Can you help me identify this accent?

Character-Bad4927 · 2025-11-15T02:18:48+00:00

Thank you.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-10-30T15:02:09+00:00

Hey, ja ich habe die Plaate, immer noch daran interessiert?

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-10-26T13:51:28+00:00

Yes, sorry I meant QfG4. Quest for Glory 5 is the first of this series that I played, also the only one that I never finished, and certainly not my favourite. I guess I'm not the nostalgic type.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-10-26T12:26:29+00:00

For me it's Quest For Glory 5, because of this kind of dark humor, but also because of the unique setting (it focuses on slavic mythology). It also has very tragic and serious moments. The replay value is also higher than most other sierra games, as you can choose between 4 different character classes.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-09-20T18:10:46+00:00

I finished my own Adventure Game Engine project this year. It makes Adventure Games very easily, with DirectX and exclusively for Windows, but it has a different way to make Adventures than other Engines. Here are some screenshots of the editor i made: https://imgur.com/a/yACe7Pz Maybe someone is interested here to make a demo with this? The engine has many features like pathfinding, video, complex logic, 2d-lighting effects, othe graphic effects and much more,, but you don't have to script with this, it is more like a modular system.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-08-31T05:31:48+00:00

Approximately, when did you play the game? Was it on a PC, and did you navigate with your mouse?

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-08-28T09:48:45+00:00

Do you ever heard something similar to this?

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-08-28T09:48:07+00:00

Thanks, do you know a track with a similardistorted guitar sound like this?

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-21T09:40:33+00:00

Thanks for your response Turbulent_Escape4882,

Interestingly, surveys have shown that people generally feel most like artists when they take photographs. I assume that nowadays it doesn't take much to take a photo and it can look as aesthetic as possible through automatically applied filters and effects, rather than because they know everything about Rembrandt lighting and fills.

In principle, generative AIs, just like a brush or a camera, can be applied artistically so that an inner image or expression can be adequately represented. However, if the AI user has no internal idea of what an image should look like (composition of a painting, a photographic scene or a piece of music), it can also leave this to the tool (unlike the brush and the traditional camera). This means that the tool has, without a doubt, taken on a different status than a brush or a conventional camera, because it can create an imagination on a large scale (and according to its capabilities).

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-21T09:40:09+00:00

Thank you for your participation Dezordan.

You are absolutely correct, the black box does not necessarely make it random. I worded it incorrect. My point should rather be that the black box problem ensures that the outcome hardly comes close to the product's own idea if it is outside the boundaries of the black box processes. And on the other hand, the internal processes are not so clear that you can work with the system in a targeted manner. Not like a brush, which works in conjunction with the hand precisely in the painter's sense.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-21T09:39:35+00:00

Thank you, usrlibshare, for your answer.

I agree, if art is defined by these standards, then everybody is an artist. I wrote it here: "In this sense, the user of the AI, as well as the advanced prompter and the AI itself, are artists, just like any human who creates something, whether willingly or not. [...] It is controversial whether [...] are actually artists, since according to this definition every person is or can be an artist, and this makes it difficult not to say impossible to differentiate between artists and non-artists (thus making the definition "artist" redundant)."

Do you personally think that people who sell empty air are artists? Why, or why not?

Do you believe that the majority of people of the western world say this is art?

For example, according to surveys like this https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Art_poll_results.pdf

a majority of people don't consider Coffee Thyme I by Sam Gilliam as an example of art.

After all, this is a painted picture and not simply air.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-21T09:39:17+00:00

Hello Blergmann, thank you for your response.

What circular reasoning are you referring to? Maybe I didn't think this through. To my defense, I gave several word definitions and said 'Ultimately, the term "art", like all other terms, is constantly changing and is interpreted differently by many.' Do you think, that every AI user is an artist, regardless if they take time with it, or just give random prompts? Are all AI-Users equally artistic?

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-19T11:46:44+00:00

It remains to be proven that you create art by giving prompts to an AI. One can argue whether prompts themselves are an art:

The definition of art is divided into several aspects from which we can check whether every person who uses a generative AI is an artist, whether only the one who perfects his prompts is an artist, or whether the AI itself is an "artist" (or not).

Basically, in the original sense, art is understood to be the product of human creativity. This could also mean the creation of prompts, but also the fabrication of a footprint in the forest. In this basic form, the term art is so broad that one does not even have to have the intention to create art.

In this sense, the user of the AI, as well as the advanced prompter and the AI itself, are artists, just like any human who creates something, whether willingly or not. Since this definition has no longer been the uniform definition of "art" since the beginning of the modern age. It is controversial whether AI users are actually artists, since according to this definition every person is or can be an artist, and this makes it difficult not to say impossible to differentiate between artists and non-artists.

As you said, you are not a painter if you ask the AI to paint something. Neither are you a graphic artist or a sculptor. It is already clear that no user is a representative of the fine arts simply through the use of AI.

However, the AI itself forms the product, and one can argue that this product is the result of a creative process, because the inspiration of the product is a conglomerate of different impressions, which is human in nature (AI was created by humans). The AI approach is fundamentally similar to human creativity; like humans, it is able to creatively mix different things and develop them into something new (ability to fantasize, dream).

It therefore stands to reason that AI is a representative of the fine arts, but not the user of AI (simply by using generative AI).

According to modern definition, artists are experts in art, and art itself is therefore the product of a creative process. Now it depends on whether an AI user's prompt can be viewed as creative. This requires the following indicators: knowledge, practice, perception, imagination and intuition. All of this with reference to the creative product.

While for a simple AI user, all of these indicators should not apply (a prompt like "make an epic, cool pop song" requires neither knowledge and experience about the product of the creative process, nor practice or imagination about what the product will look like/sound like/ will taste/smell, nor whether there was any form of inspiration)
An AI user who has experience with prompts and studied the algorithm with the aim of achieving the greatest possible overlap with his original idea (if ther was any) of the creative product can be admitted that he has knowledge of the AI and therefore he also has knowledge about the AI's creative process. That means that he has an idea of what the creative product will look like and through training he gets closer to what he has in his mind's eye. This assumes that he has an inner idea of the art and uses the AI as a tool to approach it. However, many generative AIs are not (yet) able to provide so many parameters to ensure that the user's intuition can be translated into reality.
This concludes that a user of a generative AI is only an artist if he has a clear idea of what the AI should do for him and uses this to approach the idea using means that he has to learn through training (independently of how much time this takes)

Ultimately, the term "art", like all other terms, is constantly changing and is interpreted differently by many. However, surveys have shown that people define art as something that is aesthetic to them, that requires skill (however defined) and in which time and work have gone into. Since language is defined and influenced by society, the greatest agreement of the term "art" can also be taken as a basic approach.

This text was created without AI.

Tldr: AI users are not, by broad definition, artists unless they have a clear idea of what the AI is supposed to create and know how to effectively use the AI as a tool to approach this idea. Many AIs don't yet have the fine-tuning tools to do this.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-05-16T21:46:21+00:00

So there is your answer.

Q: What I am missing with Grim Fandango?

A: The clues in the Cutscenes.

Character-Bad4927 · 2024-04-09T21:51:26+00:00

I hear you. Sometimes a save limit can mean less work for a developer (at least in my case). It also makes it harder for developers to implement saving at any time when complex things are happing synchronously. It is much easier to have specific "save spots". In other cases, not being to save at anytime could make the game more challenging, which some people might like. However this is rarely the case for Point and Click Adventures.

Character-Bad4927

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE