I did not really give this much thought at the time of hearing it, but then I downloaded and played Avowed, because game pass.

Dear God.

When a decades old RPG is STILL the gold standard what the hell are we even doing anymore.

Skyrim is over 20 years old

Oblivion is older still

And then there is GTA Vice City.

I bring this last one up because even in this game released almost 30 years ago the NPCs reacted to player actions.

Avowed plays more like one of the old Final Fantasy games than a modern RPG, the only real difference is Avowed does not have "Random Encounters"

Starfield

Veilguard

Avowed

Three games from three different AAA studios with a history of 10/10 games with edgy content, edgy characters, engaging story, and gameplay that keep our butts in seats to the detriment of our health sometimes.

Now, "Oh no we might offend someone, lets not let the demon possessed assassin actually act like a demon possessed assassin, Honestly? the Moggles from the old Final Fantasy game were more engaging then the cookie cutter companions we get now from AAA studios.

And maybe that is the problem, they are not afraid of failing anymore they made their money so "Here buy our game because you loved a game we made over a decade ago and made us millions.

Seriously

Janky low frame rates and bad game play that make Dark Souls seem easy by comparison. Check.

Non offensive barely alive cardboard cutout companions who could care less if you save the world or go "kill them all and let the gods sort them out". Check.

Graphics that are amazing and look like they belong in a high budget Hollywood film. Check

NPCs they ignore the presence of the player even if they are shooting them in the face. Check.

Honestly, Cyberpunk 2077 was a better game on release day than this...... Visual Novel turned game.

Also; This is not about pronouns or what ever; this is about bad games from AAA studios. You want a special pronoun? Yeah for you, have cookie and shut up I do not care. The only thing I ask of people is that you treat others around you with common decency and respect. If you try and blame this on WOKE I will assume you are a rage baiting troll and ignore you. This is about AAA studios shoving piss poor games down our throat and telling us to bend over and take it again and again.

Be honest if Starfield had been the game all the hype made it out to be would you have given a crap about pronouns? no you would not. You would have just chalked it up to yet another way to customize your character and gaming experience. Not every option is for you, some of them are for other people. That has always been my attitude about these kind of choices, personally I thought it was cool. The only complaint I have ever had is making all companions bisexual, personally I prefer some of each makes for better story telling. The companions being "attracted to the player not matter what" is a cop out and lazy, people are not like that, personally I was hoping that someday if you choose a certain body type certain companions would not be romanceable.

i.e.: Grogg is straight and will only romance females but they also have to be of the curvy or large body type, he will find the thin or skinny body type to be underfed and offer them meals if they attempt to romance him. "Umm perhaps another time, would you like some of this stew It is freshly made?"

The real world is complicated not everyone is going to like you the way you want them too, and that has nothing to do with skin tone, gender, sexuality or any other BS reason we have found to separate ourselves into these little groups. Yes sometimes it does but most of the time? people could careless.

90% of all actual face to face human interaction can be summed up thusly: "Oh sorry did not mean to block your path" "No prob, have a good one" "You too"

Or: "Hey" Hello" "How are you?" "Good, you?" "Pretty Good, oh the line moved" "Thanks, my turn have a nice day" "You too"

The second is dependent on if you decide to engage with said stranger standing beside you, most of the time you are going to be looking at some hand held device ignoring the world around you and raging at some dipsticks post on Twitter.

Most people just do not care they have their own lives and issues and are too busy dealing with them to worry about yours. This is not a mean thing is just is. Be real, are you at all worried beyond "Oh I hope he gets better" That I am in severe depression because I had a stroke and my health tanked? No and I am not offend by that you have worries of you own, like feeding yourself and your dependents.

But seriously what is your take on the state of the AAA game market?

Personally I am starting to check and if it is a studio I have heard of, I am checking YouTube for reviews before buying. I am more likely to buy a indie game now that some big market game.

Sorry for the long winded rant.

I just got soft-locked trying to do the Civil War questling for the first time in years. I chose a 'knight' build, with heavy armor. I don't have a single skill rank in sneak and because of that, I can't complete the questline. Wtf?

On a side note, I am beyond f*#@ing sick of playthroughs ending before I even get to level 15. I'm lucky if I get to level 10 due to bullshit like this, or straight stability issues.

Besides, let's be real, its impossible to play this game without using LP. I've tried, but it just can't be done. You'll be forced to use it sooner or later either to advance a major questline or simply to leave a dungeon.

As one of my past posts stated here, its impossible to play this game as a good character. Clearly it favors evil characters. Being a good-two-shoes locks you out of pretty much all the game's content, while being evil allows everything.

I just want to do my first playthrough of all my quest mods as a good character, but it just can't be done. I'm thinking I need to just say 'f*#@ it' and do my full LotD order even though my first playthrough with all of this will have to be an evil character.

Funny enough, I was thinking of a buiild that was a sort of 'guerilla fighter'. One-handed, block, light armor, archery, and sneak. And no, he wouldn't be a DB or TG character. Essentially just a soldier that can actually use stealth. A good character that uses sneak for once. Maybe I should've gone with that in hindsight.

The writing in this game is such hot f*#@ing garbage. Could they at least give you some hint as to what type of character you should play for all the questlines? Dawnguard is heavily coded as being for warriors, and even forces a follower on you for half the questline that makes stealth impossible, but you still must do it anyway. Or how the civil war questline gives no hint at all you'll be needing to use sneak until you're halfway through the questline as a heavy-armor character. Wtf? I'm starting to see why Stormcloaks don't have their own heavy armor, and why most imperial soliders also use light despite heavy being available. It was probably to try and shove players into using light armor for the stealth missions.

Am I not allowed to play a single character for more than 2 or 3 days? Am I not allowed to progress past level 10? Am I not allowed to complete a vanilla questline? Must I repeat the vile intro sequence over and over again despite being beyond utterly sick of it? I can't even get to the first mission in LotD my playthroughs are so short DUE TO NO FAULT OF MY OWN.

Maybe I need to stick to generalist characters that aren't lopsided in what content they can access. This means everyone I play as will have sneak, one-handed, and magic. Limited and repetitive yes, but clearly that's what this game is designed for.

Also, leveling speech is a pain in the ass. Even selling everything myself isn't getting me very far. I'm already running into checks that I can't beat yet. Bullshit. I'm really starting to think the 'useless' perks are necessary. Yeah, they all become meaningless once your speech hits 100, but seriously YOUR SPEECH IS NEVER GOING TO BE 100. I think the highest I've ever seen it is in the 50s. The 'useless' perks are NECESSARY TO MAKE SPEECH WORK. f*#@ online guides I should just trust my own judgement. Why do I even bother to listen to anyone online? The internet is nothing but lies anyway. I should've learned long ago that any guide or 'tips' is really just labeled that way to lure in ignorant people who can't know better. f*#@ it I'll judge the game for my f*#@ing self.

Yet another dead character. f*#@ the garbage writing of this game.

- All characters are their default races. So, Nerevarine is a Dunmer, HoK is an Imperial, and LDB is a Nord. However, as the Vestige doesn't have a default race (none that I could find), I'm making them a Breton. Why? For some variety. Gender is irrelevant. Use your imagination for that one.

- All characters have max stats and their best gear. However, to make this fair, all optional stuff is banned from the fight. So, no vampirism, lycanthropy, factions/faction-only gear or abilities (Dark Brotherhood, Guilds, Blades, Companions, Stormcloaks, etc), Daedra items, and so on. Example, no Dawnbreaker or Nightingale armor or abilities.

- All characters have every spell in the game within the rules of this poll. For DB, all shouts will be added, as well.

- No outside help. No summoning dragons to the fight, Dovahkiin!

- Only canon achievements are to be considered. So, only stuff from the main games and DLCs. No mods allowed. So, if HoK did become Sheogorath, that will be allowed.

- Only the default characters are to be considered. I don't care what your Nord Skyrim character, Sifnus Alpha-Male, had achieved. It's irrelevant here.

- Finally, this is meant to be fun. So, don't be a jerk, OK? If you disagree with anything here, just leave.

1) Misinformation does not require a rigorous examination of the facts, it is made up. This means that it is far faster and cheaper to develop than information.

2) Truth is often complicated and boring. Misinformation, on the other hand, tends to be easy and captivating, meaning people engage with it more easily.

This means that 1) misinformation can easily swamp out information, and 2) that even if information is present people might display a natural tendency towards misinformation

This misinformation is harmful, and the effect it has on people is often beyond their conscious control. Therefore people must be protected from misinformation.

Free speech in a political sense means having the liberty to speak out against political opponents without fear of being imprisoned and murdered like Navalny. It does not mean having the liberty to slander, threaten, harass, or any other number of crimes.

---

I'm going to be reading Foucault soon. He wrote a lot about free speech before he passed away.

Thoughts?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ohxry7E_IKyi6Y4OfBXikMzrFokkehVSrNgW4IBP0VI/edit?usp=sharing

Quote

BG3 narrator Amelia Tyler described coming across multiple instances of her already-iconic performance being replicated through AI, including for upsetting and unseemly purposes: "I went on to this stream because somebody gave me a heads up, and I went on and heard my own voice reading rape porn.

"That's the level of stuff we've had to deal with since this game came out and it's been horrible, honestly."

Tyler said that such use of her voice "is stealing not just my job but my identity," and that while she loves videogame mod scenes, "to actually take my voice and use it to train something without my permission, I think that should be illegal."

Given the issues with AI voice mods and the fact that actors themselves had said that they don't want their voices used for mods (especially NSFW mods) I don't understand why Nexus doesn't ban them, or at the very least limit the kinds of AI voice mods that are allowed. Maybe a limit that the mods can't be from a voice actor who has not consented to their voice being used in a voice bank? There certainly are actors who have consented to their voice being used in a voice bank and have gotten paid for their work. Nexus has banned things before like racist or homophobic mods, so I'm sure they could also do something like this with AI voice mods.

The topic in few words is what type of goverment you think is better (technocracy,democracy,comunism,capitalims....) and their pros and cons (obligatory ,theres no perfect system).

For easy and no external interfirence we will imagine is a world whit 1 goverment ,2 if needed to give an example of external implications.

Please keep civil and respect each other opinion or at least give a good argument against the opinio given.

(Sorry about my bad english). :confused:

(edit:You can mix goverments system if you think a combination of them will give a more stable (or interesting) system.

In general, I spent a whole lot of my lifetime playing games. It is like being in a better alternative reality. It makes me feel good.

Anyone else?

We live in an endless ocean of lies. All we can really trust is what we've seen with our own eyes. I don't know if atoms exist. I don't even know if dinosaurs existed. I've never seen an atom, and I've never seen a dinosaur fossil with my own eyes. I do know pictures I've seen of them online has made my question all the paleo media I've ever seen. I'VE SEEN CONSPIRACY THEORIES MORE SOLID THAN EVOLUTION WHAT DOES THAT SAY????

