#YES the overall game was good

[tethys-the-aquatic-sea-godness]

One other thing that bothers me in the Bhaal plot of BG3 is that they made it sound like Bhaal created his Bhaalspawns as... servants? Puppets? And that's never been the purpose of the Bhaalpsawns? Ever? Every new Bhaalspawn he created in BG3 is counterproductive to his plan.

Bhaal knew in advance he would die, so he divided his divine essense into many mortal vessels. Then he charged his faithful (cough) high priestess Amelyssan to ensure every Bhaalspawn was killed after his passing, so that his power could be returned to him and he could be reborn.

Thats' the plan. A plan that's impeded, not helped, by more Bhaalspawns. It means splitting more of his essence.

Bhaal never wanted those spawns, he never intended to keep them, he never wanted a 'perfect child', they were fuel, born to be consumed for his return.

And that Larian has to make their dark urge the one true most *specialest* Bhaalspawn is just... pathetic. Can't find another word for it. They're trying to push aside Gorion's ward entire storyline, two incredible previous games, just to shove in their perfect, most special Bhaalspawn of all Bhaalspawns. And what flesh and blood of Bhaal is the Dark Urge made of? When Cyric killed him, he didn't have a mortal body, he was possessing one. Is the Dark Urge made of the dead flesh and blood of the guy he was possessing? Doesn't feel that special, but sure, go ahead.

I'm not saying their main charatcers shouldn't have been special somehow, it's part of the salt, but they should've have made it special with their own story. Not by trying too hard, and failing, to match the previous two games. I don't know, make the main character special reguarding something Illithid? You know, the supposed main focus of this game?

And yes, they do fail. The original game gives you the opportunity to become a god, in this one, your great evil achievement would be to be to work for a god. Congratulation, you've got a job. The one where you control the brain would be the only one where you truly achieve your evil overlord dreams. Surprise, surprise, that's the one connected to Illithid plot, not the Bhaal plot. They can do good work when they're not trying to one up their predecessors.

[mellowthorn]

i finished my da2 replay with anders rivalmance and i chose to kill him and now i can't stop listening to "i'm not calling you a liar" and it's making me very very sad :(

[s-ccaam-era-crepe]

this was the arts and crafts btw <3

[crab-people-overlord]

An excerpt from my wip on A03 (and something I’ve been too scared to share on here, idk why lmao) along with some parallels from the show. I’ve been working on a ‘The Good Place’ x ‘South Park’ crossover for some time now. I’m almost to publishing the very last season (most of it is already written and just needs to be edited ).

I’m always a lot of chapters ahead vs what I publish so I can edit beforehand. Part of this is because I’m aware I’m not a great creative writer and want to spend time editing. I’m much more in tune with writing dialogue and argumentative computer science college papers vs pretty prose, but this has been great for me to practice. Below are Google doc excerpts for the last chapter in my Season 3 of 4 I’ll drop on A03 soon:

The above scene corresponds to the Good Place season 3 finale x South Park’s 07x14 ‘Raisin’s’. It was watching those two episodes of the respective shows that got me thinking that a crossover between the two shows in the first place would work.

I know it’s long and at some parts it seems like the end games (Style and Bunny) may not even come to be (I promise they do), but I hope y’all will give it a chance :) I really do care about all the characters I write about, and while it’s quite slow burn and sometimes it feels hopeless, every one gets substantial character arcs by the end along with substantial ship gains… just in a very slow burn way.

Note- you don’t necessarily have to have watched either show to enjoy, but it’s best if you at least are familiar with South Park (since I drop in way too many useless ass references/Easter eggs to SP lmao). Almost done with season 3 of 4 but already have most of 4 already written to be edited and would love to get more engagement xD

[moirascribbles]

So, I finished Veilguard last night and I'm still just...

[felix-krain]

I love Sonic Frontiers guys!

[mariyekos]

One day I'm going to finish my FFXVI mega essay, but for now I think my thoughts on the game can be summarized like this:

When making FFXVI, the developers sure knew what they wanted to do, and by god were they going to do it.

Were they also going to do other things that would make those first thing better? Were they going to do other things that make a good game overall? Ehhhhh...they were going to do what they wanted to do, and invest all their time and effort into that, so surely that would be enough! Surely!

[stinkrascal]

now that ive beaten bg3 idk what to do w myself... i miss her already...........

