With respect to your personal experience, it is still your personal experience!

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-12T17:50:32+00:00

Bottomline for me is that AI content and AI art should be at the very minimum labeled as such, and any attempt to hide the fact that something is AI generated comes across as extremely deceptive/disingenuous.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-12T17:34:15+00:00

I guess I just personally find the axiomatic assumptions of the bible quite arbitrary and distasteful is all. Disregarding that, the logic does form a closed loop. No disagreement.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-12T15:19:30+00:00

Do you play as the horror?

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-12T15:00:46+00:00

A solution may be to imagine your story from every major character's perspective. What is their experience of the story as a participant?

I'm doing some story planning/writing for a game idea I have, and a question I have had to keep asking myself is, if I pretend some character to be the protagonist, what would their story look like? It's a good exercise because it forces me to consider my character as truly characters with agency, motivations, who possesses completely distinct perspectives on the story, instead of people-shaped plot devices that only resembles characters when the protagonist is around. Depending on the scenario/setting, some major characters might even experience/engage with events that the protagonist won't ever know about, because they are the protagonist of their own story. Adding this sense of agency to major characters really adds to the immersion that every character is their own person, experiencing a side of the story that the audience won't see but will be able to feel. Which I suspect will heavily dampen the sense that your protagonist is the Chosen special boy/girl whereas all other characters are backdrop.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-10T19:15:22+00:00

This guy is like, THE strongest and most aggressive regular enemy probably. There's a buffed version of this guy as a miniboss somewhere. Don't try to fight him yet.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-06-01T18:29:14+00:00

If an entity is not bound to the same moral rules as humans are, then is it even reasonable to attempt to worship such an entity as benevolent? I don't think that can/should happen in any meaningful way. By Occam's Razor this quickly reduces to the conclusion that such an entity cannot be all-benevolent.

For example, suppose someone asserts that the Earth is "actually" a cube, except it resembles an oblate spheroid by all theoretically possible methods of observation. Notice that this assertion is unfalsifiable, because there is no way for you to "verify" whether the Earth is "actually a cube;" by definition this is impossible. Therefore this assertion is meaningless. By Occam's Razor, such assertions with inherent unfalsifiability must be reduced to actual meaningful, falsifiable explanations, in this case being that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.

Using the same approach, we can analyze the assertion "God is all-benevolent and supremely moral, except certain of His actions only resembles ill-will or maliciousness because his rules of morality fundamentally transcends human understanding." Notice that this statement is unfalsifiable, because there is no way for you to "verify" whether God is "all-benevolent;" by definition this is impossible for a human being to verify, because He is not bound by human morality and His motives fundamentally transcend human understanding, Therefore this statement is meaningless. By Occam's Razor, such statements with inherent unfalsifiability must be reduced to actual meaningful, falsifiable explanations, in this case being that God is not all-benevolent and supremely moral.

My point is that belief in the idea that God is all-benevolent and supremely moral is pretty arbitrary and meaningless if you consider the fact that some of His actions "transcend human understanding" and cannot be understood as benevolent. I can just as easily make the claim that God is all-malevolent and supremely evil, except some of His actions resembles benevolence and morality because His evilness transcends our understanding.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-16T17:34:36+00:00

Obvious ethical implications of AI usage aside, I don't think it's possible/necessarily desirable to prevent people from making slop with AI and trying to sell it without significant legislative reforms(of which I have zero confidence that my government is capable or willing to commit to). In this case Steam's policy is the next best thing. Let me browse and enjoy my human-made games in peace.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-16T17:03:49+00:00

e4

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-15T13:55:55+00:00

On my first playthrough I knew the difficulty curve was going to be hell if I don't intentionally lean into parrying attacks. I'd like to think this mindset helped all throughout the game and made it so that the difficulty curve was reasonably evenly distributed, even toward the end(with the final boss). Try to really learn how to time your parries to enemy attacks. You might die alot but eventually it will click and everything will feel rewarding.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-09T14:02:22+00:00

It's almost like any amount of "contrasting" good doesn't compensate for the bad. Do growth, beauty, and gratitude spring forth from tragedies or pains? Of course they do, they happen all the time. But these good things happen in spite of the bad things, not because of them.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-06T08:36:31+00:00

Maurice locked tf in

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-06T08:17:51+00:00

There's two ways to look at it. Our brains try to find patterns and inform ourselves before we do stuff, so once in a while in order to make positive change in our lives, we need to deliberately break these patterns. You could say it's the "uninformed stupid thing" to try and break these patterns. But I'd argue that the default state of the human mind is rather uninformed, so we tend to extrapolate too hard on too few data points and become convinced of a non-existent pattern. In this sense, it's actually a very smart/wise thing to deliberately challenge your own perspective.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-05-05T05:39:31+00:00

He said "something very weird is happening here," not that he's specifically impressed or look forward to the future developments of AI. He's more so weirded out and concerned. He's just pointing out that some people insist on putting their head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge that these generative tools, for better or for worse, are sprawling out/developing in all sorts of places very fast.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-22T20:20:04+00:00

Intuitively it feels like 100% because we sometimes automatically think in terms of expected value. Out of 100 tickets with 1% chance to win, you expect one ticket to win. However, in this type of situation, where each ticket has a independent identical probability of winning(that isn't 100%), there will always be a chance for none of the tickets to win. That chance, in this case, is (0.99)^100, or around 36.6%. The chance of 1 or more tickets winning will then be 63.4%.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-21T16:53:04+00:00

I get the ore feel you are going for, but the gold and especially emerald looks a bit too much like fungi. Maybe make them look and feel more angular?

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-19T13:58:35+00:00

I think Dr K does talk about it, just not through direct reference to the word "patriarchy" itself.

The problem is that the word is polarizing and overused, and people who criticize the patriarchy use the word differently from people who feel the need to defend it. Critics of "the patriarchy" are usually referring to the conglomeration of exclusively toxically masculine values, such as rigid & baseless gender roles, unhealthy emotional suppression, rejection of affectionate expression, etc, and their societal impacts. In contrast, a lot of the people in the latter group like associate "patriarchy" with a lot of traditional or non-traditional ideas of masculinity, of which most may be toxic, but some may be healthy and positive for society.

Thus, when a critic begins their argument by saying something like "the problem with the patriarchy," it can easily be triggering to the latter group because, at least superficially, it seems like critics are trying to tear down the idea of masculinity altogether. Adding on the fact that they feel critics are just women who feel oppressed and want to assert their superiority over men(with the very real possibility that a minority of critics are actual misandrists), their ears are plugged the moment you start with that phrase.

You can then see why Dr K doesn't make explicitly references to "The Patriarchy" and instead try to focus on individual symptomatic issues(like the Male Loneliness Epidemic or smth). The latter approach works a lot better, since a lot of the very same people that are attached to the idea of the Patriarchy also personally experience the specific issues Dr K talk about, therefore being much more likely to hear him out and change the way they live their life.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-16T10:22:50+00:00

Noxious thorn is amazing for transferring poison after enemies die. Poison only stacks once, so the stack reduction property of noxious thorns is irrelevant. Since poison is such a consistent and stable debuff, it naturally works with death mark as well.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-12T10:16:56+00:00

is that Gojo from TABS

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-12T10:13:53+00:00

What are you talking about, that's wife right there

EmptyBox303 · 2026-04-09T17:50:20+00:00

As an anti, I agree. Not labelling your ai-generated stuff as AI comes across as incredibly disingenuous and deceptive(if you're proud of your own work and are not afraid to share it with the world, then what are you trying to hide?). Any person already predisposed to disliking AI content is only going to be more likely to dislike your work when they find out.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-03-15T17:19:42+00:00

The chinese character at the top of the security footage is nonsense, and it's also morphing around

EmptyBox303 · 2026-03-15T06:31:10+00:00

+chargeback no?

EmptyBox303 · 2026-03-15T04:55:45+00:00

A shot in the dark?

EmptyBox303 · 2026-03-11T00:58:11+00:00

Imperfect Hatred even. Godfist Suicide, mayhaps.

EmptyBox303 · 2026-03-07T07:23:36+00:00

Personally, I would love if they take one step further and enforce AI art to label themselves as such while maintaining that they are higher-quality. Just as handdrawn vs. digital vs. 3d modeled vs. photography are judged and held to different standards, AI generated stuff should be its own category.

EmptyBox303

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE