What are some VR games where the person in the headset can cast to a TV and the people watching can still participate/have fun?

For example, at a get-together over the summer, my friends and I played a hot seat version of I Expect You to Die 2. The person in the headset played the single-player game themselves, but everyone in the audience was able to watch the cast on the TV and help that person by giving them recommendations to try different things and help them solve the puzzles (or just recommend ridiculous stuff to see if the game will allow it). Even though the game is single-player, it worked really well as a communal experience and was a ton of fun for the whole room.

Any other recommendations for games like this we can try?

Note: we've already played Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes
Target Hardware: Oculus Quest 1

I don't think I saw a feature like this in the gitLab, apologies if it's already in the works or been suggested.

The gist of it would be to have an @/help ping so if someone needs an edit to a title or tags or something, they can use that and it'd flag the topic or somehow show those who have the permissions that this thread needs attention. This might be helpful for users (like moi) who might not know the people who CAN do this already off the top of their head, beyond Deimos.

Let me know your thoughts or if this could be a useful feature for anyone else.

The first time I saw beat saber was this gameplay video in 2018 and I immediately fell in love with it. I adored the concept and wanted to play it so badly.

There's a VR arcade close to my place, where I actually played Beat Saber for ~30 mins last year. Lots of fun! And last week, I bought and received an Oculus Quest 2 and finally played it by myself.

First of all, god damn that is a good game. It's perfect at making you feel like you're naturally good at it, too. Or maybe I actually am. With only ~4 hours of played time I'm doing hard or expert on most new songs with faster song mode (+20% song speed). Which has this weird effect of making me feel like that's the natural pacing of the song… super, super weird when they are ones I already know, as now the version I know feels slowed down.

The campaign felt short and a bit too easy, with one exception (1-hand expert $100 bills with max 4 misses… spent 2 days on that. Looks like I'm not the only one having problems with it). Though it's been frustrating in places; I find the whole "you need to make at least x mistakes to win this level" pretty ridiculous. Min/max movement is an interesting mechanic but I'm not fond of the execution.

I have some frustrations with the game. No replays I can save to show off the most awesome combos. Hit detection feels way off on some levels. I haven't tried online mode yet, pretty excited about it.

But god daaaaamn it's an awesome game. I'm finally playing something again! I haven't really played any video games since … shit, almost two years. And the workout you get is fantastic. I am finally getting a handle on my lockdown atrophy.

Ben Brode once said: "Make your games super easy to get into. The longer it takes me to get into your gameplay, the less interested I will be in playing your game. Except for Beat Saber: I will jump through any hoop just to play that."

And that brings me to the Oculus Quest 2. I was a 2020 original Oculus Rift kickstarter backer. I actually tried the first dev kit. A pretty awesome and unique feeling, but all that for shitty resolution, motion sickness and 4 cables hanging off your head.

Well, it's all gone. Integrated audio, fully wireless, good resolution, no cables, no base station, no PC required. And the features just blow my mind. IR cameras to detect objects around you, the guardian mode with its virtual barriers, the pass-through mode which lets you see outside the oculus without removing it (killer feature). Casting support so it's easy to show your gameplay to friends in the same room. Oh and hand detection?! This is some Star Trek shit.

I recall my reactions to touching and playing with the first iPhone: "Wow, this is game-changing." - Such is my reaction to the Oculus Quest 2. VR is now a console that is, frankly, cheaper and less intimidating than owning a playstation-type console or some such (after all, you need a TV for those). It's on the same level as the Nintendo Switch. I know a lot of people who are greatly intimidated by VR and this removes almost everything scary about it.

Incremental progress is weird; sometimes you stop following the various upgrades in a field and suddenly you catch up and it's mind-blowing.

The problem with the Quest 2 is still the lack of true killer games. Right now, I bought a $400 Beat Saber game… though, it's still worth it. Like Ben said: any hoop.

(I also got The Room VR because I'm a sucker for these kinds of games and it came highly recommended)

Sometimes I get into a back-and-forth... heated interaction with someone, and it goes on for a while, and then they stop responding. Afterwords, I might wonder if it was worthwhile. Maybe they got tired of arguing with me, or maybe they just thought the conversation reached its natural endpoint? Rarely, the conversation might end with us explicitly agreeing it was a good discussion, but that's kind of formal and not the usual case online.

Just stopping is my habit as well. If I don't want to talk anymore, I upvote the last comment (if I thought it was good) but don't reply.

