battlewraith
-
Posts
1346 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Patch Notes
Posts posted by battlewraith
-
-
On 10/17/2025 at 11:15 PM, Silver Lancer said:
I uploaded a screeshot into Grok Imagine and I love the way it turned out.
Why are you posting this stuff here instead of the AI art thread?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Excraft said:
Cool! So you're sending money to the families of all the artists who created the superhero genre this game is based on?
If it was identifiable as their distinct creations, yeah they or the IP owners would expect compensation --hence rules in this game about using copyrighted characters. Beyond that, this argument is just silly. Nobody owns genres, despite the fact that they may have been popularized by certain creators.
-
11 minutes ago, Excraft said:
Exactly. Bob Ross learned (some say he "stole") from Bill Alexander. Should Ross' estate pay the Bill Alexander estate for any money Bob Ross made off of using the wet on wet technique? Is any artist today who paints impressionistic style paintings forking over any money to Monet's estate? I guess its acceptable for one artist to copy another artists' style or work and sell it for money because they're all artists, so that's makes it ok.
This is a weird argument. People get sued for copyright infringement. You can look into court cases and see what types of things constitute infringement.
A style or technique alone is generally not something that an individual owns (eg. Monet doesn't own impressionism).
-
5 minutes ago, biostem said:
You really don't know what automation is, do you?
You come across as someone who doesn't understand art production or automation in this context. If I crop something, either physically or digitally, I'm making a decision and taking action on it. Digital work is definitely more flexible, but so what? You think artists don't make changes on physical paintings or drawings? You're fixating on one aspect of the process of image making and thinking that makes it equivalent to AI, that's ridiculous. You give AI some tokens and it gives you results based on what it's model thinks those tokens mean. You have no hand in the actual image making.
18 minutes ago, biostem said:Some people are just not capable of certain types of art, so use various tools in order to achieve their ends. It is no different than using a long lever to lift or move something that you couldn't move otherwise. Do you complain when a computer program scans your registry for errors instead of having to go through it manually? Do you complain if an automatic transmission "robs" the driver of "developing" that perceived skill? Art programs literally "do the work for them" - again, it's just the degree to which it does so that you have a problem with...
You can make all these inane comparisons all day long but it's pretty easy to demonstrate the difference here. If you can't draw at all--Photoshop is not going to help you. All those layers and undoes will not make a difference. But you could go to Midjourney and tell it to make a portrait in the style of Norman Rockwell and it will do just that.
23 minutes ago, biostem said:And most artists cannot learn without "scraping" the methods and techniques of those that came before them.
The scraping involves breaking down the formal characteristics into a kind of vector math that is associated with tokens and filtered through a model. It's actually nothing like how a human artist actually learns and it's completely contingent on existing work that people have done. The AI doesn't ever learn anything and it can only be derivative because it's doing a pastiche of datapoints from it's dataset. Non artists trying to defend AI scraping don't understand the difference between that and a human being having influences.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, biostem said:
Actually, they are. You can undo something you don't like - automation. You can have it save your work at set intervals - automation. You can change colors, layers, hide some objects, and so on - all tasks you could not do by hand - all automation. They are different degrees of automation, but in the end, it is a person providing input and the computer processing that input to produce a result. You are just unhappy with the degree to which AI performs those tasks vs what you have deemed acceptable.
Non-destructive editing is not automation. The only thing that you mentioned that would qualify would be auto saving, assuming you were using an application set up to do that.
Undoing something you don't like is automation...really? So my pencil is a form of automation because it has an eraser on the back?
Computers run automated processes to execute code. That doesn't mean that non-AI digital art applications are automated to create art or do editing. Any more than the gears that automatically turn on a bicycle mean that it's self-propelling.
AI is bad for artists, actors, musicians, etc. It robs people of the benefits of actually developing artistically instead of having something do the work for them. Fortunately it's not about what I deem acceptable. Most creatives hate it and it cannot function without scraping their work. Even non artists are getting tired of the slop and fake videos of cute animals bouncing on trampolines, etc.
-
1
-
-
Just now, biostem said:
Take the actual physical photo and edit it without a computer, like people used to do...
Both would be examples of me editing a photo. Neither are automated processes.
Same with art. I can draw on a piece of paper. I can draw on the computer as well. Neither case is automation.
-
1
-
-
Just now, biostem said:
Just as cars automated tasks that horses or other such beasts of burden used to perform, Photoshop and other such tools automated manual art/editing techniques. AI is just the next step in that evolution.
Wow, as someone who has been using Photoshop since the 90s, I didn't know it automated art and image editing. Maybe you can point out the hot key that will tell it to do my work for me, I must have missed it somehow.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Krimson said:
I was there when the market for bow-legged waifus fell out at DeviantArt. None of the artists I know are blaming AI for anything because they have ability. Also, why is it that people ONLY started caring about artist compensation AFTER generative AI came out?
Compensation for artists has been an issue for a long time. The concern with AI is not simply about compensation, it's about your creative output being used to train an automated process that is intended to replace the need for people like you. Most anti-AI people aren't focused on blaming afaik. They are just trying to keep AI content out of their communities and are focused on supporting creative people and not tech companies.
