• Technus@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Say what you will about people who play Minesweeper but it’s a fucking rush when you end up in a situation like this.

    You have no choice but to take a deep breath and just pick one.

    There’s no real consequences to losing but it sure as hell feels like it’s life and death.

  • rattking@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ah my old friend the 50/50/90. Where I get this 50/50 choice wrong 90% of the time…

  • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sometimes, it do be like that

    Some of the better minesweeper clients have a “Prevent guessing” mode. Otherwise you can accept the 50-50

    • MrJ199414@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Could you provide me with one of them? I love minesweeper. Would play it religiously, but my frustration at having to play the guessing game. It only made it worse that my win to lose ratio was not based on my own failures but on chance. Also doesn’t matter what it’s for Windows, Linux, or Android.

      • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        My fave, since I play on Android, is Antimine (you can find it in f-droid)

        Has a mode where each win, increases the mines by 1, for that sweet sweet sense of pointless progression

  • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    10 months ago

    If you like minesweeper but hate these random picks, I really recommend the Hexcells series. They’re fun puzzle games that can be solved purely with logic. Kind of a cross between minesweeper and sudoku.

      • GoosLife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Also this isn’t a 50/50 chance to lose. You can win by placing all the flags without clearing all safe squares. So you’re guaranteed to win here by just flagging one, then the other if the first didn’t do the trick.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I’m not sure that is a normal win condition. Most places describe a win as being when all safe fields are cleared, not if the flags are placed correctly or at all.

      • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think the existence of no guess mode (something that I don’t think existed the last time I played stock minesweeper) would prevent people from wanting to try a fun game in a similar vein.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          There’s a competitive scene for Minesweeper, and they don’t use the basic Windows version anymore. Too many issues like this.

          • LostWon@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Oh I see. Does it look similar to the picture above? I’m used to the earlier version.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    When you ask her what’s the matter and she says “Take a fucking guess!”

    Do not, my brothers, take a guess.

  • mathemachristian[he]@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 months ago
    Extreme dork doing an ackshually alert

    This is not a case of “Schrödingers cat” because which field is the bomb and which is empty is already determined. The information is present in the memory of the program prior to the observation. Schrödingers cat is a paradox about a quantum superposition where two states exist simultaneously but are collapsed into a definite one by the act of observation. The cats fate is tied to the states of this quantum and therefore prior to observation the cat is both alive and dead, since both states exist simultaneously. It is only after observation that the definite state is determined.

    • xionzui@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      But the state of the cat is also already determined in a real experiment because it is linked to the outside through air and the walls of the box via vibrations and temperature. Probably even through photons coming off the cat hitting the box. I don’t know if there’s any way to fully disentangle it from the experimenter. This theoretical cat superposition only exists as a thought experiment

      • mathemachristian[he]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Right, it’s meant to extrapolate the idea of two states existing simultaneously from the very abstract mathematical formulas used to express it into something more comprehensible to show the absurdity of the idea.

    • elrik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The game could be programmed in such a way that the state isn’t determined ahead of time.

      Or you, the player, the computer and the game state could all be in the infinitely branching, never collapsing wave function of the many-world hypothesis where every outcome exists.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      You’re wrong. Quantum isn’t how the world is, but how the mathematical model is. The superposition is “we don’t know yet because we haven’t looked”. The truth is present in reality just like minesweeper’s information is present in memory.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is schrodinger’s bomb a good joke here? The bomb is not simultaneously on both squares until measured, it is only on one. It doesn’t change or err “spin”

    • bitwaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s the joke. It’s a 50/50 choice, yet somehow (it feels like) you get it wrong 100% of the time. So the mine is in superposition being both present and not present under a tile. When you click the tile, you collapse the wave from and the mine appears in the tile you clicked.

  • ieightpi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    I wish I understood Minesweeper better. If anyone feels inclined to explain this situation with how the rules work, id greatly appreciate it.

    • Kyrrrr@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I got you.

      Each number corresponds to the amount of adjacent bombs. The game randomly assigns bombs on a grid and it’s the players who need to uncover everything except for the bombs. In this situation you can logic your way to knowing the three flagged squares are bombs. The square marked 4 has one more bomb next to it but there isn’t enough information to know which of the remaining squares is the bomb. There are no extra lives in minesweeper. This 50/50 chance could lose the game

  • r00ty@kbin.life
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Just fence off those two squares forever, and we’ll never talk about it again.