Yeah, when I got there the first and only time, I was also surprised how little separates you from Zot once you’ve made it through the Dungeon and the rune branches. Far too many of my characters have died on the final stretch…
I have also recently been playing Mini Motorways and found it more fun than Mini Metro (too bad it’s not available on Android, since mini metro is one of my favorite phone games)
If you’re a grand strategy fan: Crusader Kings 3. You could spend hundreds of hours in that game, and it’s mainly designed to be played with only a mouse.
It’s definitely a bit difficult to get into, but I’d recommend doing the tutorial and going with the flow rather than trying to understand everything. You’ll slowly start to realize what’s going on.
I'd also add that CK3 is a step above most Paradox games in terms of beginner-friendliness. Everything has a tooltip defining what it does, and most of the game-specific words in that tooltip have tooltips of their own. It's not like the older games and their "lol keep the wiki open and good fucking luck" approach to explaining themselves
CK can be daunting, I recommend you choose which time period you like best and go with that game, e.g. if you like sci-fi go with Stellaris, if you like WWII go with Hearts of Iron 4, etc. liking the time period where the game is set can make a huge difference in you willingness to learn it. For example if you don’t like medieval it might be daunting to track lineages and hereditary traits and how the ownership of land works (I once lost an entire kingdom because of it on CK2), but if you like WWII maybe seeing historical facts reflected on mechanics or learning military tactics is more interesting to you. All of those games are very different from one another, but they’re also very alike, starting with one that’s just the right one can help you pass the steep learning curve.
Because Myasaki has very publically spoken about thinking AI generated stuff is horrible and soulless, and that he’d never use it. Them coming out with a Ghibli filter felt like it was a reaction to that.
Well for one, they didnt come out with a Ghibli filter, they just removed restrictions on imitating art styles and using ghibli style just became a trend.
And honestly who cares what Miyazaki thinks? He’s famously stuck in the past, stubborn and kind of elitist.
I am honestly not informed enough to say whether the whole Ghibli trend grew organically, or whether it came from OAI marketing.
And yeah, Myasaki can be a bit of a dick, but I don’t think he’s wrong here. I worked with both LLM and image generation for some personal projects, and you have to coax it a lot to get anything halfway usable, and even then, it isn’t great. Even stuff that’s heralded as exemplary by the corps behind the trend mostly seems kinda shitty.
Also, even if you like GenAI, most of the stuff that OAI is doing right now feels like desperate attempts to keep the hype train rolling, to justify their frankly ludicrous valuation.
A lot of people care what Miyazaki thinks because he created over a dozen films that are beloved by millions because of their artistry, is well respected in the anime/manga world, and is generally regarded as a master of his artform. People tend to take your words seriously when they have nearly 50 years of experience and success behind them.
The issue with Rowling is more that she started talking out her rear end about something of which she doesn’t have much, if any, understanding. If she gave you advice on writing YA fiction, it’d be worth something. Miyazaki is a visual artist broadly respected for his art, so his opinions on visual art have some weight. If it was about the cultivation of kumquats, I think I’d ask a farmer.
Almost no one knows how SD works. That’s not the point. He’s not contrasting it against some other GenAI concept to compare training cost. He’s looking at it based on the results. You don’t have to know how to build a CPU to compare benchmarks for ones built by someone else.
Except how AI works is pretty crucial to the entire anti-AI argument.
The amount of people that claim AI just collages together pieces of existing “stolen” art and use that as an argument against AI is ridiculous.
And your CPU example isn’t great since you would be comparing CPUs to other CPUs, it would be more apt to talk about someone who doesn’t know how a computer works to demonise computers in general and advocate doing maths by hand instead.
Actually, yeah, that’s a bad metaphor from me. Comparing benchmarks would be comparing AI models.
He’s not comparing benchmarks. He’s comparing results, so it’s more about maybe error rate than processing speed.
I guess it’s like comparing the result of an approximation versus an explicit computation. GenAI makes an approximation of art. It very quickly spits out something that looks a bit like the intended answer. It even gets you close enough to be totally satisfactory for some purposes, in the same way 3 can be a usable approximation of π for some purposes. However, the picture is not the full purpose of creating art. Art is a form of communication, transmitting something from one mind to another using indirect means because telepathy isn’t available. AI is not trying to communicate anything. It’s just an approximation of something someone could say.
Miyazaki is someone with years of experience in creating art so he understands the ‘language’ of art better than some. He has ‘fluency.’ AI images hit the uncanny valley for artists because they are attuned to the difference between what an art is supposed to look like vs what the imitator approximates. They have the fluency to spot the fake the same way you might be able to spot someone speaking your native language as a mother tongue vs out of a phrasebook. Because he is ‘fluent’ in art, people take his words on art seriously, just as one would generally take a born-and-raised German’s words seriously regarding German grammar.
Art is a form of communication, transmitting something from one mind to another using indirect means because telepathy isn’t available. AI is not trying to communicate anything.
That’s like saying photography isn’t art because a camera isn’t trying to communicate something. Like AI it’s a tool uses by people to convey that idea.
Like when I use AI generation, I have an idea or specific image in my head and I do my best to come up with a prompt that will produce what I want, or more usually, I use photoshop, so piece piece several pieces together and edit it a bit so the match is more accurate. At a fundamental level, if you consciously try to clear your mind of any existing biases regarding AI, then it’s not really any different to photography or photoshop as an artform.
AI images hit the uncanny valley for artists because they are attuned to the difference between what an art is supposed to look like vs what the imitator approximates.
That is a somewhat valid point, but there are AI models for specific tasks, say generating human faces, that co trolled experiments have found that people can’t distinguish between the AI content and the real thing. There is also plenty of traditional art that hits the uncanny valley or simply doesn’t look right, but that doesn’t make it any less art, does it?
Because he is ‘fluent’ in art, people take his words on art seriously, just as one would generally take a born-and-raised German’s words seriously regarding German grammar.
Good analogy, but there’s still a barrier between the type of art miyazaki is fluent in and AI art. Like imagine a British person saying your English is wrong because you’re using American English or AAVE. Would you take them as an expert because and denounce those variations because they are not British English? Or would you consider their ignorance of the other side limiting to their expertise?
And also, I feel I should add, Miyazaki is famously not a fan of digital art. Should we take him as an expert on art and view digital art as less than traditional art? Or should we just roll our eyes at the stubborn old man stuck in his ways?
…when I use AI generation, I have an idea or specific image in my head and I do my best to come up with a prompt that will produce what I want, or more usually, I use photoshop…
Therein lies the difference. You have an intended target and use tools to create it. The artistry is in the skill and effort put into communicating your internal concept. To my knowledge, people generally aren’t saying AI is useless in a creative process, just that typing in a few words and hitting ‘generate’ until you get something cool, or just running a filter over an image to make it look like a drawing, isn’t artistry.
…there are AI models for specific tasks, say generating human faces, that co trolled experiments have found that people can’t distinguish between the AI content and the real thing.
I failed to communicate my idea clearly enough. I’m not talking about the artefacts that sometimes make images look weird. I’m talking about the deep brain sense that one can develop that can tell the difference between someone acting vs emoting, singing vs lip synching, etc. An ingenuous performance has a different character to it that can be said to fall into the uncanny valley.
There is also plenty of traditional art that hits the uncanny valley or simply doesn’t look right, but that doesn’t make it any less art, does it?
That depends. If hitting the valley is intentional and done using skill, that’s just normal art. If it has intent but not skill, it’s incomplete art. It’s failing to communicate as intended, much like I failed with words above. It’s part of becoming good at something to screw it up, though, so it’s to be expected sometimes. If it has skill but no intent, that’s craftsmanship rather than artistry. Craftsmanship is great but has a subtle difference in how it is experienced.
there’s still a barrier between the type of art miyazaki is fluent in and AI art.
That’s not so good as an analogy. AI imagery isn’t art by itself. Even in your example of your own work, it’s materials, at best. Saying AI image generation is artistry is like saying hiring someone else to paint a picture makes you an artist. Even ‘prompt engineering’ at its finest makes one an artist as much as project management makes one a programmer. So, the general argument comes from the pretense rather than the tool. Bringing your sentence closer to the mark would be something like ‘There is a barrier between art, which Miyazaki is experienced in, and this particular type of tool one can use.’ It’s an apples to oranges comparison, like comparing the field of astronomy to a camera.
Should we take him as an expert on art and view digital art as less than traditional art? Or should we just roll our eyes at the stubborn old man stuck in his ways?
That’s an obvious false binary. People are perfectly capable of being right about one thing and wrong about another. You give his words weight because of his expertise. That doesn’t mean you have to take them as gospel, but ignoring all of an expert’s opinions because you dislike some of them, or some implications of them, is a terrible idea as well.
Miyazaki, the shit take machine deadbeat dad who’s kinda known for being overall somewhat of a cunt? That miyazaki? His opinions don’t matter to me personally.
I expect to be burnt at the stake for this but SMH you people are falling over yourselves over someone just because he made good anime.
He wasn’t a deadbeat dad. He was a workaholic and distance father, but he provided for his kids.
He was a workaholic and expected the same level of commitment from his employees, not more. He frequently reanimated whole scenes while his eyes would allow it. Difficult to work with? Sure. Cunt? Nah.
His work consistently had anti-war, pro-environmental and pro-worker/socialism themes. He made something more then “good anime”.
I’m wondering what shit takes you think he has or why they should outweigh his other accomplishments.
btw, Miyazaki grew up around his uncle’s plane factory. That’s why he has an appreciation of flying scenes and why he made Wind Raises, which really isn’t pro-war when you start dissecting it.
edit: He also has some of the best written female characters, each unique and sensible for the story.
I simply started playing less. At first I felt sad and angry, recalling my previous gaming years, but once I started to accept the fact that I was growing up and life changes, the sadness passed. Nowadays I rarely can sit on the PC to play for more than an hour every couple of days. But it’s fine. There really are not that many good games that are “must” play and there is no rush to finnish them.No stress about the back log. Also saves money on games, when you can just wait for the sales.
I do still play games on my phone, when I discover some what worthy games to scratch the itches.
I play pretty much exclusively on handheld these day. The last thing I want to do after a long day working, is to sit at my desk some more.
I have a Switch and a Steamdeck, both are fantastic for different purposes, and both let me game while relaxing on the sofa or anywhere else.
I usually bring one of then when I travel for work as well, great for killing time in airports or while flying. I’d highly recommend the Steamdeck for your situation - it’s definitely worth it.
Sounds like you’re mentally drained after work to be honest. Nothing you can really do about it except play on some days only when you have the energy for it, or on the weekends.
Insane congrats. I love DCsS and haven’t touched it in a few months. Didn’t know they reworked Mahleb, maybe you’ve given me some encouragement to play.
DCSS got quite a few beefy updates recently, with reworks for Makhleb, Dithmenos, Yredelemnul and Beogh, many new spells (and a new spell school in trunk), reflavouring of Poison magic into Alchemy that allowed adding some more late game spells (e.g. Yara’s is hexes/alchemy now), return of mountain dwarves and a new species that can dual wield weapons, transmutation magic school being changed into talismans…
I love the new changes and, for the first time in my DCSS obsession, I started playing trunk :D
bin.pol.social
Aktywne