Truth should be free. Truth should be a human right. But it is not. Its forbidden, unless you're rich. Greed is what has screwed over our society. Money has caused our world to descend into madness. Granted, perhaps it was never sane to begin with, but just because our situation has always been doesn't mean it is not. Do we really live in a world now where I have to explain a simple fact like that? If something always has been, then it must be. Shocking how even simply logic like that escapes most people these days.

What is clear is that:
Nintendo is struggling with an obsolete idea of commerce.
Its attitude implies that it has no new IP but wants to milk and profiteer on fossils. Listen to me!
The time of all these boomer fascists is up.
Copyright does not mean arrogance and oppression, it is a right and not a weapon to bully and protect the profits of larger companies.
If it had happened in Europe, Nintendo would have been investigated a long time ago, as happened to Intel with the Blizzard acquisition.
I guarantee you that very soon copyright will be updated to adapt to new technologies such as 3D printing and homemade production and art that cannot be banned in some sort of 1984 dystopia just for a company that makes f*#@ing pokemon;
that feels like it owns the world.
One day, you will understand that copyright is just a tool of multinationals and corporations to be able to live on their laurels, without producing and giving anything to the world;
but to perpetuate greed for greed's sake.
Abandon fanaticism, defending false flags that do not belong to you, because in the end we are always the ones who get screwed.
These acts of terrorism and oppression towards free people are only proof that the enemies of the free world have now been flushed out, along the road to their failure they desperately try to pick up the misfits and maladjusted to feed the delusions in which they are trapped and condemned to die. When the suffering is over a new world will be born and it will be beautiful because only our world is capable of improving itself again and again as a mod of Nexus, because what unites us is us, who are perfect and are destined to dominate the earth and soon also plastic and pollution.
Don't try to understand the world around you through Netflix series and virtual worlds that only represent fantasies that do not correspond to the free and progressive world that we will build and deliver to others, act with love, use the only right weapon ... Love and ask yourself if what you do is moved by the latter or by failed hatred.
Then yes, we will all win with love!
With the love you have in producing mods or in anything that you are capable of sharing.

Copyright is not an ideology, it is not a weapon;
it is a democratic right, reasoning with a capitalist mentality and look at your interests and profits without being exploited for free.

Thank you

Replace Mr Morgan with a decent, non narcissistic human being (they exist) who's on the side of improving the standard of all human beings no matter who, instead of just being the greedy business minded thing he was, not wanting to share the wealth but lock it away for the privileged few.

1920 : Possible wireless and free power for all, wireless communication, electric cars and other tech spawned from those techs, we may have had computers decades sooner.

The power of one or a small few can shape the fate of billions right into the far future, as has been demonstrated with our society on numerous occasions, we just keep allowing the wrong people too much power.

The combat in the Arkham Games, along with Shadow of Mordor is actually fun. Who needs to fix it? The story is worthwhile and fulling, so why add more? The graphics may be dated, but given everything else who needs it?

Maybe Skyrim is just an ancient turd that we keep trying to fix. Why bother? Why not just to play a game that's actually good out of the box?

I don't care for unmodded skyrim anymore. I've run through its lame quests so many times I struggle to force myself to do them yet again. The gameplay is unrewarding, I'm sick of having to grind my smithing skill simply because there's no other way to level it other than mass producing dwarven bows and jewelry yet again. No other game has ever given me the stability issues this thing has. EVEN THE NES WAS BETTER THAN SKYRIM WTF.

So maybe the game just sucks and we need to just accept that and move on? Guess I should pick up Shadow of Mordor again and actually complete it, or get all the achievements on the Arkham games. Of course, I couldn't when they came out, and I'm only older now. At least playing those game is fun. Hell, with Shadow of Mordor, I actually kept forgetting about the main questline just because it was so fun killing orcs! How often is it that a modern-era game actually has good gameplay? Modern games are normally just movies where you have to grind through the lamest combat ever conceived to see the next cutscene. I'm a retrogamer for a reason. Perhaps I should just stick to classic games that are actually worth playing more than once.

• Robert House calculated the day the bombs would fall (+1), but the show reveals that he attended a meeting where Vault-Tec simply told him they were going to do it.
• Mothership Zeta suggests that Zetans dropped the bombs. The show reveals it was most likely Vault-Tec.
• Ghouls are confirmed to go feral, at least in some instances. There may be a relation to a new yellow drug that was introduced (possibly FEV).
• In Fallout 4, roughly half the endings involve the Sole Survivor destroying the Prydwen. The show decides the Prydwen survives the events of the Commonwealth.
• Similarly, regardless of what the Courier does during the events in the Mojave, New Vegas is ravaged by a war involving the NCR.
• There's an infamous vault chalkboard with a post-war timeline that depicts "The Fall of Shady Sands" in 2277, followed by a mushroom cloud. Whether the Fall refers to the nuke or a more gradual, economic decline, there is no such Fall depicted during the events of Fallout New Vegas. To the contrary, the multiple characters that are from Shady Sands or speak of it imply that the capital of the NCR is, in fact, an economic powerhouse, even if it won't last. Personally we believe this was a production error and that the chalkboard was supposed to say 2281 or 2282, but we can't prove that.
• The show also retcons that Shady Sands was only the first capital of the New California Republic, and at some point, prior to the nuke, the capital was changed to be in the ruins of Los Angeles, aka the Boneyard.

1. The show reveals that Shady Sands was nuked by Vault-Tec, and referencing the chalkboard and Maximus's backstory, it must've happened sometime between 2277 and 2286. If it happens before 2281, it would be a significant retcon of the major faction of Fallout New Vegas, but Todd Howard clarified in an interview after the show came out that it happened after 2281, if you want to take his word for it.

(I copy and pasted this directly from the mod's page, sorry if this looks weird now, I can't really do anything about it)

All but one of these alleged "inconsistencies" are not so, and I will explain why:

House had already calculated the end of the world by this point in the timeline, and vault tec probably didn't drop the bombs, seeing as one of their executive's daughters were outside when the bombs hit, along with countless personnel and a few unfinished vaults

see above

this is not an inconsistency, it's literally just describing a plot element from the series and show. how someone wrote this and said "this is a timeline inconsistency" boggles the mind

the identity of the airship shown in the series is not necessarily confirmed to be the prydwen (one source names it as the cassawennan), and even then, the canon survival of the brotherhood in fallout is nothing new, nor is it inconsistent with the lore

See above, but also the denizens of the divide are cited as an apocalyptic level threat to the mojave, even with a full ncr victory, this is not an inconsistency, it would be following up on foreshadowing. in addition, the "evidence" for this claim is a highly stylized outro for the credits that has been inaccurate before (see the portrayal of the observatory in the credits vs the actual thing in the show)

the vault chalkboard is easy to understand for those who are capable of reading and basic critical thinking, to assume that, on a timeline, an event further down the line probably happens AFTER the thing that precedes it, shocking, I know. in addition, things like "the fall of rome" refer to a period rather than any one event, so this is not shocking or inconsistent with what we already know (it's also worth noting that 2277 is apparently a nostalgic year in the NCR judging by the wistful "spirit of 2277" graffiti you can find in the mojave, which would make sense if it was the last year before it started declining, and also may be the year of tandi's death, though I'm probably wrong about that particular detail)

this doesn't even make sense, the show takes places years after new vegas, logically they changed the capital after the events of that game, either due to the success or failure of the mojave campaign. the ACTUAL retcon that happened was its location, which was actually a good move both logically and thematically, because it didn't make sense that a (relatively) small county in the sierra nevadas had two vaults dedicated to it, while the LA metropolitan area had 0 (the cathedral was a display piece and as such doesn't count) fallout 2 also previously retconned it to be further north than in fallout 1, so this is not the first time that this has happened. it also didn't make sense that the expansionist NCR never found the vault that was literally right next to their capital so the main quest of fallout 2 could make sense, now it actually does make sense why vault 13's location is still a mystery. thematically, it's the new emerging from the cocoon of the old, so it's a better choice than "they just set up shop in the middle of a desert lol"

this also doesn't make any sense, and I'm not sure where they get their timeline from

I will explain why I got mean about halfway through

Now for the conclusion. Why am I typing this here, you may ask? because I was replied to by the mod author, who said that my correction of their assumption that these were inconsistencies was simply me doing the same thing they were doing by the mod. I replied saying that this was not the same thing at all, and that these things were not in fact inconsistencies. They then decided to implicitly insult my intelligence by flippantly saying that I was trying to debate them on semantics rather than engaging with anything I said. I replied again because they had at this point amended their stickied post with a passive aggressive jab at my comment, which I said was not cool and didn't appreciate, and this led to them deleting the entire thread and removing my ability to comment, but not before directly insulting me, whether to save face from being reported, or something, I do not know, but the fact that they left an insulting comment, only to delete the thread right after kind of proves that they wanted to emotionally hurt and/or embarrass me before they removed any trace of dissent from their page. I won't name the mod author, but you can find it if you're clever enough. I don't wanna start drama or anything like that, I was just really kind of hurt and frustrated by this entire exchange and needed to talk about it, and I figured I could also have a productive discussion about these "inconsistencies" in the process to see if I may truly be wrong, because the bad faith nature of my first interaction on this subject makes it difficult to tell now

ps: this was not the first time I had interacted with them, I had previously made a comment almost exclusively praising them on their youtube channel, with a caveat that I didn't agree with their "bethesda fallouts bad" takes but otherwise liked their content, and generally kept things cordial. they proceeded to respond completely ignoring what I'd said, argued that I was trying to use semantics against them, and them they accused me of acting in bad faith and being blinded by nostalgia (my first fallout was new vegas btw, so this was very funny) I feel I was exceedingly civil in that forum by pretending that interaction never happened, but lo and behold they reacted with the same vehemence because someone dared to correct them on fallout lore.

I don't know if this will make it past a moderator, but I do want to say thank you to whoever read this in full, I feel better with the knowledge that at least one other person understands what just happened

So watch the video and see what you think.

A part of me wants to ask the modding community to band together to make a new game that puts AAA devs to shame. I dislike AAA devs for not seeing Baldurs Gate 3 as a step in the right direction. Larian listened to the community, and AAA devs have no right to say that it "isnt the norm" because oh its just Larian, they were always awesome- get real. NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT. They listen to the community, you exploit the community. Y'all aren't the same.

Some players, are very welcome to LL injected items, where others would prefer that some of these items not spawn on enemies, or be made as something only available to the player.

So. What's your opinion?

On top of this, in Skyrim, Bethesda seems to have dropped a few hints that its wrong. The enchanting table in the game has this demonic-looking skull on it. Maiq also blatantly tells you that he was soul trapped once, and that it wasn't very pleasant (of course, if he was soul trapped, it begs the question why he still walks the earth rather than being trapped in the soul cairn, but still).

Then there's also one of the first two games where I've heard that once an enchanted item ran out of charges, the soul of the thing you soul trapped would appear and assault you. This feature wasn't implemented in future games.

Given all of this, is enchanting actually wrong? Maybe its one of those evil things people justify simply because they like the benefits of it? Even the magic-phobic nords of Skyrim clearly don't mind enchanted items, which the local mages guild likes to point out.

On top of this, there is the odd issue where there's no mention on what the gods think of it. Some daedra openly encourage it (all daedric artifacts are enchanted items, and then there's Azura's Star), but the aedra are completely silent on it. Wouldn't trapping souls condemn one? None of the games really say.

Really, seemingly everything you can do in the game has some moral questionableness to it. There's the 'evil' questlines of the TG and DB obviously, plus maybe the Volkihar. However, seemingly even the 'good' questlines have some questionableness to it. They either force you to cooporate with the evil guilds, or interact with daedric princes, or even straight visit their realms!

Honestly, despite what it looks like, bethesda still seems to have a specific personality archetype in mind. You're supposed to be a character whose willing to do ANYTHING regardless of the cost. When a Thalmor asks you if you believe in Talos, the game oddly doesn't give you the option to say 'no', implying you do even if you're an altmer. If you go to join the Stormcloaks, Galmar will either ask you why you want to join when you're not native to Skyrim if you're a nord, or ask you why a non-Nord would join. In the case of the latter, you get to tell him that 'not only nords live in Skyrim'. The latter would sorta imply you do hail in Skyrim if you're not a Nord, but of course its not specifically about the character, just non-Nords in general. Besides, you have no family, no home at the start of the game, and several other npcs will assume you're an 'outsider' if you ask them lore questions like what the companions are or who specific deities are. Also, one priest npc bluntly tells you that something he's doing won't work on you unless you're 'unaffiliated' with any god, implying your character isn't a priest themselves. Strangely though, there is a rare dialogue where you can tell an npc you worship Molag Bal assuming you talk to them at a specific point after you've done his quest. Contradiction?

Either way, there's far more evil questlines in the game than there are good ones. If you try to play a goody-two-shoes character, you'll be locked out of just about all content. Besides, some people have argued that pursuing the main questline and defeating Alduin is wrong because you're making it impossible for the world to be 'reset' in case something goes wrong (like the Thalmor succeeding in destroying the world).

And of course, there's the fact that you're a murder hobo, but that's an old argument. There is also how you're often forced to use LP. No matter what you do, you're going to have to use it eventually just to progress. Hell, you may have to use it to leave some dungeons.

Really you think about it, you can't help but be a villain in this game. Oh, and if all this wasn't bad enough, its possible to justify ALL the questlines and content this game offers if you're a villain, but very little of it is avaiable if you're good. What does that say? At the very least you can purse the main questline, dragonborn, and even the CoW (the only major questline that doesn't have you doing anything questionable, until you take into consideration the use of soultrapping anyway, considering they use A LOT of enchanted gear and one guy there even claims to sell enchanted gear) purely for the power it grants. You never have to self-sacrifice for others, and every questline has some sort of tangible benefits for you, be it money, free skills, master trainers, more merchants, unique gear, shouts, spells, you get the idea. There's no questline that an 'evil' character would never ever pursue under any circumstance.

Of course, you could say that your character is meant to be a Conan-style anti-hero; a person who does good things but for selfish reasons. You stop Alduin not because you really care, but for the power it grants. You stop Miraak not to save Solstheim but simply because he's sending hitmen after you. You stick with guilds purely for the benefits, even if they force you to ally with daedra. Everything is a means to an end. Yeah, often times others do benefit from what you're doing, but perhaps that's not why you're doing it.

On the other hand, perhaps the developers didn't make this game with the idea in mind that people would be playing a character. They may have just assumed that everyone was going to run all the questlines and do everything, not even bothering to consider a narrative. Its obvious they didn't put much thought at all into any of the narratives they did put into the game. The game's shallow, filled with plotholes, and how some guilds are protrayed doesn't line up with their behavior (such as the famous arguments that despite the Companions being a bunch of 'noble warriors', in reality they're just a bunch of assassins, the Dark Brotherhood but with good PR).

Maybe then you're not a 'villain', you're supposed to just be a player playing a game, blindly going through the storylines regardless of what they are, like older games where you couldn't avoid playing through the game's singular story arc (assuming it even had one at all). Villain, or just lazy writing?

I used to know of some website called 'debate.org' or something like that (my local community college kept recommending we look at that site). I can't seem to find it now though.I also keep trying to post here, but this board has minimal activity. Isn't there a decent place to have intelligent discussions on the internet? Is the internet nothing but abuse and misinformation? I keep questioning why I even bother to use the internet anymore. I honestly don't know why I even bother keep trying to use it. Guess I just don't like being trapped in my own little world unable to get any outside influence/aid. Is there just no place on the internet that's usable? I have tried to just not bother logging in or posting, but again I hate having to think on my own. That's how people go down rabbit holes!

In decades past, it was mainly conservatives who criticized media. They blamed it for everything from encouraging satanism, homosexuality, to even claiming it was 'teaching' people how to do evil things (as if not telling people about such things prevents them, where did they even get this idea from?) Liberals used to basically say you could consume anything you wanted, no matter how much conservatives hate it. Now however, everyone wants to engage in their own form of censorship.

This isn't about debating this, I'm more interested in discussing if media really matters as much as people say. Everyone today seems to think like conservatives have for decades, where people imitate what they see in movies and tv and whatnot. You don't show it, they'll never do it. Aka, you remove all racism or sexism from film, then you irradiate it. Yeah, a lot of the media from the 20th century and before has questionable content in it, but I don't see how eliminating it is really going to solve today's problems. Seriously, when was the last time that happened? Pro-lgbt movies hasn't eliminated homophobia. Not depicting racist heroes obviously hasn't removed racism. I'm not saying perhaps burying some questionable things is bad, I'm just saying its not the cure-all everyone seems to think it is.

On the other hand, there is evidence that media can influence people to an extent. I remember years and years ago Morgan Freeman conducting an experiment on some tv series he had. He showed people a slide of white and black people, some holding cell phones, others weapons. He told them to 'shoot' the people holding weapons, and not the ones holding cell phones. His experiement showed that people were more likely to mistakenly shoot a black person holding a phone than they were for white people. However, he noted this couldn't be because of racism, BECAUSE HIS BLACK TEST SUBJECTS HAD THE SAME DEGREE OF ERROR. He concluded how blacks are portrayed in media is causing innocent blacks to be accidentally killed accidentally, because its priming us to see blacks as dangerous and violent. This experiment made me take issue with the black panther film, particularly how it treated black women. Don't get me wrong, what they were trying to do certainly isn't wrong, I just thought that this specific attempt may actually have the opposite effect. It showed black women being violent, even if they looked completely innocuous. This made me worried that black women could suffer the same problem that black men do due to media portrayals. It should be noted that Morgan Freeman's experiment only used pictures of men, no women. I thought back then I would like to see this but with pics of women. Black women are virtually absent in film, especially back then, so they could act as a counter-example here. Does their absence in media cause them to fair better than black men? That would be pretty ironic. Sadly, no one seemed interested in seeing such, even claiming I was racist and misogynistic and whatnot for simply pondering the idea. Wtf? On a side note, I've heard that leftists often see science as inherently racist, similar to how right-wingers see science as anti-religion. Could this have affected people's perceptions of my thought experiments?

So maybe yes media does affect people to an extent, but so far all we know is it can affect people negatively. Can it affect people positively? No one's done any experiments to find that out. Either way, its clearly not going to eliminate racism. The left has essentially fallen into the same thinking as the right; if you don't show it, people won't do it. That's obviously non-sense. All the crimes you see today happened in the past even when media wasn't allowed to depict it. Also, the crime rate today isn't actually higher than it used to be; it just appears that way because news stations are more willing to report on it.

Maybe changing media isn't necessarily a bad thing (to an extent anyway, THERE IS SUCH A THING AS BLACK PEOPLE BEING MISTAKEN FOR WHITE SUPREMACISTS JUST BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T MAKE THEIR OWN RACE APPARENT). I just see no reason to think its the cure for all ills like everyone these days seems to think. It used to be unique to the right, and was widely ridiculed by the left, but now everyone does it. Is there no such thing as sanity in our world anymore?

Why do we care what these bozo's say in the first place? The only time I really care about these people are when they are in front of me doing something entertaining. Whether that is on a screen on a stage or in a book.

I have always viewed this B.S. the same way I viewed Axel Rose in the 90's. The man was a giant deuce, a womanizer a drunk and a drug addict and he did not give two shits about anyone but himself. But the he also had pipes, and I enjoyed and still enjoy the music of GnR. So yes I still bought his albums. While at the same time saying he is a prick and I do not like anything he stands for. See you can have it both ways.

Honestly I think a better reaction would be, "We do not care; we pay you for entertainment; not for your opinion. Now dance, sing, or do something funny."

If I want an opinion about something I will come here or goggle it, I NEVER check twitter, or x, or "the toxic wasteland of the internet"; what ever it is called these days.

So I ask again why do we care what these rich assholes think about anything? Wanna disagree with them? Ok fine disagree, but why care all that much when you do? Why not just be like "meh he/she is a entitled rich idiot anyway" and move on with your life.

Or is this a "Enquirer" thing? Because I honestly never understood why anyone did more that read the cover of that publication; (what even is it a paper a magazine what?); for good laugh. TLJ's endorsement in MIB exempted.

So, Thoughts?

He said his reason was "it feels like cheating". Are there really people out there that think this? I mean... MG do these people even realize how much you can mod in games anymore (Beth games are insane)? Obviously they don't. You can download so many mods to improve the performance, aesthetics, weapons, enemies, etc. and not even touch the gameplay mechanics or difficulty settings at all.

So is it just a simple case of people not bothering to even look at mods and don't understand the mind-blowing amount of stuff you can change in a vanilla game? Or is it some glitch in their programming that causes them to think "mods bad"?

I am profoundly perplexed by this. Particularly from gamers. Anybody care to explain?

Skynet: at no point in history so far has any government shown that if the leaders did not have 100% control over something like this would any government trust it. Therefore of the three scenarios I find this one the least like mostly because I have never gotten past "The government trusting something?" pfffft. So yeah. This one is easy. Paranoia is our friend this time.

HAL is well; VERY dated. mostly I like to included this for the talking point of "How do you believe AI will handle it's first morally grey decision?" My answer, it depends on who wrote its base code and taught it to think.

And Finally

Cylons.

Honestly this one is much more likely to me although I will preface that I do not believe anyone alive today will face this particular dilemma. I say and consider how far we have come in the past 60 years and am fully prepared to be wrong. in just 25 years we went from 8 bit games to full VR. Here is hoping for my holodeck.

The questions here are: How will we react to AI evolving sentience, how will it respond? what moral or ethics will it have learned from it's human creators? Could we honestly stop it considering the thinking speeds of non sentient machines of today if it decided to go full Cylon on its creators?

I would like to believe that by the time this scenario is possible we will have learned our lessons and be better. I hope that the humans that created and teach this AI taught it to value all life, and that when the machines prove their intelligence that the humans of this time listen, despite our track record when dealing with "different" . Perhaps our descendants will avoid a disaster we have long feared. Or maybe they will run head long into it.

What scenario is most likely to you?
How do you believe future humans will respond?

How will the newly born sentient AI respond?

