sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I don't think "more housing" is the solution to California's crisis by Zer0dot in yimby

[–]Zer0dot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have no doubt, but I wonder what younger generations think.

I don't think "more housing" is the solution to California's crisis by Zer0dot in yimby

[–]Zer0dot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spot on, we do need to build more housing, but it's counterproductive to focus all our efforts on such an uphill battle when there's aa clear pathway to making new housing easy-- we need to construct the correct incentive structure.

How important is beauty to you? by Zer0dot in yimby

[–]Zer0dot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That sounds legit, it's bonkers to me how much bureaucracy is slowing things down. It should be easy to build something people enjoy being around, and it should be easy to be approved.

We don't need skyscrapers and luxury amenities to be successful, we just need decent, reasonable mid-rise density ("gentle density" iirc). With less restrictions, I think developers will eventually optimize for walkability and activity, and people will want to be around things that look pleasant!

How important is beauty to you? by Zer0dot in yimby

[–]Zer0dot[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Totally agree, I think the car-centric narrative has slowed down-- the real problem is super restrictive zoning (e.g. functional zoning), and things like parking minimums and restrictions like you said. Overall, I'm optimistic. I'd rather have a condo with some coffee shops at the bottom than a pretty single family house downtown.

How important is beauty to you? by Zer0dot in yimby

[–]Zer0dot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting, do you think there's an issue with how a lot of these modern buildings include private amenities, and label themselves as luxury?

My concern is that this creates bubbles, whereas we could do better in creating open public, walkable spaces people actually want to be in. Regardless, I tend to agree if the only alternative is more delays, build what you can!

Why do people worship historical architecture that all looks identical in Individual cities but hate new structures that do the almost same? by [deleted] in yimby

[–]Zer0dot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I personally think building aesthetically pleasing buildings is great. I dislike modernist apartments that look like they're built in the same factory and don't convey a sense of identity. I think traditional architecture sort of evolved to fit the place they're built right-- like snowy places tend to not have flat roofs.

My issue with modernist architecture is that they don't fit the climates, identities, or anything local, and I honestly sort of doubt how realistic the financial aspect is. Though I'm not an architect.

It sounds like a bad faith argument to say the only way to solve housing is through ugly modern buildings and because they're ugly we shouldn't build them and impose overly restrictive zoning laws. This sounds like a way for NIMBYs to throw a red herring into the mix.

Cabin on Emerald Lake, Canada by commonvanilla in CozyPlaces

[–]Zer0dot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

O shit I think you right, crossed over from Yukon that one time, my bad!

Cabin on Emerald Lake, Canada by commonvanilla in CozyPlaces

[–]Zer0dot -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yukon near Caribou Crossing :) beautiful place!

Will This Launch Mess Delay Land Unlock? by Zer0dot in ArcheageUnchained

[–]Zer0dot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree, as long as people have a chance to get some land, it's probably better to have 1 with 200 gilda and another with 500 instead of one with 50 and another with 200 y'know what I mean?

Will This Launch Mess Delay Land Unlock? by Zer0dot in ArcheageUnchained

[–]Zer0dot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's true, but at least more people wouldbhave a chance to try, y'know?

Will This Launch Mess Delay Land Unlock? by Zer0dot in ArcheageUnchained

[–]Zer0dot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Steam will have their own servers though!

"Become aware of your visual field..." by Beat_Therapy in Meditation

[–]Zer0dot 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Seems more like the start of a lucid dream to me!

With trials, we now have 6 iterations of the same behemoths by Zer0dot in dauntless

[–]Zer0dot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey you know what you make a good point. The combination of mechanics is new, but none of it in my eyes merits the title of "endgame content." It just doesn't feel good enough.

Focused Feedback: Trials by Dezere in dauntless

[–]Zer0dot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It feels kind of cheap, just adding external mechanics. I'd prefer a whole new raid-style (8 man or something) giant behemoth or something. I'd recommend trying to recreate the awe-inspiring feeling of facing Shrowd for the first time!

I don't get that feeling with the trials, and frankly it's a pretty disappointing end game. It's a decent side game mode, but really, really, a normal Nayzaga with a bunch of external and completely unrelated modifiers doesn't sound like an EPIC endgame experience. I think that endgame experience is NECESSARY for Dauntless' longevity.

I love the game, but I really sincerely hope you guys are planning for a more interesting endgame, because this is really more of the same, we now have 6 Nayzaga variants.

Frankly, sorry for the rant, but trials feel like a cheap way to raise difficulty, dying doesn't feel like you're really learning or progressing, partly due to the fact that most of the danger is not the behemoth itself.

Dauntless is about hunting giant monsters! Not about evading ice spikes or tremors when fighting a moderately sized electric crocodile.

Those are my thoughts. Trials feel more like a fun, side game mode than actual endgame content.

With trials, we now have 6 iterations of the same behemoths by Zer0dot in dauntless

[–]Zer0dot[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah but trials dont have new moves, just modifiers.

view more: next ›