:) definitely wins out. Whenever I’m watching a streamer make a prediction that’s amusingly close to the truth, the chat turns into a sea of coy :) comments.

Also, I feel like the crowd that would use :D have now moved onto emojis.

I was introduced to one of my favourite game series by a lets play channel I don’t watch anymore. I was introduced to that lets play channel because they played a game I haven’t actually played myself. I was suggested that game by an ex partner. We first went out because I recognised an anime chartacter on her t-shirt. I haven’t seen the anime the character was from, but one of my friends has.

The chain of fate is pretty stupid when you actually look at it. And now I’m sitting here, wondering how Ace Attorney is going to radically change my life.

And after he was shot by a cannon, he was Napoleon blown-apart.

deleted by creator

It’s not dada. It’s too coherent to be dada, and it’s too shit to be anything else.

In order for something to be an artistic choice, it has to be a choice. It has to have meaning and intent. AI did not choose to put a glass there, it calculated that there was probably a glass there based on shitty reasoning. AI does not have the creative capacity to make art. It can only make images, and those images are shit.

You’ve thoroughly proven you can’t tell between slop and high art, so thank you for the compliment of my critique.

Surrealism is not nonsense. It has a purpose, even if that purpose is hard to tell. If you think Dali and AI slop is the same, you don’t understand either.

AI is like a housefire. Nobody wants it. Nobody needs it. It’s just a bad thing, and if someone sees it, they’re more than justified in being upset and trying to get rid of it. Don’t defend the fire, or you’ll be the first to burn.

Nah, you’ve got it backwards. You don’t pursue that level of money/power/privilege unless you lack humanity. These guys were always shit, but power made them more effective at being shit.

So is toast.

I’ll stop saying it if it stops being true.

False. Porn is sexy, and I can’t possibly be aroused by an image of a woman spreading her cheeks when her fingers are attached to her arse with a continuous piece of flesh, giving her skin the same topography as a teapot.

Funny. Every time someone points out how god awful AI is, someone else comes along to say “It’s just a tool, and it’s good if someone can use it properly.” But nobody who uses it treats it like “just a tool.” They think it’s a workman they can claim the credit for, as if a hammer could replace the carpenter.

Plus, the only people good enough to fix the problems caused by this “tool” don’t need to use it in the first place.

I have thought about this in embarrassing depth.

The first reason I can think of is when sex isn’t an option. Maybe you’re in a long distance relationship or something. It gives a good structure to what is essentially phone sex.

The second reason is as a form of foreplay. We already have sexy roleplay in the sheets to help set the mood, and now we’re just using character sheets instead of bed sheets. Then your “what would you like to do” can be followed by a demonstration.

This is why I think sexy RPGs should be designed for couples.

There’s another all-time-worst game called Racial Holy War, which is exactly what you’d assume from the title. And yes, it’s incompetently made to the point where they didn’t include mechanics for ATTACKING.

Looks good. Approve

Yes, and that game genre is dating sim, with some crpg elements sprinkled in for variety.

My bestie played a Durge run first and warned me not to try it because of how dark and edgy it is, especially since I like wholesome stuff. Turns out it’s incredibly wholesome if you don’t play it the way she did. I love my sweet little sad boi.

A few favourites from the Alexandrian:

• Don’t prep plots. Prep scenarios. If you give the players a goal and a world, they will make the plot themselves, and it’ll be more interesting. And it’s not like you wouldn’t need those things for a railroad plot anyway.
• Don’t plan contingencies. Instead of explaining everything the party could do to get past the guard, just describe the guard. It’s a lot more flexible, and it takes less time to prepare.
• With the 3 clues rule, make sure to have different clue types. If all your clues are pieces of evidence, then a party who prefers to talk to people is clueless.
• If you feel the need to ask “are you sure you want to do that”, there might be a miscommunication to figure out. Maybe you didn’t explain the situation clearly, or a player misheard you, or the player has an item to help things work out.
• When creating a system within your setting (eg, nobility), add two exceptions to the neat and tidy rules. “Each region is ruled by a count, except for those over there which are ruled by comtes.” This adds history to your world while making it less daunting to add more exceptions if you need them later.

I found a map-making site that is, let’s be honest, shit. The maps it makes can only ever be “good enough”, and never great. This means I don’t waste time trying to make them great, and can actually finish the dang things. Plus, if the players decide not to go to the noble manor, then it’s no big loss.

This idea goes for a lot of the game, actually. If you spend less time on the story, then it’s no big loss if the plot takes a tangent. And they probably weren’t going to be as invested in a forced narrative as they would be for something more organic.

Goodbye