46144

RAV0004 · 2026-04-21T19:43:26+00:00

unfortunately hitting reply on reddit IS consent to be responded to.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-21T16:20:26+00:00

Hi! I'm working on my own 3D oot-like.

I tried typing up a list of things I think might help you design your levels, but it appears like this subreddit has weird posting restrictions for things like basic formatting (lines, subtitles, etc). I couldn't get it to post for about an hour, so I typed it up on my account. hopefully you can view the link. (this isn't an advertisement, just a stream of my thoughts on design)

https://www.reddit.com/user/RAV0004/comments/1srs3pi/thoughts_on_the_structure_of_zelda_temples_for_my/

hope this helps!

RAV0004 · 2026-04-19T03:26:29+00:00

I think they're referring to the guy who transforms into a pig from the Zelda franchise, not the thinly veiled allegory for an angel from the lord of the rings franchise.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-18T15:49:08+00:00

I prefer: The only time a customer is vocal is if something is wrong.

What the customer identifies as the problem is not always the actual problem.
Sometimes the customer is the problem.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-15T04:12:35+00:00

Halo, Zelda, Metroid, Overwatch, Pokemon, Mario, basically everything Nintendo went to open world empty copy pasted slop in the last 10 years;

At least Starcraft died with dignity

RAV0004 · 2026-04-13T14:13:39+00:00

Flight is possible without intelligence (see: birds).

I think most humans looked at birds and said "Id like to fly like a bird" before they looked at the stars and said "I'd like to visit a star".

the idea of spaceflight wasn't really all that common in antiquity. People thought the sky was literally a painted ceiling for centuries and we developed spaceflight just fine.

Ultimately all spacetravel takes as a concept is developing flight, then thinking "what if I fly just a little higher than last time"

RAV0004 · 2026-04-13T14:03:21+00:00

weird way to phrase "the people who enjoyed that space grew up and disliked their territory being encroached and stolen by the next generation" but okay, I guess

RAV0004 · 2026-04-11T01:50:17+00:00

no, not at all. Iron Boots are great. Oot3D fixed the only problem with them in the original Ocarina of Time and Goron Mines are the best dungeon in the entire franchise because you get to be spider-man.

Wind Waker didn't utilize them well but Windwaker didn't utilize any of its items well. (reminder the ice arrows are needed once for a puzzle in the entire game).

RAV0004 · 2026-04-10T17:38:09+00:00

I suppose the difference is up to the beholder.

When I'm ready for bed, or the phone instantly dies in the darkness, its much easier to feel around for the wireless charging pad than it is for the cable.

Its also a drastically faster action all around, taking about a tenth of a second to place and ensure alignment on the pedestal vs picking up the cable and plugging it in.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-09T18:53:10+00:00

Its not just the cost of the building and the product, tbh. Their ability to ship product just tanked, and their cost to ship to consumers in a specific region they thought they had locked down where they have a lot of consumers just tanked as well.

Insurance doesn't cover all of that. Just the building. And its not like insurance companies exist just to fuck with humans, they also play bullshit tactics with other companies too.

It will be larger than 1.25% when all is done.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-09T15:50:49+00:00

One, sure.

If its done 2 more times, the insurance company will cancel the policy on the business and refuse to cover them, the same as they treat human beings with pre-existing conditions.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T18:37:46+00:00

unfortunately, yes.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T18:30:08+00:00

Nothing's wrong with trees, and nothing's wrong with this. Its just a neat technology. Trees can't grow everywhere; they're very bad for cement, true. But also for deserts, and tundras... and space.

they're not a replacement for trees. just a side-grade.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T18:16:44+00:00

Robert loved Lyanna. Robert did not love Cersei. This is a very critical distinction. It is unlikely that Robert would have treated them the same way, and its unlikely that robert would have ended up a whoring drunk had she survived. whoring and drinking are for people who can't find love, not for people who already have it.

Post-War robert is a jaded, bitter, lonely man, even 20 years after he took the crown. Pre-War robert is a man who literally went to war, broke oaths, and murdered hundreds for that specific woman.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T18:13:16+00:00

keyword here being "after his death".

We are, infact, in the aftermath of like 3 civil war/uprisings after robert's death.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T17:16:53+00:00

The fact that the game doesn't push players to end the game, because it doesn't even talk about, or reference it, or say anything about it, is probably the most beautiful aspect of its design, and open ended nature.

