It also has one of most spectacular multi week hikes in the world, if not #1, the Annapurna circuit. I was lucky to take it in 2008 with almost nobody on the trail (just right after monsoons in second half of September), took 16 days, around 220km IIRC. No roads built back then although we saw few CAT bulldozers dropped in the impossible places in gorges, I guess part of construction.
From absolute tropical jungle, through all other climates to frozen high altitude icy desert and all the way back, top point is 5,400m high. Also at one point hinduism of lowlands switches to buddhism. Wild marihuana growing everywhere. Muktinath just after(before) the highest pass is an important sacred and pilgrimage place for 3 different religions.
There is one point in Kali Gandaki gorge where you look left and there is absolute tibetan-style desert with 0 plants, just rocks and dirt, going up to Manang region. You look right and its typical tropical jungle. And in between, in span of maybe 7-8km the whole gradient happens continuously on Annapurna western slopes. Another nice spot is IIRC Marpha where you are looking at almost 5000m pretty much vertical drop on cca top of Dhaulaghiri, its sister 8000m+ peak. Even after 2 weeks of constant exposition to himalayan giants I just stood there in awe.
A life changing experience for me due to various factors and also people met. It has a special place in my heart.
I've done that one too, cca 7 years ago. A bit harder variant - 3 passes trek, where EBC is a side hike. Amazing place and whole region too, can't get enough of that country. Other valleys are much more remote seeing only fraction of the main EBC route traffic.
If you are not part of organized group (I went solo), without prior booking it may be tricky to find accommodation in Gorak Shep, sort of bottleneck since everybody goes to EBC for morning views on the top of the world and its the closest place. I ended up convincing one of owners of guest house there to let me sleep with them in dining room, it was -10C outside and my sleeping bag would not be up to that, even in dining room it was just above freezing.
Wishing you good weather for nice views from Kala Patthar and on Ama Dablam!
Life is too short to be left with regrets, and such adventures are easier done when younger for many reasons.
That being said, please manage your expectations, what was a wonderful profound experience for me may end up being a very different one for you. The best is to go there 1) physically prepared for long hikes with some backpack (not heavy but not just daily pack neither); 2) have your mind open to handle everything that comes your way as part of adventure, both good and bad.
Plus careful with hygiene, mostly using hands sanitizer before touching any food, eating just freshly cooked meals. Some folks I know ended up with subpar experience due to catching nasty stomach infection which made it too hard to enjoy it. Using consistently hand sanitizer before any meal may be common stuff now but in 2008 I raised some eyebrows. But 3 months of backpacking in India and this and no stomach issue with such approach, that's pretty rare.
> The mountain is named after Annapurna, the Hindu goddess of food and nourishment, who is said to reside there. The name Annapurna is derived from the Sanskrit-language words purna ("filled") and anna ("food"), and can be translated as "everlasting food".[8] Many streams descending from the slopes of the Annapurna Massif provide water for the agricultural fields and pastures located at lower elevations.[9]
For reference, Annapurna Interactive are not a mainstream publisher churning out franchise type games, but tend to publish unique games, some of them considered classics:
> I'm confident that creators of distinctive, original games will be able to find other publishers.
That confidence is (partially) misplaced. It's a really rough world out there for indie devs, and if you do find a publisher, many times they are not interested in paying as much attention to your title as you are.
Exactly, and if you take stray or Neon White as examples, part of the reason they got so much attention was the reputation that Annapurna Interactive had gained by publishing a game as excellent as Outer Wilds. So people took much more notice of those games than they might have done coming from some random indie publisher with no track record. As excellent as those games are, this might have made a very big diference to the traction they got at the start.
That’s definitely one of those easier said than done things, that someone who’s never tried to do will think.
Publishers have benefits, there’s a reason some game, developers, and other type of media creators will eagerly sign away a big chunk of their revenue. Not true for every media or genre, but there’s a reason these companies exist.
most publishers dont give money without seeing a fairly elaborate demo. And making games is something that can be done with zero budget unlike endeavors in many other industries.
Outer Wilds was in production for 7 years. Practically nobody can fund years of full time work without some external funding. I don't have any proof, but I am confident that Annapurna poured some amount of money into that venture during those 7 years.
IIRC Mobius Digital got their initial money for Outer Wilds from crowdfunding after a much more limited demo of what they wanted to achieve, then I assume Annapurna came on the scene later when they went professional and needed support for multi-platform. The period where kickstarter was more commonly accepted for game projects is over, and fewer projects could get a similar starting point that lets them spend years on their first release
Most games aren't good. If we don't talk about the outliers we'll be stuck talking about roblox maps, king.com games, or assassins creed. Everything Annapurna interactive funded was an outlier, that's what made it interesting.
I didn't know that. I was wondering how a team of only 25 people could make so many games. This makes it less of a big deal in my mind. Sure the publisher can be important in providing funding for games and which games get a marketing budget but they still aren't making them.
It looks like they just have an exclusive publishing agreement with them not owned by them? At least that's what wikipedia says? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simogo
Depending on the team that walked, this may be a new opportunity. Sounds like this all happened because they worked pretty well without Ellis, but Ellis would come in every now and then and cause a tornado of everything when she did. There's a name for this kind of manager, but it eludes me.
Shame they lose the name, but the talent is what makes the company. And I'm sure any small dev will be following them closely on their next venture.
You’re thinking of seagull management, managers who “flew in, made a lot of noise, dumped on everyone from a great height, then flew out again, leaving others to deal with the consequences”. That’s the polite version anyway.
That's definitely the million dollar question (literally). I don't imagine they got all 25 or so staff to resign at once if they didn't have a plan for funding. But there weren't any details about that aspect from what I read (could have missed it).
