To be honest, I also can’t fathom it being such a massive flop. On Steam it peaked at 700 players. Shadows of doubt release peaked at 2200. Something had to go seriously wrong when a niche indie title with no mainstream appeal has a better launch than a AAA game. I don’t think it should’ve been a success, but it definitely should’ve done better than that.

So is Twitter but that didn’t stop Twitter from becoming wildly popular. YouTube shorts are just tweets in a video format.

Mutations are also good, see evolution.

Yeah, it’s not about monetization. I think for content creators the biggest limiting factor is the user base. If you make a video but nobody sees it then what’s the point of making a video? You want people watching your creations and the more users a site has the more likely you’re going to have people watching your video. So a real suggestion would be something like video visibility which is kind of a hit or miss on Youtube since the magical Youtube algorithm pretty much throws only clickbait.

I think diamonds get a bad rep because of shitty companies like De Beers who artificially pump up the price of diamonds. I don’t think anyone would have an issue with diamonds if their price range was comparable to amethyst and made ethically.

Because the biggest goal for Linux gaming is to get people gaming on Linux. You and me might not care that Sony games won’t run on Linux but there are people who want to play Sony games and they will either switch back to windows or not even try Linux. If we want Linux to grow we can’t just dismiss issues simply because they’re not an issue to us, dismissing issues others have is how we will have the year of the Linux for the next 10 years.

Support is kind of a catch 22. Companies have very little reason to support Linux because their customers don’t use Linux, but their customers don’t use Linux because companies don’t support Linux.

And that’s where Proton comes in to solve the catch. Proton is just a stepping stone for wider Linux adoption. The more people we get on Linux the more companies have to support Linux the less users need to depend on Proton.

I agree that native support is the way to go, but we’re nowhere near having the user base to even justify native support.

Depends, just the base game or with all the DLCs? The DLCs are some of the best in the series, but the base game is about as enjoyable as fucking a fleshlight with glass shards in it. With the DLC I’d put it just above DS3 because you still need to suffer the base game to play them.

It seems like you’re agreeing with me on the reasoning why AI art is art, you just refuse to accept AI as art. So let’s try a different way. Who says art has agemcy or intent? Clearly it’s not just “everything made by humans” because if I showed you the toilet paper I used to wipe my ass we can both agree that it’s not art. Neither is the comment I’m writing right now. So there needs to be something more that separates not art and art. The two most common ways would be the intent of the artist and the perceived intent of the viewer.

If it’s what the artist intended the am artist can prompt AI until AI generates the image the artist intended. Since the artist intended the AI generated image to look that way the intent is inherited from the artist.

If it’s what the viewer perceived we can reach the original question I postulated. If an image makes you feel something and you can’t know if it’s made by the artist or by AI, how do you know it’s art or not? If we take by whether you perceive intent of not then you’re attributing intent to art and it doesn’t matter how it was made. If you feel something and after the fact you find out it was AI generated image then it doesn’t invalidate what you felt.

You can come up with whomever to validate intent or agency and I’ll show you how AI wouldn’t play a role in that decision because AI isn’t sentient. It’s a tool like a camera or a paint brush or just chalk. We give the intent by using the tools we have.

there’s something’s highly suspect about someone not understanding the difference between art made by a human being and some output spit out by a dumb pixel mixer. huge red flag imo.

Translation. I can’t argue your point so I’m going to try characters assassination.

if the original Mona Lisa were to be sold for millions of dollars, and then someone reveals that it was not the original Mona Lisa but a replica made last week by some dude… do you think the buyer would just go “eh it looks close enough”? no they would sue the fuck out of the seller and guess what, the painting would not be worth millions anymore. it’s the same painting. the value is changed. ART IS NOT A PRODUCT.

Pretty ironic to say art is not a product and then argue that its monetary value would decrease, which can happen only if you treat art as a product.

Imagine if instead of a physical painting Mona Lisa was a digital file and free on the internet, would people think Mona Lisa is less impressive as an art piece because anyone could own it? I think it’s artistic value wouldn’t decrease, only its value as a product would decrease because everyone could get it for free.

As a thought experiment let’s say an artist takes a photo of a sunset. Then the artist uses AI to generate a sunset and AI happens to generate the exact same photo. The artist then releases one of the two images with the title “this may or may not be made by AI”. Is the released image art or not?

If you say the image isn’t art, what if it’s revealed that it’s the photo the artist took? Does is magically turn into art because it’s not made by AI? If not does it mean when people “make art” it’s not art?

If you say the image is art, what if it’s revealed it’s made by AI? Does it magically stop being art or does it become less artistic after the fact? Where does value go?

The way I see it is that you’re trying to gatekeep art by arbitrarily claiming AI art isn’t real art. I think since we’re the ones assigning a meaning to art, how it is created doesn’t matter. After all if you’re the artist taking the photo isn’t the original art piece just the natural occurrence of the sun setting. Nobody created it, there is no artistic intention there, it simply exists and we consider it art.

Steam deck feels like a product people at Valve would use while the competition is making products they think would sell well. Turns out the product that feels good to use is much better than the product that looks better on paper.

But what’s the distinction? I’m not saying there isn’t but I would put those two examples as pve/coop and their difference comes from the fact that they’re in very different genres.

Ah checked the wrong version of NV, no updates for the CIS version (or however it’s called) but the regular version had a update in February.

When exactly? I can find game updates for FO4 but not for NV.

Pretty sure that was FO4, Bethesda wouldn’t touch NV with a 10 foot pole.

Just last month I was wondering how I would get Vortex working in Linux and decided my backlog is long enough to not bother. Guess it’s time to start another playthrough of New Vegas.

Valve didn’t invent lootboxes. The concept has physically existed for decades, they’re called trading card packs or kinder eggs or gashapon. The latter is the inspiration for what became known as lootboxes. The first “lootbox” was actually in the Japanese version of MapleStory in 2004 and it spread in eastern markets (because pay to win is more normalized there) and in mobile games. It wasn’t until 2009 when EA added card packs to FIFA. Hard to say if they were inspired by the lootboxes from the east of the insane football trading card market in the west, or by both. It was only after a year and a half later in 2010 when Valve added loot boxes to TF2. So Valve definitely didn’t invent lootboxes, they weren’t even the first in the west to use them. You could argue that they popularized loot boxes but even there is an argument to be made that Overwatch was a much bigger cultural hit than TF2 or CSGO or EAs FIFA games and normalized lootboxes.

I don’t mind the “Valve is bad” narrative, but at least keep your facts straight. The “strongest DRM” is also BS but others have already somewhat covered that part.

And let’s look at music and coding. Since I can speak a bit to both. For music, OF COURSE there are difficulty sliders. When I took recorder back in school, they had 2 different versions of many songs. When I first learned Christmas music on piano, I learned special “simplified” tracks for the songs. I never “Got Gud” at music, but I still got to the end of the book.

Some songs have an easier version and a harder version, but being able to play a Christmas song on a piano doesn’t mean you can demand to be able to play Korsakovs Flight of the bumblebee on a piano. You just can’t play it, you have to “git gud” to play that song. And games are like songs. Some songs are easier, some song are harder. Some harder songs can be made easier, some can’t without losing an important part of the song.

And coding. Coding is the opposite of a Fromsoft game. You’re surrounded by mountains of tools that try to make it easier. When I bring in a junior developer, I’m not giving them some unforgiving code challenge to power through. Maybe they’ll never be good enough to design a specialized cache or optimize queries. So I give them the things they CAN do, and hold their hand so they always succeed. Junior devs don’t ever fail, not because they “git gud” but because I set them up to succeed by this little difficulty slider called “how hard is this ticket to do and how much help do they need from me?”

I feel like that analogy brings in an entirely different concept, the concept of a sherpa. You’re sherpaing junior developers by giving them easier problems and giving them tips on harder problems. But a Junior dev won’t magically know how to build a 3D engine or a compiler or something for an embedded system (just to give a few random examples). They still need to “git gud” to become a senior developer and be able to do those things. In fact I’d argue that software development as a profession is one of the closest professions to Fromsoft games, because you always need to learn new concepts or tools or ways to do things. Software development always challenges you the same way Fromsoft games challenge you. You can’t just take a problem and be “could I get the easy mode version of this problem”. And much like you sherpa junior developers so they could get better, some people sherpa others through Fromsoft games so those people could get better. Maybe instead of demanding an easy mode for your problems you find a sherpa who helps you get over them.

Up there as one of the most dangerous chemical compounds in the world, near 100% fatality rate.