• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

StarTopic Nintendo General Discussion |ST14 Nov 2022| Comfy And Easy To Wear

  • Thread starter Deleted member 2
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode
I finally managed to get a copy of tropical freeze (second-handed on vinted for 30 euros) and holy shit it's kicking my ass.

It's my first DK game (don't kill me I'm a baby gamer despite my age) and I was really not prepared, I thought my platformer skills were ok since I played all of 3d Mario and Celeste 😭
 
VelvetMonkey said:
I finally managed to get a copy of tropical freeze (second-handed on vinted for 30 euros) and holy shit it's kicking my ass.

It's my first DK game (don't kill me I'm a baby gamer despite my age) and I was really not prepared, I thought my platformer skills were ok since I played all of 3d Mario and Celeste 😭
Click to expand...
If you got through Celeste but are having trouble with DKC then I'm... surprised, honestly. I mean, DKC is challenging but Celeste? There were points where I genuinely thought I wouldnt get through it. If you managed to beat that game I'd say your platforming skills are pretty good, maybe you just need a little more time for DKC's playstyle to flow with you.
 
VelvetMonkey said:
I finally managed to get a copy of tropical freeze (second-handed on vinted for 30 euros) and holy shit it's kicking my ass.

It's my first DK game (don't kill me I'm a baby gamer despite my age) and I was really not prepared, I thought my platformer skills were ok since I played all of 3d Mario and Celeste 😭
Click to expand...
Donkey Kong
 
chocolate_supra said:
If you got through Celeste but are having trouble with DKC then I'm... surprised, honestly. I mean, DKC is challenging but Celeste? There were points where I genuinely thought I wouldnt get through it. If you managed to beat that game I'd say your platforming skills are pretty good, maybe you just need a little more time for DKC's playstyle to flow with you.
Click to expand...
There are things in DK that stress me out a little more. For example the lives system, I got two annoying game over so now I spend all my coins to always have like 50+ lives. Also missed collectables, some seem pretty tough to find, I only completed 1 level si far. But maybe I just need to get used to the feel and controls, I'll try to get better!

That said, it's soooooo goood.
 
EvilChameleon said:
Being an ST creator is sending PMs to yourself to test out the formatting of your post like a madman.
Click to expand...
my man

ry1gRDo.png
 
Party Sklar said:
Prepare your wallet, my friend

Click to expand...

Not saying he's wrong, but I would caution reading too much into this guy. He's not publishing his methodology. He just says "the data says this", without mentioning what the data is (and mentioning it's  not polls). He's also re-tweeting a bunch of people criticizing probabilistic (and historically reliable) models like FiveThirtyEight, which is a red flag.

I feel like something like this happens every election cycle - someone relatively obscure makes some surprising calls that bear out, and then encourages the subsequent narrative that their model is infallible and everyone else's sucks.

Basically, election forecasting is not an exact science, and I'm pretty suspicious of anyone who says otherwise.
 
VelvetMonkey said:
There are things in DK that stress me out a little more. For example the lives system, I got two annoying game over so now I spend all my coins to always have like 50+ lives. Also missed collectables, some seem pretty tough to find, I only completed 1 level si far. But maybe I just need to get used to the feel and controls, I'll try to get better!

That said, it's soooooo goood.
Click to expand...
Yeah I also find DK more stressful. Never underestimate how much of a godsend frequent checkpoints / instant retry is
 
It Takes Two really feels very "Nintendo" in its design.

The way it introduces a new gameplay mechanic, uses it in a series of challenges that gradually escalate in complexity, then jumps to the next one is very reminiscent of EAD's games, particular 3D Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Splatoon, etc.

The developers' admiration for Nintendo really shines through, to the point where it comes the closest of just about any Western game I've played to capturing that toybox magic of the big N's best titles.

Tonally it's very different of course, but in terms of how it plays, it's practically a love letter of EAD design philosophy.
 
Pac-Man world Re-pac is so much fun but freaking Anubis Rex is a pain in the but as always. That’s 3 worlds down

Also the Sega genesis mini 2 still tempts me
 
0
VelvetMonkey said:
There are things in DK that stress me out a little more. For example the lives system, I got two annoying game over so now I spend all my coins to always have like 50+ lives. Also missed collectables, some seem pretty tough to find, I only completed 1 level si far. But maybe I just need to get used to the feel and controls, I'll try to get better!