In the case of repeated interactions like this with the same person, sometimes I wonder if I'm annoying them by replying to their comments too much, particularly if we disagree often. I've never been explicitly told to go away, but people are often reluctant to say things like that, for good reason since you never know how people will react.

It seems to me that upvotes don't tell me this. Upvotes tell you whether your comments make sense to the crowd. They don't tell you whether the person you're talking to liked your reply. Which seems like it would be good to know. It would be valuable feedback if the goal is to be a better conversationalist. That seems like a good goal to aim for?

I guess we could get in the habit of saying "good point" and all that, and sometimes things can be inferred from what people say if you're good at taking hints, but not all of us are. But we are all trained to upvote things we like already, and it seems like it would be nice to take advantage of that.

To the extent that people like to gather internet points, I wonder what sort of conversation would be encouraged if you got them by writing a good reply from the perspective of the person being replied to? But I guess it could be gamed pretty easily if two people cooperate, so we probably shouldn't keep a total.

Also, think about how this looks from the outside: if you are reading a conversation by two other people in a heated back-and-forth, how do you know whether they're having a good time or not? Maybe it seems obvious, but in some cases a heated discussion might look worse to outsiders than participants. If you could see that they liked each other's comments then it would seem friendlier.

Note that Facebook does tell you who upvoted a comment, but since it tells you everyone who upvoted it, it's even more information, maybe too much.

(This is a followup to @NaraVara's previous topic, focusing on a particular aspect of it.)

This idea is inspired (at least for me, there are probably actual forums like Tildes to draw better comparisons to and take better inspiration from) by Danbooru (P.S: This image is just SFW scenery but the site as a whole is not) , where they have meta tags for stuff like image resolution, if it has commentary, it it's translated, animated, GIF, etc.

Should we consider that but for tags like long and short read or watch, videos, reposts/duplicate posts, spoiler threads, recurring.[ ], maybe news article authors too (also appropriated from Danbooru), since these can supercede any topic or group and will rarely be suggested in any single one of them?

If it's not clear what that looks like, imagine all the normal tags being suggested/typeable at the top and all the meta tags being suggested in a separate search box just below the current one, which are displayed regardless of which group you're in, since they can apply to all the site.

I'm sure it comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with what I generally submit to tildes that videos, history and history.military are my favorite topic tags... but some of the other slightly more obscure ones I also enjoy (all music related) are live, soul.blue_eyed, singer_songwriter, and cover_songs.

What about you all? What are your favorite topic tags on tildes?

p.s. If you provide the associated https://tildes.net/?tag=topic_tag links to the ones you mention so that we can all peruse them, that would be greatly appreciated. :)

I just noticed today that in ~music, the "topic-info-source" metadata isn't visible in listings; it shows the author name instead. Clicking through to the post it's clear that it's been scraped, it just doesn't get a site name or favicon.

eg: Youtube link on ~movies versus Youtube link on ~music

Is this intentional? It sorta makes it look like everything on ~music is a text post.

... exactly the same as the old name.

Yep, "lgbt" won the vote from this thread. That may not be a surprise to many people, but this has still been a worthwhile process to go through. There were some concerns expressed about the name, and it was only fair that we gave everyone a chance to have a say.

Of course, not everyone will be happy with this outcome. I saw a variety of voting responses which made that clear. At one extreme, I saw a couple of responses with "lgbt" marked as #1, and all other names marked as #N/A. At the other extreme, I saw a couple of responses with the other seven names ranked from #1 to #7, and "lgbt" marked as #N/A. Someone else marked any name which even included as "lgbt" as #N/A. So, there are definitely strong opinions for and against "lgbt".

But the vote was convincing. Nearly half of all people (43 out of 87) put "lgbt" as their first choice, two-thirds of people had it as their 1st or 2nd choice, and more than three-quarters of people had it as their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd choice. As I checked the results occasionally throughout the period of voting, "lgbt" consistently had about 50% of the first choices. And, counting all the ranked votes, "lgbt" got a final score of 6.98 out of a theoretical maximum of 8. The next closest names - "lgbtq" and "lgbtplus" - were scored at about 5.5 out of 8.

Here is the published result on Survey Monkey, and a screenshot of the detailed count.

Prologue: Feeling cranky, trying to be civil.

I posted a link to an article, in the ~news, about two of the top US dairy producers declaring bankruptcy ... and Someone moved it to ~food.

Harumpf.

~food is "check out this new latte recipe" or "how to survive the vegetarian keto diet" (yes, that's a thing; I'm on it. May be why I'm cranky).

My post was ~news, about the US economy, shifting societal norms, potentially about climate change.

