Is there a game that just fundamentally fucks something up...

Is there a game that just fundamentally fucks something up? Like a game that claims to be realistic and then does whatever the fuck it wants?

Pic related isnt vidya but it's a great example. Zero is neither odd nor even, but it got hamfisted in to make it work

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_(mathematics)
tutorialspoint.com/cprogramming/c_data_types.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

When "odd" and "even" are used for logic, it's not to mean actual odd or even numbers, it just means that the integers sequentually alternate a variable with two states. Like it's "turning integers into binary 0 or 1", while that's not exactly the case.
0 even
1 odd
2 even
3 odd
4 even
5 odd
6 even
7 odd
8 even
9 odd
10 even

This sounds less like game fuckups and more like personal 'tism.

Genji and the whole "Giant Enemy Crab" thing after being announced as a realistic game about Japan's real pre-shogunate wars.

From a number science perspective, zero is even.

Zero is even, no question about it. If you want to start an autism fight, you should get people asking "Is zero positive or negative?"

I thought 0 was gender neutral?

Even better, ask people "Is zero a prime number or a composite number?"

Just watch the chaos ensue.

Giant Mammoths existed less than 5,000 years ago, it's not a big stretch

Life? The tutorial is shit, it's grindy as hell and the endgame sucks. Also they forgot to patch out permanent iron man mode.

There are other ways to parse digits, though, like the functional definition. A computer would consider an odd number to give a non-integer when dividing in half, while an even number gives an integer when dividing in half.
Zero is a weird case because it does meet this standard on a very surface level, but when defining it in terms of a set of finite values (i.e. 3 = |+|+|) you get the real result, that 0 ( + , …) is not a number at all, neither odd or even, it's the absence of value. For this reason, a programmer defining sets as odd or even may add a conditional to ensure there is at least one value embedded.

Similarly,

neither.

neither.
Zero holds only assumed and symbolic properties, and it acts differently depending on how you frame the situation.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_(mathematics)

Happy to help, OP. Next I recommend memorizing various laws and identities so you won't make such SHIT threads again.

YOU ARE LIKE A LITTLE BABY
WATCH THIS

Dynasty Warriors

Metal Gear Rising's tutorial is pretty awful, it doesn't even stop you from progressing if you don't do as your told in the parrying section. Just kill the guy and it kicks you off to the next section then the game.

Retard.
Bring the history books that say that there were giant crabs fighting samurais in pre-feudal Japan then.

...

Has both +0 and -0 if you're using a signed integer.

Not for programming. The negative number has one extra value than the positive number.

in programming zero has a value, that's a flaw in and of itself

Honestly, I find null to be a bigger problem than 0

Shit at being Metroid, shit at being a Contra style run 'n' gun.

don't get me started on null

...

Do you not understand how signed ints work? The first bit is whether the number is positive or negative.

I am disappoint.

Yes. And using an sbyte for example, the numbers start at -128, increase to 0, and cap at +127.

0 is considered even because even numbers are numbers that set the carry bit to 0 after doing a %2 to them.

You guys like Gauntlet, right? Well, what if someone made Gauntlet, but made it PC exclusive and forced all players to use the same keyboard? They actually did this.

Yes, but it does:
If we're using only 8 bits (essentially, a word) this sequence would be:
Wonderfull world, the one of lower-level processing, isn't it?
I want to choke whoever came up with BCD to death.

B-but you could use a gamepad.
Right?
Right?
I only played it single player. Loved Gauntlet on the PSone, but was really disapointed with the newer one.

You mean the remake? They also crippled it with Steam cancer and then stuffed it full of microtransactions.

I don't think a C64 has enough inputs even if you could use a controller.

But that's wrong. By IEEE specification, literally the entire spec on how any CPU chipset you have consumer access to, is build on, defines otherwise.

...

That could be mitigated by PIRATING.
I don't really know why. It just didn't feel like a Gauntlet game to me. Maybe I missed the open spaces from the PSone, maybe the items, or the simple TURBO mechanics.
Also: the hordes of enemies were shit.
Actually, wait a second.

THAT'S PRECISELY WHERE THEY FUCKED UP
See, modern dev's don't know how to make horder enemies. In the newer gauntlet, there's plenty of enemies. But they spawn in waves, climped together. One or two AoE later and they're dead.
On the PSone version, enemies had generators all over and came from all sides. THAT's a proper horde. You can only attack in one direction at a time, so at most you can cleave a path to run through and reach a critical point (like a generator or a chest) and you gotta keep moving because the horde is closing in on you.
The AoE you have are reserved for when things get dire: you start cutting a path, something with a lot more HP gets in the way. Your path is blocked, enemies are one inch away from you.
You got potions (that are limited in the first few levels and gotta be rationed), you got items that cost money, can't use them willy nilly and you had your turbo attacks. Lvl2 Turbo was a surround attack that cleared a few mobs around you to give you a breather but on a cooldown.
Shit, that's it. After a few levels, the game threw so much shit your way that whenever you found yourself in trouble, you had a dozen ways to get out of it. It came down to optimizing and figuring the best way to pull it through.
It's not really a tactical game, it's a fairly simple hack & slash, but you had a bunch of shit you could do at any given time.
The newer gauntlet gives less tools and the few that it gives you are limited to being equiped 2 at a time: an amulet and a relic (can't really remember the mechanics, it was what, 2 years ago?).
Limiting the player for balance and dificulty reasons is retarded: just throw more enemies, bigger enemies, faster enemies, enemies from above, enemies from bellow, enemies from within and let the carnage and particle effects consume the screen.

...

That's after your compiler fixes it. And you're working with a consumer-grade chip.
I'm talking about raw shit. PLC's, small chips you put in fridges or crappy alarm clocks.
Maybe should say crap from 10 years ago.
Most modern ALU's will read "-1" and when you "++" it will perform a sign change.
Or the sign change occurs in the rever, when "1" get's "–" to "0".
I got to work with a chip that did both and it fucked up constantly because we had to test for sign changes. We ended up moving all values to the 1 - 20 range because of it, less hassle
You're also printing it on a console. The Write() will never print "+0" or "0", only "0"

Actually, the blue-cased keyword, "sbyte" is defined in the .NET specifications, that is, common CIL code. If it were a "SByte", then yes, that is the C# equivalent type.

>When fucking C itself does the same thing tutorialspoint.com/cprogramming/c_data_types.htm

...

This is how God intended Man to program.
You can't get closer to the CPU than this.
It's like having sex with the ALU making that dirty whore JUMPNZ on your dick all day.

ARE YOU AN FUCKING RETARDED?

Here let me help you.
Posts like yours often convey a stronger meaning if you attach a video or image to it.

By the way, you know why that "Gauntlet" remake was made in the first place right? A Gauntlet clone by the name of Hammerwatch was released a while back and was pretty good. It made the rights holders sweat and decide they needed to remind people that Gauntlet exists.

Who would win in a fight?

...

Newsflash, retard: CPUs don't run x86 assembly anymore, it's cores are RISC and x86 code is converted to that using bypass translation unit. That's not even to mention things like out of order execution.

It's called "by definition" you dumbfuck. Same as with 1 is not a prime.

give me your lunch money

...

Of course zero is even. If -1 is odd, and 1 is odd, and 0 is in between them, then it's even.
Brainlets.

Give me your sauce

...

Is this some monty hall bullshit? You either win, lose, or draw

Assuming a draw means playing again, drawing has no effect on winning or losing.

and what does draw do?
resets the game

It's ⅓ chance to win and ⅓ chance to draw. Hence RPSLS is a better game because chance of draw is only ⅕. Also no negative zero is the same as positive zero.


Draw draws out the game in a stalemate, resulting in both of you quitting eventually, with neither of you winning or losing.

yikes

...

So clearly, we need RPS-infinity, since as N approaches zero, you get more and more likely to draw; only with infinity does it become certainty.

The game I depicted here is better, You both chose either odd or even, like heads or tails, then each one throws any number with their fingers, you can even use two hands if you're retarded. Winner depens on if the sum of the numbers is odd or even, so it doesn'1t actually matter if the number you chose is high or low, only if it's odd or even, so technically only 1s and 0s would work. It's impossible to hit a tie with this game.
I've no idea how it's supposed to be called in other countries, it's very popular in Brazil yet I've never seen it in any sort of media.

Another popular one is used when there's three people: Everyone throws out either a 0 or a 1, not choosing anything, the winner is the one that threw the number that only he threw. Like, two guys throw 1s and only one guy threw a 0, or vice versa. If everyone throws the same number, then it's rematch.

Couldn't you just make it so that anyone who picked an unpopular choice is removed? Eg, you have 13 people, and cull about half the people out

Also, there was a gameshow based around the odd or even concept, called Friend or Foe. It started with 6 players and did trivia rounds to build up money as they were gradually eliminated. At the end, whoever had the most picked a partner or something, and they'd do a teamup round to get extra money.

The catch was that they also secretly voted FRIEND or FOE

Zero is actually a number that contains all values, much like infinity. The proof for this is elementary school shit:
0 = 1 + -1 + 2 + -2 + 3 + -3 …
Zero is equal to the sum of all numbers.

Sorry it's equal to -1/12

Actually, having come back to this video months later, I question (everyone's) ability to devise the sum of -1/12.

He states that with the sum of [N=1-1+1-1+1-1…] it's equal to 0.5, because you don't know if it's either 0 or 1 so you just average it (with additional ways to prove this). However, I disagree. This makes sense if you are guaranteed to start on +1-1. What if it was the other way around? It would be -1+1, and the reverse would be true: You would either have -1 or 0, so if you averaged that, it would be -0.5, which would be the opposite of what he claimed. Thus, the sum truly would be 0 if you follow what he claimed to a logical conclusion.

You are close, but nu cigar.

Zero, 0, null, nothing, or what ever, has multiple possible attributes, and you should assign them according to what you are trying to do. This is a rare as hell case of everybody who manages to do something worthwhile with their set of attributes assigned to zero are right.

The number zero has been shit written in sand and bonfire flame warred to death - long before any of us was even born. I bet even the ancient Sumerians had jolly time trying to accurately define nothing.

Mathematical real number zero is accurate if you are not an attention whoring academic.