/lounge/ - Lounge

>>111562
Solid game but it doesn't seem to have gotten as much traction as needed to be considered particularly successful unfortunately.

I'm not one of those people that unironically thinks that 6,000 in game RIGHT NOW means only 6,000 are playing it the entire day-but even if we presume a very optimistic interpretation that it's 6,000 new people rotating out every hour that still suggests only around 150,000 people, that multiplied by $13 (their $20 asking price minus steam's cut) and they've pulled in a little under 2 million USD which, given Yacht Club's 15 person staff is about half of what its development costs may have been over the course of the previous four years if their average before tax salary is 75k each

JUST

-and yes this isn't even counting non-payroll budgetary concerns which are doubtless considerable. It's so over lads; the Shovel Knight dev may have ironically dug their own grave with this one unless sales pick up. L-...LOL!

>>111723
The only way to make a profit on a game is to keep costs down. If you have to pay people a real salary you might as well just donate your lifesavings to israel.

>>111723
says they sold 300k copies, its not just steam.
i would've preferred they did psx style instead of early snes style.

I just know they're going to ruin the OoT remake somehow. They ruined OoT v1.1 with the awful new Fire Temple music due to religious censorship, they ruined the color palettes and lighting in Wind Waker HD and Twilight Princess HD, and they ruined the character models and animations (e.g. Link running) in OoT 3DS. Regardless it will be a hit because Nintendrones are in a cult like Apple fangirls and Steam/Gabe fanboys.

GTA3 was made with 23 employees.

>>111883
overstaffed isnt the word there lol

>>111890
I'm sure redx would have appreciated the new design

>>111890
The only real OoT was for the 64. Nintendo a SHIT.

>>111890
It's going to be garbage. Nintendon is dying and trying to squeeze the last cash out of their cultists before the end

Youngsters know better.

Graphics? Nothing looks better than my imagination.

The thought occured to me last night that the Zelda series is pretty much blatantly copying the fantasy film Legend from 1985
>orphaned forest child is friends with a princess
>princess is captured by a demon that looks like Ganon
>forest boy goes to save her
>meets fairies, has a fairy that looks like a ball of light that follows him around to help
>he stops by a shrine in the forest to get a sword and armor
>goes into a deep underground lair under a tree that strongly resembles the great deku tree
It's all so blatant. I suppose it's as they say- good artists create, great artists steal

https://archive.org/details/legend-us-tv-cut

>>111955
>good artists create, great artists steal
Was just about to say this.

Im playing V Rising, also acquiring Enshrouded. If any of you know any good 24-26 release open world survival, roguelite, good fps or tower defence games you can hit me with a recc. I like V Rising but I havent unlocked fast travel for my castle/,base yet and it's kinda a pain running all the time back and forth... Might relocate to near a waypoint.

>>112050
those games are cringe and shit and youre retarded

>>110291
The FF foids in this video are truly mediocre looking. There are literally better looking women in every gas station and Walmart across America

>>112073
Well of course, real-life women are far more beautiful for their flaws and imperfections so long as they're not completely covered in so much paint and perfect studio lighting that they look like porcelain dolls. Case in point: imagine how much better she here would look in a more natural setting than celebrity photos.

>>112073
>this third world fuck makes like 50 images every other day and is absconding with $8,000 a month minimum by pressing "enter" on his keyboard repeating his "[character(s)] in the style of [actual artist]" prompt over and over again. He probably has a simple script doing it for him and doesn't even look too closely at the output, himself, and likely has multiple accounts, besides.

We literally live in a demonic timeline lmao

>>112079
>making AI pictures
>'demonic'

youre retarded as fuck

>>112080
>Data Centers poisoning the environment, causing desertification and making so much noise they're driving nearby people and wildlife insane
>Data Centers being erected everywhere despite overwhelmingly negative popular support and in spite of noise and other pollution ordnances that would see normal people or businesses fined into insolvency or even thrown behind bars
>Data Center energy use and infrastructure costs being diverted to nearby residents causing their energy bills to skyrocket
>Data Center hardware needs causing massive increases in consumer electronics costs and costs of any related markets that rely on electronic components
>all so some low iq amoral third world faggot a thousand miles away can make a small fortune effortlessly peddling herculean amounts of homunculus composites of someone else's artwork to mentally ill fap masters
>that's it, that's the literal use-case and as good as any for this technology there is

Yes, it's literally demonic when deception, theft and environmental destruction at biblical scale is rewarded and likewise effort is exploited and uncompensated, I don't know what else to tell you. AI isn't the only thing bad about how things work these days, obviously, but it's just a particularly sensational example of its excesses.

>>112082
larry ellison of oracle says the use-case is for surveillance (realistically only against white anti-sea mites)

>finance.yahoo.com/news/larry-ellison-once-predicted-citizens-171713539.html

>>112082
Sounds kinda like an undead necropolis spreading blight. I personally like AI slop, but I also understand that it's the lure attached to the head of the angler fish

Data necropolises are evil

>>112085
The AI is trained off of the best artists and the work of the best photographers, musicians and so on so it's natural to "like it" or if nothing else be impressed by it and to be upset by people liking it would be victim blaming to a degree; why wouldn't someone enjoy having an illustration or book or piece of music tailor-made to their own brief description? It is however at the end of the day a tool that by and large was created specifically to deceive consumers and to demoralize humans into abandoning all creative processes for themselves by cheapening them all down to nothing.

>>112084
That sounds about right. Remember when we were all worked up about the Utah Data Center specifically 15-ish years ago? smh

>>112082
tldr methhead retard ramblings probably though

>>112086
the main ethical issue with "AI" is that companies are stealing people's work and renting that information out for profit. if we (royal we, not me, i don't really care in things i have no say in and will just adapt however i can, i break stupid laws every second i breathe) as a soyciety are just going to pretend copyright and IP no longer apply, then "AI" should at least become a not-for-profit public utility (or similar possibly-more-efficient arrangements, e.g. membership co-op) where the citizens have an actual stake

>>112089
Even with all that, a lot of them seem to be losing out on their ass-and bigly. Consumers (outside of octogenarian boomers that don't know any better, and people who are very invested in the technology themselves) have largely rejected the idea that they should pay for content without human input and effort. A few outliers here and there, as aggravating as they may be to those of us who know we'll work our entire lives to do by hand what a machine can do in seconds, can't remotely make up for the billions these companies are losing. There will be a huge market retrace on this stuff over the next two or three years. As you've more or less suggested, their only hope of surviving is entrenching themselves as a "public service" and integrating themselves into the tax code which is absolutely deranged but probably inevitable given how these things work

>>112086
>It is however at the end of the day a tool that by and large was created specifically to deceive consumers and to demoralize humans into abandoning all creative processes for themselves by cheapening them all down to nothing
This is merely the advancement of progress. Horse breeders once said the same about cars. The issue with data centers is that they're for mass surveillance and suppression of the people

>>112089
>the main ethical issue with "AI" is that companies are stealing people's work and renting that information out for profit
Thoughts are not original. We all stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. Intellectual copyright is poison for the advancement of a society. Pokemon copyrights throwing a ball and troglodytes cheer

>>112091
Of course it seems like progress if you have the mindset of a goyim drone consumer that'd repeat a lame surface level interpretation like this. Snap out of it lad.

Take this technology to its logical conclusion and even ignore its current predominance as a tool to industrialize massive fraud on behalf of third worlders who'd literally be rolling around in their own shit without it (and have instead become legitimate "trusted journalists", "artisans", "musicians", and "authors" as far as you're concerned), corporations defrauding customers, employees defrauding their employers. Beyond all that deceit, beyond the almost comically super villainous effect on the environment, what it will soon evolve to be is a means to trap those under its spell into a permanent, endless cycle of seductive, masturbatory self-curated fraudulent content in which hundreds of hours worth of consumption can be manifested with minutes' worth of input.

It has irrevocably poisoned illustration, animation, photography, film, music, creative writing, graphic design, non-fiction writing-not a single aspect of the "digital life" has gone untainted by its employ or reasonable suspicion thereof and this ingress has a residual effect on the real world in which people are discincentivized to pursue healthy self-actualization in favor of the equivalent of entering a query into "Google Images" and pressing "enter" over and over again until a self-satisfactory result is produced.

