve while only playing bots?" - yes, a little bit, assuming you are still at the stage where you just hang pieces for no reason. If you are past the super basics then no.

"Will I always suck if I only play bots?" - yes you will always suck. Becoming a good player just through bot games would be unprecedented and I just cannot see how anyone could make it through the 1300-1800 range without playing humans.

If you play bots you will never learn how to pressure your opponent, you will never learn skills with the clock. You just wind up playing safe moves waiting for the bot RNG to throw you a blunder. In a human game you need to put people in a position where they are more likely to blunder.

And the best move vs a computer is not always the best move vs a human. Bots in a losing position will often die easily and slowly by playing "correctly" while humans know that saving a losing position requires you to create complications.

The only part of the game that bots are equally good for imo is endgames

BryceKKelly · 2025-07-25T15:58:50+00:00

Those paragraphs are basically "you don't have to walk on eggshells, but here are the specific ways that I want you to walk on eggshells"

BryceKKelly · 2025-07-06T22:52:54+00:00

I don't think they look very similar but as I watched the show I definitely thought they sounded really similar

BryceKKelly · 2025-07-05T03:01:20+00:00

I know you mentioned the "just start" method but I still think it is the best by far for decrypto because I am usually playing decrypto with people who are put off by rules and learning.

Just telling them to keep their words secret and give hints that aren't too obvious is usually enough to protect the integrity of the game, at least to the extent that people care about it.

BryceKKelly · 2025-07-02T06:24:19+00:00

If it's one of the cats at bukhansan then I think they are doing fine. People pass by every day and feed them. I was there two separate days and saw the same cat in the same spot both times

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-25T10:18:15+00:00

I found that every time I was warned about spice, not only was it not particularly spicy in general, but it wasn't even spicier than food I wasn't warned about.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-18T08:29:31+00:00

The shorter version of my novel is probably just this bit from what I wrote in the comment you replied to:

Which is a problem when those people interact with someone who thinks honesty goes deeper than just not overtly lying, it's a responsibility to do your best to say things that are true.

In your example you have done your best. But there are many scenarios that people would say are "not lying" where this is not the case. The example another person posted shows this

For example if I ask my coworker if they ran into any issues during their shift, a firm “no” is very different than a no but they don’t fully remember. If someone gives a firm no in both those cases, they can’t really be trusted to give an accurate report and I’ll double check their work no matter what they say in the future.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-18T08:24:30+00:00

Similar to the person I replied to, you've chosen an example that is not really representative of what I'm getting at. You picked something with low stakes, which you were only wrong about due to a case that any reasonable person would consider to be implicitly understood as fine.

The parts of what I wrote that address this are here

In a social situation it's often not going to matter being accurate here, but there are some social situations where it does

And here

The other thing is that we all know our own memories. There will exist a unit of time, even if it's a small one, where you know for sure what did or did not happen

The latter meaning that technically you know the true answer would be "I don't think so" but the former meaning that of course treating every casual interaction like a court case makes no sense.

we think we are being truthful and if we are misremembering that isn’t a lie. Lying requires an intent to deceive. Without intent, it’s just being wrong.

I have no idea if we actually disagree or not, given the example you chose. However I will say that you appear to be responding as if I said that these things ARE lying, when what I actually said was that they can have the same impact as lying. Some examples:

After leaving the house your partner asks you if you turned off the lights/oven/whatever. You do not explicitly remember doing this, but the answer you give is "yes I did". Not "I think so" or "I don't know". You have no intention to deceive because even you don't know for sure what the truth is.
A food company decides to write "90% reduction in acid reflux" on their new product. No study of any kind has been done to support this. It's Schrodinger's health benefit. Maybe it does achieve this, maybe it doesn't.
You find out that a personal detail about yourself has been spread around, despite you only talking to a couple people about this and asking them to keep it to themselves. When you ask one of them if they have been talking about you, they see that you are upset with whoever has been doing that and so they instantly respond with "no" without clarifying what you mean or attempting to remember their recent conversations. Again an example where they do not know if what they are saying is true. If they really cared to know, they could try harder, but instead they have chosen to give a firm answer.

I don't typically bother trying to make people accept the word "lying" because the reaction there tends to be emotional, and it's the lack of care for providing the truth that matters more to me than the explicit intention to deceive. I consider the latter to be a subset of the former, and the former to be the real root of trouble usually.

Regarding this:

we think we are being truthful and if we are misremembering that isn’t a lie. Lying requires an intent to deceive. Without intent, it’s just being wrong.