[hmmwellok]

i love how, after spending a week with harry's antics and then finding out he used to be a gym teacher, kim just goes for the conclusion that gym teachers are just superhuman like that

[tenthdocter]

This is all because of ange btw. His pull is obviously massive considering he literally convinced timo to come in 2 seconds lol

[sysig]

Hey baby, did it hurt when you, oh geez, yeah it did, sorry for asking (Patreon)

[agentark]

stream of consciousness talk about the hunger games prequel below

I find it really interesting that people don't like how certain last names (that we already know from the trilogy) show up in the prequel book (e.g Lucky Flickerman is the host/commentator and we can presume that he's Caesar's relative - father? idk if it's stated)

I've seen people say they wish there were other people involved, that they didn't like recognizing so many names, but that's the whole point.

Like, there is very little upward mobility in Panem, whether you're district or capitol. Every single citizen is entrenched in their role from the birth. Not only that, but legacy? tradition? those are cornerstones of this whole system - so Heavensbee Hall/Hilaria/Plutarch? Arachne/Seneca Crane? Lucky/Caesar Flickerman? There's a reason Plinth and Highbottom are not names we see again if I'm remembering correctly.

Anyway, to me it just screams, "This is how it is, was, and will always be." The people with power and influence, the people who made it out of the rebellion with their wealth intact, they're going to be the first players in this larger game and they are never going to stop playing.

Not to mention, the man that Snow becomes? He's keeping people who can play their part close, and people he can manipulate closer.

[bazelgeuce]

I'm so fucking tired

[the-rogue-mockingjay]

Worst Part/Best Part of Ravi’s MSQ journey so far—GO!

OKAY UHHH. ALL OF IT

Jk LMAO

We're making a sandwich out of this, we gonna start with aspects of MSQ that she likes, put all the MSQ shit she hates in the middle, and then we're gonna end with which sections of MSQ she enjoyed the most! :> Buckle up, friends, and let me spin you a bit of O'ravi's tale! 🥪☕

Best part of MSQ, as in "the aspects she likes the most": getting to meet such a huge variety of people, see all these incredible vistas, making a positive impact on people's lives, the friends she's made along the way, just- the incredible depths of love that she gets to experience. In some ways, it's her ultimate dream come true- she set out to become a minstrel, she wanted to see the heart of humanity, to learn of other cultures, she wanted to just...it's hard to put into words, but she wanted to live life to the fullest. To experience fully, to understand fully, it's sort of like- you know how Y'shtola's dream is to uncover the truths and secrets that lie at the heart of the world? O'ravi's dream is very very similar, except instead of being like, based on knowledge of the star, it's centered around people- their histories, their folklores and languages and songs, the love and loss and hope, the rage and sorrow and despair. O'ravi loves the star, but her truest love has always been people, not unlike Venat. And being the WoL is the only path that allows this dream to be reality.

Worst part of MSQ, as in "the aspects of it she doesn't like": she has a whole ass list and it is LONG. Really long, and it includes watching people die, people using her for their own political ends, having to put up with people she fucking hates, being everyone's Ace In The Hole, people making her play the kingmaker, people acting entitled to her time and energy (this is the biggest reason why she currently dislikes and distrusts Wuk Lamat T^T*), having to kill people literally constantly, the pain that all the fighting leaves her in and the toll it takes on her mind and body (she used to ignore it/not give a shit but she can't do that anymore)... Long story short, there is a Reason(TM) why she's a dark knight ldfkjghdkjgh, and she might be a paladin now but that doesn't mean she's hung up the greatsword. Far from it. (She has hung up Shattered Heart (formerly Zephirin's sword) though, much to Aymeric's relief fdklgjhdkgj. Not sure what sword is her main one now.)

*IT'S NOT REALLY WUK'S FAULT, O'RAVI IS JUST REALLY FUCKED UP AND HAS BEEN BURNT TOO MANY TIMES BEFORE 😭 I believe that she means well and is just overenthusiastic but O'ravi 100% does not, tbh she almost resents Wuk Lamat for sins that she hasn't even committed yet, just on account of the way she, like, approached O'ravi like the fact that she was gonna agree to help her was already a done deal and assumed the answer would be "sure let's go" without really even considering the possibility that she could - and had the right to - say no....