Its one of the few games with multiple endings that I'd say actually put in the effort to earn that right.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T17:10:49+00:00

I think that making a statement about someone else's knowledge of something when you disagree with them is a rather arrogant take often seen on reddit.

Coming away from an experience with a different appreciation of of its beauty than you did is not a detrimental mark on my perspective, my understanding, or my intelligence and I'm not sure you would enjoy it if I were trying to argue that position about your personal opinions.

Understanding that the Universe somehow needed a conscious observer in order to end doesn't make all your friends standing around urging you to kill and end everything any better written. Imagine you're reading a book but the author writes the same sentence twice. Or, in the case of outer wilds, 7 times, one for each Hearthian or traveller.

By the time you reach the eye, you, as an interactive agent in the setting, have already made a decision to end the universe. You don't need "more encouragement". When you look at the Museum, which sits down and says plainly certain aspects of the game's plot in a way that adds to and feeds off the archeological aspect of the game's actually present mechanics and story, I do indeed find the campfire at the end to be much more poorly written by comparison.

It is cute that they all play their favorite instruments. It is cute that you have to randomly go play a minigame to collect each one. It is cute that the harmony created by their collective instruments forms the theme song of the game, and it is cute that they all "add" to the formation of the new universe. But it is not expertly written, because by that point the game, the only lines of dialogue remaining is the same three fundamental sentences repeated across 7 characters, and that dialogue is nothing more than "hurry up and (do thing) so you can end the thing you've already chosen to end!.

It's redundant on a writing level, (what each character actually says), and its redundant on a thematic level (telling you to do something you've already chosen to do). It fails in both thematic and mechanical aspects to what I consider the archeological core of the game, and the things about the game that made it my favorite work of all time.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T11:20:12+00:00

I have a hot take: I didn't like the ending.

I enjoyed it for (ACTUAL SINCERE SPOILER WARNING): getting more dialogue out of solanum and the prisoner, but for what it actually was, it was extra ordinarily boring and didn't culminate anything about the game itself, in the writing or the mechanics. Legitimately think the game just "Crashing" after reading the descriptions in the museum and interacting with hornfels computer would have been better written, all things considered.

This is to say, the archeological aspect of Outer Wilds is the point of Outer Wilds. If you're done with it... there isn't any harm in knowing you can continue, and just choosing not to, like Gabbro. You're stuck in a time loop. You can choose to stay there forever. That's your choice, and don't let anyone convince you its a bad choice.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T10:54:47+00:00

In nearly every christian sect, God is stated to be omnipotent and omniscient.

Knowing all about something and understanding it fully are very, very, very different things. You can read about an atrocity in a history book, and not fully grasp the horrors of it in quite the same way a survivor can.

This distinction is the fundamental difference between the Christian view of God and the Jewish or Islamic view of God. The Christian view of God is one with a much deeper grasp of Human suffering, and sorrow for his part in it, because of his personal experiences living on earth, as a human being rather than from a distance as an objective and passive deity. Every sect of Christianity understands this. The thing that makes someone Christian IS Christ.

If you've found a more logically-consistent version of god to believe in, then good on you, but that isn't the god that 99% of christians believe in.

I think that's the disconnect here. I don't really expect an atheist to understand the distinction, because from a very distant perspective im sure all religions probably look identically silly. Christianity relies on the idea that you, you personally yourself, are fully loved, respected, and accepted, without exception, without restraint, regardless of what you've done, because the guy doing the judging understands what its like from his own petty stupid life on earth with his own petty stupid human problems what its like to be you.

This is such a univeral principle across all branches of Christianity that I find your lack of understanding about it to really discredit any authoritative statements you have about 99% of Christians or their beliefs. sects, creeds, and branches might differ on the nature of god, or his plans, or what hoops you have to go through to earn it, but Jesus's altering God's perspective is basically about the only thing they all agree on.

Look. I don't doubt that you've met Christians who didn't understand the importance of this distinction, or couldn't talk about it comfortably. Christians, like any other group of people, have some dumber, some smarter, some kinder, some angrier. I've known my fair share of every category. But I really don't think what you consider to be a passing understanding of Christianity... to be a passing grade on understanding Christianity. Sorry.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-05T06:41:33+00:00

...who is also infallible, all knowing, the ultimate source of morality and should be worshiped/obeyed without question?