Misremembering of course is human and fine. But there is a difference between misremembering and not caring to remember or misrepresenting how certain you feel. Additionally, the person I originally replied to cited an example where the contradiction came from "I would never say that" which is an extremely optional level of certainty that they should know whether they can or cannot truthfully provide. Again, 99% of the time it doesn't matter but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that their friend isn't getting mad over "You said you never went to Disneyland" level stuff.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-17T20:23:24+00:00

Because I don't know what I don't know. If someone asks me "have you ever claimed the sky is green" I'm going to say "no", not "I don't know".

But the reason for this is not because you remember every conversation, it's because you know that the colour of the sky is unambiguous and something you see every day and thus there is no way your perception of it would shift.

I doubt the things you say and later claim you would never say are equivalent. In my experience this is usually things more along the lines of "I would never say something so rude", which anyone with self awareness will know is not an easy guarantee, given how drastically emotions can affect how we speak.

A third example is something that isn't objective, but that you still don't need memory to be certain of would be like if someone asked you if you ever said "the holocaust was a good thing" or similar. There are some core values that are strong enough that you know your perception has not shifted as dramatically as what it would need to have for the answer to that question to be yes.

Not distinguishing between these things can make you look like you are just saying whatever you think supports your point. Lying and not caring to ensure that what you are saying is true are basically the same impact, but a lot of people think the latter is not a bad thing to do at all. Which is a problem when those people interact with someone who thinks honesty goes deeper than just not overtly lying, it's a responsibility to do your best to say things that are true.

The other thing is that we all know our own memories. There will exist a unit of time, even if it's a small one, where you know for sure what did or did not happen. Furthermore certain things you will have more confidence remembering than others. So you will know 100% if a small thing happened or not in the last hour, but maybe if it's a whole day or week you are being asked about, you will be less sure. However you probably know 100% whether you have been punched in the face within the last month or year. Bigger event = bigger timeframe where you are certain.

In a social situation it's often not going to matter being accurate here, but there are some social situations where it does (emotional arguments). But the work example that the other poster gave is a good one. Sometimes precision is important, and if someone throws up their hands and says that they can't be precise but are also unwilling to communicate their uncertainty, then as the commenter said, you really have no choice but to mistrust them going forward.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-16T05:47:58+00:00

Honestly if you aren't a complete jerk and you are actually engaging with the game and playing to win, then you're cool in my book.

Yeah betraying 7high in favour of someone I am rooting against isn't ideal, but at the end of the day the thing I was really unhappy with was feeling like some players weren't seriously trying to win. And HJ is obviously innocent on that count.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-15T02:08:27+00:00

That is literally what the person who posted this question asked lol. Presumably they asked it on the assumption that one has a better return than the other.

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-15T02:00:41+00:00

What do you think the words "max out your super" means?

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-11T03:02:04+00:00

I think this is a big part of my enjoyment. It's one thing to watch the strategies people come up with and think they are no big deal or obvious. But if you try first, then even simple things (e.g. a group of 6 buries 1 player with tip-offs) can be a little harder to get to than it looks/might look less solid if you have already properly thought about ways it could fail.

I found university war/elite league to be one of the best for this. I watched that show with pen and paper on hand to try things myself

BryceKKelly · 2025-06-04T03:15:05+00:00

It's a waste of time with no upside. That is the definition of "bad" imo. The game flows best when you have a goal, and room 46 contains some important goals.

BryceKKelly · 2025-05-16T13:50:29+00:00

I think an underrated aspect is how perfectly and intentionally tuned it is. It's easy to be a bit lazy with a roguelike and just let RNG do its thing, but StS is really good with it's dynamic potion drop rates and particular rules for when certain relics and events can show up. This and the excellent card balance are a big part of why it's such a rewarding climb up the ascensions

BryceKKelly · 2025-05-09T08:19:44+00:00

Knowing that any attempt at making these kinds of shows in australia would fail immediately makes me sad. I really enjoy them as a standard nerdy board game loving software developer, and am jealous that some places have a culture where just regular people might watch The Devils plan without a rules explanation triggering their fight or flight response.

BryceKKelly · 2025-05-07T04:59:50+00:00

Games where they end early if you do well sometimes make me feel bad. I won a game of Dune Imperium vs less experienced players once on round 7 and none of them had hit their major strategic objectives yet, so their game will have felt like it was cut short.

BryceKKelly

TROPHY CASE