Worst part of MSQ, as in "time that sucked the most": base Endwalker and Stormblood (base + patches). Somehow those ended up being a lot worse and a lot harder than post-Vault Heavensward, because at least in Heavensward she had the support of her friends and the Fortemps, it was a conflict she had very personal stakes in and no one was forcing her to be there (unlike SB), and she had hope that she could save Estinien. Endwalker was just....a different can of worms which I'm putting under a cut in a bit.

Stormblood was bad because she absolutely did NOT want anything to do with that war and she didn't believe for a second that winning it was possible (Nidhogg and the Horde had reasons she could understand and she was still semi-naive and optimistic back then, but the Empire felt incomprehensible and unstoppable and she'd become extremely pessimistic by then). She just wanted to go back home to Ishgard and be left alone to grieve her friends. To sum up her biggest issue with Stormblood: Hien found it odd that she was dead silent most of the time, and he once asked for her thoughts about his plan to flood Doma Castle. Her answer amounted to "I don't have any thoughts because there's no point in thinking, it's not my job- I'm just here to be a good obedient weapon and kill whatever you tell me to. Why would I waste my time having an opinion on something when what I feel/think/need doesn't matter to anyone?"

Yeah it was really fucked up lfdkjgfdghldk. (For the record, I do like Stormblood, this is all just O'ravi's feelings about it, and they're extremely negative because it was the lowest point of her life by a landslide. She was overwhelmed by trauma and grief and it kind of broke her, she was afforded no time to process anything that happened before she was thrown into war as the Alliance's #1 Weapon. Her opinions are not my opinions, please don't come at me FKJGLHDKGJH)

Endwalker fucking sucked because uhh.....well. She held herself personally responsible for the Final Days. The rest of this is going under a cut!

It's kinda hard to get into details but between the time loop and the fact that she personally slew Zodiark, not only does she believe the blood of everyone who became blasphemies is on her hands, she also believes she doomed the Ancients - and Azem, personally - and sacrificed them on the altar to save her own people, her own timeline, her own life. She considers herself the root of all Final Days-related suffering and death both for the Ancients and for modern Etheirys, and the whole time she's practically praying that she'll be killed to end the Final Days. She believes that fate demands it- that all she is MUST die to redress the balance. If everyone else were to flee on the moon, she would be obligated to remain on Etheirys until the bitter end, because she caused this. She burned the world. All of it is her fault, she deserves to die, and there is no ending to this story in which she lives. For her to survive would be an affront to the gods, to fate, to the people she's wronged, to everyone that ever lived. She adamantly refuses to listen to anyone who says otherwise or any evidence to the contrary fgljkdhk.

I know in-game the narrative treats the concept of WoL becoming a blasphemy as kind of a joke because in what world would that ever happen lol, but uhhhh, it does almost happen to O'ravi after what I call her day from hell (the Final Days of Thavnair, where Ahewann dies and Matsya's friends are killed and he and his friends' baby almost turn to blasphemies, etc). She has a breakdown after the meeting with Shirabaht and the dignitaries, and it takes the combined efforts of Ardbert, Estinien, and probably Fray to stop her from turning. The guilt and self-loathing and sheer fucking stress from all that happening just turned into wholesale despair. It only happened that once, though.

The only reason Endwalker DOESN'T rank as being a worse time for her than Stormblood is, ironically, her unshakeable belief that she had to die at the end. Because dying at the end was her best shot at redemption and atonement, and the thought of being able to atone, even if only in part, became the hope she could hold onto. She wasn't sure if she could save Etheirys, but being able to give it her absolute all without the distraction of being worried about her survival was sort of a saving grace sdkjfhlkdjgh. Idk it's weird!!! It's a lot!!! It was a bad weird time!!!

Her other saving grace was whatever the fuck she had going on with Aymeric FKGJHDFLJGHD. That's a post for another day but the tl;dr of it is they had a sort of star-crossed lovers thing going, she threw caution to the wind and decided to kiss him and be open about how much she loved him despite the fact that they'd never get to be together the way they both wanted, they were sort of just making the most of the scraps of time they had because time was running out

Best part of MSQ, as in "time she enjoyed the most": ARR patches and the first round of ShB patches. The ARR patches were her highest point for a long time, she had everything she wanted, all the adventure and purpose and thrills she could ever want. It was also before grief shattered her and she was made to pick up the pieces, before most of her idealism and hope was ripped away from her. It wasn't perfect, though, much as she used to think it was.

The first round of ShB patches were for the most part such a joyful time? Norvrandt never for a moment took her for granted the way Eorzea does, and they don't idolize her to the point of dehumanizing her either. There's a sort of kinship that she has with the people of the First, because they've known such horrible loss and kept on living anyway, same as she has. It's more of an even playing field, as it were. She can breathe easier there. She was also sort of drunk on the joy of being reunited with G'raha and the fact they both survived; the very complicated feelings she had about Emet and Amaurot were sort of buried under that fdlkgjhdgjk. She loved helping people, and then getting to go home to the Source and reunite with the people she thought she'd never get to see again (Aymeric, the Fortemps, and her family most of all!), and so that all outweighed the problems of Elidibus's Weird Stupid Bullshit by a lot. Most of the second round of ShB patches were good too, but she was so emotionally fucked up by the Seat of Sacrifice (as well as her own insecurities getting really bad) that she couldn't enjoy those as much.

tysm to anyone who read all this, and tysm for asking this meg!!!! this is probably more than you bargained for FGKJLDHGJH but you asked a very good question!!!!!!

[txttletale]

Saw a tweet that said something around:

"cannot emphasize enough how horrid chatgpt is, y'all. it's depleting our global power & water supply, stopping us from thinking or writing critically, plagiarizing human artists. today's students are worried they won't have jobs because of AI tools. this isn't a world we deserve"

I've seen some of your AI posts and they seem nuanced, but how would you respond do this? Cause it seems fairly-on point and like the crux of most worries. Sorry if this is a troublesome ask, just trying to learn so any input would be appreciated.

i would simply respond that almost none of that is true.

'depleting the global power and water supply'

something i've seen making the roudns on tumblr is that chatgpt queries use 3 watt-hours per query. wow, that sounds like a lot, especially with all the articles emphasizing that this is ten times as much as google search. let's check some other very common power uses:

running a microwave for ten minutes is 133 watt-hours

gaming on your ps5 for an hour is 200 watt-hours

watching an hour of netflix is 800 watt-hours

and those are just domestic consumer electricty uses!

a single streetlight's typical operation 1.2 kilowatt-hours a day (or 1200 watt-hours)

a digital billboard being on for an hour is 4.7 kilowatt-hours (or 4700 watt-hours)

i think i've proved my point, so let's move on to the bigger picture: there are estimates that AI is going to cause datacenters to double or even triple in power consumption in the next year or two! damn that sounds scary. hey, how significant as a percentage of global power consumption are datecenters?

1-1.5%.

ah. well. nevertheless!

what about that water? yeah, datacenters use a lot of water for cooling. 1.7 billion gallons (microsoft's usage figure for 2021) is a lot of water! of course, when you look at those huge and scary numbers, there's some important context missing. it's not like that water is shipped to venus: some of it is evaporated and the rest is generally recycled in cooling towers. also, not all of the water used is potable--some datacenters cool themselves with filtered wastewater.

most importantly, this number is for all data centers. there's no good way to separate the 'AI' out for that, except to make educated guesses based on power consumption and percentage changes. that water figure isn't all attributable to AI, plenty of it is necessary to simply run regular web servers.

but sure, just taking that number in isolation, i think we can all broadly agree that it's bad that, for example, people are being asked to reduce their household water usage while google waltzes in and takes billions of gallons from those same public reservoirs.

but again, let's put this in perspective: in 2017, coca cola used 289 billion liters of water--that's 7 billion gallons! bayer (formerly monsanto) in 2018 used 124 million cubic meters--that's 32 billion gallons!

so, like. yeah, AI uses electricity, and water, to do a bunch of stuff that is basically silly and frivolous, and that is broadly speaking, as someone who likes living on a planet that is less than 30% on fire, bad. but if you look at the overall numbers involved it is a miniscule drop in the ocean! it is a functional irrelevance! it is not in any way 'depleting' anything!

