Well, can’t say fairer than that.

Yeah, I did try to stress that just because I can’t envision a use for it, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t exist. I’m totally OK with that. My question was more “Am I the idiot here for not being able to see what the use is?”

Obscurity is not the same thing as security.

You know those can be self hosted, right?

And yes, by all means just set up your own Wireguard or OpenVPN access if that’s what you prefer. You do you bud.

But that implies you do have your SSH open to the world, right?

The way I access my private web interfaces remotely is through something like Netmaker, Tailscale or Zerotier. Same thing for SSH. No way in hell am I opening 22 on my router.

I’ll admit, as neat as this is, I’m a little unclear on the use case? Are there really situations where it’s easier to get a command prompt than it is to open a webpage?

The CLI side I can see more use for since that does expose a lot of actions to bash scripting, which could be neat. But on the whole I can’t say I’ve ever really found myself thinking “Man, I really wish I had a UI for managing Radarr, a program that already includes a really good UI.”

I know it’s shitty to hate on something just because you’re not the target for it. That’s not my intent, it’s more that I’m just fascinated by the question of how anyone has a burning need for this? It feels like there must be something I’m missing here.

The problem isn’t so much the lore connections; everything seems to more or less line up from the rough pitch they’ve described. It’s more that no one who loved the original games for their amazing world building and storytelling is going to be super jazzed about a psuedo sequel in the form of an extraction shooter. That is the absolute antithesis of a story driven game, as far as I can see.

If this was a side project to acompany a new single player Marathon game, I wouldn’t care. But announcing this as the continuation of Marathon just feels like a slap in the face.

The possibility of betrayal is exactly what makes the social aspect fun. Like, I’d hate it if they somehow got rid of that. The problem I found with standalone was that you never even got to “This person might betray me,” it was just shoot on sight. If I wanted that I’d play Tarkov.

Have they managed to do anything about the absolute death spiral that the culture of the game suffered?

I think that’s really what turned me away. I loved the mod and played it obsessively, but after standalone launched it really felt like people were no longer willing to take any chances on each other. The whole game became very much kill on sight, when it wasn’t assholes just handcuffing people and feeding them bleach.

OK, Factorio I totally get, but how the fuck is DayZ back? Like, what the actual shit? Did they finally make an actual game?

That’s what three years of university and a lot of student debt gets me 😅 But I appreciate the compliment.

This argument just dismisses all criticism of the rules and implies that the “game” portion of the role-playing game is irrelevant.

If you truly think that, then I contend that you didn’t understand their argument.

They are dismissing one specific criticism of the rules; that they can be “abused”.

Roleplaying games are a collaborative social activity. The goal should be to collectively tell an enjoyable story. Under those circumstances, no one should have any incentive to abuse the rules or their fellow players.

In other words, criticising the rules because they can be abused is like criticising the design of a hammer because it can potentially be used as a weapon. There is basically no way to design a functional, effective hammer that does not open up the possibility that a bad actor could use it as a weapon. That does not constitute a flaw in the design of the hammer, and trying to redesign the hammer to prevent such an abuse will result in a very bad hammer.

There are bad rules and good rules, but good rules are good because they facilitate enjoyable play effectively. In other words good rules should help the GM and the players do the things that are fun. The rules do not exist to create a perfectly balanced showdown between equally matched opponents, and they cannot ever exist to do that in a context where you have a GM/DM, because the overwhelming power afforded to someone with near total narrative authority makes it impossible to ever balance that dynamic. Rather, the rules exist to a) introduce an element of chaos to the narrative, and b) guide the game towards outcomes that tend to reflect the individual capabilities and circumstances of the characters involved.

And within that context there are plenty of examples of good and bad rules design. You can absolutely find, make, or customize a better hammer. But if your criticism comes down to “You could hurt someone with this if you wanted to” then you have absolutely missed the point.

There is no set of game rules that will ever prevent a toxic table from being toxic. Despite OP’s objections, the only solution to shitty people in your gaming group is to either remove the shitty people, or remove yourself. I get how much that sucks, but it really is the only solution.

“You see, we like money…”

I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with the idea of using a GUI, especially for a non-professional who mostly just wants to get into self-hosting. Not everyone has to learn all the ins and outs of every piece of software they run. My sister is one of the least technical people in the world, and she has her own Jellyfin server. It’s not a bad thing that this stuff has become more accessible, and we should encourage that accessibility.