I imagine well get more developments over the coming weeks on that.
Outer Wilds is an unforgettable game, I have no problem calling it a classic. It already has a community developed to the point that it has a modus opperandi - never spoil anything for anyone.
Its a magical game and the community protects the experience for future players, as its impossible to 'rediscover it' again.
In gamedev, the only thing that matters, once you have a good product is how to market it. Without exposure your project is dead, no matter the quality of it.
Who will talk/write about it and for how much? Yters have steep pricing, and they usually don't give a F about your project.
That's why Steam and other similar platforms are a trap. And yet, people protect/love them, like it's the 8th wonder of the world.
I feel like actually good indie games have a much better chance, because from all I have heard the Steam algorithm actually wants to make money. It will show the game to a bunch of people regardless of the number of wishlists and if it does well, it will show it to more people. Of course Steam can not even do half the work for you, but it's still a much better system than just needing to have enough followers on Twitter or knowing someone at Kotaku or IGN.
How, when you have to compete with thousands of games from the same genre? How do you find the outlier amongst the mediocre stuff? Who takes the time to fish out the real gems among the moissanites?
> That's why Steam and other similar platforms are a trap. And yet, people protect/love them, like it's the 8th wonder of the world.
Sure, if you only look at it from the developer perspective. From the player perspective, having a centralized ___location to find and download games is massive. I'm not saying there aren't tradeoffs, but looking at it from only one side ignores all of the reasons that it's successful in the first place.
This is the often given answer, but is wrong. The company, the mountain, and many other things are named after a Hindu god of food and nourishment. Don’t just mimic the first search result (check its etymology section, instead).
"You need to think of [Megan] Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don't fall into that trap about [Annapurna]." -- Bryan Cantrill, on the sins of the father, heavily editorialized.
That's not how I read it. Often square braces are used to denote a -- factual -- addition to a quote, in order to add information that would otherwise make the quote incomplete or confusing to the reader. Square braces around "Megan" doesn't mean "it was actually someone else and I'm taking creative license with the quote".
True, but they did link to the exact timestamp of the original quote, so it's not like they were hiding anything. The only people apt to be tricked are people who make firm conclusions without checking the sources first.
You don't need to form firm conclusions about anything to get tricked by an internet comment. Pretty much everyone reading this would get the wrong idea about the quote. No one is going to the source and forming "firm conclusions" for some random quote.
To be candid, I couldn't think of a polite way to say you'd have to be credulous to believe that's what the quote was about, and irresponsible not to double-check before posting about it.
My point is, it's a random internet quote. You don't have to be "credulous" or "irresponsible" to believe it because no one with a life is going to check sources for such a minor thing. You just believe it to some degree and go on with your life because it has basically no effect on your life whatsoever. You probably won't even remember reading the quote in a few hours, so who cares about "sources" lol. I swear some people are way too online and take the internet way too seriously.
This seems like a very different scenario -- don't be part of a hobby business that's so low on the owner's radar that they aren't willing to bleed for it.
Because if they lose interest and everything explodes, you're out of a job and they're still a billionaire.
so, 99.9% of all businesses? passion or not a company will gut your position if it means more money or power.
But yes, this is an extreme scenario. it sounds (crudely put) like Ellison saw the pandemic, completely retreated for a while, then decided to come back and act like nothing changed and just shuffeled stuff around. Then when her labor decided they wanted to be more independent she sat on her hands.
I'm just proud the workers for a rare time could actually just completely walk away. Many issues would be solved almmost overnight if workers could coordinate a joint walkout like this.
The majority of businesses are not run by billionaires, in fact most of them are more tightly affiliated than the average large tech company.
It's not nearly as simple as you're making it out, and those of us that work in large capital industries (tech), have a very different relationship than the majority of workers in America.
I'm not saying we don't share problems, or that they don't have their own issues that are worse, just that your view doesn't reflect the total of reality
well I can't prove my notions, so I suppose we're at a stalemate. All I can say is I never felt like much more than a number in any company I worked at that had more than, say, 10 people on staff. So whether they want to tank the company or are pouring 110% of their soul into the product doesn't seem to trickle down here to my level.
you get the entire story of a collapse of one of the most renowned indie game publishers over the course of ~7 years, a situation where the entire staff of the house walks out, and all you get out of this is "well we'll see what game they release next"?
It's a long story, so if you are just wondering about their portfolio, you can skip to the end section "The Future of Annapura".
> How does such an industry survive? In a very round about manner that has nothing to do with what they say they do.
can you clarify this statement? I just read this as "companies need to make money, creatives aren't focused on money".
> Don't focus on the drama a fucked up environment produces.
if you somehow found this politics/drama free work environment with no creative tensions whatsoever, congratulations I suppose. Most of us don't have that and are only one whim away from those "dramas" costing us our jobs, even if we keep our heads down.
> There is more content being produced than there are eyeballs and time to consume it all.
There's more than one person can ever experience. But the ratio of production to consumption is still quite small. Most stuff put on the internet is going to be seen by someone (e.g. 95% of youtube videos have at least one view).
Check out the UN report on the Attention Economy. They quote a study that says less than 0.05% of content is consumed by humans. Obviously it has to come from the UN cause such reports wont come from within the entertainment industry which lives in a disconnected la la land.
This affects gamers who want indie games worth playing. So, yeah, why wouldn't we care? They're at least partly responsible for a handful of the best games I've played in the past decade. Their loss can't be understated.
Entire Annapurna Game Team Resigns
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41526074
Entire staff of game publisher Annapurna Interactive has reportedly resigned
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41528266