'stopping us from thinking or writing critically'

this is the same old reactionary canard we hear over and over again in different forms. when was this mythic golden age when everyone was thinking and writing critically? surely we have all heard these same complaints about tiktok, about phones, about the internet itself? if we had been around a few hundred years earlier, we could have heard that "The free access which many young people have to romances, novels, and plays has poisoned the mind and corrupted the morals of many a promising youth."

it is a reactionary narrative of societal degeneration with no basis in anything. yes, it is very funny that laywers have lost the bar for trusting chatgpt to cite cases for them. but if you think that chatgpt somehow prevented them from thinking critically about its output, you're accusing the tail of wagging the dog.

nobody who says shit like "oh wow chatgpt can write every novel and movie now. yiou can just ask chatgpt to give you opinions and ideas and then use them its so great" was, like, sitting in the symposium debating the nature of the sublime before chatgpt released. there is no 'decay', there is no 'decline'. you should be suspicious of those narratives wherever you see them, especially if you are inclined to agree!

plagiarizing human artists

nah. i've been over this ad infinitum--nothing 'AI art' does could be considered plagiarism without a definition so preposterously expansive that it would curtail huge swathes of human creative expression.

AI art models do not contain or reproduce any images. the result of them being trained on images is a very very complex statistical model that contains a lot of large-scale statistical data about all those images put together (and no data about any of those individual images).

to draw a very tortured comparison, imagine you had a great idea for how to make the next Great American Painting. you loaded up a big file of every norman rockwell painting, and you made a gigantic excel spreadsheet. in this spreadsheet you noticed how regularly elements recurred: in each cell you would have something like "naturalistic lighting" or "sexually unawakened farmers" and the % of times it appears in his paintings. from this, you then drew links between these cells--what % of paintings containing sexually unawakened farmers also contained naturalistic lighting? what % also contained a white guy?

then, if you told someone else with moderately competent skill at painting to use your excel spreadsheet to generate a Great American Painting, you would likely end up with something that is recognizably similar to a Norman Rockwell painting: but any charge of 'plagiarism' would be absolutely fucking absurd!

this is a gross oversimplification, of course, but it is much closer to how AI art works than the 'collage machine' description most people who are all het up about plagiarism talk about--and if it were a collage machine, it would still not be plagiarising because collages aren't plagiarism.

(for a better and smarter explanation of the process from soneone who actually understands it check out this great twitter thread by @reachartwork)

today's students are worried they won't have jobs because of AI tools

i mean, this is true! AI tools are definitely going to destroy livelihoods. they will increase productivty for skilled writers and artists who learn to use them, which will immiserate those jobs--they will outright replace a lot of artists and writers for whom quality is not actually important to the work they do (this has already essentially happened to the SEO slop website industry and is in the process of happening to stock images).

jobs in, for example, product support are being cut for chatgpt. and that sucks for everyone involved. but this isn't some unique evil of chatgpt or machine learning, this is just the effect that technological innovation has on industries under capitalism!

there are plenty of innovations that wiped out other job sectors overnight. the camera was disastrous for portrait artists. the spinning jenny was famously disastrous for the hand-textile workers from which the luddites drew their ranks. retail work was hit hard by self-checkout machines. this is the shape of every single innovation that can increase productivity, as marx explains in wage labour and capital:

“The greater division of labour enables one labourer to accomplish the work of five, 10, or 20 labourers; it therefore increases competition among the labourers fivefold, tenfold, or twentyfold. The labourers compete not only by selling themselves one cheaper than the other, but also by one doing the work of five, 10, or 20; and they are forced to compete in this manner by the division of labour, which is introduced and steadily improved by capital. Furthermore, to the same degree in which the division of labour increases, is the labour simplified. The special skill of the labourer becomes worthless. He becomes transformed into a simple monotonous force of production, with neither physical nor mental elasticity. His work becomes accessible to all; therefore competitors press upon him from all sides. Moreover, it must be remembered that the more simple, the more easily learned the work is, so much the less is its cost to production, the expense of its acquisition, and so much the lower must the wages sink – for, like the price of any other commodity, they are determined by the cost of production. Therefore, in the same manner in which labour becomes more unsatisfactory, more repulsive, do competition increase and wages decrease”

this is the process by which every technological advancement is used to increase the domination of the owning class over the working class. not due to some inherent flaw or malice of the technology itself, but due to the material realtions of production.

so again the overarching point is that none of this is uniquely symptomatic of AI art or whatever ever most recent technological innovation. it is symptomatic of capitalism. we remember the luddites primarily for failing and not accomplishing anything of meaning.

if you think it's bad that this new technology is being used with no consideration for the planet, for social good, for the flourishing of human beings, then i agree with you! but then your problem shouldn't be with the technology--it should be with the economic system under which its use is controlled and dictated by the bourgeoisie.