That said, it's soooooo goood.
Click to expand...
Oooooh yeah, I'm a boomer gamer so the lives system is just kinda par for the course for me, I forget to consider how wild that might be for someone who hasn't been at it for.. fuck, 35 years.

Also don't let the collectibles stress you out, use them as more of a secondary goal to come back to and revisit levels. I know it's tempting to try and get them all as you progress but they're there more as a way to give some replayability. Probably easier to come back to them later as you get more skilled.
 
hologram said:
Not saying he's wrong, but I would caution reading too much into this guy. He's not publishing his methodology. He just says "the data says this", without mentioning what the data is (and mentioning it's  not polls). He's also re-tweeting a bunch of people criticizing probabilistic (and historically reliable) models like FiveThirtyEight, which is a red flag.

I feel like something like this happens every election cycle - someone relatively obscure makes some surprising calls that bear out, and then encourages the subsequent narrative that their model is infallible and everyone else's sucks.

Basically, election forecasting is not an exact science, and I'm pretty suspicious of anyone who says otherwise.
Click to expand...
I think it's pretty clear from the past 6 years in general that the vast majority of election forecasting is indeed horrendously flawed. What used to work fairly well (reliance on polls) no longer holds much weight at all.

Someone will probably come up with some new and fairly reliable methodology in the future but I don't think it'll happen anytime soon. Politics has radically changed in the last decade in this country (at least) and it's gonna take analysts a while to catch up to that.
 
Is it just me or does it feel like we’re overdue for a non-N64 game update? NES/SNES, or Genesis, something.
 
Skittzo said:
I think it's pretty clear from the past 6 years in general that the vast majority of election forecasting is indeed horrendously flawed. What used to work fairly well (reliance on polls) no longer holds much weight at all.
Click to expand...
I'm going to push back on that - a lot of the forecasting is working as intended, but the mathematical literacy of its audience is lacking. If you give 100 candidates a 70% chance to win, you should expect to be "wrong" in around 30 of those races. In fact, if you're "right" too often, your model is bad - it's overly cautious and not accurately representing the probabilities.

FiveThirtyEight did an analysis last year of their performance over all races they've modeled (I believe since 2012) and their model did very well. Their model was slightly underconfident for the highest probabilities - that is, they were "right" a little too often in races where they gave one candidate a 90% chance of winning or higher - but otherwise, it did not underperform.

The issue is the average reader - including political pundits and journalists, to be honest - aren't that interested in the probabilities. They see someone gives Trump a 30% chance of winning, then Trump wins, and they conclude the model was bad. But that's not how probability works. It's frustrating, but like I said, election modeling is not an exact science.
 
Last edited:
hologram said:
I'm going to push back on that - a lot of the forecasting is working as intended, but the mathematical literacy of its audience is lacking. If you give 100 candidates a 70% chance to win, you should expect to be "wrong" in around 30 of those races. In fact, if you're "right" too often, your model is bad - it's overly cautious and not accurately representing the probabilities.

FiveThirtyEight did an analysis of their performance last year over all races they've modeled (I believe since 2012) and their model did very well. Their model was slightly underconfident for the highest probabilities - that is, they were "right" a little too often in races where they gave one candidate a 90% chance of winning or higher - but otherwise, it did not underperform.

The issue is the average reader - including political pundits and journalists, to be honest - aren't that interested in the probabilities. They see someone gives Trump a 30% chance of winning, then Trump wins, and they conclude the model was bad. But that's not how probability works. It's frustrating, but like I said, election modeling is not an exact science.
Click to expand...
Feels like that's kind of a useless forecast though. Obviously 30% is still a chance but if lower probability outcomes keep happening constantly then what exactly is the point of giving probabilities from these models in the first place?

People (and pundits/journalists as you said) want to know the likeliest outcome. Saying "anything is possible" doesn't really mean much.
 
Skittzo said:
Feels like that's kind of a useless forecast though. Obviously 30% is still a chance but if lower probability outcomes keep happening constantly then what exactly is the point of giving probabilities from these models in the first place?

People (and pundits/journalists as you said) want to know the likeliest outcome. Saying "anything is possible" doesn't really mean much.
Click to expand...
But that's literally how probability works. Low-probability events do happen all the time. The point is they're getting the probabilities  right. The model isn't useful if these 30% probability events happen 50% of the time, but it's equally not useful if if they happen 10% of the time.

