Apparently “W” was originally written as “uu” as early as ~600AD, hence the name, however it still used Latin/Roman letters which hadn’t yet distinguished between u and v as letters. For at least 700 years, u and v appear to have been considered the same and interchangeable (so "Double U " could look like “uu” or “vv”) but it depends on your language whether it was verbally called a “U” or a “V” until the first recorded distinction between the two in a Gothic era alphabet written in 1386. The two apparently did still see some overlap in use until about the 1700s with the turning point appearing to be when the distinction between their capital forms was accepted by the French Academy in 1726.

tl;dr: “Double U” predates the distinction between “U” and “V” so it’s up to chance which letter a language called it before it stuck.

You’re presenting the two options as similar when I’m not entirely sure they are. You’ve explored making an easy game harder and a hard game easier, but let’s look at the other two results from your presented options: making an easy game easier and a hard game harder.

Making a hard game harder is often met with praise because the people who beat or otherwise enjoy the hard game already want and expect a challenge out of the game, so giving them more of that is almost what they expect already.

Making an easy game easier can be met with praise as much as it can be subject to criticism. The Pokemon series has long been critiqued for continually making every next installment easier and easier for the last several generations.

Obviously in your example of making a hard game easier there are people in favor of it but also people against it. The fact that we’re having a discussion about this controversy is proof enough that many people want it, but dedicated fans are often against it.

And just like in your example, I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone against allowing an easy game to have harder modes as long as it doesn’t negatively impact those playing the easier modes.

The trend I’m seeing amongst these 4 outcomes is usually that allowing the option for a harder mode than the game already allows is often agreed upon by the wider gaming community, but asking for easier modes is often controversial. The trend I’m also seeing is that this remains true regardless of if the game was considered easy or hard in the first place.

Your original post seems to imply that players and fans for hard games are being obstinate and resistant to allowing the same concessions that players and fans for easy games do, when you could use the other two results I brought up to make players for easy games seem just as obstinate. “Us players of hard games are allowing for harder games to be made, why do you fans of easy games seem to be having such a controversy over if easy games should be made easier?” or something to that effect.

In my opinion, the controversy isn’t whether hard games should be made easier, it’s whether games that fans enjoy should be made easier.

Fair enough, I stand corrected. Was a little factoid I had heard a long time ago and never questioned. Good to know that it wasn’t actually true.

The Chicago area has more people of Polish descent than Poland.

Because my phone is a lot easier to carry in my pocket while I’m out doing errands than my gaming desktop. Or a steam deck.

Iirc there’s ways in steam to do the same thing, though I believe it’s a bit more involved of a process.

I used to play a ton of this game Magicite before the developer destroyed the game with its final update which came out conveniently around the release of their next game. Which they did again for that next title, and again for the one after that.

And by destroy I mean now you have a chance to soft lock in every level, picking up specific auto loot items can cause shops to permanently close up, crafting certain items cause glitchy behavior, co-op went from “minimum one person must survive each level” to “the first death causes everyone to instantly fail”, and the game crashes on the final boss fight before counting it as completed.

Every recommendation I’ve seen for this game also comes with an explanation on how to revert to the second latest version of the game.

That’s to say Early Access, not the other EA in the gaming industry of Electronic Arts.

Exactly this. I tell my friends not to get their hopes up too high about Palworlds eventually being completed because the studio has a history of abandoning titles in early access. I’m not telling them not to buy it or that it’s not worth purchasing, but to weigh if where it’s currently at is worth the price they’re charging.

The studio may use the funding they got from its spike in popularity to actually complete a title just as well as they might sell out to a bigger studio (I’d imagine The Pokemon Company would love to buy then bury it), or abandon it entirely. We don’t know what the future holds and we do know the studio has a history, so keep that in mind when you’re purchasing or when you’re asking yourself if it was worth the buy.

You guys wear socks?

Last time I tried diving headfirst into Linux, I got frustrated by having a problem and all the suggested solutions are all wildly different (from an outside perspective) series of editing settings or unusual terminal commands. I already knew how Windows worked well enough to do most things I wanted, but didn’t have almost any understanding of how Linux operated so all of the opaque solutions offered without explanation of why or how it should fix the problem just added to my confusion. Couple that with having to sort through one or two dozen suggestions to find one that actually works, not knowing if even attempting any solutions would cause other issues later.

I would imagine they’re trying to ask what someone’s ethnicity is but forgot the word for it.

What happened with Crystal Castles?

When I said “they owned bukkit” I didn’t mean they founded it, just that they were at the time of the controversy the owners of bukkit. Them taking it over isn’t mutually exclusive with owning it.

Also the controversy I was referring to was back in the peak of bukkit’s use, and they had owned it for some time before that peak. I’d wager the controversy was a much larger component of the fall of bukkit than them “plucking it apart” considering it was a product they owned and wholly benefited from it being the defacto standard at the time.

In retrospect that reminds me of the big controversy with Minecraft back in the day when Mojang just casually revealed they owned bukkit.

My go to is “Do I have to?”

I’m a big metal fan. Will my presence boost my Wi-Fi signal?

Not everyone in the US has health insurance or (more importantly) the same quality of health insurance. Insurers here have the final say on whether they’ll cover certain treatments, medicines, procedures, doctors, practices, etc. as well as how much they’ll cover, how much they’ll charge the patient, or how much any use of the insurance will affect the price of said insurance going forward. Insurance often prefers you work with doctors, practices, facilities, etc. within their own list of approved doctors, practices, etc. and going outside of that list for any reason may cause you to have to pay for any goods or services out of pocket. Then lastly you have to remember that both health insurance as well as hospitals and clinics are generally for profit businesses trying to maximize profit and minimize costs.

And the little cherry on top of the whole situation is we’re in a political landscape where even having universal access to healthcare is labeled as communist/socialist by many in a derogatory way.

Do you have a source for this?