Weirdly enough, I’ve heard the opposite - that the first game is way better than the second 🤔

I think that’s the bug they put in Neo in the first Matrix film

Whoa, some amazing paint jobs! The detail is insane

Yeah, they changed too much unnecessarily whilst keeping the rest of the game identical. The addition of first person shooting really broke it in some ways because the original game wasn’t designed that way. I think they’d need to redesign it from the ground up to make the more modern mechanics work properly. Something like RE2 Remake.

Thanks for this perspective. I wonder if a lot of this isn’t so much an issue with attention span, but more a reluctance to put the work in?

That said, it does sound like it’s the environment itself that’s causing it. If the schools are encouraging ‘brain breaks’, I assume there’s good reason behind it? Does that improve learning/retention?

Yes the karma system here is way better! It definitely reduces the hive mind mentality.

I don’t think we need any kind of algorithm though. That would only serve to make the popular stuff more popular and the niche stuff gets buried. Maybe if I could personally filter out communities that I’m not interested in?

I find myself researching movies, books etc. before I read them so I can see if they’ll suit my tastes. Then, even if they start slow I know generally I’ll enjoy them and it’ll be worth the initial investment. I think that helps improve my attention span because my patience is then rewarded.

An older film I really recommend is Twelve Angry Men. No special effects or camera work. Just twelve jurors in a room discussing a murder case - and I was hooked throughout! Perfectly paced.

What older forms of media are you referring to here?

Yes I think you’re right. People haven’t changed, but the environment has changed - it’s continually getting better at manipulating us.

Lemmy does have a limited amount of content, but what it does have seems to be of higher quality. Which is perfect! We don’t need constant, cheap content.

I do agree with your points for the most part. But I wonder - do films need to be constantly grabbing our attention? Sometimes a bit of downtime can enhance the subsequent action.

And boredom isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It can push us to try new things and be creative, to consider our thoughts. If we have short form content available to fill every last second of our free time, it begins to feel like we have to fill those moments, otherwise we’re wasting our time.

I think delayed gratification is a good thing, regardless of whether the delay conveys any benefit. Constant reward feels less meaningful. But yes it’s a cost/benefit analysis - I wouldn’t watch three seasons of a show in order to get to the good bit.

Some great points! So you think that people’s capacity for attention hasn’t changed, but the types of media we’re exposed nowadays to can encourage us to change our behaviour toward consuming short form content? But if that content wasn’t available, they could happily move back toward longer form content?

I do agree that short dopamine hits do make me feel good in the moment, but hollow after the fact. Longer, informative content does lodge itself more into my brain and provide longer lasting feelings of reward.

I agree with Analogy’s take on this. I don’t think it’s based on ‘needs’. Selfish people are, and have always been selfish regardless of the situation. Stress does exacerbate it of course. And it’s unfortunately the case that we live in a world that doesn’t reward kindness. But despite this there are a lot of people that are kind because they want to be, because it’s rewarding for it’s own sake.

There’s giftofgaming@lemmy.world

As far as I’m aware the leader was alone in that opinion. Not only did the army use live ammunition, they used a kind that caused maximum damage. Completely unjustified - and on student protestors - not terrorists.