Saying "this has a 70% chance" very much is saying "this is likeliest outcome". But something being more likely doesn't mean it's guaranteed. If you roll a die hoping for at least a 3, and you get a 1, you don't say the die is broken and throw it in the trash
 
Derachi said:
Is it just me or does it feel like we’re overdue for a non-N64 game update? NES/SNES, or Genesis, something.
Click to expand...
Genesis feels due this week.

Also I’m anticipating Goldeneye 64 next month.

Derachi, you should be pleased to know I have ordered Megabeast investigator Juspion.
 
hologram said:
But that's literally how probability works. Low-probability events do happen all the time. The point is they're getting the probabilities  right. The model isn't useful if these 30% probability events happen 50% of the time, but it's equally not useful if if they happen 10% of the time.

Saying "this has a 70% chance" very much is saying "this is likeliest outcome". But something being more likely doesn't mean it's guaranteed. If you roll a die hoping for at least a 3, and you get a 1, you don't say the die is broken and throw it in the trash
Click to expand...
I mean I absolutely get it, like I said I understand what probability is but in general haven't these models been proven to be off in recent elections? I.e. the low probability events happen more often than their probability would indicate?
 
Okay, where the hell can I download the PS Remote Play 64 bit version of the app onto my Acer laptop?
 
hologram said:
I'm going to push back on that - a lot of the forecasting is working as intended, but the mathematical literacy of its audience is lacking. If you give 100 candidates a 70% chance to win, you should expect to be "wrong" in around 30 of those races. In fact, if you're "right" too often, your model is bad - it's overly cautious and not accurately representing the probabilities.

FiveThirtyEight did an analysis last year of their performance over all races they've modeled (I believe since 2012) and their model did very well. Their model was slightly underconfident for the highest probabilities - that is, they were "right" a little too often in races where they gave one candidate a 90% chance of winning or higher - but otherwise, it did not underperform.

The issue is the average reader - including political pundits and journalists, to be honest - aren't that interested in the probabilities. They see someone gives Trump a 30% chance of winning, then Trump wins, and they conclude the model was bad. But that's not how probability works. It's frustrating, but like I said, election modeling is not an exact science.
Click to expand...
People aren't interested in the probabilities because this is all stupid and doesn't matter. These elections only happen once, so there's no way to prove that their probabilities were even remotely accurate. "100% of the time, one of these two people will win, so we'll be correct either way", isn't useful, so why even pay attention to it?

Take the recent NBA finals. 538 way over valued the Celtics due to some arbitrary advance defensive statistics and gave them something like an 80% chance of winning the finals. Even when they were down 3-2 they still gave them a 60% chance of winning. What good is all their data and these nerd's numbers when literally any casual NBA fan with even passing knowledge of the sport gave a better prediction of the Warriors, with multiple super star players and a core who have been to five finals and won 3 championships together were more likely to win than a young Celtics team who had never been there before.

Again I don't believe their probability was correct. It wasn't some sort of fluke finals with crazy finishes that could have gone either way. There is no way on earth you play that series 100 times the Warriors only win 20 of them or whatever. It more likely would have been the completely opposite.

Nate Silver is a complete fraud and nobody should listen to him. He's Skip Bayless with a Texas Instrument.
 
VelvetMonkey said:
I finally managed to get a copy of tropical freeze (second-handed on vinted for 30 euros) and holy shit it's kicking my ass.

It's my first DK game (don't kill me I'm a baby gamer despite my age) and I was really not prepared, I thought my platformer skills were ok since I played all of 3d Mario and Celeste 😭
Click to expand...

I too found myself at the shop buying lives and extra health for certain levels. It's a challenging but rewarding game for sure.
 
HockeyBird said:
Famiboards P U
Click to expand...
There's a joke in that Tony Danza movie The Garbage Picking, Field Goal Kicking, Philadelphia Phenomenon where he's a garbage man whose leg is super strong because he would kick the lever on the side of his garbage truck every day dozens of times and ends up playing for the Eagles after some try out camp where he kicks the ball stupidly far due to his garbage man leg, and when he gets to the locker room and all the players are roasting him telling him he shouldn't be there and one of the guys says "What college did you go to?.... P.U.????"

Still think about it every now and then. Perfect burn in that situation.
 
