Hm so it is, I could have sworn that Temu was around before 2022

I think Temu has been around a bit longer, Wish just got more popular during Covid

Sorry

It reminds me of that bit from Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia where Dennis is talking about Hollywood movies.

I mean, it used to be only, like, the hard-line conservatives, like the pearl-clutching types, were the only ones that were overly vocal and extreme in their policing of sexuality. But now you got this, like, liberal wave of moral authority sweeping the nation. You know, it’s nuts. I mean, think about it. If the conservatives had always run Hollywood, movies would have sucked. You know what I mean? The art would have suffered. So I guess the question we’re asking is how will art fare under the oppressive thumb of this new liberal Hollywood moral PC elite?

It’s just so silly and yet so accurate. Whether it’s social values, politics or even just the opinion of AI and it’s capabilities vs. it’s potential vs. how people actually use it, there’s this pervading idea that restrictions en masse are a viable solution. I feel almost the opposite, like to some extent the oversaturation of it intrinsically lowers the negative reception of it. Prohibition philosophy - when it’s not allowed people will work even harder to use it in those ways, when it’s not only allowed but widely used and even encouraged, people just inherently care less over time.

We’re at a point right now where we are getting some pretty poor quality oversaturation of AI content and the tool alone is what is being blamed, to the point where copyright is being touted as this saving grace despite it consistently having been used against us smaller artists when corporate money is involved. Copyright isn’t promoting small artists, rarely has, nor is it preventing AI, but it’s somehow suddenly meant to ensure that the art you uploaded isn’t reproduced? That seems not only unlikely, but like it’s a scapegoat for a larger issue. Generative art isn’t a problem because Ms. Jane working two 40-hour jobs uses it to make art featuring existing characters. That circumstance was and never will be a problem because Jane very likely would never have the money to commission an artist in the first place. What Jane makes is 100% irrelevant, so long as she’s not claiming it as her original creation and trying to sell it - beyond that? I don’t think anyone should care or fault her, because she is doing the amount of art that her circumstances allow her.

What I absolutely agree is an issue is businesses and corporations using AI, cutting staff further overworking employees that remain. However, that Secret Invasion intro that seemed likely AI generated? I can’t in good faith try to argue “they should be tried for infringement” but I can fully support the fact that they should have hired an artist who would at least try to better use the tools at their disposal. I can simultaneously feel that the fact that Deforum may have been used is absolutely awesome, while also being annoyed and frustrated that they didn’t utilize artists who deserve it.

There is a very large difference between Ms. Jane making AI images, even movies, and any corporate product - or that AI generated rat for the science journal. For the former, it is something that IMO is fully necessary in order for Jane to be able to enjoy the experience of a creative process under the bullshit system we’ve worked out. The latter is a completely unnecessary replacement used to cut costs. And yet, for neither does the concept of infringement actually matter that much, because copyright isn’t the fundamental issue of AI, it’s just the one people are latching on to. Without realizing that the likelihood of copyright laws helping someone like us is nil. Especially since there’s probably an overlap of people who laugh at NFT’s and pirate files because bits of data aren’t a physical commodity that runs out, but a generative Imaging tool that does it is… Too far?

I think AI’s issues are separate from what I’ve mentioned here. What people blame AI for is something else entirely. AI is still just the tool that speeds up the process. We have the concept of safeguards utilized as signs, barriers, and nets, so that if someone wants to use a bridge for the wrong purpose there are some measures in place to prevent them. We don’t blame bridges for what the person is trying to do - we recognize that there is some reasonable level of safeguard and beyond that we just have to trust the person to do the right thing. And when it does show to be a pervasive issue, even still there is pretty much a bare minimum done - add another layer and a net and call it a day - instead of focusing on maybe why people in society are so inclined to jump.

The issue is always us. Yes AI makes evils job easier, like so many tools have. But trying to safeguard AI to the point of non-existence is just absurd from every angle, given that the bad stuff is likely going to happen in abundance regardless. I don’t particularly see AI as the evil so much as the humans creating the meaningless AI generated articles.

I just want people to be able to compete if they use cannabis. But you’re right that it would likely devolve lol

Some of them seem pretty bad. I feel like the example image with the eyes and the teeth is quite a damning stylistic choice, compared to some of their other monsters which look more like a palette swap and animal change with some model variations. Save for the few that straight up have the same attack, like the Deciduueye example, I think it’s reasonable enough to use them for inspiration, although not necessarily the best option. It’s a shame they felt the need to rely on something that is popular I think it hurt them a bit by not having as uniform a vision.

That said, even if I do think it’s pretty obvious I don’t want them to lose this if anything comes of it, Pokemon is just as bad and they have nothing to gain from ruining this persons work other than asserting dominance.

I do hope they use this as a learning opportunity for next time and maybe stop being so goddamn blatant in their “homage”. I would have been much more inclined to the game if it felt like the monsters had some rationale behind them because the game is pretty solid overall. All I can say is that I hope the game continues to exist but maybe gets a more original in-world bestiary and not Pokemon Gen 15

To add to this, DD1 has quite a number of NPC’s that travel between regions and you can come across them. As you progress through the game their patterns and locations change.

I actually am ambivalent on the latter mechanic as it really makes it a pain sometimes, but it still has lots of ways that it can work well.

I don’t go as hard as other members of the community, I just want to have the parts in case of an issue. I have my key caps, switches, and tools all in the same Ziploc bag (not loose though, each are separate just consolidated).

I keep the bag with my PC parts box

I had 666 sessions this year lmao

That’s why they decided to kill it, but people who were interested in it had some reason for hope.

On the PS3 it was basically a team death match with the mechanics of the game. That’s all it needed to be and it was fun.

Now people get angry if the game doesn’t have support with content updates for at least 3 years and if it’s not monetized then there’s no point for the publisher to do it (and the inclusion of it angers the players). It’s rough.

However in the case of the PC version, I think it’s for the best. If Sony wanted it to be profitable beyond the games price point, that means mtx. If there is development happening on mtx then it’s budget not going into the development of the game, which considering the state of the game that did get released… Well…

I would disagree with your 50 hour Starfield assessment, only on the basis of Todd Howards own comment that the game was made to be played for a long time.

50 hours for a game meant to be played for a long time just isn’t very long at all. Heck, I enjoyed my time in Starfield and I had more than 50 hours. However I could not continue with NG+, it was just godawful.

For a game meant to be played extensively it failed in most regards.

They definitely want that Roblox money

deleted by creator

The main thing I’m confused about is why they didn’t include some of what they’d worked on for Payday 2. Like, it has a genuinely decent VR but it’s just not present (I guess they’ve “hinted” at it).

The 911 should have been, I remember doing the quest to get it and then hating the car lol.

The metros are exciting, I used a mod that put a system for it in the game and it was fun to use. Though, what I’m really looking for is the ability to ride as a passenger in cars any time!

It’s a fun game. Part of its strength is the freedom it gives the players, I was playing with friends last night and we were having a blast. It’s that mix of Phasmophobia fear and fun exploring.

I personally am not as big of fan of open random lobbies which is why I don’t continue to play Phasma or likely this game, but they are great with friends. Excited for a VR version if they can make it work :)

I also enjoyed the game on release, I had very few bugs and the ones I did encounter I was able to work around in various ways. The most memorable one was a bug where killing the enemies would prevent the next objective from being scannable, preventing it from continuing and completion. Everything else was pretty minimal and I was able to 100% the game. Post game I spent modding which I also got a lot of enjoyment out of a little over 200 hours total in the game.

Haven’t been able to get to Phantom Liberty yet, and I haven’t started a new playthrough for the update be has I’m attached to my save (which is silly lol). I’ll get to it.

I feel you on the lack of compelling FPS games these days though. Like Dishonored, but with guns!

Yeah but so what? They can also go as low as $15 so it’ll just depend on the package size. I mean frankly, they are the ones who need it most and OP is clearly in a position where they are able to take some kind of L trying to sell it.

May as well be a good guy and pay it forward. Few around the states would be likely to buy it when the availability from official sources are just simpler and safer.

Besides, I bought a guitar from eBay from AUS. If they can charge me only $217 after shipping and the guitar itself, then a Steam Deck can get a nice price too ;)

I feel like selling it internationally is your best bet. Find someone in Australia and sell it to them for fair shipping.

Selling it locally is just going to make you tear your hair out. You’re trying to sell a popular device that has just had a refresh and a fair sale, outside of Facebook Marketplace or somewhere where a buyer is, quite frankly, not knowledgeable, I feel like your chances are just very slim.

On the other hand, Australian’s are looking at ~$1,200 AUD for a “new” high model that someone else bought and supposedly didn’t use.

You’d be doing the Steam Deck community a favor by selling it to an enthusiast without charging them extra just because they’re down under.

Don’t you remember that 2 weeks of astroturfing talking about how great New World was?