1 hour ago, biostem said:No one mourns for the buggy-whip salesmen...
Fallacious comparison. Technological development leads to specific goods and contingent services becoming obsolete. The type of AI being discussed is an automated process that seeks to replace the creative labor of human beings in general (ironically by scraping vast datasets of human creative output). So the logical extension of your statement is "no one mourns for the creative people."
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Krimson said:
Don't worry about the Anti-AI crowd, not even a little bit. All they do is make comments but otherwise they do nothing. They have no organization, no lobbyists, no funding, no plan, and no clue. They'll make comments about AI wasting water, while eating rice and beef.
The Anti-AI crowd are disruptors. They ONLY exist to disrupt while contributing nothing to society. On Reddit they are a dime a dozen.
Ignore the disruptors. No one is going to hold their hands and shut down AI for them.
This is one of the craziest AI takes I've ever read.
The anti-AI crowd are mainly artists. They are the ones who actually create things for the society. And they actually do have a plan--don't indulge in this garbage. Try to protect your work so that it isn't laundered through an AI process that some company will profit off of. Etc.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:
Update.
Now, there’s been some talking around on these boards before as to whether box office may or may not be the best indicator of how good a movie is.
But.
If current numbers are anything to go by, Ares will open with around $38m over the four-day holiday weekend.
Which is about $5m behind Tron:Legacy from 2010, and $1m behind… Morbius.
…ouch?
Without a serious pickup over the next few weeks, this will leave Legacy as the only one of the three to hit that magic 3x breakeven point on release. (The 1982 one ran it very close, but the Mouse made much more than the movie on merch.)
By contrast, the album is mostly favourably reviewed and hitting the top end of charts all over the shop. I don’t think it’ll become as iconic as the Daft Punk one, but it’s not quite as warm/cuddly/chillout spa zone friendly as that…
The majority of the “good” reviews I’ve seen said something like “it’s an awesome album that was released with a movie.”
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, macskull said:
At the end of the day, this game has never been very difficult which tends to attract a certain type of player, very few of whom are interested in PvP. Hell, go into almost any PvP-related thread outside of the PvP section of the forums and you’ll find people who are outright hostile to even the idea of PvP even though this game’s PvP has always been entirely opt-in
I think there is some sort of power fantasy dynamic that is at play here—the degree to which a lot of players got personally offended if their character was defeated is crazy.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, JayboH said:
Yeah the aggro limits was the point. Do you think Captain Fabulous is still upset that he can't play the game that way anymore?
I don't know, why don't you ask him?
Nerfs kill people's fun. Usually in service to some overarching view of balance. The people that left over ED probably had other complaints and ED was the straw that broke the camel's back. And they were probably right to do so.
We have hindsight now. We also have confirmation bias. If you're still here posting, you probably favor a finely balanced, predictable, more of the same kind of game experience.
-
4 hours ago, JayboH said:
The absurdity of Invul tankers aggroing an entire map of Warwolves...
Pfft…
The absurdity of an invuln scrapper herding the whole map.
Which was a blast. Fun times. Some of the best times involved things being out of wack.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Rudra said:
But why does it also affect the character's teammates and pets? Because they are following the character's example and striking at the same point on the target, emulating your movements to avoid being hit, and following your lead to hit targets they would not be able to find without your guidance.
Riiight. And when you have multiple characters with these powers on a team, the group essentially becomes synchronized K-pop dancers with crime fighting choreography.
This is no more or less goofy a post-hoc rationalization than what the OP was describing.
The name of the game at this point is powerset proliferation. The fact that something exists elsewhere is not a reason to prevent it from occurring elsewhere. Because something like focused accuracy is available in a patron or epic pool doesn’t mean players shouldn’t have more options.
Even is this was something like a single target version of the leadership pool—that would be interesting. As Beet already suggested, I’d like to see something like this being an avenue for debuff resistance.
-
1
-
-
I think the scene in part helps define Metamorpho as a character. I doubt many people watching that movie know him. The whole sequence tells us something about his powers and that he has a moral tipping point, at which he will risk further separation or even harm to his child in order to take a chance on Superman.
-
53 minutes ago, BrandX said:
I felt the scene was showing just how evil Lex and the Belarus President were. Lex murders someone in cold blood and they both shrug it off. Lex is more than just a guy with a high IQ and a little prick who's jealous of Superman, he's evil regardless. If it wasn't Superman he'd be going after someone else.
The scene also took place in Luther’s pocket dimension, where his god complex is unfettered.
-
Is it any good? Do the people that have played it feel that it’s worth supporting?
-
8 hours ago, JKCarrier said:
In other words, people who actually like the game. The whole point of Homecoming is that people loved the old game and wanted to play it again.
The whole point of Homecoming is to bring back the game AND continue development. Which is why we have a suggestions forum and engage in these conversations.