But forget about this specific categorization issue. This is the first time I've bumped into Tildes' moderation methodology.

I don't subscribe to ~food, so for me, my post just vanished, w/o notification or explanation. Took me a few minutes to find it. I don't see any way to ID who moved it (may well have been @Deimos, for all I know), nor any way to challenge the move.

Have I overlooked some 'moderation dispute' button, or some such? Or is moderation here beyond dispute?

ETA: For anyone visiting this post down the line, here's the official/original statement on this ...

https://tildes.net/~tildes.official/53r/users_can_now_be_manually_granted_permissions_to_re_tag_topics_move_them_between_groups_and_edit

Not-So-Secret Santa Is Live!

Sign-ups for the group itself will NOT close and will continue to be available on an invite-only basis.

IMPORTANT EDIT: It is more than okay to join the group even if you do NOT intend to gift games to others! Please join if you want to receive games. Gifters love to have an eager audience to gift to!

For certain events (such as Not-So-Secret Santa) gifting is necessary for those choosing to participate, but these are always optional. Membership in the group and accepting freely given gifts requires no burden of gifting on your behalf.

ALSO IMPORTANT EDIT: Not-So-Secret Santa has a buy-in of under $5 USD. Though gifters can certainly choose to gift a more expensive game if they prefer, each participant is including at least one game on their wishlist that is less than $5 USD in order to minimize the people who are priced out of participating.

With @Deimos's permission, I have started the Tildes' Steam Game Gifting Group and am beginning its first event: Not-So-Secret Santa!

In proper Tildes' fashion the group is invite-only at the moment, so if you would like to join, please reply here or PM me with a link to your Steam profile or your Steam username. I'll have to friend you to send you the invite, but you don't need to keep me on your friends' list after you've accepted it if you don't want to (I promise I won't mind!).

I envision the group being used for specific events (like Not-So-Secret Santa), random giveaways, and group-limited lotteries (using the platform Steamgifts).

People have been using song.link links on Tildes a lot as a way to effectively link to the same album/song on all the different streaming services.

It looks like, as of today, they've changed their name to "Odesli", and their site is now https://odesli.co.

This tweet is about the only information I can find so far, I don't know if there's anything more anywhere: https://twitter.com/songlink_/status/1183919368058499073

I apologize if this is a topic that has been covered before. I haven't really been able to find anything and I'm not really sure what a good search keyword is. But I noticed this as part of the Hearthstone player ban thread.

On a traditional bulletin board forum it's not really an issue because the conversations unfold chronologically anyway. When you have the atemporality of threaded comment chains that gets disorganized fast.

Basically, it's a "still developing" story where more events and news keep happening that's germane to the discussion. As the news comes up, people who already read the thread might not see the comments being posted about subsequent developments and be able to follow it because each piece of additional news or info. ends up happening in a comment/sub-thread that ends up arranged in fairly arbitrary, rather than chronological order.

The Democratic Debate threads have been similar, where the reactions and consequences of the topics being discussed can keep a discussion going for a long time, but it all happens in sub threads that people are unlikely to see. Many of these developments don't really merit a thread of their own, but after a few days or so it gets hard to actually have a big-picture discussion because the news has overtaken the scope of the discussion thread.

In a thread with an active OP, I've noticed what tends to happen is the OP will steadily edit new developments into the main post to update it. I think this has actually worked pretty well BUT edits don't bump posts as far as I can tell. Also, the people posting the updates aren't necessarily getting as much credit (in terms of votes, exemplary labels, or whatever) and, insofar as that matters to people that's a thing. Do you think this is adequate as things scale or would some novel design or subcomment system be needed?

The Problem

A large problem in internet communities is internet debates that devolve into metadiscussions on credibility. This likely isn't bad, because the default alternative is generally large-scale misinformation campaigns.

Examples

Tildes hasn't been free of this, naturally; for a (very) recent example, see this thread on Andrew Yang's climate change proposals.

I, personally, have partaken in a thread that seemed as if it might head in the same direction; take a look at this thread, on gun suicides of a certain population & aggravating factors of them. A third-party delivering a breadth of sources seemed to have stopped it in its tracks, however.

Solution

It does seem to me like something that could be solved—or at least mitigated—at the platform level, with a feature that would allow other users to cite sources for a comment in question, ideally with community ranking of those sources.

Getting rid of the question of credibility in casual discussions in a way that doesn't interrupt the flow of dialogue seems like something that would undoubtedly help The Conversation™ flourish, while simultaneously preventing disinformation catastrophes.

Now that a good portion of people have had accounts here for over a year, it seems fitting to ask: are there any interactions that have particularly stuck out to you? Anything that's caught your eye? Maybe changed your life, at the polar end of possible positive results?

Since @Deimos has stated he will likely not be restarting the tradition of the Official Daily Tildes Discussions, which is something I and a number of other users greatly enjoyed and miss, I have decided to attempt to take on the responsibility of continuing them unofficially (with his blessing). And since these are not official (so won't be in ~tildes.official, which everyone is subscribed to and probably shouldn't unsubscribe from), I will only be doing them weekly instead of daily, and we now have topic tag filtering (so unofficial weekly discussion can be filtered out), hopefully the people who found the official daily discussions annoying can more easily ignore/hide these unofficial ones.

With the explanation out of the way, on to the topic for this week:

Suggestions/ideas/concerns for future unofficial weekly discussions

I thought it would be appropriate to have the first one of these be a bit of an open-ended, meta-meta discussion on the future of these topics. And to kick things off:

• What would everyone here like to see discussed in these topics in the future? Are there any particular site features (planned, suggested or theoretical), policies (tagging, moderation, etc), or other meta issues/subjects you would like to be the topic in future discussions?

• What would you like us to try to achieve with these discussions? Should we have any specific goals in mind, or should they just be fun brainstorming/theory-crafting/naval-gazing sessions?

• Does anyone have any suggestions for me with regards to how I should handle these discussions? Is there anyone out there who would like to help me with these in some capacity going forwards?

• Does anyone have any concerns regarding these unofficial discussions, and if so, can you think of any ways we can try to address them?

The floor is open, and I am all ears. :)

Tildes Official Docs : Donate to Tildes | Tildes Gitlab : Issues Board

Following this previous thread in which we shared our suggestions for the name of this group, you can now vote for your preferred name(s) on Survey Monkey.

Voting is by ranking. You will be presented with a list of 8 suggested names. You need to drag-and-drop these names into your preferred order, from top to bottom. (After you've dragged one name into place, the list will then number itself and you can manually number each option if you don't like dragging-and-dropping.) Put the name you like best at #1, the name you like second-best at #2, the name you like third-best at #3, and so on to the end of the list.

If you do not like an name and do not want to vote for it at all, tick the "N/A" box beside it. This will remove it from your submitted vote and give it a zero weighting in the count.

The names will be displayed in a random order for each person.

Make sure you click on "DONE". "OK" is only the first step. You must submit your response by clicking
"DONE" or it won't be counted.

Vote counting will be done automatically by Survey Monkey. The algorithm allocates a weighted number of votes to each option, based on its order in your list. If you vote for all 8 names by preference, your 1st preferred name will receive a weighting of 8, your 2nd preferred name will receive a weighting of 7, your 3rd preferred name will receive a weighting of 6, and so on to to your 8th preferred name which will receive a weighting of 1. Here is an explanatory video for anyone who's interested.

The survey prevents multiple responses from the same device. However, I've set it to "anonymous" so that IP addresses are not included in the results (why would that even be an option?).

Here is the survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZKD76FS

Happy voting!

There has been occasional concern about the name of this group: ~lgbt. Some people believe it's not inclusive enough, some people think it's a bit clinical, some people think it's not expressive enough, and so on. Nothing major, just minor concerns here and there.

However, Deimos has said he'll rename this group if we want to.

So I'm here to find out what we might want to change the name to.

This will be a two-step process. This thread is for gathering suggestions, and discussing the pros and cons of the various suggestions. After I've collected a list of everyone's suggestions, I'll then post a second thread with a survey in it, for us all to vote on those suggestions.

But, for now... what do you think this group should be called? (And it's okay if you think it should be called ~lgbt!)

The current list of suggestions:

• ~lgbt
• ~lgbtq
• ~lgbti
• ~lgbtiq
• lgbt+ [not usable for technical reasons]
• ~lgbtplus
• ~gsm
• ~queer
• ~rainbow

Hey all. My old computer is fine, but the Oculus software has recently pushed an update where it no longer starts up, attempting to repair the software uninstalled it, and the install errors out despite clearing out the install cache and existing files while running it in network capable Safe mode with Defender off as recommended.

Eventually I narrowed it down to this error. https://forums.oculusvr.com/community/discussion/71083/cant-install-software-exiting-with-code-18 and since I'm using an old HP xw8400 build with two Xeon 5355 processors, it does kind of check out that this latest update finally became incompatible with my processor and it may be time to upgrade anyway. To my knowledge, there isn't really a way to get a more modern processor onto the motherboard, and I'm not going to rage at Oculus for not supporting hardware they were never supporting in the first place. (Auto Update and being unable to downgrade is meh, but I'm not going to win that fight.)

