C# isn't a bad language, but this is my opinion.

I have written stuff in a lot of them, and C# is probably my favorite if you look at all the marks it checks.

If you look at Dart, it is pretty much C#, only slightly altered. And I like Dart.

I would agree that F# is a "better language", but C# is good enough. Again, good is the enemy of great. This is why Kotlin is replacing Java at a higher speed. Java isn't really good.

C# does a good job at keeping up with F# in a way that is interesting.

Just my two cents.

Material reductionists spending half their life watching liquid crystals changing color while telling you what reality is.

Yet another whine, sulking, bitching repeat-post. Sigh. I never realized at the time that things were so good...I honestly expected that we would keep going forward. For the past 10-20 years, it has just been whining laced thickly on whining. For every comment with a constructive suggestion or a "hey, let's go make something new and interesting ourselves, because we have some good ideas, right?", there are two whiners whining about how much better things were before and how much better everything would be if everyone's time were spent making something new, as if newer is better. It just says that things were better before, when everything was new, and there was nothing to whine about.

In their excuse, there is apparently a food shortage.

The excuse about not finishing it because of globalization seems a bit contrived. It could be easily solved by selecting to play as "the frenchman" or "the italian", and give the players gestures depending on which character they played. Or simply just choose culture-agnostic gestures.

However, it seems like a cool idea to implement a simple thing like a real-time stone, paper, scissors, where you can pretty much attack and defend at any time. Seems like a game likely to boost reaction time and ESP skills.

Trials HD on the XBOX360?

Don't you mean infinite repetitions of F, A and P?

I call bullshit/COBOL.

In the case of software engineering, more code isn't better. It's always better to spend some time making a good design, which are almost always smaller in code than worse designs. Typing a lot creates a lot of code to maintain. Unless you are coding COBOL or using an ancient development environment, you shouldn't be typing that much. If you truly would have increased performance as a coder by typing more quickly, you are indeed very special, I've never met a coder who wasn't a total newbie who had typing speed as the main bottleneck.

Also, the typical keyboard layout, at least here in Norway, makes "touch" or any derivative of it almost useless. Open curly brace (which is quite commonly used, I imagine) on a normal keyboard here is Alt-gr and 7. Close curly brace is Alt-gr and 0. Considering the extremely high frequence of use of these characters, slightly slanting the hand and making it dynamic instead of keeping it in a typical static "touch"-position not only increases throughput from brain to compiled code but shields the body from stress.

Looking at how Visual Studio presents the editor surface to a coder, the following keys are used in the extreme: open and close curly brace, dot, open and close parenthesis, enter, space, cursor keys and control. I'd say that with the current level of code completion, macros and intellisense these keys are probably used as much as most of the other keys combined. And keep in mind, most of these keys aren't even present on the keyboard the touch system was invented for. It really just doesn't make sense for coding performance to go through the roof with touch typing.