The shivans and nukes are a funny example. In a sense they are free, because they were content set within the context of an open PvP zone. The intent was to bring players into the zone, where they would fight each other in order to achieve the objectives and get the desired reward. If people can routinely go there and get the rewards without interacting with anyone from the opposite side, then the primary challenge in earning the reward has been skipped. And yet the sky did not fall. The game did not go shrieking down the slippery slope of ruin.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, srmalloy said:
If they're such a trivial matter, why don't you just skip them, since you seem to believe that they're not worth the effort to acquire unless the requirements for them are dumbed down to the point where you don't have to make any real effort to get them?
I do skip them, generally speaking. And when I don’t, the “real effort” amounts to moving a character to locations that are memorized or marked on a map in order to get “exploration” badges. Or clicking on history plaques, the contents of which were first introduced in what, 2004?
Moreover, the “don’t like it, don’t do it” argument can be applied to anything.
Don’t like that a melee set underperforms? Don’t play it.
Don’t like that certain ATs are less favored in hard content? Don’t play them.
Don’t like that certain areas of the game are underpopulated (eg. redside)? Just don’t play there.
It’s a recipe for stagnation that favors risk-averse players that are satisfied with what they have and don’t want change.
-
1 hour ago, JKCarrier said:
If getting those accolade boosts becomes a trivial matter, then that does impact game balance to some degree. Would it be game-breaking? On its own, nah. But it's another degree of power creep in a game that people already complain is too easy.
They are a trivial matter. It’s just a repetitive, tedious activity that people have been doing for years. There’s nothing particularly difficult about it.
As for the power creep argument—the game is easy, whether they make a change like this or not. People that have a problem with this can play harder content or skip the accolades if they think it’s a big deal.
-
13 hours ago, JKCarrier said:
Incremental adjustments? Sure. Major alterations? Total crap shoot. Remember when the live devs "fixed" PVP?
Tweaking the requirements of the accolades to make them less tedious is, imo, an incremental adjustment. It does nothing to change the strength of the accolades or their influence on gameplay.
-
2 hours ago, JKCarrier said:
erything in this game is a balance between effort and reward. Is the reward worth it to you? Then you put in the effort. If it's not, you don't. Nobody's holding a gun to your head either way.
1 hour ago, Troo said:The game is what it is. Folks like the game or not. We've been playing the game for how long? Are we playing a game we don't like for that long? It is a mix of elements that work in concert with each other.
The game is not some unchanging platonic ideal. It’s gone through various phases of development and continues to be altered. The gist of development is to make it fun and appealing presumably to a wide variety of players. The notion that certain legacy things have some sort of perfect balance and therefore should not be adjusted is silly. It’s a dogmatism that could actually cost the game players in the wider view of things.
-
8 hours ago, Skyhawke said:
Or the fact that it feels like they're saying "32 gb of ram" because that's the new "you must have this much" standard for AAA gaming now, it seems. Nerd buzzword, if you will. That and the way they're treating people on the Steam forums makes me wonder if Randy Pitchford is their PR person. 😄
It’s just crazy to me. The last three games I played all have vastly better graphics than this and didn’t recommend that much. Google came up with some minimum specs for this game that are lower, but they aren’t listed on the company’s info page. I think I’d probably have to buy a new computer to run those recommended specs.
-
15 hours ago, Kyksie said:
I just noticed that the recommended system specs include 32GB RAM. Even the upcoming Battlefield 6 only recommends 16. Slideshow framerates and microstuttering ahoy.
Everyone is rightly focused on price, but damn that’s a lot of RAM for a game that looks like that. Seems very risky to drop enough money for a AAA game on something that appears very poorly optimized.
Alien: Earth
in Comic, Hero & Villain Culture
Posted
I was out of town for a month, so didn't see the last two episodes until a couple of days ago.
There were a lot of things I liked about the show, but I think it suffered from everything being sort of shoehorned into this Peter Pan theme--to the extent that interesting issues, characterizations, ideas, etc. were just overlooked or discarded.
My main gripes:
--I don't buy that these hybrids would remain childlike for long. I think they would develop really quickly and in ways that would probably seem unexpected or counterintuitive to the technicians. The closest thing we got to that was the character that became convinced she was pregnant, but that wasn't allowed to play out. There's also no explanation why Wendy develops super hacking skills and the ability to talk to xenomorphs while the others are hanging out throwing pebbles in the pond--other then keeping things in line with the Peter Pan motif.
--Nearly every human or humanoid character in the series possessed the self preservation instincts of a potato. It's one thing in the original film when you have a group of space truckers encounter an alien, while being mislead by an android. It's another when you have trained people who know they're dealing with dangerous lifeforms exhibit sustained incompetence in dealing with them.
--At the start of the series, everyone is speculating that the hybrids will lead to great discoveries such as faster than light travel. By the end, Boy Kavalier tells them "you're just floor models!" Wtf?
By the end of the episodes, I really didn't find myself rooting for anyone with the exception of eyeball creature. I do think it's interesting that the people ultimately responsible for the situation are trapped at the end. It could be interesting to see them have to put their heads together and think of a way to turn the tables on the hybrids. However, the genius made stupid decisions throughout and I don't have faith that the writers would actually redeem him. I was also convinced that Kirsh wanted to end humanity, but I guess that's not the case.
It did inspire some dog costumes this year: