But Trump

Originally Posted by Amadeus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwiRnxSnknM


Cue responses from people who will not watch the video and thus prove it right with their ignorance.

My honest review of the video.
The 32 second Intro was entertaining, narrator seems very bri-ish, but lost me after the balloon. I lasted 1 minute and 1 second. Very challenging to masturbate to. 2/10 would not click again.

Originally Posted by samUwell

the comment section is filled with theythem trantifa ******s getting all excited that normal people are bothered because they must choose pronouns in a game. The pronoun people make up such a small % of the population, let alone gaming population that it's amazing that the dev team included it.

What a **** ass game.

And earlier this year, the Harry Potter game came out (which featured a prominent trans character) and all the trans activists showed up en mass to trash the game anyway (because "Rowling is anti-trans" (no, she's not and she has nothing to do with this stupid video game)) and anyone who streamed/played it to the point where this became a thing for some reason:
How to Hide your Hogwarts Legacy Achievements - Prima Games

So when clown girl makes a video about people outraged over stupid Politically Correct gender pronouns shoehorned into video to appease the 1% of the population of people who even give a ****... it's kind of hard to ignore that his same tribe of people lost their **** to an even more extreme.

-We've got one group who wants to boycott a company (or vote with their wallet) over a shallow or 'tone deaf' marketing ploy.
-And another group who personally harass streamers and gamers for playing a game because the creator of the IP that game was based on was labelled as 'anti-trans' in a bad faith representation of something she once tweated.

Which group are the real pieces of **** here?

And **** Jim Sterling. In the ass. With a Cactus. Because he used to pride himself on calling out industry bull**** like multi-billion dollar companies cranking out **** games and calling them "TrIpLe A" and charging full price--Which is exactly the video he should be making about Starfield. The fact that Microsoft owns Bethesda. These dudes put like 6 years into developing this game and it's a hair better than Mass Effect Andromeda?

And we're talking about pronouns instead?

Anyone remember Anita Sarkeesian?


The cow who tried to take over the gaming industry with her feminist bull****? Same scam we're seeing here.

Originally Posted by Atreides

Anyone remember Anita Sarkeesian?

Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency shuts down after 15 years - Polygon

Disclaimer: I have not been following Starfield, haven't been on the hype train, barely even knew of its existence until its release. There's probably a bunch of info that's been gleaned over its years of development, I'm coming into this fresh with some personal observations, nothing more.

Much of it is no doubt wildly and hilariously inaccurate.




Have been playing Starfield the last couple of days.. Running on a 2080 and 11th gen i7..

Yeah, I think 'unoptomised' is a fair call... given they're partnered with AMD, that's not surprising. I get the feeling (just from looking at the game and trying to work out why) that under the hood there's perhaps a lot more procedural generation going on, that a lot of the titles people compare this to are using motion captures where this is making more use of IK driven animations, and certainly some of what's being done is quite impressive (the self-shadowing on facial features - wrinkles, etc is really good, for example) the overall effect leaves something to be desired.. realistic skin has always been a serious challenge to render and this misses that by a long way.

So assuming that the devs and folks at AMD that helped them haven't just completely ****ed it up, something like that sort of system has a lot more potential... For those of us who are old enough, going back to something like Duke Nukem 3D versus Quake... DN3D arguably "looked" better to most people thanks largely to its blend of polygon graphics and 2D sprites, while Quake relied entirely on 3D polygons but was limited by the hardware available at the time, with end results being decidedly.. chunky. As a system, it was far more advanced and represented the future way of doing things, but without dedicated 3D accelerators, it was restricted to low poly counts and low resolutions in order to get anything like a playable game.

So I'm wondering if (hoping that?) the way they're doing the characters in this game is somewhat similar. Requiring motion capture and carefully created textures for character animation isn't something that scales well. If you can do that procedurally (and do it well), then suddenly you have the ability to fill a universe with characters which are all unique and can have their 'own' animations.

Combine that with AI/machine learning that can drive those physical traits as well as 'character' traits and even dialogue, and you have the potential to have a genuinely evolving sandbox. Dialogue options where you're not restricted to a handful of preselected responses but can talk back (and with speech-to-text engines actually talk back)... obviously this isn't talking about Starfield any more but some hypothetical "...down the track."

But moving away from more traditional methods of hand-crafted texture maps and mo-cap (if that's what they've done) is going to require a step backwards in both appearance and performance until everything catches up, but it's a system with much more potential for better and bigger results as time goes by. Again, it's possible I'm giving them too much credit here and it's truly just woefully optimised (I don't doubt some of that will improve with patches and driver updates), but I'm hoping it's a first step for a better long-term setup.


Also: pronoun selection/character androgyny has been a thing for a fair while now in all sorts of titles. This is by no means the first title to do it, and is pretty damn tame in comparison to plenty of others.

Originally Posted by Atreides

Correct gender pronouns shoehorned into video to appease the 1% of the population of people who even give a ****...

It would seem that a lot more people than that give a ****.

(you're being made fun of)

Originally Posted by amRam

(you're being made fun of)

yeah, by people like you

if anything, that's an accolade

the only good thing about trannys is that 40% kill themselves hopefully discouraging other would be trannys

so heres to hoping jim and ama do their good deed for humanity

Originally Posted by Amadeus

It would seem that a lot more people than that give a ****.

It would seem that way, but you would be wrong.

This is Ghostbusters (2016) all over again. Let's just please call disappointing **** a disappointment without blaming the consumer.

Originally Posted by Plasmatic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydmPh4MXT3g

She's kind of cute in a fat black uneducated kind of way... but not that cute.

Originally Posted by Nmag

She's kind of cute in a fat black uneducated kind of way...

delete this

Originally Posted by Amadeus

It would seem that a lot more people than that give a ****.

Let me put it this way: 99% wouldn't care if there were no pronoun selection.

its addition wasn't for the majority demographic.

And I'll agree that this kind of stuff does exists in games but the biggest example I can think of is Cyberpunk 2077--where it fits with the theme of the game. Even the tranny in Harry Potter was kind of a funny 'wtf' moment as it catches you off guard. But at least in Harry Potter, the devs didn't make the main character a tranny--and nobody that I saw was refunding the game due to its inclusion... so maybe there's something more to this calculation that you and Jim aren't being honest about (or are too blind to see).

Large multinational companies do this **** to make money. Full stop. I don't blame anyone for voting with their wallet to call out some stupid attempt at virtue signalling. If it's genuine and makes sense, people don't push back.

I can't find the source but someone compiled corporate twitter accounts and there were a bunch of brands that would do **** like add a pride flag and alphabet hashtags to their western bio pages--while those same companies would omit them for their international pages. It's a cheap ploy to win over idiots who don't see it for what it is. If these companies think it won't cost them anything, they'll toss it in. Specifically to Starfield, people are telling them they were wrong to think it wouldn't cost them.

If Bethesda wasn't to 'diversify' their workforce; that's their choice. If the end product of those workers is something that people don't value then they're in trouble if they can't be honest about it and I don't feel bad for a company that knowingly doubles down on a bad decision. Imo they've been a **** company since the early 2000's so w/e

It makes sense the game dev industry would be inundated with transqueers if you think about it.

Socially awkward highly creative incel types desperate for in-group affirmation. Not surprised at all that they're making a stink in that industry.

Originally Posted by Atreides

Let me put it this way: 99% wouldn't care if there were no pronoun selection.

its addition wasn't for the majority demographic.

And I'll agree that this kind of stuff does exists in games but the biggest example I can think of is Cyberpunk 2077--where it fits with the theme of the game. Even the tranny in Harry Potter was kind of a funny 'wtf' moment as it catches you off guard. But at least in Harry Potter, the devs didn't make the main character a tranny--and nobody that I saw was refunding the game due to its inclusion... so maybe there's something more to this calculation that you and Jim aren't being honest about (or are too blind to see).

Large multinational companies do this **** to make money. Full stop. I don't blame anyone for voting with their wallet to call out some stupid attempt at virtue signalling. If it's genuine and makes sense, people don't push back.

I can't find the source but someone compiled corporate twitter accounts and there were a bunch of brands that would do **** like add a pride flag and alphabet hashtags to their western bio pages--while those same companies would omit them for their international pages. It's a cheap ploy to win over idiots who don't see it for what it is. If these companies think it won't cost them anything, they'll toss it in. Specifically to Starfield, people are telling them they were wrong to think it wouldn't cost them.

If Bethesda wasn't to 'diversify' their workforce; that's their choice. If the end product of those workers is something that people don't value then they're in trouble if they can't be honest about it and I don't feel bad for a company that knowingly doubles down on a bad decision. Imo they've been a **** company since the early 2000's so w/e

It's also a gamble to raise awareness of their product through virtue signaling.

Originally Posted by Nmag

She's kind of cute in a fat black uneducated kind of way... but not that cute.

Meh.

Uneducated people are never cute, at least not to me. Especially dip****s trying to speak in a provocative way so they can be on television.

That one guy that was all "hide yo kids, hide yo wife" was also guilty of this. People at Trump rallies with T-shirts of Trump giving 2 middle fingers and screeching "TRUMP DAT ***** hehehehe" at the camera are in this category.

I know that stupid people shouldn't be judged harshly because they were born that way and cannot help it, but it's tough, man.

Thats racist

Racist against what race?

yes