[Official] LittleBigPlanet: Play, Create, Share!


Recommended Posts

Tutorial isn't important at all. Just played the first level and there was plenty of onscreen instructions to help. All the text onscreen is in English too. Can't go wrong :)

Blazing through the levels is pretty easy, but the tutorials for edit mode are useful/needed.

I take it Stephen Fry isn't in the Japanese build?

He's awesome in the English build :p

Tutorial isn't important at all. Just played the first level and there was plenty of onscreen instructions to help. All the text onscreen is in English too. Can't go wrong :)

Have you played the tutorial? I mean, at all? I think you'll find you DO need it - or they wouldn't have bloody bothered in the first place!

Tell you what, you know best.

Haha, Popis bible right there!

I don't see what you are getting so worked up about? I'm telling you I am getting on a breeze here without the voice overs. What's so hard to believe about that?

Still struggling to get past the required tutorials to place a box.

I think taking this persons advice on the game is a little silly to be honest.

The tutorials are hugely important to the game.

Oh, and I'm getting a little tired of the name calling. I have no idea who popis is... Drop it, please.

You'd be daft not to watch the tutorials for edit mode (you actually have to to unlock all the content to use in edit mode).

During the game they do tell you some obvious stuff, but Stephen Fry is awesome and I think they just add to the game for the few levels you watch them (Y)

How can you not, you are forced to sit through 'em all :sleep:

Yeah I remembered.

Well if you don't care about learning how to use edit mode, don't use it.

I want to edit levels but I don't want to be FORCED to sit through lame obvious tutorials.

Two clearly different things.

I'm not a tard, I am able to learn things on my own.

As am I, the edit level tutorials were so damn boring. I could have learned that myself.

I really don't care about watching the tutorials in the beta, I have the full game to look forward to when I learn every single detail if I ever need to. I've watched more than plenty of hours of footage on this game to know a lot already.

I rarely ever need a tutorial for any game, nevermind something like LBP which is designed to be accessible. So please, accept my opinion, deal with it and move on!

You are so pathetic, I want to edit levels but I don't want to be FORCED to sit through lame obvious tutorials.

Two clearly different things.

Seriously man what is up with you this week?

Talk about anti-social gamer on this forum. Any chance to moan/joke/slate and you're at it.

I'm not pathetic.

The tutorial mode is fairly complex, I don't think you'd learn how to glue items together without being told and other stuff - At least not without trial and error. They last about 20-30 mins if you burn through them and tell you how everything works.

If you can't dedicate that time to the game to learn how to be efficient in edit mode, you clearly don't have any passion or interest in using it.

I really don't care about watching the tutorials in the beta, I have the full game to look forward to when I learn every single detail if I ever need to. I've watched more than plenty of hours of footage on this game to know a lot already.

I rarely ever need a tutorial for any game, nevermind something like LBP which is designed to be accessible. So please, accept my opinion, deal with it and move on!

The playing part of LBP is designed to be accessible - the create part needs a tutorial. Anyway, bored of this now, have fun.

If you can't dedicate that time to the game to learn how to be efficient in edit mode, you clearly don't have any passion or interest in using it.

Ah yes, because I don't want to waste my time on some extremely boring tutorials, I must have no passion for the game. Seriously, stop that crap. I can have plenty of passion for a game yet still skip as much as I like. I played games to have fun and do as I please.

So what if my levels aren't top professional, my console, my game, my time.

Ah yes, because I don't want to waste my time on some extremely boring tutorials, I must have no passion for the game. Seriously, stop that crap. I can have plenty of passion for a game yet still skip as much as I like. I played games to have fun and do as I please.

So what if my levels weren't top professional, my console, my game, my time.

Yeah okay, sorry that 20-30 mins makes you grumpy and angry to the extent that you are.

Guess some things I'll just sit through, enjoy for what they are and get on with things.

As I said, Stephen Fry is awesome (Y)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!