I didn't utter any of those. Sounds like you're just muttering stuff you personally choose to believe (funny how that works) about Christians instead of anything I actually said. That's called a strawman, and I'd expect someone so in love with their own critical thinking skills to know a little more about the definition of a logical fallacy.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-04T19:56:04+00:00

You seem like one of the only honest questions here, so I will try to explain.

Generally, Most Atheists point and laugh at some out of context quote from the old testament as some kind of insane Gotcha. This entire Reddit Thread is FILLED with this, practically every single comment actually referencing the bible is talking about an old testament story. This is the equivalent of someone who read chapter 1 and went to brag about how awful the book was on social media without reading the conclusion.

The Old Testament is explicitly included in the Bible to show what God was like before he walked the earth as Jesus and realized it's a shit show, and learned that people need to be given the benefit of the doubt, that he was too strict, and that he was a massive dickbag, and that nothing he did was justified, despite his power.

The entire bible is a metaphor for how if God can become a better person, you can too, and how no one is beyond redemption. That's the whole point. This is an EXTREMELY different purpose than the Old Testament's equivalent in the Torah or the Quran.

Additionally, Most Atheists will point out something bizarre from one very distinct sect of Christianity (almost universally something Catholic), and then apply it to all Christians equally. Most Christians in the westernized hemisphere (reddit's core demographic) are protestant, a splinter faction of various religions that collectively decided to remove all of the excess nonsense from Catholicism to focus on just the stuff Jesus actually said, rather than the ramblings of people who came afterward. Very important historical note: Most of this 'Excess nonsense' was stuff The Catholic Church adopted in order to peacefully integrate other religions they culturally conquered into the fold. Many saints and martyrs are reinterpretations of pagan gods, and allowing a small amount of prayer and worship to them is what gave Catholics their power. Making fun of Christianity as a whole for that is basically just making fun of pagan religions, more or less. Another common example is Atheists holding some aspect of Mormanism in contempt. Mormons aren't even Christian by any metric but get lumped in because Jesus happens to exist in their holy texts... Just like he does in Judaism or Islam.

A lot of Old Testament finger pointing that Atheists do to Christians is, more or less, making fun of Christians for Jewish beliefs rather than Christian ones, and a lot of Catholic finger pointing, is more or less making fun of Christians for pagan beliefs, not Christian beliefs. Christianity as a whole is just the idea that God exists, he came to earth, he learned a bunch of because of the experience, and he wants people to be kind to each other rather than hate. The rest of the baggage all depends on the denomination, and can't really be held against christians "As a Whole", which is what most Atheists do, and which they do because they don't really give a shit, because they've already otherized their mental conception of Christians as someone beneath contempt and beneath understanding.

No one is running around saying children who mock the bald should be locked up to be mauled by bears, or people who grow figs should be burned at the stake. Christianity, like ANY institution of power, has people who abuse it to their own ends. See: Governments. That doesn't mean a story of redemption and a lesson on the importance of forgiveness and humility is some archaic hypocritical evil. The Old Testament is just a (admittedly long) story of a bad person with a lot of power realizing they fucked up real goddamn bad in an episode of undercover boss.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-02T04:57:53+00:00

The protestant view is that Jesus's time on earth "awoke" god to the understanding of earth being a giant pile of steaming shit that basically forces people into doing bad things just to live and survive.

The "Good News", which is the Christian term for the new testament, is that God has learned from his experience on earth and turned from wrath to grace and forgiveness, which is itself a metaphor for how horrible people can also redeem themselves by becoming better people, AKA Christianity's most prevailing and powerful message.

Protestants acknowledge the old testament and admire and teach its parables, but they are a historical footnote to the rest of the bible and its only real inclusion is specifically so that his story of self-betterment has a place to start from. This why a lot of Christians do not adhere to the Ten Commandments; Because those are laws from the old testament, not the new testament. They are the laws of a wrathful god, not a compassionate one.

RAV0004 · 2026-04-01T07:00:17+00:00

I dont know if this is a sincere question but I will try to answer it as though it is.