>>112119
>corporations defrauding customers, employees defrauding their employers. Beyond all that deceit
If AI slop fits the bill then that's either no problem, or the employer/ees problem. Not my problem

>it will soon evolve to be is a means to trap those under its spell into a permanent, endless cycle of seductive, masturbatory self-curated fraudulent content
The internet has been that already for a long time

>It has irrevocably poisoned illustration, animation, photography, film, music, creative writing, graphic design, non-fiction writing-not a single aspect of the "digital life" has gone untainted by its employ or reasonable suspicion thereof
Human crafted art is not threatened by the existence of AI content provided it is of sufficient quality. If one is threatened by AI they need to either change careers or up their skill level

Complaining about AI is no different than the complaining about video games ("THAT'S NOT REAL FUN UNLIKE SPORTS!"), or about the car by horse-and-buggy salesmen a century back ("THAT'S NOT REAL TRAVEL, THE AUTOMOBILE IS ARTIFICIAL!!"), or scribes complaining about the printing press ("THAT'S NOT REAL WRITING, ALL THIS EASILY COPIED SLOP IS GOING TO THREATEN TRUE ART!!!"), or the industrial revolution ("THAT'S NOT REAL LABOR, ACTUAL WORKERS ARE GOING TO LOSE THEIR JOBS!!!!"), or that one huge industry where entire ships would go to the Arctic or Antarctica and chop up blocks of ice to take down south and sell to people to keep their food cold until the invention of the fridge ("REFRIGERATORS AREN'T REAL COOLING, IT'S BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!!!!!"). tl;dr keep up with the times or be left behind

Can see why Oh The Biomes We've Gone disables the eroded borealis by default. It's neat, but obnoxious.

>>112120
>>112137
You're speaking in materialistic terms and even then you're off base; you're comparing inventions that have made things objectively more efficient and less expensive to AI which has done the literal opposite. LOL

Over 99% of artists, musicians and writers will never make their primary wage plying their trade in art. The amount of artists AI affects in this manner per capita is very little so speaking in terms of material wealth or career isn't entirely appropriate. Sure, it's noteworthy but it's still largely beside the point.

Human made art is about effort, self-actualization and the pursuit of connection with others. AI's purpose alternatively is atomization, creating a world where so much is churned out in such numbers and with such ease that there is no time or interest for anything other than what we ourselves are made "capable" of through our subscription to the machine (and the brown drinking water, inorganic market fluctuations, surprise utility bill increases and new taxes that comes with it).

>left behind
Ok, I'll stay behind with Gustave Dore, Rembrandt and Michelangelo, you can go on ahead with the guy we were talking about earlier who's made over 140 images in the past two days and who will have without fail have produced 140 more images in the next two days from now and so on.

>>112144
>AI's purpose alternatively is atomization, creating a world where so much is churned out in such numbers and with such ease that there is no time or interest for anything
That's literally what all technology does. Thanks to the gasoline engine we are atomized into cars, and plastic consumables can be shipped across the ocean and then tossed into the ocean when discarded. All technology enslaves. All "efficiency" (that you claim to value) further atomizes. A large family once was needed to farm. Now the efficiency granted by technology has made it where one man can grow the food for a million people. "Efficient" GMO food that grows much faster than traditional crops

>you're comparing inventions that have made things objectively more efficient and less expensive to AI which has done the literal opposite
Efficient = less humans needed to get the job done = atomization

>>112120
>Human crafted art is not threatened by the existence of AI content provided it is of sufficient quality.
Simply not true in a lot of cases. The only scenario where I personally can see hiring an artist at this point is if you need a lot of art that needs to be sequential and consistent, like a 2D fighter or something. It's not that I would like to stiff artists or anything, but "quality" has largely become a cope at this point and it would take something niche to justify hiring an artist or in many cases even buying assets now. What you see people generating from mainstream LLMs like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok are actually substandard results. Models that have a specialized purpose are much better at their job.

>>112144
>Human made art is about effort, self-actualization and the pursuit of connection with others. AI's purpose alternatively is atomization, creating a world where so much is churned out in such numbers and with such ease that there is no time or interest for anything other than what we ourselves are made "capable" of through our subscription to the machine (and the brown drinking water, inorganic market fluctuations, surprise utility bill increases and new taxes that comes with it).

