If the internal sponsor of an idea get bored or loses support from colleagues, the project just halts.

Yeah, i kind of agree with everything you've said, and history as i remember it kind of backs up what you've said about tf2.

But I don't agree that they don't care about story and only do it for marketing. I think halflife's episodes are all about an attempt at continuing that story.

I think that the Cave and Glados bits of portal are a large part of what made those games (of course the gameplay loops are really tight there.

I think the only way to know would to be an insider. I also don't think it really matters, the games they make are good.

I do think you are right, they start out on gameplay; getting that inner game loop to be fun is primary (I kind of though that's how most (non narrative) game studios worked though).

they don't make games to tell stories

This was mostly what i was suggesting was incorrect. I also don't think it's a major part of marketing. I'm suggesting they don't bother putting the work of story into something until that inner game loop is fun.

TF2 was the result of experimentation with team based death match gameplay

Didn't they already know about team fortress? This seems off based on team fortress having already existed, same with wolfenstine enemy territory.

Wow, really appreciate these points. I was mostly thinking about teaching people how to budget, not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century.

Point of a corporation is to make money. Point of a "limited liability company" is to prevent losses on the company side from financially damaging the owners. LLC's do not (and should not) protect owners from criminal acts.

I know halifax has some shit history that i didn't learn in school -- i think i mostly learned about black history from american sources, and my own reading.

I've heard 4% rule, but for myself I use an investment firm that does monte carlo projections, with ages, spending rates, and current assets to give you a rough idea of likelihood of assets lasting till death.

Ive also played with a few of the retirement calculators made by the FIRE crowd i.e. https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/beyond-4-rule-how-much-can-you-spend-retirement

oh yeah, not saying it's a good thing at all...

No dead cells. risk of rain 2 at 71? nahhh

Stagnation is way different then reduction, I'd also be fine with that, as i suspect would be other home owners.

Tank "to suffer rapid decline, failure, or collapse" is different from stagnate. The OP said:

In all seriousness, all levels of government are moving too slowly on housing affordability. They should be trying to reduce prices to prepandemic levels, or, even better 2010 levels.

This jives with tank, but not with stagnate.

I think there might be a balance here that's hard to strike, every one who's in a house is going to hate loosing that value, and any politician who lowers the current value of property will have to deal with upsetting that category of voters. It seems like building more affordable houses would be better, it'll have a similar effect, but probably not as drastic.

If they put effort into making them environmentally friendly and employeed/educated people to do that we could make our country a nicer place to live. Just have to breakup the grocery conglomerates and things would be looking up

Yeah ok, that jives with this https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2023001/article/00006-eng.htm, next time save me the time and backup your stats

May be worth looking at distroless containers.