Now, to be clear, I understand the benefits that would come of this. It would be a lot easier to do more work on this game if you were getting financial support. Even I could benefit from this as I've stated. Obviously, my modding career isn't the most impressive, but my biggest problem really is my inability to make my own assets. I do have more impressive mods that I've made, but they all use assets that I don't own. Of course, I would prefer to use dedicated assets, rather than recycling assets from other mods. I would also like to have actual voice actors, because then I could actually do quests. I could probably do scripting too, but the thing holding me back from that is my inability to get the creation kit to compile anything, or perform half its functions. Now that I'm on a new OS, I was sorta hoping that may be fixed now. Of course, I have yet to even try it, but thinking about it isn't the CK available through steam? Does that mean I could use my proton emulator to run it? Maybe I should look into that.

Point is, I don't deny that good things could come from that, but I think the negative outweighs the positive. All mods made are passion projects, that means people actually care about their product. The only reason you would make one is to help out other people. If money was involved, such things may not go away but they would surely become a minority amidst a flood of mods for profit. Guess maybe Bethesda's (to hell with them) numerous attempts to monetize mods, and how they're all cheap garbage not worth using (they literally had to forcibly install them onto people's computers just to get people to play them, and even then few want to, what does that say? The cc garbage is just one reason of many I've stuck to playing LE for years and still have no intent to change). Even CC garbage made by famous mod authors for some reason is always inferior to what they've made for free. I don't know why that happens, but its hard not to think its because they were just making it for money and abandoning the project as soon as they got their pay.

The reason I'm making this topic though, is because I'll be honest, I've been starting to question my unpopular stance. Some mod authors lately have genuinely impressed me with their work enough where I've lamented that they aren't getting financial compesation for what they're doing. The latest two would be Xavbio and SkySinclair. Don't ask me how I stumbled upon his fluffworks patches; as I said I haven't played SE in years, and I rarely bother to even look on SE anymore. Its just sheer dumb luck I ran into his mod. I can't even use it, and I'm pretty certain that a backport is never coming. The fact that those patches exist at all is hard to imagine. I'm also aware of that one mod author who was making the best city overhauls we've ever seen by a longshot, quit modding because he decided that for his skill and time investment, he was better off doing something that actually made a profit. He literally used his mods to land himself a job, and of course no one's heard of him since. He never even released Riften, the last city mod he was working on before he quit. I still lament that those mods will never be finished, but what can you do? This is the only incident though where I think money would've helped.

I'm unsure what to think now. I still think paid mods would do too much harm, but lately I'm starting to think that maybe there's more benefits than I initially realized. Of course, I'm probably not going to see anyone that shares in my opinion. Of course, part of that may be that a good chunk of the people who use these boards are mod authors themselves; why wouldn't they advocate for something that could bring them money? Guess I just feel like that's being crooked. As I said, I would love to be able to pay people to make assets for me or do voice work, but I've just long thought that such a thing would harm the community far too much.

Fire away I guess. Hopefully this doesn't get too vicious.

For one, how can you really debate anything when you can't agree on basic facts? Could you use debate alone to prove that the earth is round? The only way to argue this is to cite physical evidence. I mean, if that was possible, then why would there be so many flat-earthers? Surely it would be easy to talk reason into them.

Another problem I have is that debating relies heavily on speculation. Let's be real here, how often is it that speculation turns out right? In all my life, I can count on one hand how many times I've seen ANY form of speculation turn out to be true, from layman opinions to even scientific theories. I don't support speculation at all now; only hard evidence matters to me.

On top of this, thinking about logical fallacies, they're not actually that reliable. Every fallacy has exceptions. At best, they're just an overly simplistic way to fix faulty thinking.

Really, all debating is, is a highly methodical attempt to 'fix stupid'. Literally, you're telling people how to think in hopes it'll make them make less dumb decisions. Fixing stupid is obviously impossible, so then why does this field exist?

I don't see any point in debating. Its nothing but an overly simple attempt to fix stupid. Besides, what about the hard evidence problem? You can't prove through debate that the earth is round. Such discussions always devolve into monty python arguments, and there's no way to avoid that. No south americans aren't lying, yes they are, not they're not, yes they are, etc... Discussions like these lead nowhere.

So debating is pointless. If it does have uses, its clearly not a fix-all solution.

A mod for Cyberpunk that allows male players to date a lesbian character "Judy" was removed. I'm not sure what its removal was based on but it appears to be political. I personally feel that a player should be allowed to mod their game however they want and share these mods as long as it doesn't promote criminal behavior.

If allowing a mod like this violates an administrator's morals to the point where they felt it must be removed, that is this person's choice. This is basically saying that it is a rule that mods are not allowed to change the sexual preference of an NPC. If this is true, then this rule should be applied universally.

I have noticed however that a mod that allows female players to date a straight female NPC "Panam" has been allowed to remain on the Nexus. This violates the newly established rule of not changing an NPC's sexual preference. Doesn't that seem one sided?

I have always been on the side of people's rights and freedom of preferences. I have always believed that people should be free from discrimination for their preferences, ethnic backgrounds, or religious beliefs. Basically against discrimination of any kind.

If the rules on this site are different for people depending on race, religion, or sexual preferences, wouldn't that be discrimination. It's based on these things that I believe that both of these mods should either be removed or allowed to remain but regardless of the choice, both mods should be treated the same.

There are other issues I've heard of in regards to mods being removed unequally. These include mods that involve gender or race swaps. If that is a rule, (and maybe it should be idk) then it should be a rule universally. Remove any mod that changes female to male but also remove any mod that changes male to female.

Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening. I am here to report a significant violation of the licenses for "NVIDIAGameWorks Streamline" publicly available on GitHub. It seems there is a consensus here on Nexus Mods that we cannot distribute the DLL files related to NVIDIA DLSS and NVIDIA DLSS Frame Generation, "nvngx_dlss.dll" and "nvngx_dlssg.dll" according to the official license provided directly in the distribution folder:

Quote

LIMITATIONS. Your license to use the SDK is restricted as follows:
[...]
(b) Except as expressly provided in this license, you may not copy, sell, rent, sublicense, transfer, distribute, modify, or create derivative works of any portion of the SDK. For clarity, you may not distribute or sublicense the SDK as a stand-alone product.

This is the main clause used to justify that it is not allowed to distribute DLLs related to NVIDIA DLSS, which is made available together with Streamline on GitHub publicly. However, there is a significant problem if your interpretation is correct. In addition to NVIDIA DLSS, the DLLs related to NVIDIA Reflex "sl.reflex.dll" (essential for the operation of DLSS Frame Generation) and the NVIDIA Real-Time-Denoiser "NRD.dll and sl.nrd.dll" have the same clause presented in the NVIDIA DLSS license.

Quote

"reflex.license.txt"
"2. Limitations.
[...]
2.2 Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, you may not copy, sell, rent, sublicense, transfer, distribute, modify, or create derivative works of any portion of the SDK."

Quote

"NRD.license.txt"
"4. LIMITATIONS. Your license to use the SDK is restricted as follows:
(b) Except as expressly provided in this license, you may not copy, sell, rent, sublicense, transfer, distribute, modify, or create derivative works of any portion of the SDK. For clarity, you may not distribute or sublicense the SDK as a stand-alone product."

If these clauses are used to restrict distribution in mods for NVIDIA DLSS, this should also apply to NVIDIA Reflex and NVIDIA Real-Time-Denoiser (respectively "sl.reflex.dll" and "sl.nrd.dll" and "NRD.dll").

This affects several upscaling mods that share the entire NIVIDAGameWorks Streamline without the NVIDIA DLSS files, but with the NVIDIA Reflex and NRD files, and specifically Reflex because it is the most widespread and distributed without concern by modders and is also essential for the functioning of DLSS Frame Generation.

I open this report not only to discuss the matter but also to find the best solution to this problem and publicly disclose it in the NVIDIA Streamline SDK community.

in no particular order:

Global Economic Collapse

Russia will use a Nuke in Ukraine

POTUS will not see 2024

There will be large scale violence and martial law or curfews will be enacted in at least one us City.

Unemployment will skyrocket

Bitcoin will drop below 10k

Russia / Ukraine conflict will spread to other nations forcing NATOs hand

China will take advantage of the wests feckless leadership and engage Taiwan

Evictions will be higher than the 2008 housing crisis

Trump will be overly aggressive and be surpassed by Ron DeSantis in popularity.

A military draft will be seriously talked about.

Let's hope I'm very very wrong

Also, regarding these posts I plan to only release them every 24 hours to avoid flooding this thread with them. Of course, given how few posts this place gets the front page is probably still going to get filled with my posts. Also, I sorta apologize for my last post. I didn't intend it to be that long. I believe part of the reason why it was so was because I ended up bringing up three fallacies rather than just one. I'll be avoiding doing that, and I also may make posts about the latter two later simply to expand on them further. In particular I've learned a bit more about the 'appeal to authority' argument I brought up. I also suspect I may have at least partially misunderstood it, so there's that too. I also accidentially referred to the 'ad hominem' fallacy as a genetic fallacy. I think it would constitute a type of genetic fallacy, though not all genetic fallacies are also ad hominem fallacies.

That said, I think I'll get to the topic now. In my eyes, the no true scotsman fallacy may be the most rampant and damaging fallacy in our society today. To put it simply, its feeding polarization.

Simply put, its a fallacy where one disregards counter-examples. Let's say Bob claims that no true scotsman drinks bear. Billy then retorts that he's a scotsman and he drinks beer. Bob then replies by saying that means he's not actually a true scotsman, thus his original claim still holds.

This I see as the most rampant and possibly damaging in the current era. Anyone who isn't hard left or hard right often gets accused of being part of the opposite faction. For instance, if you're anti-abortion, people will all assume you're right-wing and misogynistic. Of course, these don't coincide; there are left-wing anti-abortionists, in fact the democratic party was ousting them for a while. Basically, they were making the no true scotsman fallacy, basically claiming you're not actually a democrat if you oppose abortion. Republicans could be said to be doing the same thing in the past with the 'rhino' concept (short for Republicans In Name Only). Also, there are entire feminist organizations who are anti-abortion, and some date back to the 70s. Are those feminist organizations actually misogynists? That seems rather unlikely.

So, people assume you aren't actually a part of the party you identify with unless you believe all of x, y, z, etc... This is obviously a really serious problem for centrists. However, in reality most people are centrists to some degree. Its rare for everyone to believe with ALL of the tenets of their party. This means that most people could actually suffer the consequences of this fallacy if they speak their minds. Even if you can make an argument that opposing x IS compatible with your party, people probably won't believe you anyway since in their eyes you're not actually a part of the party anyway. As this example demonstrates, this also means the no true scotsman fallacy has encouraged self-censorship. People who hold contrasting views with the rest of their party must remain silent to avoid being ousted, or worse yet branded a member of the opposite party (that itself is part of another fallacy which I will also bring up in another post, just so we know).

So in summary, this fallacy is wide-spread, its feeding political polarization (though its obviously not the only factor, just so we're clear), and its discouraging debate by making people wary of expressing contrasting opinions within their own circles.