If, however, you intend to use these tools in a professional environment, then you definitely need to understand what’s happening under the hood and at least be comfortable working in the command line when necessary. I work with Docker professionally, and Dockge is my go to interface, but I can happily maintain any of my systems with nothing but an SSH connection when required. What I love about Dockge is that it makes this parallel approach possible. The reason I moved my organization away from Portainer is precisely because a lot of more advanced command line interactions would outright break the Portainer setup if attempted, whereas Dockge had no such problems.

The thing is, those poor design decisions have nothing to do with those features, i claim that every feature could be implemented without “holding the compose files hostage”.

Yes, this is exactly my point. I think I’ve laid out very clearly how Portainer’s shortcomings are far more than just “It’s not for your use case.”

Portainer is designed, from the ground up to trap you in an ecosystem. The choices they made aren’t because it’s necessary to do those things that way in order to be a usable Docker GUI. It’s solely because they do not want you to be able to easily move away from their platform once you’re on it.

Not the point. If you want to interact with the compose files directly through the command line they’re all squirelled away in a deep nest of folders, and Portainer throws a hissy fit when you touch them. Dockge has no such issues, it’s quite happy for you to switch back and forth between command line and GUI interaction as you see fit.

It’s both intensely frustrating whenever it comes up as an issue directly, and speaks to a problem with Portainer’s underlying philosophy.

Dockge was built as a tool to help you; it understands that it’s role is to be useful, and to get the fuck out of the way when its not being useful.

Portainer was built as a product. It wants to take over your entire environment and make you completely dependent on it. It never wants you to interact with your stacks through any other means and it gets very upset if you do.

I used Portainer for years, both in my homelab and in production environments. Trust me, I’ve tried to work around its shortcomings, but there’s no good solution to a program like Portainer other than not using it.

Please don’t use Portainer.

• It kidnaps your compose files and stores them all in its own grubby little lair
• It makes it basically impossible to interact with docker from the command line once it has its claws into your setup
• It treats console output - like error messages - as an annoyance, showing a brief snippet on the screen for 0.3 seconds before throwing the whole message in the shredder.

If you want a GUI, Dockge is fantastic. It plays nice with your existing setup, it does a much better job of actually helping out when you’ve screwed up your compose file, it converts run commands to compose files for you, and it gets the fuck out of the way when you decide to ignore it and use the command line anyway, because it respects your choices and understands that it’s here to help your workflow, not to direct your workflow.

Edit to add: A great partner for Dockge is Dozzle, which gives you a nice unified view for logs and performance data for your stacks.

I also want to note that both Dockge and Dozzle are primarily designed for homelab environments and home users. If we’re talking professional, large scale usage, especially docker swarms and the like, you really need to get comfortable with the CLI. If you absolutely must have a GUI in an environment like that, Portainer is your only option, but it’s still not one I can recommend.

It’s not really that Concord was bad, and more that it was unremarkable.

The game was trying so hard to be a clone of Overwatch that what they ended up with was the gaming equivalent of those knock-off GI Joe clones your mother would buy you from the dollar store. Except that Overwatch is free, and Concord was $40. Why am I going to spend more money on getting the knock-off version?

Copying what works only gets you so far. At some point, you have to actually step ahead of the thing you’re copying.

For anyone not familiar with this game, or anyone who’s only familiarity is through the trailers (which really focus on tone and visuals), I really want to recommend the videos by YouTuber Riloe, who has been playing early builds with the devs and chatting to them extensively about the game. They’re really well produced videos, and they really help to explain the tone of the game, the interesting mechanical ideas behind it, and what exactly this company is trying to achieve. Obviously, take with a grain of salt, the guy is clearly a fan and these videos aren’t really trying to be critical, so this should all be read as basically press releases;

This antishooter game is beautiful and horrifying

The living war ecosystem where you don’t matter

The beautifully dark warscape of the antishooter

I’m really excited for this game. Not just for the visuals, but for everything they’re doing with the mechanical design. The idea of playing as scavengers trapped between two warring factions is incredibly cool, and based on early previews it sounds like there are a lot of very clever design elements, especially in the AI, all built to back up that core idea. For example enemies intelligently prioritize targets; a tank won’t focus on infantry if there’s an enemy tank present, and even when it does target the infantry it’ll use its machine guns, not the main cannon. Enemies will focus on you if you make yourself the biggest threat, but if you’re smart and follow the flow of battle you can keep their focus elsewhere.

That’s really smart stuff, and by all accounts it works very well. I also really like what the studio is doing more broadly. They’re really trying to push back on a lot of the toxic practices in the gaming industry. I’ll be getting the game day one, mostly just to reward them for trying to do something different.