So what would you guys recommended for a new processor/ram/motherboard combination? My Graphics Card (RX480) and hard drive is still fine, and I'd like to keep it on the cheap for as much as we can do with VR.

I've posted a few lengthy topics here outside of programming challenges, and I've noticed that the ones that seem to have spurred the most interest and generated some discussion were ones that were directly related to code quality. To avoid falling for confirmation bias, though, I thought I would ask directly.

Is there generally a greater interest in code quality discussions? If so, then what kind of things are you interested in seeing in those discussions? What do you prefer not to see? If not, then what kinds of programming-related discussions would you prefer to see more of? What about non-programming discussions?

Also, is there any interest in an informal series of topics much like the programming challenges or the a layperson's introduction to... series (i.e. decentralized and available for anyone to participate whenever)? Personally, I'd be interested in seeing more on the subject from others!

What's this?

This post contains all entries of the "a layperson's introduction to" series. I will keep this thread up to date and sorted. This means this post is an excellent opportunity to try out the bookmarking feature!

Physics

Quantum Physics

Basics of quantum physics

Material Science

Classical physics

Thermodynamics

Computer Science

Artificial Intelligence

...and if you think about it, people need to actively unsubscribe as this is one of the standard groups on here.

Maybe we should work on what gets posted here — focus less on links and more on healthy discussion and text posts!

~talk seems to fit this criteria, but as I browse Tildes to my dismay the majority of content is re-posts of links from external sources. Obviously, there are also quite a few posts which are more than simply URL pastes, and even in the comments of a URL post, there can be healthy discourse happening.

But I am interested to discover whether anyone here knows of any other platforms that are entirely dedicated to written discussion and communication, where external links do not play a big part in that ecosystem of discourse.

Got it up and running, currently will do fine with about 25 players.

It's not set up locally so the hosting fee is $6/month, I'll leave it up for at least one month.

Currently running vanilla 1.13.1, will modify if requested.

167.114.73.187:25565

Have fun and please don't grief spawn!

Since we are currently discussing tagging conventions in other areas of ~ I thought it would be useful to start one in this group.

The 'football' tag is currently used for both association football and American football. This is not a surprise, but we should agree on how to handle this from now on, in order to not hinder the tagging functionality (ie people wanting to filter out one of the sports).

Here are some ideas, to kickstart the discussion:

• Use soccer for association football and football for American football

• use football for association football and other terms (like NFL, NCAA) for American football

• don't use the football tag and use association and American football instead.

• Use tag groups to solve this issue, ie football.association and football.american

They don't have to be significant in any way; just threads you personally enjoyed.

The ones that immediately come to mind for me are:

Chasing the American dream has got me jaded - started by @dodger.

https://tildes.net/~talk/29a/chasing_the_american_dream_has_got_me_jaded

and

grab some tea baby, it's midnight. this is today's slam thread. - led by the fantastic @earlgreytea.

https://tildes.net/~creative/3gt/grab_some_tea_baby_its_midnight_this_is_todays_slam_thread

Neither of them had hundreds of comments, and neither of them were particularly active; I just find myself particularly fond of them for whatever reason.

So, as a followup to the music tagging thread from a few days ago, I would like to propose the following for discussion.

1. Should all musical posts be tagged with at least one high-level musical genre?

The consensus from the last post appeared to be a yes on this. Please note:, this doesn't mean that anyone who submits a track is required to go look up / determine the best genre themselves. If they choose not to, one of the tag mods may do so for them while browsing. Further, we seemed to reach a consensus last time that in the future it would be best to automate this step as completely as possible.

2. Which tags do we want to use?

I / @Whom have done some digging and found several different schemes we might use as a basis. For convenience, I've reproduced them in a table for you below:

I think ideally we will be able to come up with (say) a list the size of wikipedia, allmusic or discogs such that determining the right genre isn't much of a burden on tag mods. In the future, we could expand this or even start inheriting the RYM genre hierarchy (e.g., Ska -> 2 Tone, Jamaican Ska, Spouge, Third Wave Ska)

So with that out of the way, I think the best way to proceed is for each of you to either:

A) Build a list of your own with one of these as a basis. We can count up how many people include a genre an count as a vote for it's inclusion.

Or

B) Argue for / against a specific genre's inclusion.

Sound good? Did I miss anything?