Speaking as someone who used to draw a lot and is cognizant of the true costs of "AI", I largely agree with your sentiment, but firstly if we're honest here most art is commercial slop and most people who never tried to take art seriously aren't going to have the same appreciation for the craft that you do. It's similar to someone who wants to write their own game engine instead of using unreal or unity. While it is an impressive feat, no one outside of the craft is going to give a fuck if the result looks worse than ready-made assets in unity. It's like how imageboard admins always think their new software is going to be a real game-changer and drive traffic toward their site for some reason.

And while AI is very inefficient on a macro level, It is my belief that for the time being we are in the AI "golden age", where it isn't totally monopolized and useless as I expect it to one day become, and can be used productively for personal or small indie projects. Back in the day if you were making something as simple as an Oblivion mod and you wanted voice actors you would in all likelihood need to do it yourself or you would use some shitty text to speech program, and then even if you were lucky enough to find a group of amateur volunteers, you'd need to edit the various audio files of different quality yourself and hope they'd do more line reads if you decided to change anything. Do you need custom icons or textures? Well then you're going to need to be able to draw or find an artist. Want new music? Well better know how to make music or find someone to do it for you. Sure there are a lot of free assets out there already, but AI fills all the holes so you don't need to be a multi-talented savant or have a small team just to produce something that feels complete. Also the fact is the quality you can get from AI is usually better than what you can reasonably expect to get on a budget. Lastly if you need answers for just about anything, Claude AI has given me the best results I've seen for years. It is leagues better than other mainstream ones when it comes to finding information, and it's very suspect that it's the only American-based LLM the government is taking issue with.

Stop Killing Games in the EU failed and got no concessions and I said from the beginning they should've at least pushed for something like stricter upfront product labeling at purchase stating that it's online-only and can shut down at any point kind of like with tobacco product warnings (so that if you're still stupid enough to buy something like The Crew, it's your own fault for wasting money on an online-only product) but they didn't bother with that, instead they only asked for the maximalist demand of forcing companies to have an offline patch or equivalent. I predicted this would happen but y'all got butthurt (>>103504 >>103505 >>103506).

>>112150
Uncle Ted was right once again.

>>112153
Yeah and Rossmann became blackpilled and quit lobbying after toothless legislation got passed and seeing how little got achieved in a decade. Frieren autist was correct, you can't fight the system from within.

>>112144
Who can hate AI when it can create nightmares unavailable to the human psyche such as this?

They're so desperate the shills are here on dying microchans.

>>112264
I think their bot armies are just swelling in numbers

>>112287
the

Steam Machine 512 GB: $1049 USD / 1509 CAD / 1039 EUR / 879 GBP / 1609 AUD
Steam Machine 2.00 TB: $1349 USD / 1919 CAD / 1359 EUR / 1149 GBP / 2109 AUD

500 GB microATX PC: $1085
2.00 TB microATX PC: $1326

What does this custom PC build with three variants have over the Steam Machine?

RTX 5060 Ti GPU which is 5 times faster than Steam Machine's semi-custom AMD GPU (see chart).
32 GB of RAM instead of 16 GB of RAM.
More USB 3.0 ports in the back.
Guaranteed Windows support if you need it.
Future upgradeability.

Knowing Steam fanboys though, it'll probably still profit enough for Gabe to purchase yet another superyacht.

>>112345
its a new games console that isnt xbox playstation or nintendo, regardless of price, its interesting, i wouldnt buy it but i can see why someone would, also, rich people exist, that isnt that expensive

>>112345
My knowledge of tech specs is about a decade out of date, as I remember when 32gb RAM was "bragging rights" not "this is what I need to run Chrome or Firefox faster than I can click or tap". But I will say a custom-build is almost always superior to a pre-made, not just in saving money (you aren't paying for their labor in putting it together, assuming you're building it yourself) but in having the specs fit your planned use cases so you don't overpay for (i.e.) a top-tier graphics card when what you plan to do would be better served by a bigger better processor.

>>112349
>this is what I need to run Chrome or Firefox faster than I can click or tap
thats just not the case though is it

>>112350
Close enough, and coming in quick.

>>112388
>close enough

its just not though you lying freak

>>112390
ok sheldon