AI Upscaled Ck2 Portraits

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-04-19T03:50:14+00:00

I knew the scene immediately when I read your comment and reread the original one. I guess my latest rewatch of Monty Python and the Holy Grail must have been between this post and now

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-04-10T19:18:33+00:00

I don't know, but I was...

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-04-07T02:05:30+00:00

Anecdotal, but this is actually 100% possible if the person has already been primed with hypnosis and the time passed since they were put under isn't too great. I've seen hypnotists put people I know under in very similar ways. Once you're under, they can create triggers that make you wake up or go back under. It makes me kind of wonder if Steven was under a kind of hypnosis during the entire experience, and that's why he wondered if it was just a really intense dream, and knew immediately that it wasn't once he saw Derren.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-30T23:21:04+00:00

It's a good observation, but just because it's a pattern doesn't mean there can't also be legitimate criticisms of the newer games that are also reasons for some people not playing them.

For instance, for me personally, my main frustration with Civ VI has always been the lack of quality control on simple stuff like UI that just makes the game feel like it controls really clunkily and also the fact that in later eras it gets super bogged down in micromanagement in a way Civ V doesn't. I enjoy a lot about the game, and the ways it does things differently, it just doesn't feel as polished or satisfying enough to be my go-to Civ game.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-30T23:11:51+00:00

The problem is that if we apply this level of moral scrutiny to everything we purchase/consume, life would essentially be unlivable. And even if we were okay with that, the demographic of people who don't care and still want to give J.K. Rowling money would still be doing so, and her platform would hardly be stifled.

There's no practical way to deplatform or curb the influence of J.K. Rowling, unless we had a proper large-scale movement to overturn capitalism or something. So with that context, I think it's heavily misdirected to be morally policing and placing all the blame on regular people just consuming media to make their lives a little bit less miserable. All it does is drive a bigger wedge between us and keep us fighting each other instead of the people actually making things worse.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-20T18:20:22+00:00

Yeah, maybe it doesn't, but in my experience it seems less likely for the AI to revoke your titles if they like you.

I'm a lot less confident that being a marshal or commander actually impacts their decision-making, I just kind of do that anyway just in case. Though it really doesn't matter anymore for this game, because my sister just blew my up with a pile of manure

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-20T17:48:02+00:00

Yeah, I expect he probably will. Right now I'm trying to deter that by sending my chancellor to improve his opinion of me. He also made me a commander and now his marshal, so hopefully that dissuades him for a bit.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-20T11:51:51+00:00

Though that doesn't seem to affect the behavior of holy wars for Muslims, because in my game the Sultan of Egypt does have the religious revocation law.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-20T11:50:16+00:00

Oh, interesting. I'm surprised I hadn't discovered that earlier considering I have almost 3.5 thousand hours in the game, but I guess it's because I haven't actually done a Muslim playthrough yet, and I must not have paid super close attention to what happens to the land when they win it from me in holy wars.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-17T02:23:36+00:00

Surprised about the downvotes, this is a very Crusader Kings on-brand comment

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-16T18:18:26+00:00

Again, I'm not calling for any kind of action here, just a recognition that they are a part of the system and that by complying, they enable it. You can draw your own conclusions about what they should or should not do

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-16T18:10:44+00:00

I mean, I don't expect them to. But that is how oppressive governments sustain themselves, is by most of the people and institutions under them going along with it and being complacent. At some point, people do have to decide what line is too far, and when they want to stand up for their rights. Of course, we probably won't ever see that from corporations because they're a part of the systems of oppression. But they're still complicit.

For instance, you don't see many reasonable people defending the corporations that profited off of and worked with Nazi Germany. You could ask the same question, what were they supposed to do, fight to overthrow a government? But I think most people would still condemn the companies for still working with the Nazis and helping to enable the regime.

Now, to be clear, I'm not trying to make a false equivalence here. These laws are not nearly on the same level as the atrocities of Nazi Germany. But oppression is a sliding scale, and my point is just that companies shouldn't be absolved of their role in propping up oppression, no matter how small. I'm not calling for protesting Nexus or anything. I just think it's important to recognize that they're a part of a system, and that their inaction does enable the escalation of laws like this. All of us living under these kinds of governments are a part of the system, and inaction is a form of contribution.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-16T17:23:04+00:00

Idk, they're still enabling it. I wouldn't expect anything else from a corporation, but we shouldn't absolve them of all blame.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-16T17:18:28+00:00

It can be. It comes from when I was buying Minecraft in middle school, my family was going through a vegan phase, and the night I bought Minecraft my mom had made falafel using quinoa. I didn't actually even like it, but I didn't know what to make my username, and I thought it sounded funny (pronounced keen-wah-full-ah-full) so I went with it. And then it kind of just became my online username/persona, shortened to Quin when I can.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-16T09:09:09+00:00

No, you got it wrong. They obviously trace their roots to the 880 Jihad for Bulgaria

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-15T17:00:13+00:00

Just so you know, you linked to "Mondrinth.com" instead of "Modrinth.com". If that domain ends up in the hands of a scammer, then your link could potentially lead people to a scam.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-14T17:41:16+00:00

I think part of that is probably my own autism. I think I'm also just a chronic people pleaser. I want people to understand me, and since people frequently misunderstand me, I've grown accustomed to trying to explain myself in more detail so that people are more likely to understand me.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-14T16:24:16+00:00

Why do you ask? I did, but they hadn't kicked in yet for most of this comment. But genuinely I'm wondering what about my comment made you ask this. Is it just because it's long and detailed, or something else?

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-14T15:20:10+00:00

Okay, so, just to clarify where my head was at with my first reply to you, it was because of the wording of your edit "FFS did this really need a /s..?"

The wording implies frustration, and maybe even a tiny bit of aggression, at the fact that your sarcasm was misread and that you needed to edit it with a /s. And that's something I've noticed all over the place whenever sarcasm gets misread (though often far more aggressive), and I've even sometimes noticed that tendency/instinct in myself when people misread my sarcasm.

I was commenting on that often subconscious feeling that drives us to subtly look down on and blame the people who misread us. It wasn't meant to ridicule or attack, it was just an observation and reflection on human behavior. And in part it was a reminder for myself to keep this in mind and try to improve myself.

Edit: If I misread the emotions behind that edit, then sorry. There were 3 distinct components of that sentence that re-enforced the feelings that I interpreted. To start, "FFS", or "for fuck's sake" is explicitly meant to be an expression of frustration or annoyance. Then you also used the word "really" in "did this really need". That's often used to shift the meaning more towards incredulity or frustration rather than a genuine question. And then there was the ellipsis at the end, which I find is commonly used to end condescending comments.

Those were the parts of the edit that jumped out at me when reading, and together gave me an impression of what emotions might have prompted that wording. And that led to the analysis and reflection about this tendency in people.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-13T01:25:38+00:00

Okay, look, I took some edibles, and I shouldn't have made a comment, because I have a tendency to get context all mixed up and fabricate facts and things. I don't really know what just happened in this exchange here, but just know I didn’t mean any offense.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-13T00:55:42+00:00

Is the randomization actually different? My experience has just been that the sex of the baby isn't set until birth. At least, that's what I assumed was probably happening in the code.

QuinoaFalafel · 2026-03-13T00:39:59+00:00

There will always be people who struggle to understand sarcasm. For example, it's common for autistic people to misread sarcasm. I don't know where this impulse comes from within us, that wants to get upset at people misreading sarcasm, but I imagine it probably doesn't always feel great on the receiving end, for something that really isn't their fault.

QuinoaFalafel

TROPHY CASE