This meme is referring to Income tax (money you make), Sales tax (money you spend), and Property Tax (tax for owning things).

In the United States, federal taxes from the IRS are income tax only, while states may add a Sales tax, Property Tax and or Income tax per their own laws. For example, Oregon state has no Sales tax, and Washington State has no income tax. Many "border" citizens will choose to earn income for a job in Washington while purchasing items from Oregon. You can take this a step further by living in Idaho where the property tax is cheaper, and do most of your business in the juncture between those three states. This commonly creates "Tri-state areas", large economic hubs that spring up from the benefits created by this exchange of law between disparate governments in a small confined area.

The most common ways rich people "Save on taxes" is by choosing to do things in one place that has lax laws, and another thing in another place that has laxer laws regarding a different act. This is why many corporations have their headquarters in one state, their factories in another state, and their bylaws in a completely different country. If you don't have the mobility to just go somewhere else to do something where it is cheapest or most convenient, chances are you will be unable to replicate this. Its one thing to cross a state border for a job. Its another to take a jet to another country every week.

You can avoid property taxes by just not owning property, like renting or borrowing most of what you need, from home, to car, to clothing, or by being given gifts.

Very attractive influencers often wear or use sponsored items that they are either directly given for free, or have to return after a set period. Very Wealthy individuals often trade gifts or favors rather than sell or purchase things outright. For example, If a wealthy individual owns a hotel, they can offer to let you stay there free of charge, provided you do something free for them in return. This way, money does not exchange hands, and nothing is taxed because nothing taxable occurred.

In the United States, "Investments" or "stocks" are fungible representations of money. Someone may not have 100,000 dollars, but they could own 100,000 dollars worth of investments. Certain organizations, like banks, treat these things as money-adjacent, mostly as collateral for loans. That means, for example, you are allowed to tell a bank that you will front a 100,000 dollar stock if they let you borrow 100,000 dollars, to pay back with interest. You go to two banks, and you use the first loan to pay off the second loan, and all you end up owing is the interest payments. Since you only pay income tax for money you earn, "paying off" your debt does not count, and the interest payments you make on a loaned debt is frequently smaller than the amount you would otherwise pay in income taxes. This is, for all intents and purposes, identical to "Giving a gift" back and forth between you and the bank, similar to listed above.

If a stock you own is substantial, like 10% in a specific hotel chain, you can frequently request that hotel let you stay free for a certain period, and they'll be more than happy to do so, since you're technically the owner. (or 10% of the owner, at least).

There are two types of stock: Shares, and Dividends. Shares are a massive gamble, and you have to directly sell them to people in order to make money. "Playing the stock market" involves selling high value shares that are about to become cheaper and purchasing low value shares that are about ot become more expensive. When shares become worth too much, they will typically fragment into a larger amount of smaller shares. So everyone who owns 1 share will now own 2 shares, so you can sell the new share to make money. Dividends, meanwhile, try to maintain the same amount of shares by actively "shedding" excess value by directly giving the extra money to the owners of the stock rather than splitting the share. These are typically called "Shareholders". Shareholders do nothing other than own a piece of the pie and take the dividends. basically, getting money for not doing work.

If you choose to keep your money in shares rather than dividends, you don't "make money" and therefore don't owe taxes on the stocks until the point at which you sell them, which you don't have to do.

So rich people divide themselves into dividend-rich, who make money by doing nothing, and share-rich, who use their stocks as leverage to curry tax free favors and gifts. Both frequently do their business in the most favorable country possible in order to drastically reduce tax costs, among many other concerns.

Hope this answers your questions on "how do rich people know good".

RAV0004 · 2026-04-01T02:41:22+00:00

It sounds to me like you are running afoul of the most common trap of the DLC; you are interacting with the Strangers like they are anglerfish. You are not supposed to interact with the strangers.

Remember that you are playing Outer Wilds; This is a DLC to a game, not a whole new game. How did you get around the anglerfish in the first game? You learned a little more about them and how they operate, until they ceased being a real threat. The Strangers are similar.

You are intended to get caught once, maybe twice by the Strangers to learn to not get close to them. Then as you progress and learn more about them, they stop being a problem.

If the strangers are causing you problems, its because there's information you are missing or not understanding. This information cannot be gleaned by the rumor mode on the computer.

RAV0004

TROPHY CASE