0
Excited for Somerville to launch on Tuesday so I can finally see what kind of fucking game it is lol.
 
0
Need people’s confirmation before I do something drastic:

If I archive my Animal Crossing New Horizons data, I will NOT lose my save memory, correct? I have cloud save.
 
Mekanos said:
Need people’s confirmation before I do something drastic:

If I archive my Animal Crossing New Horizons data, I will NOT lose my save memory, correct? I have cloud save.
Click to expand...
not only will you not lose your cloud save, you shouldn't lose your local save
 
Wait I forgot data from Pokémon games doesn’t cloud save

Fuck

Is there ANY way to get that onto my new SD card? All my Pokémon games are physical.

EDIT: looks like all Pokémon save data stays on the internal switch?
 
Last edited:
Mekanos said:
Wait I forgot data from Pokémon games doesn’t cloud save

Fuck

Is there ANY way to get that onto my new SD card? All my Pokémon games are physical.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't the save file be on system memory and not the SD Card? If you're just swapping data to a new SD Card and not wiping your system, then there should be no issue, then. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to do?
 
Mekanos said:
Wait I forgot data from Pokémon games doesn’t cloud save

Fuck

Is there ANY way to get that onto my new SD card? All my Pokémon games are physical.
Click to expand...
IIRC all save data is stored on internal memory, not an SD card? But someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that
 
Skittzo said:
I mean I absolutely get it, like I said I understand what probability is but in general haven't these models been proven to be off in recent elections? I.e. the low probability events happen more often than their probability would indicate?
Click to expand...
Nope. Like I said, they've been more or less on point, with the exception with of a slight underconfidence in the extremes (so that means the very low probability events have been happening less, not more, than predicted).
Soul Skater said:
People aren't interested in the probabilities because this is all stupid and doesn't matter. These elections only happen once, so there's no way to prove that their probabilities were even remotely accurate.
Click to expand...
You can't post-test individual races, of course, but that's why you have a consistent model and check your performance over time. Probabilistic models are used very widely in many industries - in finance, in weather, etc - and that wouldn't happen if there was no way to test model performance.

Election forecasting is difficult, and the tentatively low lack of samples to test performance against means that variance tends to be pretty high. It's why a seemingly substantial average polling lead is not particularly safe. But that's accounted for in the model. It's not a reason to throw the whole concept out
Soul Skater said:
"100% of the time, one of these two people will win, so we'll be correct either way", isn't useful, so why even pay attention to it?
Click to expand...
Suggesting that a probabilistic forecast is hedging so as to always technically be correct betrays a lack of understanding of probability and statistics Take the recent NBA finals. 538 way over valued the Celtics due to some arbitrary advance defensive statistics and gave them something like an 80% chance of winning the finals. Even when they were down 3-2 they still gave them a 60% chance of winning. What good is all their data and these nerd's numbers when literally any casual NBA fan with even passing knowledge of the sport gave a better prediction of the Warriors, with multiple super star players and a core who have been to five finals and won 3 championships together were more likely to win than a young Celtics team who had never been there before.
Soul Skater said:
Nate Silver is a complete fraud and nobody should listen to him. He's Skip Bayless with a Texas Instrument.
Click to expand...
Nate Silver is a bit of a smug asshole but he's by no means a fraud lol
 
VolcanicDynamo said:
Shouldn't the save file be on system memory and not the SD Card? If you're just swapping data to a new SD Card and not wiping your system, then there should be no issue, then. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to do?
Click to expand...
SammyJ9 said:
IIRC all save data is stored on internal memory, not an SD card? But someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that
Click to expand...
Yes, you guys are right, I’m just deathly paranoid.

I am about to archive all of the software. That should do the trick.
 
Sunday dinner:

Homemade fajita bowl. Made my own Mexican style rice (don’t tell anyone I used basmati since it is all I had available). Then just a simple fajita/taco recipe. Layer the two and some cilantro and sour cream. Then you have a pretty tasty meal that isn’t super hard to make since I keep these ingredients on hand all the time.


ABD5-DF56-B0-CD-4-D7-D-9-CF4-AB2-C3-C8-F0993.jpg
 
Ye gods it’s gonna take forever to redownload everything, why does Nintendo make it like this

At least I shouldn’t have to replace a 1 TB card for a long time
 
0
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom