I’d still 100% let them drive me instead of a sociopath conman.

I never said story games are shallow. But if the games you like are ones where you can feel like you’ve experienced all the game and the story has to offer in a single playthrough then they are, by definition, shallow. Even a great movie is worth watching multiple times of its story has any appreciable depth. Video games, even more so since there should be more to the story to experience.

Sounds like what you enjoy are shallow, linear story games. To each their own, of course. Glad you’re happy with what PS5 offers you in that regard. But the industry has a lot more to offer than that.

I’m in the same boat (as far as free time goes) but I have the opposite outlook. Strategy games, and other games with some amount of crunchy complexity, keep me engaged even when I’m not playing. I can spend some time on wikis, crafting theories, and cooking up plans throughout the week and that keeps me coming back.

I can’t do story games because it’s too easy to forget what’s going on when you spread it out that far. Or there’s online action games (shooters, mobas, etc) but it’s rare that I can guarantee I’ll be on long enough to complete a match.

Guns may not cause the mental health issues that make people turn violent, but they do allow violent people to become mass murderers. Video games do neither.

I’m not sure how anybody can look at the way GTA 5 online was monetized to hell and not seriously question how far they’re going to try to go with GTA 6. I’m fully expecting it to leak into GTA 6’s single player with an intense focus on getting more and more out of mtx.

I thought the inclusion of the even the hacking mini game in the terminal was another nice touch. I don’t know why that one made me smile. Like you said, there’s a ton of little details.

Bro what are you even talking about. Lucy and Maximus had their entire world-views turned upside down, completely changing allegiances by the end of the season. Cooper/the ghoul probably had the least development but he did go from bounty hunting for the love of it to trying to find his family again.

I’d swear you never even watched the show, you’re just throwing out mindless criticisms with no bearing on the actual plot.

I’m guessing this is it. The setting is a 1950’s culture but without the racism and sexism that were rampant at the time. Women and POC holding significant positions in the corporate world, which never would’ve happened in the actual 1950s. It is a fictional world, of course. People seem to forget that.

I would think it would take 4 back to back presidential election wins by the Democratic party. Maybe 3 if it included wipeouts of Republicans in Congress and at the state level. No party can survive being out of power for that long without changing and shifting towards were voters are and that leaves the Democrats room to shift left to solidify that flank.

We’ve already had 1. We’re on the cusp of a possible second. That means we could be 4 years from a complete collapse of the Republican party, if people were actually serious about creating a real leftist movement in this country. That’s because winning is how you affect change. A loss just tells politicians that they need to be more like the winner.

It does and they’re kinda weird (if you’re used to more like Java-style interfaces). It flips the dependency between the interface and implementor on its head. Worth looking it up, it’s interesting.

C is just a work around for B and the fact that the technology has no way to identify and overcome harmful biases in its data set and model. This kind of behind the scenes prompt engineering isn’t even unique to diversifying image output, either. It’s a necessity to creating a product that is usable by the general consumer, at least until the technology evolves enough that it can incorporate those lessons directly into the model.

And so my point is, there’s a boatload of problems that stem from the fact that this is early technology and the solutions to those problems haven’t been fully developed yet. But while we are rightfully not upset that the system doesn’t understand that lettuce doesn’t go on the bottom of a burger, we’re for some reason wildly upset that it tries to give our fantasy quasi-historical figures darker skin.

I mean “taking pictures of people who are smiling” is definitely a bias in our culture. How we collectively choose to record information is part of how we encode human biases.

I get what you’re saying in specific circumstances. Sure, a dataset that is built from a single source doesn’t make its biases universal. But these models were trained on a very wide range of sources. Wide enough to cover much of the data we’ve built a culture around.

This is the thing. There’s an incredible number of inaccuracies in the picture, several of which flat out ignore the request in the prompt, and we laugh it off. But the AI makes his skin a little bit darker? Write the Washington Post! Historical accuracy! Outrage!

How’s the concurrent player count doing? The number of people playing it on my friends list has declined significantly.

I was just thinking cartoon dicks lol

Designing for a huge amount of users costs money and expertise, so more money, and not even their most optimistic predictions included this many players. If they hadn’t made it big, that money would’ve been wasted. Which games are going to go viral is just insanely hard to predict.

People are saying that the rubber band on joystick trick doesn’t work, at least. So they at least are checking for changes to input events.

Too bad it was only one season long.

You can be thinking about shareholders despite not having them if your goal is to sell to them. I take it that they mean they don’t really have any interest in catering to the demands of even potential shareholders.