I was one of the haters on initial release, but Hello Games 100% redeemed themselves over time and are still actively maintaining the game with new content - free new content, not paid DLC - every few months. And today, I'd rate NMS as one of my favorite games of all time.

That said, from the two comparisons you made, I suspect you're thinking of NMS as the wrong kind of game here. It's not an "escape room" style survival game, and base building is mostly meant to be a simple place to keep / display your stuff, not Factorio-in-space. There is no real plot or long-term goals beyond what you set for yourself and a few "story" missions to encourage you to at least leave the starting planet and check out the neighborhood.

If you haven't seen it since 2016, it's a radically different, and better, game. And if you have - Hey, it's not for everyone and that's okay. Some people like open world exploration, some people like puzzle games, some people like FPSs.

I found this other article that talks in more detail about what he's been doing with it.

You are right. Maybe Linux Foundation members have been pressuring him to use it for something in the kernel. They pressured him successfully in the past.

There's effectively no difference between single and multiplayer in NMS. Multiplayer isn't so much a distinct mode of gameplay, as merely hanging out in the game with another player. Think "playing Legos with a friend". Same activity, just more than one person. There are a few features intended to focus on multiplayer, like the nominally co-op Nexus missions - But I'm not aware of any exclusively multiplayer content, and even the Nexus missions are IMO easier to solo than trying to coordinate with someone else. And even in purely single-player mode, you can still see/visit bases/etc from other players, you just won't see the other players themselves.

I suppose a proper answer to your question depends on what you really mean by single-vs-multiplayer, though. There's a core storyline that's honestly more like a long tutorial mode, and they put on events roughly every two months (which are again often about showing off new features); but there's not really anything you'd call a proper "campaign mode". It's fundamentally an open-world exploration / survival / building game, from start to there-is-no-finish.

And just in case anything I've said here sounds negative - NMS is a mind-blowingly good game. Strongly recommend, particularly in VR.

No one else wants them.

This article does a better job showing what Linus has been working on with LLMs.

I guess the key is to use AI to do something you're bad at. Apparently you are good at making lovely documents, so that wasn't effective.

People who talk about "junior devs" don't know much about the software industry.

Those are functional tests, not unit tests (unless your specification was so detailed it was written in UML).

That is begging the question. What I mean is, a lot of people want more complexity, because they want things to take longer, because they make more money. Middle managers want programmers to be busy but go slowly so they can justify hiring more people. There was an interview with Marc Andreesen about that, and Bjarne Stroustrup earlier.

Bottom line: faster isn't better.

Generally if you document your interfaces, that's enough. The comments end up being useful because then I can just read the comment to figure out what a function does (and what values are valid, how it behaves on error) instead of spending time looking through the code to figure it out.

Get the interfaces pretty. The internal code can be fixed later if needed.

If you want to do a good job with code review, it takes about as much time as writing the code. You need to test every line, etc.

Most of the time we trust the developers so as reviewers we just skim through the process, but that's harder to do with AI.

When the web was born JPEG was already there. It was adopted from (ok, almost) day 1, along with GIF.

Sure, we'll just assign "master all things x509" to engineer #78 of 205... in our four-person shop.

Everyone in this conversation seems to be assuming every company has a massive IT department with folks just standing around picking their noses waiting for real work to show up and break the monotony. Outside Silicon Valley and Fortune-500s, that's an extreme rarity.

There's also an implicit assumption we're all running major-vendor enterprise-grade software written within the last twenty years; rather than an actively automation-hostile "best of a bad breed" industry-specific solution cobbled together by the nephew of a paranoid former CEO around the time I was graduating high-school, and it's sadly still the top tool of the trade.

Those who enjoy the luxury of never needing to leave Entra to do their jobs should stop throwing stones, take a step back, and realize their world isn't representative of the real world of IT.

Probably not.

25 cents is two bits (in auctioneer talk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... )